• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Arab nations are not responsible for Israel exiling 750,000 Arabs. Therefore, they should not have to compensate them.
Virus' claim was that the countries that started the war should compensate the victims, and you countered with a strawman about who was responsible for causing the refugees, not about who started the war. I suppose a strawman is better than accusing American Jews for starting the Holocaust.
 
Virus' claim was that the countries that started the war should compensate the victims, and you countered with a strawman about who was responsible for causing the refugees, not about who started the war. I suppose a strawman is better than accusing American Jews for starting the Holocaust.

since when does the world follow the rule that whomever starts the war gets stuck with the bill?

Germany didn't start WW1 but they got stuck with the bill, did they not?

Did we bill Iraq for the Gulf War? Force Serbia to pay compensation for the Yugoslav War?
 
since when does the world follow the rule that whomever starts the war gets stuck with the bill?

Germany didn't start WW1 but they got stuck with the bill, did they not?

Did we bill Iraq for the Gulf War? Force Serbia to pay compensation for the Yugoslav War?
That's the argument you should have started with instead of inventing the strawman about American Jews compensating Holocaust victims.
 
that was their stated reason, often its something else entirely. Everyone has to have their own reality where they are not at fault and didn't start it....arabs, Israelis.....everyone has their own mythology.

Not only was it the stated reason it was in fact what was going on. This was confirmed by the very jewish and very israeli authors Ilan Pappe, Tom Segev, Benny Morris, Avi Shlaim, and Shimha Flapan back in the 1990s using declassified Israeli government records. There have been others but these are the best known.

Anyone who publicly discusses this subject is giving an implicit assurance to the reader that he is in fact knowledgeable on the subject. But when it comes to Israel people seem to think they can say all kinds of things they know are not true and scream anti-semite when not believed.

Funny thing is the oldest accusation of people hating Jews was by Josephus because people refused to believe the nonsense he was spouting about Jews. Some things never change.
 
Last edited:
What compromises are ever expected and/or demanded to be made by the Palestinians?

I would say giving up claims to 77% of Palestine was more than sufficient.

You think they should offer the murdering, thieving foreign invaders more?
 
Last edited:
The Palestinians aren't even expected to abide by previous agreements.

Israel agreed to remove the "outposts" that even it considers illegal nine years ago. Needless to say not a one of them has been removed.

But you were spreading something you know full well is a lie.

The Palestinian Authority said it would cease exercising its lawful right to kill Israelis and it has. The Israeli criminals found that an important right for them to give up.

Other than that the occupied people have nothing to offer. The criminal occupying power holds all the cards.

Israel has been using its tyranny to extort concessions from the PA. And you know that but still you will post as though you do not. That is not what an honorable man does.
 
Why have I never even seen such a simple, obvious, elementary and introductory question openly engaged?

What are reasonable expectations of outcome when one side openly swears only to kill the other side and that same side is not held to any standards or expectations whatsoever?

What result is expected? What result is demanded?

This is madness.

It is madness to expect anyone to believe an intelligent person such as yourself does not know the premises of your questions are false. Therefore I ask you why you post what you know is false?
 
Last edited:
Did we bill Iraq for the Gulf War? Force Serbia to pay compensation for the Yugoslav War?

Actually Saddam was supposed to pay Kuwait reparations.

So in your view, you should be able to wage aggressive wars then demand compensation from the defender when you lose?
 
Last edited:
What is Israel going to do now?

I have asked the question at least a dozen times and no one has the least idea. More of the same is not acceptable to the world. It is not acceptable even to the US.

Israel has proposed nothing. He said no to everything and imposed demands on the subject population of Palestine.

As none of you have any ideas as to what Israel should do next, why bother with further discussion.

=====

Perhaps some clarification is needed for non-Americans here. Congress may have loved him. By the US Constitution Congress has no say in US foreign policy. That is purely the responsibility of the President. Congress can make life hell for him in other ways but it has no control over foreign policy.

So, yes, Congress loves Netanyahu. So what?
 
dig him up and demand the money?

Iraq is still paying the reparations. It is taken from a percentage of oil sales.

The US backed the reparations just to stick it to Hussein. The US encouraged Kuwait to come up with as high a number as they could without giggling.

The naive innocents working for Bush expected the Kuwait to play along and graciously drop their claims. Needless to say Kuwait laughed in his face.
 
FYI: A Peace to End all Peace

Yes it is impossible to read so this is the only quote I am going to give from the subject book. I do this only to shed some confusion on some recent attempts to characterize what was "promised" and/or expected.

To Zionist leaders, on the other h a n d , it a p p e a r e d that the wavering stance or d o w n r i g h t hostility of the British administration hampered their effort to s e c u r e A r a b a c c e p t a n c e of the B a l f o u r D e c l a r a t i o n . T h e y c l a i m e d that, h a d the A r a b population of the country been m a d e to feel that the Balfour D e c l a r a t i o n w a s the u n a l t e r a b l e policy of the B r i t i s h g o v e r n m e n t a n d inevitably would be carried into effect, A r a b s w o u l d have a c q u i e s c e d — a n d might even have b e c o m e receptive to its benefits. Dr W e i z m a n n and his colleagues in the Zionist l e a d e r s h i p s t r e s s e d their desire to cooperate with the Arab communities ; e m p h a s i z e d that the new Jewish immigrants would not be taking anything away f r o m the existing inhabitants, b u t would buy, colonize, a n d cultivate land not then being u s e d ; a n d repeated that J e w i s h colonization w o u l d b r i n g substantial economic benefits to the whole country, a n d indeed to the whole Arab Middle East .

Obviously the Palestinians were not as impressed with the Jews as the Jews were with themselves.

A m o n g the A r a b i c - s p e a k i n g c o m m u n i t i e s of Palestine, there was considerable d i s a g r e e m e n t on m o s t i s s u e s , and p e r h a p s even on Z i o n i s m . T h i s was shown in F e b r u a r y 1919, at a c o n g r e s s convened by the anti-Zionist M o s l e m - C h r i s t i a n Society. A majority of the thirty active politicians who a t t e n d e d the congress were able to p a p e r over their differences by agreeing on a program calling for an A r a b federation headed by Feisal a n d centered on S y r i a . T h e r e was s o m e feeling, however, in favor of creating a s e p a r a t e Palestine, s o m e pro-British feeling, s o m e p r o - F r e n c h feeling, a n d e n o u g h d i s c o r d so that five of the thirty delegates did not sign a resolution o p p o s i n g Z i o n i s m. M u c h volatility in political views was d e m o n s t r a t e d by the delegates a n d their colleagues d u r i n g the c o u r s e of the next couple of years, as those who had called for Feisal to b e c o m e king t u r n e d against him, p r o - B r i t i s h a n d anti-British factions c h a n g e d sides, a n d the p r oponents of G r e a t e r S y r i a were forced, by the F r e n c h c o n q u e s t of D a m a s c u s , to restrict the focus of their views to the territory about to be e m b r a c e d within Britain's Palestine M a n d a t e .

A r a b politics within Palestine were f o r m e d by the rivalry between
the great u r b a n families. T h r o u g h o u t the British o c c u p a t i o n , the m o s t c o n s p i c u o u s rivalry was that between the J e r u s a l e m families of a l - H u s s e i n i a n d a l - N a s h a s h i b i . A l - N a s h a s h i b i family politics m o v e d f r o m anti-British to p r o - B r i t i s h a n d pro-conciliation in 1920; a n d in the years immediately thereafter the Zionist leadership believed that it h a d arrived at a b a s i s for m u t u a l cooperation with the a l - N a s h a s h i b i that might lead t o A r a b - J e w i s h h a r m o n y . T h e al-Husseini , however, who moved at the same time from s u p p o r t e r s to o p p o n e n t s of the British, found themselves favored in the competition to lead the A r a b c o m m u n i t i e s of the area by the s y m p a t h y shown by the British local administration to the anti-Zionist c a u s e . If even British officers a r g u e d that the A r a b s s h o u l d m a k e no concessions, how could p r o -conciliation A r a b leaders p e r s u a d e their followers that concessions had to be made?

In other words they pioneered the Israeli party system.
 
A Zionist Is ...

a Jew who collects money from another Jew to send a third Jew to Palestine.

You should be able to guess the age of the joke from that.
 
Did you even read the link you just posted?

"The agreement made it explicit that the form of the new governments was to be determined by local populations rather than imposed by the signatory powers."

Fail.
No worries, another failed Parky claim has been retracted in the method he usually employs, ignoring it. ;)

On a side-note, an article that finally gets the issues pertaining to the WB correct:

Attorneys to Ban: Halt unilateral Palestinian statehood
An international group of some 60 attorneys, including former Foreign Ministry legal adviser Alan Baker, has appealed to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to prevent a General Assembly resolution on unilateral Palestinian statehood, based on the pre-1967 lines.

In a letter dated Wednesday, the attorneys noted that such a resolution would be a violation of all past agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. They added that it would also contravene UN resolutions 242 and 338.

According to the attorneys, the legal basis for the establishment of the state by the League of Nations in 1922 affirmed its presence on territories that included Judea, Samaria, and what is now east Jerusalem.
...
As a result, the attorneys said, the “650,000 Jews [who] presently reside in the areas of Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem, reside there legitimately.

The 1949 Armistice Agreement stated that these lines “are without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines, or to claims of either Party relating thereto,” the attorneys said. Therefore, they said, “the 1967 borders” do not exist, and have never existed.
Rest of the article is worth a read.
 
Where do we go from here?

I keep reading the you said/he said bickering and I keep asking the only question of interest. I am listening to the crickets.

It keeps coming to mind the seventh season of Buffy episode, Once More With Feeling, which ends with the song, Where Do We Go From Here?

And as Spike said to them, I say to you. Go back in there and get your Kumby-yayas out, you'll never figure out what you really want.

You guys are getting your Kumby-yayas out with your bickering and your dwelling on who loves who the most and holocaust, holocaust, holocaust! (Take your holocaust and shove it. It does not excuse beating a Palestinian child within an inch of his life just for the fun of it. It happened this week. Reported on haaretz.com)

Where do you go from here?

Come on you izziehugging geniuses (sorry for the stereotype) where do you go from here?

Come on you stereotypical geniuses, tell me what you are going to do to break the impasse. You can't be relying upon the inferior non-Jews to do something. You are the geniuses. You are the creative leaders of everything that has improved the world. What are you going to do in Palestine?

How do you plan to end your to keep depriving you subject Palestinians of the human right of self determination in light of the entire world telling you to EF off?

How do you plan to deny Palestinians the human rights you demand for yourselves?

Come on folks. I want an answer. An honest answer. Why the silence?

=====

BTW: Buffy rules!
 
yes, it was. how can you tell me what my argument was or was not? I think I would be the one to know.

OK, fine, it was your argument. Your strawman argument.

Now, are you still claiming that the Arab states were promised democracy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom