Israel, the strong horse amidst the clash of Arab civilizations

[Lemon law]

Maybe IHV should move to Gaza, see how long he remains a pro-Israeli fan boy.

But it still misses the overall point, there is a rich history of simple religious bigotry killing billions over our long human history, but when religious bigotry is combined with lack of economic opportunity, its truly a terrorist playground.

Recent human history of the past 15 years have shown that equal rights can end such long standing conflicts, and drive away the terrorists. I cite South Africa and Ireland as living proof.

 

[Noobtastic]

Maybe IHV should move to Gaza, see how long he remains a pro-Israeli fan boy.

But it still misses the overall point, there is a rich history of simple religious bigotry killing billions over our long human history, but when religious bigotry is combined with lack of economic opportunity, its truly a terrorist playground.

Recent human history of the past 15 years have shown that equal rights can end such long standing conflicts, and drive away the terrorists. I cite South Africa and Ireland as living proof.

Why not actually respond to my post?

 

[Zorkorist]

When Religious Bigotry was combined with lack of economic oppurtunity, our fore-fathers boarded, la nina, la pinta, y, la santa maria..

They didn't terrorize.

Which is pretty awesome.

-John

 

[Bitek]

When Religious Bigotry was combined with lack of economic oppurtunity, our fore-fathers boarded, la nina, la pinta, y, la santa maria..

They didn't terrorize.

Which is pretty awesome.

-John

What are you talking about? Our fore-fathers terrorised, murdered and genocided the Natives into near extinction. No quarter was ever even given to women or children.

One lovely example of our fore-fathers at Sand Creek:

Black Kettle ever trusting, raised both an American and a white flag of peace over his tepee. In response, Chivington raised his arm for the attack. Chivington wanted a victory, not prisoners, and so men, women and children were hunted down and shot.
With cannons and rifles pounding them, the Indians scattered in panic. Then the crazed soldiers charged and killed anything that moved. A few warriors managed to fight back to allow some of the tribe to escape across the stream, including Black Kettle.
The colonel was as thorough as he was heartless. An interpreter living in the village testified, "THEY WERE SCALPED, THEIR BRAINS KNOCKED OUT; THE MEN USED THEIR KNIVES, RIPPED OPEN WOMEN, CLUBBED LITTLE CHILDREN, KNOCKED THEM IN THE HEAD WITH THEIR RIFLE BUTTS, BEAT THEIR BRAINS OUT, MUTILATED THEIR BODIES IN EVERY SENSE OF THE WORD." By the end of the one-sided battle as many as 200 Indians, more than half women and children, had been killed and mutilated.
While the Sand Creek Massacre outraged easterners, it seemed to please many people in Colorado Territory. Chivington later appeared on a Denver stage where he regaled delighted audiences with his war stories and displayed 100 Indian scalps, including the pubic hairs of women.

 

[Noobtastic]

What are you talking about? Our fore-fathers terrorised, murdered and genocided the Natives into near extinction. No quarter was ever even given to women or children.

One lovely example of our fore-fathers at Sand Creek:

Nice twist.

Zorkist was saying the original british settlers responded to the injustices they experienced in their native state by getting on a boat and leaving.

They didn't strap bombs to their children and murder innocent people for the sake of murdering innocent people.

Now, what happened when they made it to North America had nothing to do with fighting injustices but exploiting the indiginous population.

This isn't unique. British settlers in Australia exterminated 2/3 of the aboriginal population.

 

[Lemon law]

When Religious Bigotry was combined with lack of economic oppurtunity, our fore-fathers boarded, la nina, la pinta, y, la santa maria..

They didn't terrorize.

Which is pretty awesome.-----------------------------------------------------------

Totally historically wrong, if you look at the total jerko in Colombuses original voyages, their first act was to dominate and enslave native inhabitants.

But the North American continent was later populated by a wide variety of religious groups seeking to escape religious oppression their own countries. But if any one group were left to their own devices, they would have cheerfully adopted their own brand of only their religion bigotry. But there were soon too many religions to make that workable, and the true American miracle was the separation of church and State.

And because various religious bigots were not allow to dominate everyone else, everyone got down to the business of building a country. Without wasting energy trying to tell others how to practice religion. Its worked very well for America.

So tell me again why I should support Israel when they say only Jews have rights. And other native born people, by reasons of religion, should become third class citizens in the land of their own birth. Is that an American view?

 

[Zorkorist]

What are you talking about? Our fore-fathers terrorised, murdered and genocided the Natives into near extinction. No quarter was ever even given to women or children.

One lovely example of our fore-fathers at Sand Creek:

I live in Colorado and am quite familiar with the Sand Creek Massacre.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

When Religious Bigotry was combined with lack of economic oppurtunity, our fore-fathers boarded, la nina, la pinta, y, la santa maria..

They didn't terrorize.

Which is pretty awesome.-----------------------------------------------------------

Totally historically wrong, if you look at the total jerko in Colombuses original voyages, their first act was to dominate and enslave native inhabitants.

But the North American continent was later populated by a wide variety of religious groups seeking to escape religious oppression their own countries. But if any one group were left to their own devices, they would have cheerfully adopted their own brand of only their religion bigotry. But there were soon too many religious to make that workable, and the true American miracle was the separation of church and State.

And because various religious bigots were not allow to dominate everyone else, everyone got down to the business of building a country. Without wasting energy trying to tell others how to practice religion. Its worked very well for America.

So tell me again why I should support Israel when they say only Jews have rights. And other native born people, by reasons of religion, should become third class citizens in the land of their own birth. Is that an American view?

Jews should be supported, because they left their countries on la nina, la pinta, y, la santa maria, to avoid religious persecution.

To allow them to be attacked, in the land they retreated to, would be wrong.

-John

 

[Noobtastic]

So tell me again why I should support Israel when they say only Jews have rights. And other native born people, by reasons of religion, should become third class citizens in the land of their own birth. Is that an American view?

Why can't Jews live in their own country free of oppression? Minorities have full rights in Israel, unlike in the Arab world, where minorities are subject to 2nd and 3rd class citizenship.

Oh, and women.

But naturally Lemon Law is not bothered by the apartheid Muslim states. Too busy inventing facts about Israel.

Even assuming the fiction that Jews enslave their large Arab minority, so what? Is it any worse than Egypt's treatment of their Christian minority? Or Lebanon's treatment of their Palestinian population? Or Saudi Arabia's treatment of their women?

Israel is a sovereign state and it can do as it pleases. If the Left is so bothered by injustices Israel shouldn't even be in their itinerary.

 

[SamurAchzar]

That article is pretty much bang-on. You won't find many advocates for this viewpoint for people outside the ME region, though. Anyone who thinks the Muslim world has issues with Israel because of the Palestinian land occupation is frankly a detached idiot. Not only did both Egypt and Jordan signed peace agreements with Israel separately of the Palestinian issue, they CREATED this problem by refusing to retake Gaza Strip and the West Bank, respectively (their land before 1967!). When Palestinians caused some troubles for King Hussein, he didn't hesitate to slaughter them in thousands.

Israel is a very convenient target for nations like Iran to blame their troubles upon. There are much bigger cases of injustice going on around the world, yet they repeatedly pick on the Palestinians (which frankly have it much better than Muslims in Sudan or even Iraq).
Palestinians are an excuse for these dark regimes to maintain their act, while offsetting the attention of both their domestic population and dumb Liberals off the real issues.

What this article narrowly misses, though, is the need for King Abdullah to have a formal Palestinian state created, because of his demographic concerns. Some people in Israel say Jordan is the real homeland of the Palestinians - perhaps rightly so, seeing the demographic composition of Jordan), and he's scared to death of what mess it might cause.

 

[ElFenix]

Seeing that the subtext of any discussion of Israel nowadays is its conflict with Iran, the OP has a fatal flaw in his "analysis". Persians are not Arabs.

where does it say that persians are arabs?

 

[werepossum]

I can't comment but can't, I'm still laughing over "Arab civilizations".

 

[PJABBER]

That article is pretty much bang-on. You won't find many advocates for this viewpoint for people outside the ME region, though. Anyone who thinks the Muslim world has issues with Israel because of the Palestinian land occupation is frankly a detached idiot. Not only did both Egypt and Jordan signed peace agreements with Israel separately of the Palestinian issue, they CREATED this problem by refusing to retake Gaza Strip and the West Bank, respectively (their land before 1967!). When Palestinians caused some troubles for King Hussein, he didn't hesitate to slaughter them in thousands.

Israel is a very convenient target for nations like Iran to blame their troubles upon. There are much bigger cases of injustice going on around the world, yet they repeatedly pick on the Palestinians (which frankly have it much better than Muslims in Sudan or even Iraq).
Palestinians are an excuse for these dark regimes to maintain their act, while offsetting the attention of both their domestic population and dumb Liberals off the real issues.

What this article narrowly misses, though, is the need for King Abdullah to have a formal Palestinian state created, because of his demographic concerns. Some people in Israel say Jordan is the real homeland of the Palestinians - perhaps rightly so, seeing the demographic composition of Jordan), and he's scared to death of what mess it might cause.

The article and the referenced book are both quite insightful, but the message is not one that percolates easily through the obfuscations and the agendas that many here have.

As you state in your last paragraph, everyone is scared of the Palestinians. Most everywhere they are, there is turmoil, death and corruption.

It would be better to carve out a place for them, but at this point they have little legitimate claim to areas contiguous to Israel. And any claims they have are negated by their abysmal proclivity to violence and corruption. Every time they have been granted a concession, an option for self-rule, a new start, they have failed to achieve any semblance of a peaceful and democratic state.

There will be no peace in the Mid-East so long as there is not a place for the Palestinians, but where will a people so committed to self destruction be welcomed?

 

[Lemon law]

Part of the myth here, as the thread goes off on a new tangent, is that as we prove the various Arab States are far less than perfect, lies in the fact that the bad past behavior of Arabs in no way excuses or elevates the behavior of the State of Israel.

But maybe its time to address the IHV statement that, "Israel is a sovereign state and it can do as it pleases."

And there are three things wrong with that.

1. The UN created the State of Israel in 1948 to rectify past injustices. Suddenly the world had all those homeless European Jews made homeless by the actions of fascist in Europe. So instead of foisting them back onto the nations that caused the damage in Europe, they foisted them off on the Arabs who did not cause the problem. But even then, allowing Jews into the former British mandate of Palestine still would have created a 50 50 mix of Jews and non Jews, and the post 1948 new Israeli government was at a fork in the road, they could, as the UN had a right to expect, taken a high road and granted equal citizenship and governance to Jews and Non Jews, and instead took the low road of granting rights to only Jews. So what did the UN formation of the State of Israel solve, by solving one refugee crisis, and then replacing it with another equal or greater sized refugee problem still unaddressed.

2. We can say Israel is a sovereign State and we should do nothing. Did we say that about Nazi Germany when it started to take over other countries? And if the US and the rest of the world had done nothing, Hitler would have finished his final solution and there would be no Jewish refugee problem to worry about. And the other point to make is that we are doing things, since 1948 the USA has given massive foreign and military aid to the State of Israel, and for that matter have bribed Jordan and Egypt into signing peace deals with Israel. And now when the rest of the world says Israel must give back the land illegitimately captured in the 1967 war, Israel says hell no but still demands we step up our foreign aid to them???????????? The fact is and remains, its the USA who have given arms free gratis to Israel while refusing to sell our arms to Arabs for cash that has given Israeli its present counterproductive to peace military hegemony. IF the USA just says Israel, do what you want, we will no longer aid you, its the Arabs with oil money who will soon have the arms to have the military hegemony in the mid-east.

3. We can not go back and change a failed past, we can only move forward. And now we have a huge Palestinian refugee problem, because Israel has kicked them out of their former homeland. There are only two ways to address that refugee problem. Either Israel must give the land captured in the 1967 war back, pay full restitution for the Palestinian land confiscated in 1948 by Israel, and that would help fund a viable Palestinian State. Or Israel can assimilate the Palestinians with full voting rights which might then realize the original UN dreams when they formed the State of Israel in 1948.

 

[Lemon law]

I can't comment but can't, I'm still laughing over "Arab civilizations".

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe a brief world history lesson is in order. After the death of Mohamed, the primitive and loutish hordes swept out from Saudi Arabia to start a century of Muslim conquest. the like of which had never been seen before. And soon they had all of North Africa, All of Spain, a good part of France, and that only talks about expansion to the West. To the East, they dominated all by land until they were stopped half way through India. But by boat they extended their trade route and religious dominions as far east and North as the Philippine Islands.

But could the muscle power of barbarian louts have accomplished this alone? The answer strangely came from the original Sunni Shiite split and Persia. Where the Shiite Persians lost the original battle of succession. But enough highly cultured Persians who were basic successors to greek learning and sciences joined the Sunni expansionists and brought the higher sciences and cultures along with the Muslim expansion.

And up to the time of the start of the voyages of Columbus, the Muslims were light years ahead of the Christians of Europe in terms of the sciences, metallurgy, and even the art of warfare and diplomacy. Many of the criteria by which we judge civilization.

They too laughed at the concept of European civilization. And rested on their laurels while being lulled into a false sense of security. It was the Christian crusades that helped in the cross cultural pollination, because European sciences were about to make huge leaps in though.

In short werepossim, times always change.

 

[Lemon law]

Maybe PJaABBER gets it half right with, "It would be better to carve out a place for them, but at this point they have little legitimate claim to areas contiguous to Israel. And any claims they have are negated by their abysmal proclivity to violence and corruption. Every time they have been granted a concession, an option for self-rule, a new start, they have failed to achieve any semblance of a peaceful and democratic state."

To some extent the PJABBER error is to assume when the only outlet is violence, its violence we get. But in terms of the Palestinians, former residents of the British mandate, had their property confiscated, were herded into concentrations camps by Israel, and then denied any opportunity of productive employment. And now we say they are poverty stricken, can't lift themselves up by their bootstraps after we stole their boots, and then we are amazed when they violently but ineffectually protests. And laugh at their poverty when Israel is the author of it. And claim they have a inborn PROCLIVITY to violence.

Well there is another group that had an inborn PROCLIVITY to violence, namely the Jewish residents of the former British mandate. Blowing up the King David Hotel, murdering Palestinians at every opportunity, terrorizing the British army by planting bomb after bomb.

But now they are the good guys because they got a chance to build a State, and even Arab critics have to admit they have built Israel for the better. What it does not mean is that better results could not have been achieved by Israeli Jews and Palestinians building a peaceful Israel together.

But PJABBER is correct, the Palestinian question can not be denied.

 

[PJABBER]

I haven't much time to get into a detailed discussion at this time, but the history of the region bears some reading.

I again highly suggest that the following short histories be read to gain a fundamental understanding of what happened in that part of the world and why a resolution is unlikely without some very creative thinking and some great leadership coming from the Palestinians themselves. And I am not taking about someone like the corrupt and inadequate Arafat, but someone with the ability to inspire at the level of a Mandela.

Israel and Palestine: A Brief History - Part 1

History of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict since the Oslo Accords

As I am not an apologist for the Palestinians as LL is, and neither am I an apologist for the Israelis, I believe that we must recognize the actions reflected in modern events as well as accept history.

The Palestinians were never going to be removed by the Israelis upon the formation of their State, nor were they forced into some unusual poverty, as, for many, that was generally their condition at the founding of Israel. They were robbed of nothing, they abandoned everything.

Some joined in the initial attack by the Arab states at the founding of Israel. Those that took part in the attacks against the new Israeli state subsequently left without any direct action on Israel's part. They were held and continue to be held in contempt in all the places they subsequently settled. No one wants them, in great part because they have been the worst of neighbors.

Other Palestinians, most with already productive farms and otherwise productive lives, stayed and share in the bounty of hard work and decent government and, in many good examples, continue to be contributing citizens of Israel. They are not vassals or refugees or second class participants as part of the Israeli experience. They live lives that are the envy of all of their neighbors. And that, too, like an unscratched itch, is a problem not recognized enough.

The Palestinian question cannot be denied, but the answer is not apparent as all attempts to grant sovereignty to the Palestinians have resulted in disasters of violence and corruption.

As the clearest mark of insanity in this matter it is that the world continues to demand that more be taken from a fully functioning Israel until it exists no more. If we are to reject the charade for what it is, it then becomes incumbent to take a different and more creative tack.

The Palestinians need to bootstrap themselves up wherever they are right now and no outside party will do that for them. Some Palestinians have already done so, they have rejected victimhood and built productive lives, too many haven't. Waging unending war against Israel and all of the host countries whose hospitality they abuse will only keep them the pariahs they have been.

As this is a distant hope, maybe, ultimately, it will take the removal of the Palestinians entirely from the Middle East, where they hate all who surround them and are hated in turn.

The vast majority of Palestinians have no memory of the places that have now been Israel since the 1940's. They have no ties in personal memory to that place at all. Why not grant them a new State in Africa or some other uncontested reserve of undeveloped land such as Palestine was when their ancestors left with such lingering bitterness?

Let them show the world that they, like the Israelis, can themselves build a new and productive home and do it the way they would like, without taking from those who have built from nothing and in sixty years have been an example of what could be with hard work and representative government.

 

[mjrpes3]

where does it say that persians are arabs?

Wherever Iran is implied. Not in the book itself but in the article. It's sloppy to not mention the distinction, because it is easily assumed by those who aren't away of the distinction, since Iran is currently envisaged as the dominant, existential threat to Israel.

If you want to argue that Iran is currently dominated by an "Arab mentality", even if they are not Arab, then that is fine. But you will need to argue this point, and explain how it can be that Arabs hate democracy, yet the Green revolution seemed to be all about the desire for a more moderate, more open, less hard-line, government.

 

[werepossum]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe a brief world history lesson is in order. After the death of Mohamed, the primitive and loutish hordes swept out from Saudi Arabia to start a century of Muslim conquest. the like of which had never been seen before. And soon they had all of North Africa, All of Spain, a good part of France, and that only talks about expansion to the West. To the East, they dominated all by land until they were stopped half way through India. But by boat they extended their trade route and religious dominions as far east and North as the Philippine Islands.

But could the muscle power of barbarian louts have accomplished this alone? The answer strangely came from the original Sunni Shiite split and Persia. Where the Shiite Persians lost the original battle of succession. But enough highly cultured Persians who were basic successors to greek learning and sciences joined the Sunni expansionists and brought the higher sciences and cultures along with the Muslim expansion.

And up to the time of the start of the voyages of Columbus, the Muslims were light years ahead of the Christians of Europe in terms of the sciences, metallurgy, and even the art of warfare and diplomacy. Many of the criteria by which we judge civilization.

They too laughed at the concept of European civilization. And rested on their laurels while being lulled into a false sense of security. It was the Christian crusades that helped in the cross cultural pollination, because European sciences were about to make huge leaps in though.

In short werepossim, times always change.

Oh, I agree that the time of Muhammad Islamic nations were more advanced than was Europe - the Roman Empire had collapsed, after all, and the entire socioeconomic structure with it. Even for a few centuries that remained the case. But Islam took societies advanced in some ways and in many ways froze them at the seventh century level - great for conquest, lousy for advancement. Whilst Europe was in the throws of the Dark Ages that was good enough, but by Columbus' time the Arab nations and even Persia had fallen far behind Europe in virtually every field, anatomy and medicine being obvious exceptions.

 

[Lemon law]

IMHO the PJABBER link is not all that bad.

Israel and Palestine: A Brief History - Part 1

Basically all it proves is that, of the various contenting groups, Israelis, Palestinians, and Arabs, Palestinians were the least violent and did not seek violence any where to the extent Israeli Jews and Arabs States did.

The Arabs were more the rascals, they would not and maybe never will accept an Jewish Israel in their midst. But as the Arabs used the Palestinians as a justification for their own violence, they have thus far found the Israeli Jews are capable of stopping them. But when the Arabs have lost due to the violence they provoked, the people who pay the price are the Palestinians. Nor have the Jews been model citizens either as the PJABBER link details their set of pro war behavior, terrorist activities, and outrageous behavior.

But going forward, the end goal has to be the right to exist of Israel and Arab acceptance of that right. As long as the Palestinians people keep getting totally screwed,
it only contributes to make the above end goal impossible. And since the Arab States surrounding Israel on all sides have the oil money and outnumber Israeli Jews by 50 or more to one or more, its hard to conceive of Israeli always militarily prevailing. And failing that Arab military victory, anti-Israeli terrorists are now the big winners and may be the ultimate victors if they acquire chemical and biological weapons, or worse yet nukes.

Meanwhile, its the Palestinian plight that drives the continual tensions that grow more extreme ever day.

 

[Noobtastic]

Basically all it proves is that, of the various contenting groups, Israelis, Palestinians, and Arabs, Palestinians were the least violent and did not seek violence any where to the extent Israeli Jews and Arabs States did.

What? the Palestinians were the primary tool to wage war against Israel from 1951-1967.

Hello, remember the Fedayeen? Over 960 Israelis killed between 1951-1955 alone, majority killed in last 6 months of 1955.

The "Palestinians" were inseparable from the general Arab belligerents. The modern Palestinian identity was not developed until after 1967.

No one viewed the violence against Jews in the 20s, 30s, and 40s in Palestine any different than the violence against Jews in Damascus, Tripoli, Fez, Bagdad, etc.

It was all for the same reasons. The Jews are displacing them (false), the Jews want to demolish the al-aqsa mosque, Jews baking Arab children into Matzo (false, popular canard in Syria), etc.

Lemon Law, you have been demolished in virtually every Palestinian/Israel thread you post in. Your constant attempt to play down, if not outright romanticize the collective violence against Israelis and Jews, and drawing parallels between Israel and Nazi Germany, is becoming very, very old.

Either accept reality and join the human race or continue lobbying for monsters and terrorists.

 

[Lemon law]

If the best IHV can come up with is, "Hello, remember the Fedayeen? Over 960 Israelis killed between 1951-1955 alone, majority killed in last 6 months of 1955.", a mere 960 is a tiny amount compared to the number Israeli terrorists murdered. Entire villages totally gone and ethnically cleansed. Not just one village, we are talking thousands of villages over an entire region.

And unlike IHV who is totally pro-Israeli biased and thus incapable of seeing Israeli wrongs while seeing every anti-Israeli wrong in amplified clarity, while I try to see all sides being total rascals who mutually bungled any hopes of a better mid-east.

But Israel will know no peace until a semblance of equal justice is restored. And that means solving the Palestinian refugee problem and getting just compensation for the Property Israel confiscated.

I have little false hope that IHV will ever learn, but I have more than held my own as I have discredited much propaganda.

Excuse me for my overoptimistic faith, that Israel, for the first time in its always change hands history can finally be peacefully shared by Israeli Jews, Palestinians, Muslims and Christians. But in the past history of Israel, all these groups have had multiple times with the hegemony over Israel, and each time everyone of these groups have tried to pig it all. Have their years in control, but then some other unhappy denied group kicks them out in an orgy of violence as a new group of piggishness begins.

Has it ever occurred to anyone that its time to break that Holy Land of Israel cycle by sharing Israel for a damn change?

 

[Noobtastic]

If the best IHV can come up with is, "Hello, remember the Fedayeen? Over 960 Israelis killed between 1951-1955 alone, majority killed in last 6 months of 1955.", a mere 960 is a tiny amount compared to the number Israeli terrorists murdered. Entire villages totally gone and ethnically cleansed. Not just one village, we are talking thousands of villages over an entire region.

Uh?

Tell me of these villages? It seems your argument is not enough Jews died. Well, I'm sorry Lemon Law.

I can't think of any "villages" cleansed 1951-1955. I know many Arabs fled in the 48 war, but even then civilian casualties on the Arab end (including Palestinians) was somewhere north of 800 plus executed POWs.

Hardly a blood bath as far as post-WWII conflicts go. 13 million "cleansed" in Western Europe by the allies and the Soviets, yet their legitimacy is not held hostage 6 decades later.

Ah, reserved for the Jews I guess, eh Lemony?

And unlike IHV who is totally pro-Israeli biased and thus incapable of seeing Israeli wrongs while seeing every anti-Israeli wrong in amplified clarity, while I see all sides being total rascals who mutually bungled any hopes of a better mid-east.

I'm capable of deciphering lies and propaganda. We haven't been discussing Israeli wrong-doings, but fiction and mis-information that are passed off as "Israeli criticism" made by yourself.

YOU are incapable of DEBATING FACTS. And when faces with unrelenting TRUTH, you simply move on to another rant.

Assuming I am a pro-Israeli biased poster, so what? I've provided facts and figures to back up my arguments. Whatever my personal agenda is it is completely irrelevant at this point. If and when you want to have an honest conservation that does not lead to terror apologism, let me know.

But Israel will know no peace until a semblance of equal justice is restored. And that means solving the Palestinian refugee problem and getting just compensation for the Property Israel confiscated.

Haven't we had this discussion already many times, how the Arabs rejected peace (you have yet to respond to this very fact), and how they continue to reject peace, and how many more Jews than Arabs were forced out of their homes during this conflict - yet the Jews don't predicate their conflict as some reaction to "take back what's theirs."

Has it ever occurred to anyone that its time to break that Holy Land of Israel cycle by sharing Israel for a damn change?

Sharing Israel? Maybe when Israel's neighbors join the 21st century, and start sharing their land with JEWS and other ethnic minorities, maybe I'll care.

As long as it's illegal for Jews to buy land in the Arab world - why should I give a shit about their beefs with Israel? Israeli tourists to so-called enlightened Jordan can't even wear their kippahs in public.

And you say Jews are racist?

 

[Lemon law]

IHV incorrectly states, "And you say Jews are racist? " If you read my posts I have said being a pig when possible is all part of human nature. But Piggish Arabs and a Piggish Israel
will never lead to peace in Israel.

Then IHV also says, "Either accept reality and join the human race or continue lobbying for monsters and terrorists." Yet at the same time IHV too lobbies for Israeli monsters and terrorists. While I advocate that a better future that fairly realizes all sides have behaved in a reprehensible manner in the past so we must work to correct the wrongs on all sides, to arrive at a fair settlement now.

The point is, there have been monsters and terrorists on all sides, and its long past time to realize two things.

1. We need a just mid-east peace that rights most wrongs.

2. And then with various international guarantees, we can set up situations where the only way all parties can advance is through sharing. Otherwise there will be no peace.
And only new cycles of violence where everyone, including Israeli Jews will be losers in the end. And the only winners will be terrorists.

 

[Noobtastic]

IHV incorrectly states, "And you say Jews are racist? " If you read my posts I have said being a pig when possible is all part of human nature. But Piggish Arabs and a Piggish Israel
will never lead to peace in Israel.

Why don't you actually quote my post, as I quote yours?

Then IHV also says, "Either accept reality and join the human race or continue lobbying for monsters and terrorists." Yet at the same time IHV too lobbies for Israeli monsters and terrorists. While I advocate that a better future that fairly realizes all sides have behaved in a reprehensible manner in the past so we must work to correct the wrongs on all sides, to arrive at a fair settlement now.

Perhaps, but you have to PROVE IT FIRST. I provide specific concrete details to support the overall thesis that YOU subscribe to an IDEOLOGY inconsistent with REALITY and HUMANITY.

I capitalize those words to emphasize their importance. I'm not yelling, you just have a habit of ignoring points you cannot respond to.
\

The point is, there have been monsters and terrorists on all sides, and its long past time to realize two things.

1. We need a just mid-east peace that rights most wrongs.

2. And then with various international guarantees, we can set up situations where the only way all parties can advance is through sharing. Otherwise there will be no peace.
And only new cycles of violence where everyone, including Israeli Jews will be losers in the end. And the only winners will be terrorists.

Peace peace peace peace. As far as I can tell you apologize, condone, and glorify terrorists and Jew-killers by under-playing their hate-filled dogma and commitment to destroy Israel.

There is no such thing as "international guarantees." The UN guaranteed Hezbollah would be disarmed, they lied.

The international community backed the so-called peace process, only for the Palestinians to back out on their promises.

The "international community" does not want peace if it conflicts with oil interests. Right now oil favors war with Israel.