There was no such thing as Israel when those poor wretches were sent to their deaths, ftr...........ATG wrote:
.......and you peg Israel as the aggressors........go figure
duh....sure Cam. We all know time started around 1915 or so.CameronPoe wrote:
There was no such thing as Israel when those poor wretches were sent to their deaths, ftr...........ATG wrote:
.......and you peg Israel as the aggressors........go figure
Let me draw you a picture so to speak. The modern state of Israel did not exist until 1948. World War II occurred between 1937 (or 1939 by alternative reckoning) and 1945. The Nazi persecution of Jewish people occurred from 1933 up until 1944.ATG wrote:
duh....sure Cam. We all know time started around 1915 or so.CameronPoe wrote:
There was no such thing as Israel when those poor wretches were sent to their deaths, ftr...........ATG wrote:
.......and you peg Israel as the aggressors........go figure
Yeah. The numbers weren't in their favor any time they went to war with the Arab states surrounding them...and yet they still won. Must be because of those nukes they've never used.CameronPoe wrote:
I don't think any Arab or Muslim nation on earth, bar those that have already been forced into peace agreements, want peace with Israel. I kind of have my doubts about 6 million Israelis surviving forever (or even more than a century) on that tiny patch of land surrounded by one billion people that despise them. Numbers alone do not bode well for Israel.ATG wrote:
The Palestinians do not want peace. They never have. At this juncture it seems like they never will.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Here's an idea. Don't fire rockets at Israel from civilian areas.
Civilians aren't always innocent either. If you see that shit happening get the fuck out of the area.
Civilians aren't always innocent either. If you see that shit happening get the fuck out of the area.
It's a great concept. Some will never get it.Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:
Here's an idea. Don't fire rockets at Israel from civilian areas.
Civilians aren't always innocent either. If you see that shit happening get the fuck out of the area.
Haven't multiple threads established the futility of this debate?
Ya, so?
clearly...GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
well, since you said that, that must mean you are not a racist.....AutralianChainsaw wrote:
OMG YOU DID IT AGAIN!!GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
well, you are.
see how you get when I spell auswitch wrong. Its like you are offended.
The people who died in that camp should be offended.. Show some respect.. Stop throwing that name left and right as an insult.
A distinct pattern huh? Who conspired with the Nazis BEFORE Israel was a nation to exterminate the Jews?CameronPoe wrote:
If I were an Arab in 1948 I would view the creation of their state as an act of aggression. When they initiated an unprovoked attack on Egypt at the behest of the French and the UK in 1957 to bring about the Suez Canal crisis they were the aggressor. They fired the first shot in 1967. There's a very distinct pattern here...lowing wrote:
.......and you peg Israel as the agressors........go figureCameronPoe wrote:
I don't think any Arab or Muslim nation on earth, bar those that have already been forced into peace agreements, want peace with Israel. I kind of have my doubts about 6 million Israelis surviving forever (or even more than a century) on that tiny patch of land surrounded by one billion people that despise them. Numbers alone do not bode well for Israel.
As far as your view on the war in '68 I find it total absurd for you to say that Israel is to blame because they fired the first shot atan enemy that massed along its borders, cut off its trade routes and ANNOUNCED to the world that is was going to destroy Israel...I am not sure but I think your view point is a little slanted there.
Anyone in the same boat would have done the exact same thing.
As far as '56 From what I read http://www.answers.com/topic/arab-israel-war-1 your views are equally as slanted.
The holocaust only sped things up Cam, the idea of a country for the Jews in the land of Israel was thought up back in the late 19th century.
But because the Turks were occupying the land at the time it was not possible. And after WW1 Jewish immigrants started flowing in because the new occupier, Britain, had promised us that we could have our country BUT THE PALENSTINIANS WOULD HAVE THEIR OWN AS WELL.
Even though we didn't really like the idea of sharing we agreed, unlike the Palestinians.
And I'm pretty sure the attack on the Suez Canal in '57 was done because we wanted to strengthen our ties with Britain & France and at the same time stop the Egyptians from growing stronger. If you ask me thats a pretty good deal, too bad Britain and France chickened out.
But because the Turks were occupying the land at the time it was not possible. And after WW1 Jewish immigrants started flowing in because the new occupier, Britain, had promised us that we could have our country BUT THE PALENSTINIANS WOULD HAVE THEIR OWN AS WELL.
Even though we didn't really like the idea of sharing we agreed, unlike the Palestinians.
And I'm pretty sure the attack on the Suez Canal in '57 was done because we wanted to strengthen our ties with Britain & France and at the same time stop the Egyptians from growing stronger. If you ask me thats a pretty good deal, too bad Britain and France chickened out.
Wasn't the 1967 war started by Israel after a large amount of provocation by Syria, Egypt and Jordan that suggested fighting was going to occur anyways?
I don't think the international community would have got behind a state of Israel in Palestine if not for German crimes - and as such Palestinians ended up paying the price Germans should have paid. The Balfour Declaration itself states that any Jewish homeland should not be to the detriment existing inhabitants of the region - which it evidently would always have been. The Jewish immigrants to Israel, many of which were illegal, were Europeans - having been born and raised there for generation upon generation. All you need do is walk around the Jewish quarter of Prague to realise what an integral part of European life the Jews were. Urging them all to relocate to a place they had long abandoned and that was already inhabited by others seems rather odd. Britain had a duty to safeguard the rights of the existing inhabitants of the region, under their mandate, and failed to do so by allowing this immigration.Shadowolf wrote:
The holocaust only sped things up Cam, the idea of a country for the Jews in the land of Israel was thought up back in the late 19th century.
But because the Turks were occupying the land at the time it was not possible. And after WW1 Jewish immigrants started flowing in because the new occupier, Britain, had promised us that we could have our country BUT THE PALENSTINIANS WOULD HAVE THEIR OWN AS WELL.
Even though we didn't really like the idea of sharing we agreed, unlike the Palestinians.
And I'm pretty sure the attack on the Suez Canal in '57 was done because we wanted to strengthen our ties with Britain & France and at the same time stop the Egyptians from growing stronger. If you ask me thats a pretty good deal, too bad Britain and France chickened out.
Also, the use of military action to 'strengthen ties' with nations I find abhorrent. Perhaps our opinions differ on international diplomacy...
Aggression entails firing first. He who fires the first shot is the aggressor imo, much like the Taliban firing the first shot in what became the invasion of Afghanistan by demolishing the twin towers and one side of the Pentagon.lowing wrote:
A distinct pattern huh? Who conspired with the Nazis BEFORE Israel was a nation to exterminate the Jews?
As far as your view on the war in '68 I find it total absurd for you to say that Israel is to blame because they fired the first shot atan enemy that massed along its borders, cut off its trade routes and ANNOUNCED to the world that is was going to destroy Israel...I am not sure but I think your view point is a little slanted there.
Anyone in the same boat would have done the exact same thing.
As far as '56 From what I read http://www.answers.com/topic/arab-israel-war-1 your views are equally as slanted.
btw lowing your principles may be somewhat compromised. If you support sanctioning countries and isolating them, like Iran for instance, then you can't possibly criticise Arab nations for completely embargoing and refusing to trade with Israel or refusing them access to Arab shipping lanes. Your stance would effectively legitimise all out military action by Iran against the US and the UK - a) both US and UK troops are stationed on either side of the country in Iraq and Afghanistan, b) both the US and UK are pushing stricter sanctions and embargoes on Iran and c) the US keeps reiterating that 'all options are on the table' which is effectively a veiled threat to Iran.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-03-03 01:58:42)
I think sometimes the IDF should just go in and take them out one by one, street by street, house by house. Give a huge warning to all the civilians to get out, if they don't they can't be held responsible if they were killed. Then when its all over, build em up some new houses. Its about time the Palestinians and Gazans learnt that if they stop supporting the militant groups, the retaliation air strikes would stop.
Or Israel could learn that if they stop the airstrikes, the retaliatory rockets would stop. It's about time that the Israali population learnt that if they stopped massively opressing huge numbers of people the oppressed wouldn't feel the need to attack them.M.O.A.B wrote:
I think sometimes the IDF should just go in and take them out one by one, street by street, house by house. Give a huge warning to all the civilians to get out, if they don't they can't be held responsible if they were killed. Then when its all over, build em up some new houses. Its about time the Palestinians and Gazans learnt that if they stop supporting the militant groups, the retaliation air strikes would stop.
6 of one, half a dozen of the other...
Ah ok, so Israel stops the airstrikes and its all hunky dory? Aye ok.PureFodder wrote:
Or Israel could learn that if they stop the airstrikes, the retaliatory rockets would stop. It's about time that the Israali population learnt that if they stopped massively opressing huge numbers of people the oppressed wouldn't feel the need to attack them.M.O.A.B wrote:
I think sometimes the IDF should just go in and take them out one by one, street by street, house by house. Give a huge warning to all the civilians to get out, if they don't they can't be held responsible if they were killed. Then when its all over, build em up some new houses. Its about time the Palestinians and Gazans learnt that if they stop supporting the militant groups, the retaliation air strikes would stop.
6 of one, half a dozen of the other...
Before we enter the exact same part before, there's only one side here that deliberately targets civilians and will not accept a peace deal.
Hamas offered a 10 year peace deal with Israel which they followed.M.O.A.B wrote:
Ah ok, so Israel stops the airstrikes and its all hunky dory? Aye ok.PureFodder wrote:
Or Israel could learn that if they stop the airstrikes, the retaliatory rockets would stop. It's about time that the Israali population learnt that if they stopped massively opressing huge numbers of people the oppressed wouldn't feel the need to attack them.M.O.A.B wrote:
I think sometimes the IDF should just go in and take them out one by one, street by street, house by house. Give a huge warning to all the civilians to get out, if they don't they can't be held responsible if they were killed. Then when its all over, build em up some new houses. Its about time the Palestinians and Gazans learnt that if they stop supporting the militant groups, the retaliation air strikes would stop.
6 of one, half a dozen of the other...
Before we enter the exact same part before, there's only one side here that deliberately targets civilians and will not accept a peace deal.
when was this?
Hamas has only been around for 20 years. I dont remember hearing about a 10 year lull in violence in Israel, do you?
Must be one of those missing decades.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Hamas has only been around for 20 years. I dont remember hearing about a 10 year lull in violence in Israel, do you?
That was because after 15 months Israel stopped following it, thusly ending the ceasefire.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Hamas has only been around for 20 years. I dont remember hearing about a 10 year lull in violence in Israel, do you?
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/09/mideast/
Last edited by PureFodder (2008-03-03 06:55:24)
Just because one side says 'Oops' when it kills loads of civilians it does not absolve them of the guilt for doing so. Both sides kill civilians and in fact Israel kill quite a lot more. Palestine need to ditch Hamas for being shit-stirrers and Israel need to stop themselves being drawn into large scale fights like those seen in the past week ...it plays into the hands of Hamas in terms of PR.M.O.A.B wrote:
Ah ok, so Israel stops the airstrikes and its all hunky dory? Aye ok.PureFodder wrote:
Or Israel could learn that if they stop the airstrikes, the retaliatory rockets would stop. It's about time that the Israali population learnt that if they stopped massively opressing huge numbers of people the oppressed wouldn't feel the need to attack them.M.O.A.B wrote:
I think sometimes the IDF should just go in and take them out one by one, street by street, house by house. Give a huge warning to all the civilians to get out, if they don't they can't be held responsible if they were killed. Then when its all over, build em up some new houses. Its about time the Palestinians and Gazans learnt that if they stop supporting the militant groups, the retaliation air strikes would stop.
6 of one, half a dozen of the other...
Before we enter the exact same part before, there's only one side here that deliberately targets civilians and will not accept a peace deal.
And at the end of the day how can 100 Palestinian deaths be justifiable revenge for the death of a few Israelis? That's like an eye for ten eyes for God's sake.
thats awfully subjective. You said they followed a 10 year peace deal, then you follow it by saying it lasted only 15 months. So, apparently, they didnt follow a ten year peace deal if they were offensive again after 15 months. Israel's fault, of course. Its israel's fault for existing.PureFodder wrote:
That was because after 15 months Israel stopped following it, thusly ending the ceasefire.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Hamas has only been around for 20 years. I dont remember hearing about a 10 year lull in violence in Israel, do you?