Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

The negotiations call for an administration of Gaza and the west bank which does not include Hamas. Without any official status and without support from Israel Hamas would be powerless save for some outstanding extremists who would be opposed by the Palestinian police under a new administration

Israel will do what is best for Israel, end of!

  • Agree 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Wobblybob said:

There wouldn't have been an Oct 8th without the infamous beastial attack on Oct 7th and without removing Hamas now you are facilitating more of these attacks which should be obvious to every man and his dog.

Two more Israeli hostages have been murdered in Gaza today/yesterday, it takes a very special person to support the people responsible for these actions. 🥴

There wouldn't have been Oct 7 attacks if Israel had not been stealing Palestinian land for the past 80 years.
I am not "facilitating" more of these attacks. I am explaining why they occurred and how they may continue in the future if they do not reach an agreement on a two-state solution. That's obvious to me and my 14 dogs.
"Two more Israeli hostages have been murdered..." How many Palestinians have been murdered by the IDF? 
I am not SUPPORTING the people responsible for either of these killings. I am simply explaining why they occur and will continue to occur if a settlement is not reached.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Wobblybob said:

Israel will do what is best for Israel, end of!

I agree wholeheartedly with the first part of that statement, but that is far from the ending of anything.

Posted
2 hours ago, ozimoron said:

Netanyahu has been spoiling for a fight with the US. He may not survive this one

 

It also distracts from his stated policy of imploring Qatar to funnel more funds to Gaza to strengthen Hamas, all in order to weaken the Palestinian Authority and render any political negotiations impossible.

 

But this framing allows Netanyahu to placate his rightwing extremist coalition and partners, who have long opposed any form of Palestinian statehood.

 

The second reason is more current and practical: the confrontation is about setting up Biden as the scapegoat for Netanyahu’s failure to achieve “total victory” or “the eradication of Hamas”, two fortune cookie-type slogans that he spews regularly.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/26/benjamin-netanyahu-joe-biden-un-security-council-resolution-ceasefire-gaza

That first link to the Guardian is over 5 months old and irrelevant to the current situation of Netanyahu and Hamas

 

 

 

 

 

  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Good luck with that as neither side wants that.

 

The major points of contention include the specific boundaries of the two states (though most proposals are based on the 1967 lines), the status of Jerusalem, the Israeli settlements and the right of return of Palestinian refugees. Observers have described the current situation in the whole territory, with the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and blockade of the Gaza Strip, as one of de facto Israeli sovereignty.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state_solution

  • Agree 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

There wouldn't have been Oct 7 attacks if Israel had not been stealing Palestinian land for the past 80 years.
I am not "facilitating" more of these attacks. I am explaining why they occurred and how they may continue in the future if they do not reach an agreement on a two-state solution. That's obvious to me and my 14 dogs.
"Two more Israeli hostages have been murdered..." How many Palestinians have been murdered by the IDF? 
I am not SUPPORTING the people responsible for either of these killings. I am simply explaining why they occur and will continue to occur if a settlement is not reached.

Reverting back to a history lesson that doesn't have an ounce of truth in it, even if it did are you using that to excuse the evil actions on 7/10....... despicable!

  • Sad 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
Just now, Wobblybob said:

Reverting back to a history lesson that doesn't have an ounce of truth in it, even if it did are you using that to excuse the evil actions on 7/10....... despicable!

 

That's only true if you don't believe the entire west bank belongs to Palestinians.

  • Agree 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I agree wholeheartedly with the first part of that statement, but that is far from the ending of anything.

Are we playing riddle-me-ree now?

  • Confused 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

That's only true if you don't believe the entire west bank belongs to Palestinians.

Oh it must be correct if you say so!

  • Sad 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Wobblybob said:

Oh it must be correct if you say so!

 

Interesting that neither you nor anybody else who supports Israel won't say whether or not they believe the West Bank is Palestinian land.

  • Confused 3
  • Agree 1
Posted
1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

Interesting that neither you nor anybody else who supports Israel won't say whether or not they believe the West Bank is Palestinian land.

Stop being your usual caustic self and inserting your own strawman arguments, are you incapable of responding to a post without your usual bellicosity inserts?

  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Interesting that neither you nor anybody else who supports Israel won't say whether or not they believe the West Bank is Palestinian land.

This war didn’t start because of the West Bank. It started because of Hamas in Gaza. West Bank is Palastinian land that Israel should vacate but that is an issue for the future. The present is stopping  the war after hostages are released and Hamas finished. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted

It's disgusting that Bloomberg give a megaphone to this warmongering and ethnic cleansing eviction of Palestinians from Rafah. The fallacy in this argument is that removing civilians from Gaza, presumably to Egypt, would also permit Hamas moving to Egypt thereby achieving nothing other than finishing the job of removing all Palestinians from Gaza.

 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

Interesting that neither you nor anybody else who supports Israel won't say whether or not they believe the West Bank is Palestinian land.

Off-topic...........:coffee1:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

This war didn’t start because of the West Bank. It started because of Hamas in Gaza. West Bank is Palastinian land that Israel should vacate but that is an issue for the future. The present is stopping  the war after hostages are released and Hamas finished. 

 

Thanks for agreeing that the West Bank is Palestinian land. Would you also agree that the illegal settlements were a provocation for Hamas?

 

And why hasn't it been a question ever since the settlements started? Why is it only a question for the future?

  • Confused 3
  • Agree 1
Posted
1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

 

Thanks for agreeing that the West Bank is Palestinian land. Would you also agree that the illegal settlements were a provocation for Hamas?

Read my post again and stop asking he obvious. Or get back to your YouTube link dumping

  • Sad 1
  • Thumbs Up 2
Posted
Just now, WDSmart said:

This "war" started because of Israel's continual stealing of Palestinian land. That has happened everywhere, including in the West Bank, and is, in fact, happening there RIGHT NOW! 

Nothing to do with the underground war machine then..............😂

Posted
7 minutes ago, transam said:
18 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Interesting that neither you nor anybody else who supports Israel won't say whether or not they believe the West Bank is Palestinian land.

Off-topic...........:coffee1:

Another non-answer... :sad:

  • Thanks 2
Posted
1 minute ago, WDSmart said:

This "war" started because of Israel's continual stealing of Palestinian land. That has happened everywhere, including in the West Bank, and is, in fact, happening there RIGHT NOW! 

Can you provide a specific link to that blanket statement. The war started 7th Oct because Hamas carried out a terrorist massacre and took hostages. There is no justification for that. 

  • Agree 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Another non-answer... :sad:

You can talk, round and round and round......................🤕

  • Sad 1
Posted
Just now, WDSmart said:

No, this "war" has everything to do with Hamas' "underground war machine." Which was, IMO, a result of Israel's continual stealing of Palestinian land.

You're 'avin a laugh............😂

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Posted
1 minute ago, coolcarer said:
5 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

This "war" started because of Israel's continual stealing of Palestinian land. That has happened everywhere, including in the West Bank, and is, in fact, happening there RIGHT NOW! 

Can you provide a specific link to that blanket statement. The war started 7th Oct because Hamas carried out a terrorist massacre and took hostages. There is no justification for that. 

Here you go... This one is only four days old... 
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-approves-new-parcel-west-bank-land-settlement-2024-03-22/

 

  • Agree 2
Posted
17 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

That is not a link to why the war started. Try again much harder

 

The war started with the Nakba in 1948. A key Hamas demand is the right of return of Palestinian refugees.

 

The Nakba was the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Mandatory Palestine during the 1948 Palestine war through their violent displacement and dispossession of land, property and belongings, along with the destruction of their society, culture, identity, political rights, and national aspirations.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba

 

  • Agree 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, coolcarer said:

That is not a link to why the war started. Try again much harder

No, that's a link showing the continuing stealing of Palestinian land in the West Bank, which is what I said in my previous post. It is representative of actions that are why the Oct 7 terrorist attack occurred.

Here is a link telling why Hamas says it attacked Israel on Oct 7.
"Hamas has said it was motivated to launch the attack essentially as the culmination of long-building anger over Israeli policy, including recent outbreaks of violence at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, but more generally over the treatment of Palestinians and the expansion of Israeli settlements." 
Why did Hamas attack Israel, and why now? - CBS News

  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

The war started with the Nakba in 1948. A key Hamas demand is the right of return of Palestinian refugees.

 

The Nakba was the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Mandatory Palestine during the 1948 Palestine war through their violent displacement and dispossession of land, property and belongings, along with the destruction of their society, culture, identity, political rights, and national aspirations.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba

 

Rubbish, Hamas was not even around then. This tOpic is the Hamas/Israel war and his is the 5th War starting 7th Oct

  • Sad 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

No, that's a link showing the continuing stealing of Palestinian land in the West Bank, which is what I said in my previous post. It is representative of actions that are why the Oct 7 terrorist attack occurred.

Here is a link telling why Hamas says it attacked Israel on Oct 7.
"Hamas has said it was motivated to launch the attack essentially as the culmination of long-building anger over Israeli policy, including recent outbreaks of violence at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, but more generally over the treatment of Palestinians and the expansion of Israeli settlements." 
Why did Hamas attack Israel, and why now? - CBS News

Wrong again. Israel declared war with Hamas due to the terrorist attack. Now your claim on 5e war, where is the link?

  • Confused 1
Posted
1 minute ago, coolcarer said:

Wrong again. Israel declared war with Hamas due to the terrorist attack. Now your claim on 5e war, where is the link?

 

Israel did not declare war. They said they were in a state of war. To declare war would have been to trigger the Geneva convention.

  • Confused 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...