Provisional Decision Today: ICJ Weighs Emergency Measures Amid Allegations of Genocide in Gaza

[Brickleberry]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

The Palestinians were not the 'owners of the land'. You're making things up. Many of them weren't even 'indigenous', but work immigrants. You can also make up stuff about 'Israel would have been livid', without support - it's how you roll. If the Palestinians would have agreed, there might have been no war back then, a war which cost the Palestinians (Nakba) and the Israelis (a little over 1% of the latter died in the war - worse than what the Palestinians are experiencing now).

 

There were circumstances leading to the 1967 war which you gloss over. Not quite the story you tell. Post-war, the Palestinians/Arab side further embraced a rejectionist position, leading to an impasse. The illegal settlement effort is another matter, and Israel is clearly in the wrong on that. Your comment on Palestinian willingness to compromise is the usual misleading fare. They have agreed to some things, rejected many others. It's a wee bit more complex than you 'suggest'. As for Israel's positions, that 'will not be satisfied' bit - again, misleading, inaccurate, out of context - the usual.

 

I was responding to someone expressing genocidal, racist bigotry. They needed simplification.

 

Of course they were indigenous, saying they were not is just a false, flat out lie. A lie used by Zionists.

 

Had they accepted the agreement, the Israelis would have went to war a little earlier than when they declared war and used terrorist tactics against the British. This has been evidenced by Israeli behavior at the time.

 

My comment about Palestinian willingness has been backed up numerous times, I'm bored of discussing this with you. Nothing i said was misleading or inaccurate. Israel started the war. Right of conquest has been illegal since 1945. Jews owned 6% of the land at the time - 1947.

 

 

[Neeranam]

2 hours ago, WDSmart said:

And, yet the UN gave the territory to the Jews as their homeland without permission of the other people living there.

And absurdly, the fanatics here say the UN favours the Palestinians

[WDSmart]

37 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

And absurdly, the fanatics here say the UN favours the Palestinians

Now, I wouldn't say the UN "favors" (US spelling) the Palestinians, but the ICJ has determined that Israeli forces have gone way too far in their reaction to Hamas' Oct 7 massacre by conducting continual and indiscriminate bombing of Gaza.

I think the UN and even the ICJ have made a similar judgment to what I have made. Both sides are guilty of horrible acts, and neither side can be said to be solely the guilty party.

To make the situation as simple as possible, I classify it as a classic "He hit me first!" scenario. 

[ozimoron]

13 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Now, I wouldn't say the UN "favors" (US spelling) the Palestinians, but the ICJ has determined that Israeli forces have gone way too far in their reaction to Hamas' Oct 7 massacre by conducting continual and indiscriminate bombing of Gaza.

I think the UN and even the ICJ have made a similar judgment to what I have made. Both sides are guilty of horrible acts, and neither side can be said to be solely the guilty party.

To make the situation as simple as possible, I classify it as a classic "He hit me first!" scenario. 

 

The problem is here that some posters say both sides are guilty and some say only one side is guilty. Those that say only one side is guilty all align with the same side.

[WDSmart]

12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

The problem is here that some posters say both sides are guilty and some say only one side is guilty. Those that say only one side is guilty all align with the same side.

I see posts from those aligning themselves with one side and some with the other. Most seem to be on the Israeli side. I'm actually not on either side, but I find myself usually defending the Palestinians because most of the derogatory posts are against them. I think both sides are at fault. 

Edited January 28 by WDSmart

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I see posts from those aligning themselves with one side and some with the other. Most seem to be on the Israeli side. I'm actually not on either side, but I find myself definding the Palestinians because most of the derogatory posts are against them. I think both sides are at fault. 

 

I have not seen a single post which claims Hamas was justified in carrying out a terrorist attack. Only posts which acknowledge that there was a history leading up to the attack.

[Morch]

53 minutes ago, Brickleberry said:

 

I was responding to someone expressing genocidal, racist bigotry. They needed simplification.

 

Of course they were indigenous, saying they were not is just a false, flat out lie. A lie used by Zionists.

 

Had they accepted the agreement, the Israelis would have went to war a little earlier than when they declared war and used terrorist tactics against the British. This has been evidenced by Israeli behavior at the time.

 

My comment about Palestinian willingness has been backed up numerous times, I'm bored of discussing this with you. Nothing i said was misleading or inaccurate. Israel started the war. Right of conquest has been illegal since 1945. Jews owned 6% of the land at the time - 1947.

 

 

 

@Brickleberry

 

And I am responding to some points in your post, what of it?

 

No, it  is not a lie. There was, in fact, a significant migration from neighboring Arab countries after the British took control of the area. Better economical conditions, more work opportunities, that sort of thing. Palestinian surnames often indicate that quite clearly, many are references to original hometowns, areas, regions. I was not claiming that all were such immigrants, read carefully. A flat out lie, it is not. You are out of your depth on this.

 

You have no idea what would have happened had the Palestinians accepted the Partition Plan. You just present things as facts, that does not make them so. As for terrorist tactics, It's not like the Palestinians (or then 'Arabs') were a peaceful lot, they had their fare share of the same as well. Learn your history before coming here and making a fool of yourself.

 

Palestinians have rejected the Partition Plan. Palestinians did not pursue independence under Jordanian/Egyptian rule. Palestinians embraced a rejectionist position (them 'three no's) for decades later. Even more recently, two Israeli Prime Ministers made offers to the Palestinians which were either rejected or left unanswered. Both are more than what they can hope to achieve nowadays. You can disregard all that, you can go on believing that the imaginary one-sided narrative you push is real - doesn't change facts one bit.

[ozimoron]

8 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

 

 

I can only say I've been acutely aware of what provoked Hamas ever since I closely followed the 1967 war as a 13 year old teenager.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

And absurdly, the fanatics here say the UN favours the Palestinians

 

Absurdly, it's exactly what wannabe 'pro-palestinians' are saying on these topics.

 

[Morch]

34 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Now, I wouldn't say the UN "favors" (US spelling) the Palestinians, but the ICJ has determined that Israeli forces have gone way too far in their reaction to Hamas' Oct 7 massacre by conducting continual and indiscriminate bombing of Gaza.

I think the UN and even the ICJ have made a similar judgment to what I have made. Both sides are guilty of horrible acts, and neither side can be said to be solely the guilty party.

To make the situation as simple as possible, I classify it as a classic "He hit me first!" scenario. 

 

You wouldn't say that because you're out of touch with reality.

 

Israel gets more condemnations on the UN and associated bodies than any other country.

Sometimes, when things are so obvious and cannot be ignored, they have to toss in some condemnations of the Palestinian side.

But mostly it's a biased environment. Welcome to the real world.

 

 

[Morch]

27 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

The problem is here that some posters say both sides are guilty and some say only one side is guilty. Those that say only one side is guilty all align with the same side.

 

@ozimoron

 

And then there are posters like you, who pretend to say both sides are guilty, but direct 99% of their criticism and bile toward one side, while making only token references to the other.

[Nick Carter icp]

6 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Yes, that's what I meant. No, I haven't seen any posts trying to justify the Oct 7 massacre. 

 

   There have been numerous posts stating that the attack didn't happen in a vacuum , which is suggesting that the attack was justified 

[Morch]

16 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I have not seen a single post which claims Hamas was justified in carrying out a terrorist attack. Only posts which acknowledge that there was a history leading up to the attack.

 

@ozimoron

 

Your own posts carry that implication. Numerous times.

It was 'inevitable'. It's Israel's fault. Netanyahu armed and financed the Hamas. The war started long ago. What would you expect.

And all the rest of your not-so-veiled excuses for Hamas.

[Morch]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I can only say I've been acutely aware of what provoked Hamas ever since I closely followed the 1967 war as a 13 year old teenager.

 

@ozimoron

 

I can only say that your posts exhibit a whole lot of investment in minimizing Hamas role in things.

As for following things closely - your posts and comments do not betray this.

[FruitPudding]

12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

I can only say I've been acutely aware of what provoked Hamas ever since I closely followed the 1967 war as a 13 year old teenager.

 

Muslim terrorists have their own reasons.

 

There is nobody else to blame. It's their religion. 

[WDSmart]

8 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   There have been numerous posts stating that the attack didn't happen in a vacuum , which is suggesting that the attack was justified 

I don't see those phrases as the same thing. The attack didn't happen without some provocation, at least what Hamas considered a provocation. That statement doesn't "justify" the horrible attack. It just explains it. It would be the same as saying a thief killed someone while stealing their car because the thief wanted a Corvette. It's not a justification, just an explanation.

[WDSmart]

4 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

 

Muslim terrorists have their own reasons.

 

There is nobody else to blame. It's their religion. 

Same for Zionists... 

[Morch]

1 minute ago, WDSmart said:

Same for Zionists... 

 

Not all Zionists are religious.

 

[WDSmart]

26 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

You wouldn't say that because you're out of touch with reality.

 

Israel gets more condemnations on the UN and associated bodies than any other country.

Sometimes, when things are so obvious and cannot be ignored, they have to toss in some condemnations of the Palestinian side.

But mostly it's a biased environment. Welcome to the real world.

 

 

I never knew that, or at least saw it that way.

If you think that is the case, why do you think it is? In my home country, the USA, Israel is certainly favored over the Palestinians who live in Gaza and the West Bank - by both our government and the public. Now, of course, there is some pushback because of the bombings in Gaza, but still, primarily, any group would have support over any other group who are Arab/Muslim. 

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I never knew that, or at least saw it that way.

If you think that is the case, why do you think it is? In my home country, the USA, Israel is certainly favored over the Palestinians who live in Gaza and the West Bank - by both our government and the public. Now, of course, there is some pushback because of the bombings in Gaza, but still, primarily, any group would have support over any other group who are Arab/Muslim. 

 

It is really, really, hard to miss if one follows these issues, as you claim to.

 

I do not 'think' this is the case. That was not an opinion.

 

As to why? Easy. The UNGA is a one nation one vote operation. There's a bloc of Muslim countries, 50+ strong which almost always votes for this stuff, oil and other connections play their part to pull other votes in. Then there are Russia/China effects with their own issues vs. USA (which Israel is associated with), and so on and so forth. Things are worse on some UN bodies and committees, where the odds can be worse. That includes those dealing with human rights (but membership of committees including clearly undemocratic, non-free countries).

 

Israel's sins are what they are. But the sheer amount of resolutions/condemnations would imply that they are the worst thing ever. Russia, China, Syria, Sudan, Myanmar - just a random quick list - don't get anywhere near the that. If that sounds reasonable to you (or anyone) guess your concept of 'reason' is idiosyncratic as well.

 

The comment was about the UN, not the USA.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

6 hours ago, Neeranam said:

 

People like you make peace impossible. 

Bugger - I was hoping you had blocked me.

 

In answer - the truth is that fanatic crazy terrorists like Hamas make peace impossible.  

[ozimoron]

Just now, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Bugger - I was hoping you had blocked me.

 

In answer - the truth is that fanatic crazy terrorists like Hamas make peace impossible.  

 

Then ring up Netanyahu and tell him to stop supporting them.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

6 hours ago, WDSmart said:

Jews were not the original inhabitants of the land now called "Israel." The ancestors of the Arabs, who are now called "Palestinians," were.

You are totally and utterly wrong - I did not read past that ignorant statement. 

[The Fugitive]

2 hours ago, FruitPudding said:

 

Muslim terrorists have their own reasons.

 

There is nobody else to blame. It's their religion.

Reading up on Mohammed Deif, Commander-in-Chief of Qassam Brigades. Born in a refugee camp in Gaza 'open air prison'. What this guy (and his family) have suffered at the hands of the Israeli's is unimaginable. Anyone, irrespective of religion, would fight back. Respect to him.

[WDSmart]

15 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

In answer - the truth is that fanatic crazy terrorists like Hamas make peace impossible.  

...and militant Zionists. 

[Nick Carter icp]

9 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

...and militant Zionists. 

 

 Who are these "militant Zionist" in Israel that you speak of ?

Are you speaking about an actual group or are you imagining a group that doesn't exist?

[WDSmart]

3 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

 Who are these "militant Zionist" in Israel that you speak of ?

Are you speaking about an actual group or are you imagining a group that doesn't exist?

I'm speaking of the extreme, right-wing, nationalistic, militant group whose goal is to drive all Palestinians out of what is now called Israel. 

Here is the definition of Zionist from the online Oxford Language Dictionary:

a movement for (originally) the re-establishment and (now) the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel.

I consider it the Israeli equivalent of Hamas.

[Nick Carter icp]

1 minute ago, WDSmart said:

I'm speaking of the extreme, right-wing, nationalistic, militant group whose goal is to drive all Palestinians out of what is now called Israel. 

Here is the definition of Zionist from the online Oxford Language Dictionary:

a movement for (originally) the re-establishment and (now) the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel.

I consider it the Israeli equivalent of Hamas.

 

 

 I know what you are talking about, I asked you WHO you were talking about .

What are the names of the groups or people whom you are referring to ?

 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, WDSmart said:

I'm speaking of the extreme, right-wing, nationalistic, militant group whose goal is to drive all Palestinians out of what is now called Israel. 

Here is the definition of Zionist from the online Oxford Language Dictionary:

a movement for (originally) the re-establishment and (now) the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel.

I consider it the Israeli equivalent of Hamas.

 

I don't think it would be an exaggeration to say that there is some buyer's remorse about the last Israeli election where the Zionist took power in the most far right Israeli government in history.

[WDSmart]

1 minute ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

 

 I know what you are talking about, I asked you WHO you were talking about .

What are the names of the groups or people whom you are referring to ?

 

I don't fully understand your question. I don't know any of the names of people who I would classify as "Zionists" any more than I know the names of those who would be considered "Hamas." If I had to pick one as an example, I would say Netanyahu would be a good choice. "Zionist" is more of a label than a group. It's a "movement," as the dictionary definition in my previous quote indicated.