General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[IDB87]

They instituted autonomy.

Which means what, Thunder?

Have you read the Accords, by the way?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

yes...thats the chant you guys have chosen....except even if there were a few combat boots in there you would still be happy to award the "non occupied" award.

Except there aren't any Israeli troops in Gaza.

what stops Israel from walking into gaza today? maybe stay around for a few hours and leave? answer is ....nothing. They could do it today, tomorrow...anytime.

By this mentally retarded reasoning, Canada is occupied by the United States.

Now please explain to everyone how you standing to attention, saluting and chanting the "no boots" chant makes any difference to the occupation status of Gaza?

There are no Israeli troops in Gaza. Gaza is not occupied.

 

[Thunder]

You didn't read the post I quoted, did you? The Fool's definition of "occupation" is based on the ability of a country to enter another country with troops for a few hours, and it's ability to fly over that country. By that definition, the U.S. pretty much occupies every other country on Earth. As does China, Russia, Israel, UK, France, Germany, and probably several other countries. It's a useless definition.

Feel free to cry, if it makes you feel better for your lack of reading skills.

really??

the USA has permanent military fly-over rights in China, Russia, Mexico, Venezuela, Iran, Cuba, Sudan, Libya, and "every other country on Earth"?

and China & Russia can fly their military aircraft over the USA whenever they like? no permission required?

wow. got any evidence of this amazing fact?


.....here's a little hint: if Russia or China tried to fly one of their military planes towards the Continental United States without any permission, and refused to respond to repeated warnings, they would be blown out of the sky, a good hour before they would ever reach our airspace.

 

[likkerpig]

I've never understood why the west bank, Gaza, Sinai, Golan heights... etc has ever been in contention. They were war booty. Even better, they were captured while Israel was engaged in a defensive war.
The whole thing is a disconnect for me, if Israel wanted to kill/get rid of the Palestinians they could do it without breaking a sweat. And take away the threat of random attacks that kill a few dozen of their citizens every year. Instead they try to appease the eurotrash and yankee sentiments who don't really give a fiddler's flying fornication for some Bedouin welfare recipients but want the Joos to pay for being so uppity as to think they can make a country.

 

[bit_pattern]

Why isn't this in the Israel/Paelstine thread?

 

[Thunder]

I've never understood why the west bank, Gaza, Sinai, Golan heights... etc has ever been in contention. They were war booty. Even better, they were captured while Israel was engaged in a defensive war.
The whole thing is a disconnect for me, if Israel wanted to kill/get rid of the Palestinians they could do it without breaking a sweat. And take away the threat of random attacks that kill a few dozen of their citizens every year. Instead they try to appease the eurotrash and yankee sentiments who don't really give a fiddler's flying fornication for some Bedouin welfare recipients but want the Joos to pay for being so uppity as to think they can make a country.

interesting synopsis.

 

[likkerpig]

Sometimes you have to cut through layers of crap to get to the heart of the matter. Just my opinion.

 

[a_unique_person]

Please, a family was murdered, likely in cold blood, and how are yt vids about ww2 bombing relevant?

It is terrible. But when I see reports of Palestinians or others in the occupied territories being murdered, it seems to be justified, or a conspiracy to make Israel look bad, etc.

BTW, expect a PM from the mods when this thread is merged.

 

[mortimer]

really??

the USA has permanent military fly-over rights in China, Russia, Mexico, Venezuela, Iran, Cuba, Sudan, Libya, and "every other country on Earth"?
and China & Russia can fly their military aircraft over the USA whenever they like? no permission required?

wow. got any evidence of this amazing fact?

Strawman. I never claimed permission was required. You think Hamas gives Israel permission to fly over Gaza?

.....here's a little hint: if Russia or China tried to fly one of their military planes towards the Continental United States without any permission, and refused to respond to repeated warnings, they would be blown out of the sky, a good hour before they would ever reach our airspace.

As would Hamas when Israel flies over, if they had the ability.

 

[Thunder]

Strawman. I never claimed permission was required. You think Hamas gives Israel permission to fly over Gaza?

Israel doesn't need permission to fly over Gaza or the West Bank.

Israel only needs permission to fly over sovereign states.

 

[Skeptic]

They brought it on themselves.

This is in essence Bikerdruid's and Thunder's view. Especially the one-month old -- what was he thinking, being Jewish like that in a place where Jews are killed? Naturally there isn't the slightest condemnation of the murderer, but hey, he was just "resisting the occupation" or something.

By the way, quite apart form the moral patheticness of Bikedruid's and Thunder's excuses, it doesn't even make much logical sense. It isn't, after all, as if Hamas or such terrorists do not kill Jews outside the occupied territories. Only when they kill Jews in Tel Aviv, the excuse changes somewhat: it's not the fault of the dead Jews for being "in the line of fire", it's the fault of the dead Jews because of "the occupation".

Bottom line: when a Jew is killed, it's the Jews' fault.

 

[Skeptic]

I like the "in the line of fire" argument. In effect it means that the more violent someone is in their hatred of you, the more you are to blame if you are hurt and don't run away. After all, why did you put yourself "in the line of fire"? It's always the excuse used by those who defend the murder of innocents by terrorists, I am afraid.

Quite apart from the fact that for Hamas all the Jews in Israel (and for that matter the world) are "in the line of fire" and thus the only solution is Israel's destruction, I wish to point to Thunder's avatar: that of Colonel von Stuaffenberg, Hitler's would-be assassin. He (Stauffenberg, not Thunder) failed, was executed with his co-conspirators, and his own family (including women and children) were thrown into concentration camps.

Using Thunder's "logic", the imprisoning of his family and the death of his friends are all his fault: he knew that Hitler and his henchmen are extremely vindictive and violent people, so why did he put himself, his friends, and his family "in the line of fire"? And to think we have all those films of the conspirators bravely dying, hanged with piano wire in the gestapo's prisons. In reality the movies should show von Stauffenberg himself hanging them, for his terrible crime of being in the line of fire.

Then again, perhaps the reason Thunder uses that avatar is as a warning to the world to not ever put oneself "in the line of fire". Perhaps it's his attempt at a moral condemnation of Stuaffenberg's evil, putting-himself-in-the-line-of-fire acts, much like he is (see my signature) rather angry at the Warsaw ghetto uprisers, putting themselves in the line of fire like that: what did the Nazis ever do to them?

Of course, that's not too likely. Stauffenberg, unlike the Warsaw ghetto defenders or the dead in this latest attack, was not Jewish. Only Jews are to blame for their own deaths, you know.

 

[Quad4_72]

This is in essence Bikerdruid's and Thunder's view. Especially the one-month old -- what was he thinking, being Jewish like that in a place where Jews are killed? Naturally there isn't the slightest condemnation of the murderer, but hey, he was just "resisting the occupation" or something.

By the way, quite apart form the moral patheticness of Bikedruid's and Thunder's excuses, it doesn't even make much logical sense. It isn't, after all, as if Hamas or such terrorists do not kill Jews outside the occupied territories. Only when they kill Jews in Tel Aviv, the excuse changes somewhat: it's not the fault of the dead Jews for being "in the line of fire", it's the fault of the dead Jews because of "the occupation".

Bottom line: when a Jew is killed, it's the Jews' fault.

Thunder and bikerdruids defense of terrorists is quite alarming at times isn't it?

 

[bit_pattern]

I don't suppose it has anything to do with the fact that when these extremist esttlers attack the local Palestinian population and they react with demonstrations the IDF uses live fire to disperse the crowds.

No, of course not, it is only those dirty, brown heathens that are ever in the wrong!

 

[likkerpig]

I don't suppose it has anything to do with the fact that when these extremist esttlers attack the local Palestinian population and they react with demonstrations the IDF uses live fire to disperse the crowds.

No, of course not, it is only those dirty, brown heathens that are ever in the wrong!

Got any backup to that?
I'd suggest Reuters, they seem good at photoshop, just in case the rhetoric is wearing thin... lord knows, all jews have pasty white skin, easier to tell em apart.

 

[PhantomWolf]

imagine, what would happen in america, if the government gave land on indian reservations to homesteaders.

You mean like they did in the 1800's...

 

[bit_pattern]

Got any backup to that?
I'd suggest Reuters, they seem good at photoshop, just in case the rhetoric is wearing thin... lord knows, all jews have pasty white skin, easier to tell em apart.

Ah, the ol' liberal media conspiracy rears its ugly head again! Reality really does have a liberal bias

The Itmar colony is known to harbor some of the most extremist settlers.

On Monday, Israeli soldiers fired live rounds at Palestinians after they clashed with Israeli settlers near Nablus.

Ten Palestinians and an Israeli settler were wounded during the violence, according to Palestinian medical sources and a spokesman for the settlers.

A week earlier, following scruffles with Israeli police, settlers firebombed a house in Huwarra village, which saw two Palestinian children taken to hospital for smoke inhalation.

They also smashed up shops and cars in the southern city of Hebron and settlers also cut down 500 olive tree saplings, a practice quite common near settler colonies.

The settlers routinely react when police and soldiers demolish structures in settlements or wildcat settlement outposts in what are known as "price tag" attacks, which almost always target Palestinians.

This violence against the indiginous population is common and claims to counter what the settlers refer to as "anti-settler" activity by the Israeli government.

 

[likkerpig]

Ah, the ol' liberal media conspiracy rears its ugly head again! Reality really does have a liberal bias

Umm.. where did that news tidbit come from? Rhetoric is easy, reality is a bitch.

 

[bigjelmapro]

really?
immigration? emmigration?
does hamas have a seat on any multi-lateral organization? the u.n.?

Yep. They are. Israel has no obligation in allowing free-passage to those wishing to enter via Israel's land crossings with a government it is actively in a state of war with.

Rafah crossing is controlled by Hamas and Egypt.

EDIT: What does the last bit have to do with the legal term of 'occupation'? Bit of a rhetorical question since the obvious answer is nothing.

Anything else?

 

[bit_pattern]

Umm.. where did that news tidbit come from? Rhetoric is easy, reality is a bitch.

So rather than refute the claim your schtick is to outright deny the widely reported tensions in the neighbourhood? Ahh... Hokay. Have fun with that!

It really is no surprise you people think that it is a one sided conflict, when you strip the topic of sll context then of course Palestians are just cold blooded killers. Who needs nuance when you have ideological certsinty instead!