The Children of Gaza = More than 7000 Killed.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The land they owned before old white men on the other side of the world took it away and gave it to zionists without their consent.

 

@thaibeachlovers

 

Hamas did not 'own' any land. Many of the Palestinians did not actually own land either. 

As for your 'old white men' rubbish....we've been over that numerous times.

You, for example, are clearly not very interested in any form of compromise, legitimization, and the like. What you're after is some 'victory'.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The land they owned before old white men on the other side of the world took it away and gave it to zionists without their consent.

Just say Jews.  You're not fooling anyone  with the Zionist cover game 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

@thaibeachlovers

 

Hamas did not 'own' any land. Many of the Palestinians did not actually own land either. 

As for your 'old white men' rubbish....we've been over that numerous times.

You, for example, are clearly not very interested in any form of compromise, legitimization, and the like. What you're after is some 'victory'.

Yes and in 1948 many of the Arabs were recent economic migrants to the mandate from the pan Arabic world. 

An example of the complexity that Israel demonizers ignore. Nakba yes but never any acknowledgement of the Jewish Nakba.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The land they owned before old white men on the other side of the world took it away and gave it to zionists without their consent.

And where exactly do you think that land was located? 

[Jingthing]

11 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Agree.

Is that really what israelis want, perpetual war for ever?

 

They haven't succeeded in suppressing Palestinian resistance since 1948, so do they actually think they can, or is it just netanyahu trying to stay out of jail?

Even if they did kill every Hamas in Gaza, as long as Palestinians live inside or outside israel, there will be a Hamas or whatever takes its place to take revenge.

What peace would a fully sovereign Palestinian state that still has a River to the Sea ideology plus full military support of Israel have? 

[Nick Carter icp]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Did anyone ever wondered what Hamas were hoping to gain from the 7th of October attack?

 

Prior to October 7 the whole world ignored the atrocities israel was committing in the West Bank and the vile blockade of Gaza.

 

    Did you not see the mass World protests against Israel prior to October 7 th ?

The boycott campaign of Israeli products and the attempts to break the sea blockade by a mass flotilla of boats ?

    The World was well aware of the situation in Israel/Gaza , the terrorist attack just made it headlines again , something else will happen in the World soon  and the Israel/Palestine topic will be back on the back burner .

[ozimoron]

1 hour ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

'Their land' - What land was theirs?? 

 

The land, like all land, belonged to the denizens of that land at the time.

[ozimoron]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Just say Jews.  You're not fooling anyone  with the Zionist cover game 

 

Just stop projecting.

[Nick Carter icp]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The land they owned before old white men on the other side of the world took it away and gave it to zionists without their consent.

 

   Old White men on the other side of the World ?

India , Peru , Venezuela , Haiti and Philippines all voted in the referendum in the Hague which is a few hours flight away , hardly old white men on the other side of the World .

    Maybe you are thinking of the British invading New Zealand and taking that Country over ?

 

[Morch]

45 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

The land, like all land, belonged to the denizens of that land at the time.

 

@ozimoron

 

More vague waffle.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

thaibeachlovers  said:

The land they owned before old white men on the other side of the world took it away and gave it to zionists without their consent.

 

2 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

And where exactly do you think that land was located? 

 

Still no answer from  @thaibeachlovers   to my question.  Because there is no such people who occupied a specific area of lands - and there never has been. Clearly he is a person with no idea what they are talking about - all emotions and feelings - and no facts and realities.  Here is some facts and realities for you mate.

 

Palestine is a name that the Romans gave to the area after they had pushed down the Jewish War.  The first Jewish–Roman War (66–73 AD) — also called the First Jewish Revolt or the Great Jewish Revolt, spanning from the 66 AD insurrection, through the 67 AD fall of the Galilee, the destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple, and institution of the Fiscus Judaicus in 70 AD, and finally the fall of Masada in 73 AD.

 

 

Maybe when @thaibeachlovers looks at this map above, he will ask where were the so called Palestinians. The answer is there were no such people - it was a word used to describe the whole area - which is now called the Middle East.

 

Plus he will maybe realise the fact that Islam of which the Hamas are a people as such, did not even exist until Mohammed in the year 610 made his first revelations at the age of 40.  Yes mate - 600 years after Christ and 600 years after this map - that was when Mohammed started the religion of Islam - of which the Hamas are a fanatically anti-Jewish group.

 

History of the Jews under Muslim rule - Wikipedia

 

These so called Palestinians in Gaza are nothing but a bunch of fanatic Jewish/Israel hating extremist Muslims who are using the ignorance and stupidity of the western media and its foolish people, to battle for the destruction of Israel and all its Jewish people. Clearly this area and lands were in the hands of the Jewish people before the BS Islamic terrorists even began to exist.  And I could go back a lot longer too - 5000 years - the Jewish people and their history goes back 5000 years on those lands.  I will say it again, Islam did not even start until 600 AD. 'Taken lands' is a total fabrication - given back their lands back after the Arabs were all beaten and conquered during WW2 is more like it.  Check outr Europe post WW2 - many things happened to lands that were previously occupied and previously part of another country. That is the history of history - lose land, win land, lose land, win land - on and on it goes.

 

[Jeff the Chef]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yes and in 1948 many of the Arabs were recent economic migrants to the mandate from the pan Arabic world. 

An example of the complexity that Israel demonizers ignore. Nakba yes but never any acknowledgement of the Jewish Nakba.

Interesting read, I wasn't aware of this, another thing to blame the British for and WW11.

I wonder if the colonial powers after WW11 would have left the M.E. to get on with their lives if history would have been a lot different?

 

https://www.thetower.org/article/there-was-a-jewish-nakba-and-it-was-even-bigger-than-the-palestinian-one/

[ezzra]

Here are some thoughts provoking numbers: in the world right now, there are circa 1.8 billion Muslims!!! spread out in many countries V. 16.5 millions Jews, where the majority of them are in Israel, while Muslims can go live in many countries, ( not that many countries will want them seeing how troublesome they are) Jews has only one place, 

one of main reasons to high children death in Gaza, it's because 45% of the Gaza population are children 

(yes, forty five percent) meaning, nearly half of the population are children, a fact that no one talks about it...

[metisdead]

A post with unattributed content contravening our Community Standards has been removed.  Please provide a valid link to the source of information when posting. 

[simple1]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The land they owned before old white men on the other side of the world took it away and gave it to zionists without their consent.

The fact is Arab land owners sold land to Jewish migrants it wasn't given to them. Wealthy Arabs even bought land from poor Arabs and on-sold it to Jews for a significant profit. For a detailed review of land ownership issues leading up to 1948 I recommend you and others who may be interested in the subject read Palestine Betrayed by Efraim Karsh: the book sheds light on a number of contentious matters.

[Jingthing]

13 minutes ago, simple1 said:

The fact is Arab land owners sold land to Jewish migrants it wasn't given to them. Wealthy Arabs even bought land from poor Arabs and on-sold it to Jews for a significant profit. For a detailed review of land ownership issues leading up to 1948 I recommend you and others who may be interested in the subject read Palestine Betrayed by Efraim Karsh: the book sheds light on a number of contentious matters.

Yes yet another example of how complicated this conflict is. 

[Jeff the Chef]

33 minutes ago, simple1 said:

The fact is Arab land owners sold land to Jewish migrants it wasn't given to them. Wealthy Arabs even bought land from poor Arabs and on-sold it to Jews for a significant profit. For a detailed review of land ownership issues leading up to 1948 I recommend you and others who may be interested in the subject read Palestine Betrayed by Efraim Karsh: the book sheds light on a number of contentious matters.

Had a look at Wiki for Efraim Karsh and there seems to be a lot of debate on some of his views, not unlike on here, as has been said, " a complicated subject, all round"

 

Howard Sachar sees Karsh as the "preeminent scholar-spokesman of the Revisionist (politically-rightist) Movement in Zionism."

Prominent New Historian Benny Morris called Karsh's Fabricating Israeli History "a mélange of distortions, half-truths, and plain lies that vividly demonstrates his profound ignorance of both the source material... and the history of the Zionist-Arab conflict," titling his article "Undeserving of a Reply". Morris adds that Karsh belabors minor points while ignoring the main pieces of evidence.

Political scientist Ian Lustick commented that Karsh's writing in Fabricating Israeli History was malevolent, and his analysis erratic and sloppy.

Yezid Sayigh, professor of Middle East studies, wrote that Karsh "is simply not what he makes himself out to be, a trained historian (nor political/social scientist)."[14][better source needed] Karsh accused Sayigh of a "misleading misrepresentation of my scholarly background" and retorted that Sayigh's remarks were "not a scholarly debate on facts and theses but a character assassination couched in high pseudo-academic rhetoric".

In a review of Rethinking the Middle East, el-Aswad writes "It seems, in many cases, that whatever does not match the author's views is charged with fraud and deception".

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, Jeff the Chef said:

Had a look at Wiki for Efraim Karsh and there seems to be a lot of debate on some of his views, not unlike on here, as has been said, " a complicated subject, all round"

 

Howard Sachar sees Karsh as the "preeminent scholar-spokesman of the Revisionist (politically-rightist) Movement in Zionism."

Prominent New Historian Benny Morris called Karsh's Fabricating Israeli History "a mélange of distortions, half-truths, and plain lies that vividly demonstrates his profound ignorance of both the source material... and the history of the Zionist-Arab conflict," titling his article "Undeserving of a Reply". Morris adds that Karsh belabors minor points while ignoring the main pieces of evidence.

Political scientist Ian Lustick commented that Karsh's writing in Fabricating Israeli History was malevolent, and his analysis erratic and sloppy.

Yezid Sayigh, professor of Middle East studies, wrote that Karsh "is simply not what he makes himself out to be, a trained historian (nor political/social scientist)."[14][better source needed] Karsh accused Sayigh of a "misleading misrepresentation of my scholarly background" and retorted that Sayigh's remarks were "not a scholarly debate on facts and theses but a character assassination couched in high pseudo-academic rhetoric".

In a review of Rethinking the Middle East, el-Aswad writes "It seems, in many cases, that whatever does not match the author's views is charged with fraud and deception".

 

Goes to show that even historians dealing with this period of time can't make peace among themselves....what chance real peace between nations?

[Jeff the Chef]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Goes to show that even historians dealing with this period of time can't make peace among themselves....what chance real peace between nations?

True, complicated init?

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Jeff the Chef said:

The thing I picked up from the link is that it is possible due to lack of employment opportunity for women, even though they are often educated, could it be cultural, thinking of the Afghan Islamism problems with educating women, I also noted it is encouraged by Hamas to build bigger forces.

Whatever, that's not really the point of my post, I was calling out @Neeranam for providing misleading unsubstantiated copy and paste text. I despise dishonesty.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, Jeff the Chef said:

True, complicated init?

 

It's complicated if the narratives are adhered to and dictate the field.

[Jeff the Chef]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

It's complicated if the narratives are adhered to and dictate the field.

Give us that in plain language, please.

[Jeff the Chef]

7 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Whatever, that's not really the point of my post, I was calling out @Neeranam for providing misleading unsubstantiated copy and paste text. I despise dishonesty.

Maybe so, but arguing back and forth between the factions on here is getting a bit  tedious, I was trying to find something that we could all agree with for once.

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, Jeff the Chef said:

Give us that in plain language, please.

 

OK.

 

One side says, we were here first, it's all ours, you're evil, go away.

The other side says, no - we were here first, it's all ours, you're evil, go away.

 

That's the rough version, but I think it makes the point.

 

So between these two narratives, there's not a whole lot of room for compromise or deal making.

Add over a hundred years of animosity and bloodshed, shake well.

 

Look at these topics.

People rarely listen, budge, try to grasp complex answers.

It's more of a black and white thing, which again - not likely to go anywhere.

 

I've been on these forums a long time, and these topics are always the same.

Sort of like the relations between the two people.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Jeff the Chef said:

Maybe so, but arguing back and forth between the factions on here is getting a bit  tedious, I was trying to find something that we could all agree with for once.

lol, you do you, I will do me, which on this instance is asking why he thinks he can bypass rules while others keep to them. For agreement in a debate you need honesty.

 

14 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Whatever, that's not really the point of my post, I was calling out @Neeranam for providing misleading unsubstantiated copy and paste text. I despise dishonesty.

 

[CharlieH]

Reported misleading post and response to it removed.

[Jeff the Chef]

38 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

OK.

 

One side says, we were here first, it's all ours, you're evil, go away.

The other side says, no - we were here first, it's all ours, you're evil, go away.

 

That's the rough version, but I think it makes the point.

 

So between these two narratives, there's not a whole lot of room for compromise or deal making.

Add over a hundred years of animosity and bloodshed, shake well.

 

Look at these topics.

People rarely listen, budge, try to grasp complex answers.

It's more of a black and white thing, which again - not likely to go anywhere.

 

I've been on these forums a long time, and these topics are always the same.

Sort of like the relations between the two people.

Post of the week 

[Jeff the Chef]

39 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

lol, you do you, I will do me, which on this instance is asking why he thinks he can bypass rules while others keep to them. For agreement in a debate you need honesty.

 

 

We're all from different places so there are bound to be odd interpretations of what's being said and not trying to be rude to you Brian, you do wind me up with some of the way you comment and I like to think I've been around long enough to get over that sort of thing.

That said, I agree on the need for honesty, maybe give a few a bit of slack now and again.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

OK.

 

One side says, we were here first, it's all ours, you're evil, go away.

The other side says, no - we were here first, it's all ours, you're evil, go away.

 

That's the rough version, but I think it makes the point.

 

So between these two narratives, there's not a whole lot of room for compromise or deal making.

Add over a hundred years of animosity and bloodshed, shake well.

 

Look at these topics.

People rarely listen, budge, try to grasp complex answers.

It's more of a black and white thing, which again - not likely to go anywhere.

 

I've been on these forums a long time, and these topics are always the same.

Sort of like the relations between the two people.

Yes.

So obviously these two peoples need to separate.

But as there isn't majority support on either side for a two state solution, most likely this mess goes on for generations to come. Even when there is support for a two state solution, important details are not even close to potential agreement. For example, Israel can't possibly agree to a fully sovereign Palestinian state unless it is baby stepped in over decades (over security concerns). October 7 cemented that reality. To those who say, that isn't fair, is it fair to expect Israelis to fully empower a neighbor dedicated to their destruction as Israel is such a TINY country? Would your country if it had the power, ever allow such a horror? To expand this further, even IF a ruling Palestinian entity says OK, we really respect Israel's right to exist, are there any rational grounds for Israel to believe that as anything more than a ploy to get the power to crush Israel later?

[ozimoron]

3 hours ago, ezzra said:

Here are some thoughts provoking numbers: in the world right now, there are circa 1.8 billion Muslims!!! spread out in many countries V. 16.5 millions Jews, where the majority of them are in Israel, while Muslims can go live in many countries, ( not that many countries will want them seeing how troublesome they are) Jews has only one place, 

one of main reasons to high children death in Gaza, it's because 45% of the Gaza population are children 

(yes, forty five percent) meaning, nearly half of the population are children, a fact that no one talks about it...

 

AFAIK, Jews can live in the US. 6 million already do.

 

Why should we talk about how many Gazans are kids? It's a well known fact that the ME has one of the highest reproductive rates in the world. That's a characteristic of any poor country