General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
JihadJane said:
No evidence for your "Hamas command center" nonsense, then?
Click to expand...

For most people I present evidence when asked. For you I shall not since you never contribute anything useful to the thread. It's not like you would accept any evidence.

EDIT: I guess there might be people honestly interested though:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...commander-dies-in-iaf-strike.premium-1.479107

They admitted to it.
Anderson Cooper even reported rockets being fired from the roof of the building.
 
Last edited:
a_unique_person said:
They rejected it because they wanted their state as they defined it. It could have Japanese wanting a state there as well, the reaction would have been identical. It was not anti-semitism.
Click to expand...
Did they define it a Jew-free, or Jews "living under the wing of Islam"?

The UN craved out a majority-Jewish state, and this was unacceptable to the violent ant-semites. The Jews bought land and moved there, for some reason this was unacceptable to the Palestinians. That reason is anti-semitism, not just some generic form of anti-immigrant. Did the Palestinians object to non-Jews immigrating to the area? Turks for example?
 
a_unique_person said:
They rejected it because they wanted their state as they defined it. It could have Japanese wanting a state there as well, the reaction would have been identical. It was not anti-semitism.
Click to expand...

I love the logic used here. Anti-semitism can be hand waved away by saying that a different kind of xenophobia might also have existed.

Remember folks: If you're a bigot, be sure to hate more than one type of people. Somehow, magically, your hatred of one group is excused if you can show your hatred is not exclusive to just that group.
 
WildCat said:
Did they define it a Jew-free, or Jews "living under the wing of Islam"?

The UN craved out a majority-Jewish state, and this was unacceptable to the violent ant-semites. The Jews bought land and moved there, for some reason this was unacceptable to the Palestinians. That reason is anti-semitism, not just some generic form of anti-immigrant. Did the Palestinians object to non-Jews immigrating to the area? Turks for example?
Click to expand...

They got rid of the Turks alright, as soon as they had the chance to. The objection to Jews buying land was that the Jews were quite open about the purpose, it was to create a new state for jews right where they lived. If Japanese, English, Eskimos had the same aim, the reaction would have been no different. Throughout history, in similar circumstances, it has often involved a violent reaction.
 
angrysoba said:
Well, Britain and France have summoned the Israeli ambassador for a word in London and Paris.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/dec/03/uk-may-recall-israel-ambassador-settlement
Click to expand...

Australia too. Long time supporters of Israel in the Australian Government have supported to abstention in the UN vote. "to save the Israelis from themselves". Bob Carr sees Israel heading headlong into a full Apartheid state.

BOB CARR: We called in the Israeli ambassador this afternoon to express to him the Australian Government's great concerns at these reports, and I last week, when I saw him at Canberra airport, said if he wanted one, one-word explanation for the feelings in the Government that led to us making that decision about where we stood on the General Assembly vote, it was "settlements" - it was "settlements".

A feeling that as settlements are spread over the West Bank, the task of establishing a two-state solution, so advantageous to Palestinians and Israelis alike, becomes miserably harder, and this announcement just confirms that the danger of yet more settlements was real, even as I made that warning.

ALEXANDRA KIRK: But in the lead-up to the UN vote, you and many others viewed a 'yes' vote, or abstaining - as was the case for Australia - as helping the peace process, so have you misjudged that?

BOB CARR: No, I think on the contrary, Australia would look terribly exposed if we had not voted 'yes' or abstained, terribly exposed.

One argument, a very strong argument for Australia abstaining - and don't forget that the United Kingdom and Germany were in that company, along with close supporting nations - one reasons for doing that was to send a message to Israel about the recent stepped up settlement activity.

ALEXANDRA KIRK: But it was also sending a message to the Palestinian Authority as well as one of helping the peace process, and clearly that hasn't happened.

BOB CARR: Well it's up to the parties themselves to bring peace to the region with the encouragement, with the guidance of the rest of the world.

One reason we didn't vote 'yes' was that we wanted to emphasise that this resolution in the General Assembly, while it had its merits - sending a message of hope to moderate Palestinians, for example, sending a message of warning to Israel about settlement activity - still didn't represent the ultimate step, which is the resolution of those final status issues that enables a secure peace.

ALEXANDRA KIRK: Now Britain and France have considered recalling their ambassadors from Tel Aviv - have you thought the same thing?

BOB CARR: No we haven't. We'll stay in contact with like-minded countries like Britain and France to calibrate our response with theirs.

ALEXANDRA KIRK: The UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, says that the settlement plan would deal "an almost fatal blow" to a two-state solution to the long-running conflict.

Do you share that pessimism?

BOB CARR: We certainly share the view that it comes close to that, at the very least, and I just beg Israel to consider, as a friend of Israel, speaking for a Government that's a friend of Israel, to consider the consequences here.

If there is no Palestinian state possible, then Israel might end up, in the words of some people, and it's politics, as a "greater Israel", and some people in Israel might accept that the world will live with a continued occupation of the land won by Israel in the 1967 war.

The world won't live with that. I know as night follows day what will happen.

The world will highlight the fact that the Palestinians within that Israeli entity with no Palestinian state are denied voting rights and a civic personality of their own, and the world will make its views to Israel very, very clear.

I don't want Israel to end up isolated. I don't want Israel to lose its international friends.

But if there cannot be a Palestinian state, and if hope that the Palestinian state is blotted out by the remorseless growth of settlements, then the world is looking at that terrible possibility.
Click to expand...
 
a_unique_person said:
That is absurd. The Palestinians wanted what everyone else in the region was assumed to have a right to, their own state....
Click to expand...
What is this assume right? Where was this demand for an independent Palestinian state for what....the first couple decades around this partition period? Nowhere.
 
Jonnyclueless said:
For most people I present evidence when asked. For you I shall not since you never contribute anything useful to the thread. It's not like you would accept any evidence.
Click to expand...

How remarkably, pathetically infantile!

EDIT: I guess there might be people honestly interested though:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...commander-dies-in-iaf-strike.premium-1.479107
Click to expand...

This article is subscription only but appears to have nothing to do with Hamas planning attacks in the media buildings or using them as a command centers. Nowhere in the Geneva convention does it say that the alleged presence of politicians etc in media buildings justifes bombing TV stations.

They admitted to it.
Anderson Cooper even reported rockets being fired from the roof of the building.
Click to expand...

What is Cooper Anderson's source?

I haven't seen any evidence that Hamas fired rockets from the top of media buildings.

Please present your evidence.
 
Last edited:
Fly-on-the-wall look at life under occupation:

"""Checkpoint (original title: Machssomim) is a 2003 documentary film by Israeli filmmaker Yoav Shamir, showing the everyday interaction between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian civilians at several of the regions Israel Defence Forces checkpoints. The film won five awards at various film festivals, including Best International Documentary at the Hot Docs Canadian International Documentary Festival.

Dozens of checkpoints lie scattered throughout the West Bank and Gaza Strip, manned by the Israeli Defence Forces. Thousands of Palestinians pass through them every day, making them one of the major meeting points between both sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Many different encounters occur at these checkpoints each and every day, revealing a reality with its own rules and regulations, a reality that has a destructive impact on both societies."""


 
JihadJane said:
How remarkably, pathetically infantile!
Click to expand...

I couldn't agre more with you about your arguments.


JihadJane said:
This article is subscription only but appears to have nothing to do with Hamas planning attacks in the media buildings or using them as a command centers. Nowhere in the Geneva convention does it say that the alleged presence of politicians etc in media buildings justifes bombing TV stations.
Click to expand...

I didn't have to subscribe and it's exactly about that. It wasn't politicians, it was military commanders who were using it as a communications center. The IDF was able to monitor these communications.


JihadJane said:
What is Cooper Anderson's source?

I haven't seen any evidence that Hamas fired rockets from the top of media buildings.
Click to expand...

Himself. He was standing next to it and watched them.

JihadJane said:
Please present your evidence.
Click to expand...

Already did. You go learn what evidence is and then come talk to us. You also posted a link with no comments. That's considered spam. What's your argument with the link about settlements? That it's OK for the PA to circumvent the peace process, but not Israel? Had the PA come to negotiate instead of trying to strong arm Israel, those settlements would not be built. But since there is no intent from their side to negotiate, that's what they get.

I don't agree with it, but if you make your bed you lie in it.
 
Last edited:
a_unique_person said:
One problem with that, neither side wanted what the UN proposed.
Click to expand...

I've always been of the opinion that when both extremes have to compromise enough to be unhappy, then the solution is just about right.

Also while those that would form the new Israel might have been unhappy with the proposal, they at least accepted it.

As for now, I have always been in favour of a a two state solution.
Click to expand...

A one state solution would never work as neither side will ever willingly accept being ruled by the other.
 
JihadJane said:
How remarkably, pathetically infantile!



This article is subscription only but appears to have nothing to do with Hamas planning attacks in the media buildings or using them as a command centers. Nowhere in the Geneva convention does it say that the alleged presence of politicians etc in media buildings justifes bombing TV stations.
Click to expand...

You can register to access ten free articles monthly. It took me about six seconds to do so.

Anyway from the article:

"An Israel Air Force strike on a high-rise building in Gaza City Monday killed Ramez Harb, a senior figure in Islamic Jihad's military wing, the Al Quds Brigades, the group said in a text message it sent to reporters.

The Israel Defense Forces said Harb was one of four Islamic Jihad militants who were injured in the attack, but did not confirm his death. Harb and two other militants in the building, which also houses several foreign and local news organizations and which was also struck on Sunday, were involved in launching long-range missiles at Israel, the IDF said.

Islamic Jihad said it believed Harb was the intended target of the strike."

Hamas command centre.
 
a_unique_person said:
Some of it is documented here. It dates back to the early 19th century.
Click to expand...

Really? Palestine was under the control of the Ottoman Empire for about 500 years up until 1918 and was considered part of Southern Syria during most of that time, so when was it a independant state?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom