- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
The parents and grandparents were concerned about the survivability of the country itself.
The current generations are seeing the terrorism aspect
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
As for an alternate explanation of why "The Israeli youth is becoming increasingly rightwing compared to their parents, unfortunately.", we can lay a good part of the blame on an Israeli apartheid educational system.
And while the older Israeli generations came from backgrounds that put them together with other groups, even if they ended fighting those groups, they were still able to see them as fellow human beings because they had those interactions with them. An apartheid education system totally separates the Israeli youth and its harder to view some one like a Palestinian as fellow human beings with same aspirations as anyone else.
And while the older Israeli generations came from backgrounds that put them together with other groups, even if they ended fighting those groups, they were still able to see them as fellow human beings because they had those interactions with them. An apartheid education system totally separates the Israeli youth and its harder to view some one like a Palestinian as fellow human beings with same aspirations as anyone else.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
Israeli youth interact with many other nationalities - they are not isolated.
Whether or not they are continually "brainwashed" against the Palestinians may be based on perspectives
Whether or not they are continually "brainwashed" against the Palestinians may be based on perspectives
how about you actually argue the merits of the article, instead of simply ignoring it because it comes from the BBC? Shocking, I know.
While both sides have extremist, I think the majority of the people, particularly the youth, are not as tied to the extreme beliefs that the older generation has. Hopefully, an honest and moderate approach by both can help finally bring peace to middle east.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
With all due respect to common Courtesy, who writes, "Pulling articles from the BBC (which has always been pro-Arab) diminishes the value of you posts along with your rant in the middle.", I can hardly agree that the BBC is biased. IMHO, I think it is more than a case of pot meet kettle, and Common Courtesy is the one who has a decidedly pro-Israel bias that tend to create a mindset, that anyone not totally pro Israeli must be biased.
As it is, its been historically, at least post 1967, only the USA as the lone nation that sides with Israel and veto's any effective UN action against Israeli excesses while subsidizing Israel with a plethora of free military weaponry.
If nothing else, if Obama wants to create a viable Palestinian State, its going to require more than just a halt in new West Bank settlement that Israel finds unacceptable, and will in fact require a complete reversal of those settlements. And if Obama wants to pursue a lasting peace, its going to come at the high costs of energizing the pro-Israeli lobby in the US.
And if Obama will not do that, some future US President will have to step up to the plate and quit writing Israel blanks checks. Because the alternative is no mid-east peace at all. After 60 years, even the most dim have to realize that the Israeli long term strategy is not working and is a lose lose for every one.
As it is, its been historically, at least post 1967, only the USA as the lone nation that sides with Israel and veto's any effective UN action against Israeli excesses while subsidizing Israel with a plethora of free military weaponry.
If nothing else, if Obama wants to create a viable Palestinian State, its going to require more than just a halt in new West Bank settlement that Israel finds unacceptable, and will in fact require a complete reversal of those settlements. And if Obama wants to pursue a lasting peace, its going to come at the high costs of energizing the pro-Israeli lobby in the US.
And if Obama will not do that, some future US President will have to step up to the plate and quit writing Israel blanks checks. Because the alternative is no mid-east peace at all. After 60 years, even the most dim have to realize that the Israeli long term strategy is not working and is a lose lose for every one.
fallout man
Golden Member
- Nov 20, 2007
- 1,787
- 1
- 0
I just watched this, and HOLY SHIT. Is this a comedy show?
WOW.
Solely based on this video, I've lost all the remnants of respect I've had for the Israeli cause. Fuck 'em.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
To a certain extent, the USA took the same position as Israel against the American Indian as we exercised our own version of manifest destiny. As we started at the Atlantic coast
and swept to the Pacific coast in a little over a 100 hundred years.
But there is a crucial difference, the USA kept importing an endless supply of non native immigrants, and the the Jewish religion is distinctly non evangelistic. And with a greater birthrate, the Palestinians and Arabs will soon outnumber the Jews. Worse yet, the Jews have a too small population to patrol the land they occupy.
and swept to the Pacific coast in a little over a 100 hundred years.
But there is a crucial difference, the USA kept importing an endless supply of non native immigrants, and the the Jewish religion is distinctly non evangelistic. And with a greater birthrate, the Palestinians and Arabs will soon outnumber the Jews. Worse yet, the Jews have a too small population to patrol the land they occupy.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
It may be all well and fine for JEDOYoda to ask, " So what is wrong with my son being in the IDF instead of the US Military???
He is fighting with his countrymen...." , but there is some missing information here.
If the son of JEDIYoda is a US citizen, he is not fighting with his countrymen. If JEDIYoda's son is a Israeli citizen, he can claim to be fighting with his countrymen.
But in either case, we can see the clear bias and conflict of interest JEDIYoda has when posting in threads concerning Israel.
He is fighting with his countrymen...." , but there is some missing information here.
If the son of JEDIYoda is a US citizen, he is not fighting with his countrymen. If JEDIYoda's son is a Israeli citizen, he can claim to be fighting with his countrymen.
But in either case, we can see the clear bias and conflict of interest JEDIYoda has when posting in threads concerning Israel.
JEDIYoda
Lifer
- Jul 13, 2005
- 33,986
- 3,321
- 126
My son has dual citizenship......and when it copmes to israel there is no conflict of interest.
The clear bias is I am pro-israel! As opposed to those who try to straddle the fence--ie-- Lemon law....and others...
As a Israeli citizen and a jew I have always almost always agreed with Common Courtesy has had to say.....
What the US politically states will be of no relevance
What the US states in public is not always what happens behind the scenes in private.
The lobby force for Israel as an ally in the ME is strong.
The Jewish lobby itself is also very strong.
Politicians will provide lip service at the most.
it will be the actions of Israel's opponents that will determine the result.
As long as there are Arabs/Palestinians out there that are attacking Israel and/or threatening
a) it increase support for Israel from the above
b) it weakens the support of the opponent
c) it strengthens the resolve of Israel to not take a chance on compromising their safety.
As long as the world continues to pamper the Arabs
When ever (over the past 65 years) the Arabs/Palestinians have provoked and/or attacked Israel, they have been slapped down hard by Israel. Every time, the Arabs have had to play the sympathy card to get Israel from finishing the job. Each time, the Arabs have promised to be good and play nice in the sandbox. Every time the Arabs have broken their word - either directly, through proxies or found excuses to give a wink to the troublemakers.
Israel will raise the finger.
Until the Arabs come up with a leader that can be trusted to keep the opposition in check and demonstrates that they have to power to honor a commitment/treaty, Israel is not going to accept anything that comes out of meetings/conferences/public statements. -- I totally believe that is one of if not they key factor...
Right or wrong, Israel is going to take care of Israel first and the Palestinians will get the leftovers. This is a result of actions from both sides over the past 60 years. --as it should be
Israel "trusted" the partition plan and was willing to accept the initial land allotment. When that was shown to be dangerous; they expanded to take what available/lost by conflict.
The West Bank was taken and rather than remove all the Palestinians. Israel started the wall to protect itself. Which has demonstrated to be fairly successful.
The settlement expansion is a thorn; but that land is under their control; not the country of Jordan which was originally in charge. Jordan did not want the responsibility of the land and the people.
As an example that others have used; the US government bought & took by treaty most of the country west of the Mississippi. Then the local inhabitants were displaced.
Another example: China & Tibet.
Most countries boundaries are fixed - however, some people do not want what has been decided outside their realm of influence/control. They have to either deal with it or change it. Choosing to change means they have to accept the consequences of actions if they fail to achieve their result. While they may be right; forcing the issue does not allow them a redo button if they fail.
JSt0rm
Lifer
- Sep 5, 2000
- 27,399
- 3,948
- 126
I have a friend with dual citizenship. He was in the idf and came back with crazy stories. It's not uncommon for american/isreali citizens to go to the idf. I might be wrong but I think they have to go? All Israeli males have to go in? Anyways I won't judge people who choose that. But everyone who is pro Israeli should at least consider giving up that little bit of land in the name of peace. I mean if you want to turn Palestine into glass ok fine but if you actually want peace then maybe its time to try something new. Thats all.
I think obama is right when he says that its in everyones best interest to work something out. And that does mean everyone needs to make some concessions.
I think obama is right when he says that its in everyones best interest to work something out. And that does mean everyone needs to make some concessions.
And your comments on "The Bankers", prove you as a bigot, furthermore this also proves you as a hypocrite.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
Well at least JEDIYoda has admitted his bias and I somehow expected that his son might have dual citizenship.
Beyond that, the delusion is that Israel can remain a UN member and not be forced to give up the land captured in the 1967 war. Sooner or later, Israel must return to its pre-1967 borders, and if Obama or any subsequent US president quits vetoing UN resolutions to that effect, Israel will simply go the way of apartheid South Africa.
In MHO, the Israeli negotiating position is fairly strong now in regards to a Palestinian State, but as time goes on, its going to get worse and worse. And I have long felt, the best solution to the Israeli Palestinian problem that has festered for 61 years now, will be in binding third party arbitration.
Beyond that, the delusion is that Israel can remain a UN member and not be forced to give up the land captured in the 1967 war. Sooner or later, Israel must return to its pre-1967 borders, and if Obama or any subsequent US president quits vetoing UN resolutions to that effect, Israel will simply go the way of apartheid South Africa.
In MHO, the Israeli negotiating position is fairly strong now in regards to a Palestinian State, but as time goes on, its going to get worse and worse. And I have long felt, the best solution to the Israeli Palestinian problem that has festered for 61 years now, will be in binding third party arbitration.
I see the other side as a worse situation, because once those states are united they become a real threat to the free world.
United we stand, divided they fall- some would have it another way perhaps?
Until you have been forced to fight and work for something, you will never understand its value to those who have.
I am growing sick of the pity credited to the vanquished and the duplicity of those who have benefited by the same tactics to establish their own states, time is a constant; nothing has changed except for the words.
I would rather be dead then red!
United we stand, divided they fall- some would have it another way perhaps?
Until you have been forced to fight and work for something, you will never understand its value to those who have.
I am growing sick of the pity credited to the vanquished and the duplicity of those who have benefited by the same tactics to establish their own states, time is a constant; nothing has changed except for the words.
I would rather be dead then red!
I'm not sure Israeli leadership shares your view on that; they seem to feel 'time is on their side' as they expand settlements.
But as for their agreeing to third-party arbitration, has the US every agreed to that, and can you imagine it as politically feasible for the US? Israel may have a similar resistance.
(Although the US has done so on some economic matters in the free-trade agreements).
Nations tend to go to war before handing over 'sovereignity' in such a manner.
Israel has shown frequently that they have the right to push the hostile Palestinians out of their territory. In fact, it seems the U.S. does everything it can to keep the conflict going, often having Israel pull back after a deep march into enemy territory.
I feel deeply sympathetic for the Israeli people, who are only trying to defend the land that is rightfully theirs.
I feel deeply sympathetic for the Israeli people, who are only trying to defend the land that is rightfully theirs.
Is that why they invented Vigra?
So the Israelis have a big rim job on their hands!
Thats their worry!
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a word Truepage, NO.
Israel has shown an ability but not the right to push Palestinians out of their original 1948 borders.
When Israel talks about land captured in the 1967 war, its clearly not Israeli land and must be given back by UN doctrine. Since this thread is about the West Bank which is land captured in the 1967 war, Israel has zero right to settle on it.
And if the USA quits vetoing UN sanctions, a world wide economic embargo against the State of Israel may well be better than a war.
And after the recent rape of Lebanon and Gaza, Israel leadership is delusional if they think they are not skating on very thin ice.
Actually, it is the Palestinians militants who started the conflicts against Israel, and have through their own terrorist-like actions forfeited any rights they once had to the West Bank.
It is inconceivable that Israel would allow the Palestinians militants to settle and continue building up an aggressive force even closer to Israel.
This is about protection of Israels sovereign rights, and no sane nation would give up the West Bank.
It would be like if Mexico constantly launched attacks on Texas and then we keep making half-assed truces/agreements and let them stay, even though they occasionally bomb cafes and buses in Texas.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter