Israel / Gaza Thread

[mrSHEiK124]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude

Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: Zebo
With this level of disagreement it won't end until one side scores a genocidal type victory.

This from a guy who claims he is not an extremist. Again you prove yourself just as vile as Hamas.

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
This. Civilians die during war. If you dont want your children to die, dont start lobbing rockets.

I agree with that. Can you agree with this:

If you don't want rockets lobbed at you, don't cage people in like cattle while colonizing their homeland out from under them.

?

I like this game. My turn.

If you don't want your people caged like cattle stop suicide bombing cafes.

I fucking LOVE this game. There hasn't been a suicide bombing in years. And the cage only got smaller, and harder to get out of the longer they went without one. Your point?

your point? I hate to repeat myself, but Ill say it again

if I shoot at you 200 times and miss 199 times, but 1 grazes your arm and you live, is it still ok that I missed 199 times?

hell no, just as it is not ok for anyone to commit a suicide bombing, and even if there havent been any in recent times, according to some people, Israel should get "revenge" for the people who died and start an attack to kill x amount of people who died per attack? no then a conflict occurs like what is happening now.

:roll:

Missing 199 times and a stop in suicide attacks are not the same thing. Katyusha attacks haven't stopped, but they're still largely missing; suicide attacks aren't killing anyone anymore because they aren't happening. Meanwhile the West Bank continues to be colonized out from underneath the Palestinians, this war was planned, and Israeli politicians, even the "centrists", have proven themselves to be warmongers and racists again.

Israel should get "revenge" for the people who died and start an attack to kill x amount of people who died per attack

As long as there are people with that mentality then the bloodshed will never end.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124

As long as there are people with that mentality then the bloodshed will never end.

There will likely always be people of that mentality. However, to end this bloodshed all we need to do is strip them of their power.

 

[ghost recon88]

I searched this thread and couldn't find this posted anywhere. Here's a live stream of Gaza from someones mounted cam. You can hear gunfire in the background and planes flying overhead, and if you're lucky enough sometimes you can even see an explosion It's best to play it in VLC instead of WMP.

Live stream

 

[kylebisme]

Here is a song for those of you who get off on watching that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hii17sjSwfA&fmt=21

vicarious ?
Eye on the TV
'cause tragedy thrills me
Whatever flavor it happens to be

Like:
"Killed by the husband" ...
"Drowned by the ocean" ...
"Shot by his own son" ...
"She used a poison in his tea,
Then (she) kissed him goodbye"
That's my kind of story
It's no fun til someone dies.

Don't look me at like I am a monster
Frown out your one face, but with the other (you)
Stare like a junkie into the TV
Stare like a zombie while the mother holds her child,
Watches him die,
Hands to the sky cryin "why, oh why?"

Cause I need to watch things die from a distance
Vicariously, I live while the whole world dies
You all need it too - don't lie.

Why can't we just admit it?
Why can't we just admit it?
We won't give pause until the blood is flowin'
Neither the brave nor bold
Nor brightest of stories told
We won't give pause until the blood is flowin'

I need to watch things die from a good safe distance
Vicariously, I live while the whole world dies
You all feel the same so why can't we just admit it?

Blood like rain fallin' down
Drum on grave and ground

Part vampire, part warrior,
Carnivore and voyeur
Stare at the transmittal.
Sing to the death rattle.

La, la, la, la, la, la, la-lie (x4)

Credulous at best
Your desire to believe in
Angels in the hearts of men.
But pull your head on out (of) your hippie haze
And give a listen
Shouldn't have to say it all again

The universe is hostile
So impersonal
Devour to survive
So it is, so it's always been ...

We all feed on tragedy.
It's like blood to a vampire.

Vicariously, I live while the whole world dies
Much better you than I.

 

[ghost recon88]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Here is a song for those of you who get off on watching that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hii17sjSwfA&fmt=21

vicarious ?
Eye on the TV
'cause tragedy thrills me
Whatever flavor it happens to be

Like:
"Killed by the husband" ...
"Drowned by the ocean" ...
"Shot by his own son" ...
"She used a poison in his tea,
Then (she) kissed him goodbye"
That's my kind of story
It's no fun til someone dies.

Don't look me at like I am a monster
Frown out your one face, but with the other (you)
Stare like a junkie into the TV
Stare like a zombie while the mother holds her child,
Watches him die,
Hands to the sky cryin "why, oh why?"

Cause I need to watch things die from a distance
Vicariously, I live while the whole world dies
You all need it too - don't lie.

Why can't we just admit it?
Why can't we just admit it?
We won't give pause until the blood is flowin'
Neither the brave nor bold
Nor brightest of stories told
We won't give pause until the blood is flowin'

I need to watch things die from a good safe distance
Vicariously, I live while the whole world dies
You all feel the same so why can't we just admit it?

Blood like rain fallin' down
Drum on grave and ground

Part vampire, part warrior,
Carnivore and voyeur
Stare at the transmittal.
Sing to the death rattle.

La, la, la, la, la, la, la-lie (x4)

Credulous at best
Your desire to believe in
Angels in the hearts of men.
But pull your head on out (of) your hippie haze
And give a listen
Shouldn't have to say it all again

The universe is hostile
So impersonal
Devour to survive
So it is, so it's always been ...

We all feed on tragedy.
It's like blood to a vampire.

Vicariously, I live while the whole world dies
Much better you than I.

Says the liberal...

"Do you guys really give a shit that Israel has invaded Palestine? Fuck Hammas that's what you get for firing rockets into a country with better a army and allies. Hammas is a radical Islamic terrorist organization fuck them and the people that put them in power".

 

[kylebisme]

I am no leftist. Anyone can look though my posting history and see me supporting smaller government, the right to bear arms, and a whole host of other issues you probably agree with me on.

Do you care that the decades of support for the "oppression, tyranny, crimes, killing, expulsion, destruction and devastation" we continue to inflict on Palestinians though our nation's overwhelming support of Israel is a primary reason Al-Qaeda cites for attacking us?

Do you care that just a year before, Bill Clinton could have been an impartial intermediary and just solution to this conflict in accordance with international law, but he handed Palestinians an Israeli "offer" to cede their rights, and agree to live in a permanent state of subjugation to Israel?

Do you care that the Arab peace plan has been calling for a just solution to this conflict in accordance with international law, but our government continues to ignore it as this war on terror only gets bigger?

Our leaders don't care about any of that, they are rolling in money and power out of this and everything that has come of it. I doubt many of them even know what is going on, as they are too busy exploiting our tax dollars and the might of our great nation to further their own devious ends, with callous disregard for the death left in their paths on our side as well as elsewhere.

Put simply, it comes down to two options:

1. #1 We lead the world in bring a just two-state solution to this conflict under the terms of interntional law, so both Israel and Palestine can live in peace.

1. #2 We allow our leaders to continue backing Israel in their conquest over what little of Palestine is left, while draining our economies into their pockets and driving terrorists to attack us.

Surely no one here has a rational argument to back option #2?

 

[Freshgeardude]

you keep on talking about a 2 state solution, Israel already offered 98% of the land back in exchange for peace, keep in mind that 2% needed to be kept for security reasons and whatever, and the palestinians said no. now.. if you are on the verge of losing all your land, like you said, and you are offered 98% back, you better accept that.

but the truth of the matter is, Hamas and other groups like them do not care about the amount of land or the people of their "country" they just care for the destruction of Israel. they wont officially stop until they take over the entire land of israel, and I do not see that happening and time soon because israel's army will destroy them like they did to all the other countries that attacked them that are over 10 times its size(probably even more)

and here it is.

Link

Israeli media reported earlier in the day that Olmert had presented Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas with a preliminary or "shelf" agreement based on an Israeli withdrawal from 93 percent of Judea and Samaria (the so-called "West Bank") and free passage between those territories and the Gaza Strip.

Olmert also agreed to surrender a portion of Israel's Negev desert to the Palestinians to make up for the areas in Judea and Samaria where large Jewish towns would remain.

im sure it ended up to well over 100% when they offered parts of the negev and free passage

the 2nd request by israel

and the first was

The offer was the most generous by Israel since former Prime Minister Ehud Barak agreed in 2000 to surrender about 98 percent of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, as well as the entire eastern half of Jerusalem.

anyways, i have stuff to do, so I wont be here to discuss this tonight, but I will read your response thesnowman

 

[SolMiester]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: SolMiester
Its my understanding that if the West Bank was returned primarily to the Palestinians, it would turn into a highway for arms from Israeli neighbours?, is that not correct?

If you look at the history of this conflict, you will see that is simply a misconception.

When Israel conquered what little territory Palestinians still hold legal right to in 1967, they immediately imposed strict military occupation and started colonizing it directly. Only in 1987, after decades of Israel showing no intent to stop, effectively denying Palestine's right to exist, did Palestinian popular resistance rise up against them in the First Intifada. That was which was mostly fought by Palestinian youth throwing rocks at solders. Decades after that, and shortly after the farce that was the Camp David II "peace offer", came the Second Intifada in 2000, when the suicide bombings started getting particularly frequent. As Israel took efforts to stop that, then the rocket attacks picked up, and here we are today with mass chaos there now.

Considering that history, Israel simply withdrawing their civilian settlers would go a long way to reduce the attacks against Israel. Military occupation should remain as the reality of of Israel's recognition of Palestine's right to exist sets in, and those few who still insist on attacking Israel can be more easily captured or killed, and there will be less motivation for others to take their place.

Originally posted by: SolMiester
While I understand masters usually clean the cages of animals who soil them, I think it a bit extreme to classify the Palestinians as animals, though I admit the rearing of their young for suicide and terrorism is beyond animal savagery. Perhaps neutering would help?

That method has been used in a few situations in recent history to deny people of their right to exist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization

However, if we started recognising their right to exist, they would finally have better things to raise there children to become.

Surely the latter is the better option here?

I am struggling to understand how that question answers mine....you keep going on about right to live, WTF has that got to do with Palestinians stopping their crusade to destroy Israel with weapon if they had the means to do so with an open border?


Once again here you go about right to live....!?, you are forgetting, the Palestinian indoctrination of destroying Israel!

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: SolMiester

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: SolMiester
Its my understanding that if the West Bank was returned primarily to the Palestinians, it would turn into a highway for arms from Israeli neighbours?, is that not correct?

If you look at the history of this conflict, you will see that is simply a misconception.

When Israel conquered what little territory Palestinians still hold legal right to in 1967, they immediately imposed strict military occupation and started colonizing it directly. Only in 1987, after decades of Israel showing no intent to stop, effectively denying Palestine's right to exist, did Palestinian popular resistance rise up against them in the First Intifada. That was which was mostly fought by Palestinian youth throwing rocks at solders. Decades after that, and shortly after the farce that was the Camp David II "peace offer", came the Second Intifada in 2000, when the suicide bombings started getting particularly frequent. As Israel took efforts to stop that, then the rocket attacks picked up, and here we are today with mass chaos there now.

Considering that history, Israel simply withdrawing their civilian settlers would go a long way to reduce the attacks against Israel. Military occupation should remain as the reality of of Israel's recognition of Palestine's right to exist sets in, and those few who still insist on attacking Israel can be more easily captured or killed, and there will be less motivation for others to take their place.

Originally posted by: SolMiester
While I understand masters usually clean the cages of animals who soil them, I think it a bit extreme to classify the Palestinians as animals, though I admit the rearing of their young for suicide and terrorism is beyond animal savagery. Perhaps neutering would help?

That method has been used in a few situations in recent history to deny people of their right to exist:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization

However, if we started recognising their right to exist, they would finally have better things to raise there children to become.

Surely the latter is the better option here?

I am struggling to understand how that question answers mine....you keep going on about right to live, WTF has that got to do with Palestinians stopping their crusade to destroy Israel with weapon if they had the means to do so with an open border?


Once again here you go about right to live....!?, you are forgetting, the Palestinian indoctrination of destroying Israel!

You must remember that this is The Snowman`s reoccuring theme and answert to almost everything!!

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
you keep on talking about a 2 state solution, Israel already offered 98% of the land back in exchange for peace, keep in mind that 2% needed to be kept for security reasons and whatever, and the palestinians said no. now.. if you are on the verge of losing all your land, like you said, and you are offered 98% back, you better accept that.

The percentages you cite are fudged, not counting a huge swath around East Jerusalem which is legally Palestinian territory, and not counting what Israel has walled off in the West Bank already. Also, at least at the Camp David II "offer" including permanent Israeli bypass roads and checkpoints to further divided what little of the West Bank Palestinians would have left. Having those civilian settlers remain doesn't create security, it keeps Palestinians in a permanent state of subjugation. This Flash presentation exemplifies what that "offer" consisted of:

http://www.gush-shalom.org/media/barak_eng.swf

And here is the same information as a regular webpage:

http://www.gush-shalom.org/generous/generous.html

Furthermore, back in 1993 at Oslo, Palestinians accepted ceding their right to what Israel conquered in 1948, with the understanding that Israel would withdrawal from what little of Palestine is left. They accepted defeat there, and anything less than what is still theirs under international law would leave them with less than what could ever rightly be considered an independent state. however, settlements continued to spread across the West Bank and here we are 15 years later with our leaders in the US and Israeli doing everything they can to keep their conquest going.

Originally posted by: SolMiester
I am struggling to understand how that question answers mine....you keep going on about right to live, WTF has that got to do with Palestinians stopping their crusade to destroy Israel with weapon if they had the means to do so with an open border?


Once again here you go about right to live....!?, you are forgetting, the Palestinian indoctrination of destroying Israel!

I well am aware that many Palestinian are indoctrinated with the goal of destroying Israel.

However, I am also aware of that many Israeli's and Americans are indoctrinated with the goal of destroying Palestine.

The latter goal started first, and it is the one being actively achieved, backed by people such as yourself who now consider forced sterilization and other means to that end.

Furthermore, even an open border wouldn't give Palestinians the means to destroy Israel, and the fact that Israel does have the means to return wherever damage might be done to them 100 fold or more, as they are doing in Gaza right now, would go a long way towards keeping anyone from trying anything of the sort.

That said, I don't recomend an open border between until the reality of the end to Israel's coquest over what little is left of Palestine can set in after the settler withdraw, and then a slow and ordered widrawl to secure borders between Israel and Palestine, which would be need to be mantained as a no-man's land for decades until this conlifct is truely over.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
You must remember that this is The Snowman`s reoccuring theme and answert to almost everything!!

It's not really my answer, it's what the international community has been trying to accomplish for decades now, long before I ever heard about the conflict. I've just been paying close attention to the situation for nearly a decade now, so I'm familiar with the details. The UN votes to work towards two-state solution based on international law every year, but US vetoes all binding resolutions which would start the process of ending this conlifct. Here is the vote tally for a recent general resolution on the issue:

Vote on Peaceful Settlement of Palestine Question

The draft resolution on the peaceful settlement of the Palestine question (document A/62/L.21/REV.1) was adopted by a recorded vote of 161 in favour to 7 against, with 5 abstentions, as follows:

In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Against: Australia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Palau, United States.

Abstain: Cameroon, Canada, Côte d'Ivoire, Tonga, Vanuatu.

Absent: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Chad, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Hungary, Kiribati, Madagascar, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Sao Tome and Principe, Seychelles, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu.

http://domino.un.org/unispal.n...e9ec69852573ae00549b9c


Nearly every nation understands that there is a peaceful solution to this conflict, and are ready and willing to make it happen. However, our leaders in the US and Israel insist on contenuing their conquest over what little is left of Palestine, while misleading the masses to not even understand what is happening, and convincing most that there is no other option.

 

[SolMiester]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: freshgeardude
you keep on talking about a 2 state solution, Israel already offered 98% of the land back in exchange for peace, keep in mind that 2% needed to be kept for security reasons and whatever, and the palestinians said no. now.. if you are on the verge of losing all your land, like you said, and you are offered 98% back, you better accept that.

The percentages you cite are fudged, not counting a huge swath around East Jerusalem which is legally Palestinian territory, and not counting what Israel has walled off in the West Bank already. Also, at least at the Camp David II "offer" including permanent Israeli bypass roads and checkpoints to further divided what little of the West Bank Palestinians would have left. Having those civilian settlers remain doesn't create security, it keeps Palestinians in a permanent state of subjugation. This Flash presentation exemplifies what that "offer" consisted of:

http://www.gush-shalom.org/media/barak_eng.swf

And here is the same information as a regular webpage:

http://www.gush-shalom.org/generous/generous.html

Furthermore, back in 1993 at Oslo, Palestinians accepted ceding their right to what Israel conquered in 1948, with the understanding that Israel would withdrawal from what little of Palestine is left. They accepted defeat there, and anything less than what is still theirs under international law would leave them with less than what could ever rightly be considered an independent state. however, settlements continued to spread across the West Bank and here we are 15 years later with our leaders in the US and Israeli doing everything they can to keep their conquest going.

Originally posted by: SolMiester
I am struggling to understand how that question answers mine....you keep going on about right to live, WTF has that got to do with Palestinians stopping their crusade to destroy Israel with weapon if they had the means to do so with an open border?


Once again here you go about right to live....!?, you are forgetting, the Palestinian indoctrination of destroying Israel!

I well am aware that many Palestinian are indoctrinated with the goal of destroying Israel.

However, I am also aware of that many Israeli's and Americans are indoctrinated with the goal of destroying Palestine.

The latter goal started first, and it is the one being actively achieved, backed by people such as yourself who now consider forced sterilization and other means to that end.

Furthermore, even an open border wouldn't give Palestinians the means to destroy Israel, and the fact that Israel does have the means to return wherever damage might be done to them 100 fold or more, as they are doing in Gaza right now, would go a long way towards keeping anyone from trying anything of the sort.

That said, I don't recomend an open border between until the reality of the end to Israel's coquest over what little is left of Palestine can set in after the settler withdraw, and then a slow and ordered widrawl to secure borders between Israel and Palestine, which would be need to be mantained as a no-man's land for decades until this conlifct is truely over.

Okay, now I know you are just talking out of a hole in your ass......

I dont think I will ever be able to believe a word you say again mate because that is so far from the truth it stinks!! where the fcuk do you come up with that when as soon as Israel was created those words of destruction for Israel were uttered by Arab nations....

You sir are so deluded, I am almost laughing with disbelief at such a comment.......

edit, but after reading your next post, i understand that after 10 yrs of following this conflict, you must know it all.....what a redneck!

 

[kylebisme]

For an early example of Israel's attempt to deny Palestine's right to exist, see the Faisal?Weizmann Agreement of 1919, which was an attempt to secure all of Palestine, and slightly beyond, to become Israel.

As for the Arab nations declaring war on Israel upon it's foundation, see the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians ran out of the region by Israeli militias in the months prior, during the execution of Plan Dalet.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
For an early example of Israel's attempt to deny Palestine's right to exist, see the Faisal?Weizmann Agreement of 1919, which was an attempt to secure all of Palestine, and slightly beyond, to become Israel.

As for the Arab nations declaring war on Israel upon it's foundation, see the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians ran out of the region by Israeli militias in the months prior, during the execution of Plan Dalet.

hey...you already know that there are 2 sides to every story.....
so lets take a look at the actual 100% true facts.....

You state -- As for the Arab nations declaring war on Israel upon it's foundation, see the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians ran out of the region by Israeli militias in the months prior, during the execution of Plan Dalet.

yet other sources say -- the palestinians left of there own accord.....

Also depending on who you are quoting Paln dalet has been grossly over stated or under stated.....

You should know that one of the huge probleems with this whole Israeli/Palestinian thing is that there has been so much bull crap thrown around that the actual factual truth has been lost in all the bull shit!

Whose right....whose wrong......
Why does there have to be a right or a wrong?

We need to move beyond the bull shit in order to find a common ground!!
Peace!!

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
For an early example of Israel's attempt to deny Palestine's right to exist, see the Faisal?Weizmann Agreement of 1919, which was an attempt to secure all of Palestine, and slightly beyond, to become Israel.

As for the Arab nations declaring war on Israel upon it's foundation, see the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians ran out of the region by Israeli militias in the months prior, during the execution of Plan Dalet.

hey...uoiu already know that there are 2 sides to every story.....
so lets take a look at the actual 100% true facts.....

You state -- As for the Arab nations declaring war on Israel upon it's foundation, see the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians ran out of the region by Israeli militias in the months prior, during the execution of Plan Dalet.

yet other sources say -- the palestinians left of there own accord.....

Also depending on who you are quoting Paln dalet has been grossly over stated or ubder stated.....

You should know that one of the huge probleems with this whole Israeli/ palestinian thing is that there has been so much bull crap thrown around that the actual factual truth has been lost in all the bull shit!

Whose right....whose wrong......
Why does there have to be a right or a wrong?

We need to move beyond the bull shit in order to find a common ground!!
Peace!!

History has always shown that the victor in war gets do draw the new map. Right or wrong doesn't matter. Winning does.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
For an early example of Israel's attempt to deny Palestine's right to exist, see the Faisal?Weizmann Agreement of 1919, which was an attempt to secure all of Palestine, and slightly beyond, to become Israel.

As for the Arab nations declaring war on Israel upon it's foundation, see the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians ran out of the region by Israeli militias in the months prior, during the execution of Plan Dalet.

hey...uoiu already know that there are 2 sides to every story.....
so lets take a look at the actual 100% true facts.....

You state -- As for the Arab nations declaring war on Israel upon it's foundation, see the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians ran out of the region by Israeli militias in the months prior, during the execution of Plan Dalet.

yet other sources say -- the palestinians left of there own accord.....

Also depending on who you are quoting Paln dalet has been grossly over stated or ubder stated.....

You should know that one of the huge probleems with this whole Israeli/ palestinian thing is that there has been so much bull crap thrown around that the actual factual truth has been lost in all the bull shit!

Whose right....whose wrong......
Why does there have to be a right or a wrong?

We need to move beyond the bull shit in order to find a common ground!!
Peace!!

History has always shown that the victor in war gets do draw the new map. Right or wrong doesn't matter. Winning does.

I agree!! But in this case until we can get beyond whose right and whose wrong...I am afraid there is no solution!!

 

[poohbear]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Military might does not win a single heart or mind

JFC... Did we try "to win the hearts and minds" of Germans? hell no we bombed those 'krauts' children and cities until they begged for mercy, killed millions of them. More the better until they sued for peace. 'Japs' the same. You know nothing zero notta about warfare. That said I appreciate your naivete for it's humanitarian aspect, now if we can only get 'the other side' to think like you we'd have world peace.

but, that was'nt a guerrila war man. That was all out war of a country that openly declared war and was very capable of defating the allies, the wars fought now are very very different. You simply can't use such a strategy nowadays, america tried that in vietnam and it backfired leading to defeat. besides, who exactly would you bomb if the governments are our allies but rogue groups operating in those countries are'nt?

 

[poohbear]

Originally posted by: freshgeardude

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: Zebo
With this level of disagreement it won't end until one side scores a genocidal type victory.

This from a guy who claims he is not an extremist. Again you prove yourself just as vile as Hamas.

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
This. Civilians die during war. If you dont want your children to die, dont start lobbing rockets.

I agree with that. Can you agree with this:

If you don't want rockets lobbed at you, don't cage people in like cattle while colonizing their homeland out from under them.

?

I like this game. My turn.

If you don't want your people caged like cattle stop suicide bombing cafes.

lol you will go back till like 1900 with thesnowman. I had this arguement with him already. it came down to, jews returning back to their homeland and arabs not liking it

how can u say such nonsense? u think a 25th generation German jew in the early 20th century that spoke only german, looked german, ate german, and shat german had any notion that a patch of desert in the middle east is their home country? The guy is european through and through, and when he goes to the middle east he calls the other semites there antii-semitic because he's as ignorant & foreign to the middle east as a white man is to some polynesian island.

you want to make landclaims based on what happened 2000 years ago? this is absolutely absurd. imagine if every ethnic group made such claims based on what happened 2000 years ago? the world would just be lovely.


i can't begin to count the amount of times i just wanted to post "FU$K OFF!!! YOU'RE LIVING PROOF PEOPLE CAN MAKE KIDS THROUGH ANAL SEX" in these threads, but i've refrained from it, try to do the same.



-------------------------
YHPM

Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy

 

[poohbear]

double post.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: poohbear

Originally posted by: Zebo

Military might does not win a single heart or mind

JFC... Did we try "to win the hearts and minds" of Germans? hell no we bombed those 'krauts' children and cities until they begged for mercy, killed millions of them. More the better until they sued for peace. 'Japs' the same. You know nothing zero notta about warfare. That said I appreciate your naivete for it's humanitarian aspect, now if we can only get 'the other side' to think like you we'd have world peace.

but, that was'nt a guerrila war man. That was all out war of a country that openly declared war and was very capable of defating the allies, the wars fought now are very very different. You simply can't use such a strategy nowadays, america tried that in vietnam and it backfired leading to defeat. besides, who exactly would you bomb if the governments are our allies but rogue groups operating in those countries are'nt?

So was the Hama massacre a guerrilla war when the ruling infidel Alawites in Syria stamped out their Sunni extremism. Killed whole town of 25K or so as a deterrent for the next. And terror against infidel Alawites has stop cold since. And there has never been a war so off limits as Vietnam, it's irrelevant to war fighting. Their capital city we couldn't even bomb out and overall totally failing in the Nine Principles of War and the doctrine of Clausewitz. In reality, we had adopted the strategic defensive, since we were not taking the fight to the enemy's main force - the NVA but instead spent years toiling in the jungle hunting VC. Ridiculous comparison. I suggest you study recent insurgencies from Algeria to Saddams Iraq and how Arab leaders deal with them to start with. Further back you can study the Philippine's muslim insurrection and how USA, when we knew how to fight, delt with it. While you're at it study Nine Principles of War and the doctrine of Clausewitz which the West has long forgot but the rest of the world hasn't.

 

[Borealis7]

Freedom Fighters! get yer red hot Freedom Fighters riiight here

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Zebo
And there has never been a war so off limits as Vietnam, it's irrelevant to war fighting. Their capital city we couldn't even bomb out and overall totally failing in the Nine Principles of War and the doctrine of Clausewitz... While you're at it study Nine Principles of War and the doctrine of Clausewitz which the West has long forgot but the rest of the world hasn't.

Where's the doctrine that says we were *wrong* to oppose freedom for the Vietnamese people - under French occupation, under a divided nation with our puppet leading one side, and when we directly killed two million Vietnamese people? *That's* the missing doctrine - that we shouldn't have been there, not that we should have killed even more to 'win' an unjust war.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Borealis7
Freedom Fighters! get yer red hot Freedom Fighters riiight here

Obviously misunderstanders of Islam, The Religion of Peace.

We need GWB and Blair to explain it to them.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Zebo
And there has never been a war so off limits as Vietnam, it's irrelevant to war fighting. Their capital city we couldn't even bomb out and overall totally failing in the Nine Principles of War and the doctrine of Clausewitz... While you're at it study Nine Principles of War and the doctrine of Clausewitz which the West has long forgot but the rest of the world hasn't.

Where's the doctrine that says we were *wrong* to oppose freedom for the Vietnamese people - under French occupation, under a divided nation with our puppet leading one side, and when we directly killed two million Vietnamese people? *That's* the missing doctrine - that we shouldn't have been there, not that we should have killed even more to 'win' an unjust war.

I don't disagree it was unjust. A total waste of men and materials as most wars are. War strategy and tactics has nothing to do with that. I don't like bridge either but I can beat most people because I've read about strategies and played hundreds of games.

Incidentally great warriors, unlike our cream puff generals today, such as Sherman and others hated war but were great at winning them.

 

[Lemon law]

Poohbear manages to totally miss what it is to be a jew by citing ,"how can u say such nonsense? u think a 25th generation German jew in the early 20th century that spoke only german, looked german, ate german, and shat german had any notion that a patch of desert in the middle east is their home country? The guy is european through and through, and when he goes to the middle east he calls the other semites there antii-semitic because he's as ignorant & foreign to the middle east as a white man is to some polynesian island."

I knew exactly the guy you described, he was a next door neighbor and friend of the family. He was one of the most intelligent, thoughtful, and most tolerant people I ever met in my life, he died about a year ago age 98. He got a PH D in mathematics, just at the time Hitler was starting his rise to power but by then jews could not jobs in Universities. He ended up fleeing to Yugoslavia and was lucky enough to get an entry visa into the USA in the closing years of WW2. He certainly was not a practicing jew, but he knew where his people came from and so did his children.

But its the essence of Jewishness to know their own history, and the old Testament of the Bible is their history, and what binds the Jewish people together as a separate group. And if they lose that identity, they are likely to marry a gentile, adopt Christianity or atheism, and thus lose their cultural identity. But its sex determined, Jews segregate the sexes in synagogue, and if a female marries a gentile, technically, their offspring can be Jewish, but if a male Jew marries a gentile, their offspring is regarded technically as a non Jew, because the Jewish religion heritage of legitimacy descends from the female side. And there are very high hurdles to jump for anyone seeking to convert to Judaism, which also explains why the Judaism is not a evangelistic religion like many Christian and Muslim secs. Growing up in a University town, I had friends and classmates, some were Jews, some were Christians, and some were basically atheists. As children, we just did not care, and I still do not care about religion. My father is technically a non practicing Jew, my mother a gentile, my father could freely pass in all communities, but I can still remember feeling it odd that my catholic friends only ate fish on Friday, and going to a Jewish household and hearing the toast, "Next year in Jerusalem.", or watching my Jewish friends father's huddling around the table lighting the Monera candles while I was dreaming of a new bike for X-mas.

Now as an amateur student of history, I have to come to the conclusion that religion by itself is not a divisive force, but pair it with economic and social discrimination, and it becomes explosive.

Getting back to my German professor type, he lived to see the day when he was persecuted on the basis of religion, he lived to see the day when Christians butchered Muslims in Yugoslavia, and Saddam Hussein
butchered Shia Muslims so his Minority Sunni Muslims could rule. And he also lived to see the day when Jews did the same in Israel to Palestinians. He did not talk about it much but his eyes got sad, but if you asked him, he would freely admit he did not see a dimes worth of difference, and label it for what its is, human insanity and brutality becoming political policy.