20 hours ago, JBChiangRai said:

This doesn't help with Israel's reputation around the world.

 

No it does not, but they are past the point of needing to care. It's not as if their goodwill gestures and generosity was ever rewarded was it?  What incentive does Israel have to do otherwise? When Israel tried for peace, it was rebuffed and attacked. How many times does the past opportunities for the Palestinian Arabs to have their own sovereign territory and peace have to be reminded for it to be evident that the more Israel offers, the more the rabs demand. Whatever Israel will do will never be good enough for its critics. The Palestinian Arabs had multiple opportunities to get what they have demanded (without the destruction of Israel) and the Arbas repeatedly rejected those opportunities. FAFO.

27 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

No it does not, but they are past the point of needing to care.

Ah, that's why they're spending big on PR campaigns.

28 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

No it does not, but they are past the point of needing to care. It's not as if their goodwill gestures and generosity was ever rewarded was it?  What incentive does Israel have to do otherwise? When Israel tried for peace, it was rebuffed and attacked. How many times does the past opportunities for the Palestinian Arabs to have their own sovereign territory and peace have to be reminded for it to be evident that the more Israel offers, the more the rabs demand. Whatever Israel will do will never be good enough for its critics. The Palestinian Arabs had multiple opportunities to get what they have demanded (without the destruction of Israel) and the Arbas repeatedly rejected those opportunities. FAFO.

That argument only works if you pretend the “offers” were reasonable, viable, or made in good faith. They weren’t. Being offered a fragmented, non-sovereign entity with no real control over borders, airspace, security, or resources is not a peace deal – it’s permanent subordination with a flag attached.

Saying “they rejected peace” glosses over what was actually on the table. No Palestinian leadership could accept a deal that legitimised settlement expansion, annexation of key land, and indefinite military control and still call it a state. Rejecting a bad deal is not the same thing as rejecting peace.

Israel didn’t “try for peace” in a vacuum. Negotiations happened while settlements expanded, land was confiscated, and facts were created on the ground that made any future state less viable year by year. That alone undermines the claim of generosity.

The idea that “the more Israel offers, the more is demanded” reverses cause and effect. What changed wasn’t Palestinian expectations – it was the steady erosion of what was left to negotiate over. Each so-called offer came with less territory, less sovereignty, and more permanent constraints.

And no, criticism of this reality isn’t about Israel “never being good enough”. It’s about recognising that peace requires a genuinely viable outcome, not an ultimatum dressed up as compromise. Dismissing all rejection as irrational or malicious avoids confronting the substance of why those offers failed.

If anything, repeating the same talking points while expecting a different result is the real delusion.

8 minutes ago, RobKray said:

That argument only works if you pretend the “offers” were reasonable, viable, or made in good faith. They weren’t. Being offered a fragmented, non-sovereign entity with no real control over borders, airspace, security, or resources is not a peace deal – it’s permanent subordination with a flag attached.

 

 

Ok. However, you have inserted your own personal bias with that statement.

The Arabs were given the opportunity for all that you demanded in 1948 and instead declared war on Israel with ther intent of wiping the state out. They have repeatedly  tried to do the same thing over the years. There are consequences to  such choices.

 

In 2000, the Palestinian Arabs had an opportunity to get  almost everything they have been demanding, and rejected the agreement at the last minute because it would have required the recognition of Israel and an acceptance that israel could live in peace.

Former US president Bill Clinton said young people in America today “can’t believe” that late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat walked away from a Palestinian state during peace negotiations with Israel under his mediation as president.

Clinton added, in reference to the failed Camp David talks of 2000, that having turned down a “once in a lifetime” peace opportunity, “you can’t complain 25 years later when the doors weren’t all still open, and all the possibilities weren’t still there.”

“I think what’s happened there in the last twenty-five years is one of the great tragedies of the twenty-first century,” Clinton told New York Times journalist Andrew Ross Sorkin, in an interview for the newspaper’s DealBook Summit, promoting his new book, “Citizen: My Life After The White House.”  “All [young people in America] know that a lot more Palestinians have been killed than Israelis. And I tell them what Arafat walked away from, and they, like, can’t believe it,” said the former commander-in-chief.    Arafat “walked away from a Palestinian state, with a capital in East Jerusalem, 96% of the West Bank, 4% of Israel to make up for the 4% [of the West Bank to be annexed for Israeli settlements],” Clinton elaborated, repeating an account of the Oslo peace negotiations, to which the ex-president has returned repeatedly in recent interviews and remarks.

 

 

 

25 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Ah, that's why they're spending big on PR campaigns.

 

Are you sure? I understand from some of your fellow supporters of the Arab position that the Israelis and jews control the media., so there should be no need to spend big on a PR campaign. And where is this campaign? And what is it being spent on? I haven't seen any effort being made. On the contrary, I would describe the Israeli strategy and response as being a combination of stupidity, incompetence, arrogance and delusion.  They have sat there while an organized campaign has been launched against them. It's as if they think that they will be saved by divine intervention. The Bondi event should have been a wake up call by now.

37 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

Are you sure? I understand from some of your fellow supporters of the Arab position that the Israelis and jews control the media., so there should be no need to spend big on a PR campaign. And where is this campaign? And what is it being spent on? I haven't seen any effort being made. On the contrary, I would describe the Israeli strategy and response as being a combination of stupidity, incompetence, arrogance and delusion.  They have sat there while an organized campaign has been launched against them. It's as if they think that they will be saved by divine intervention. The Bondi event should have been a wake up call by now.

Others are saying something you claim to be in support of the Arab position, and you use that as an argument in a discussion with me. Back to school please on proper discussion techniques.

 

https://jewishchronicle.timesofisrael.com/israel-has-spent-millions-trying-win-hearts-and-minds-abroad-its-about-to-spend-20-times-more/

18 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

What Nick is trying to say is:

 

He really doesn’t like you sharing opinions on Israel that he doesn’t agree with.

 

This is a discussion forum, we get to discuss stuff.

 

 

   What makes you say that I don't like others sharing their opinions ?

What is the reason for that ?

9 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Others are saying something you claim to be in support of the Arab position, and you use that as an argument in a discussion with me. Back to school please on proper discussion techniques.

 

https://jewishchronicle.timesofisrael.com/israel-has-spent-millions-trying-win-hearts-and-minds-abroad-its-about-to-spend-20-times-more/

 

You always promise so much, and never deliver on your grand  pronouncements  The amount cited is nothing. In comparison, Coca Cola spends $5 billion on advertising annually. Emirates Airlines spends more than Israel on advertising at $191 million. What the article failed to mention is that much of the amount is spent on funding of jewish community events like promoting educational opportunities. My left wing  Irish catholic cousin took advantage of water conservation training in the Negev some years ago.  He did not come back a zionist, but did get an arab girlfriend from the deal.  In  contrast to Israel, Qatar offered a $400 million jumbo jet to the POTUS.  Since 2001, Qatar has provided $6.25 billion to American colleges and universities. Qatar has pledged to invest $500 billion in the U.S. economy over the next decade. Now, that's clout. Israel's spending is nothing, and only illustrates my point that it has bungled its public relations.  

11 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

You always promise so much, and never deliver on your grand  pronouncements  The amount cited is nothing. In comparison, Coca Cola spends $5 billion on advertising annually. Emirates Airlines spends more than Israel on advertising at $191 million. What the article failed to mention is that much of the amount is spent on funding of jewish community events like promoting educational opportunities. My left wing  Irish catholic cousin took advantage of water conservation training in the Negev some years ago.  He did not come back a zionist, but did get an arab girlfriend from the deal.  In  contrast to Israel, Qatar offered a $400 million jumbo jet to the POTUS.  Since 2001, Qatar has provided $6.25 billion to American colleges and universities. Qatar has pledged to invest $500 billion in the U.S. economy over the next decade. Now, that's clout. Israel's spending is nothing, and only illustrates my point that it has bungled its public relations.  

So the claim you questioned has been confirmed, yet you find a reason to lessen because others do more.

Do agree with you, that Qatar is buying influence in the US.

Seems like a generous offer from Israel considering October 7

 

 

3 minutes ago, EastBayRay said:

Seems like a generous offer from Israel considering October 7

 

 

What offer?

31 minutes ago, stevenl said:

So the claim you questioned has been confirmed, yet you find a reason to lessen because others do more.

 

 

   There needs to 1 rule for everyone .

"Lets just focus on Muslim Countries and prosecute them, whilst ignoring what All other Counties' do*

    How's that sound ?

3 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

 

Ok. However, you have inserted your own personal bias with that statement.

The Arabs were given the opportunity for all that you demanded in 1948 and instead declared war on Israel with ther intent of wiping the state out. They have repeatedly  tried to do the same thing over the years. There are consequences to  such choices.

 

In 2000, the Palestinian Arabs had an opportunity to get  almost everything they have been demanding, and rejected the agreement at the last minute because it would have required the recognition of Israel and an acceptance that israel could live in peace.

Former US president Bill Clinton said young people in America today “can’t believe” that late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat walked away from a Palestinian state during peace negotiations with Israel under his mediation as president.

Clinton added, in reference to the failed Camp David talks of 2000, that having turned down a “once in a lifetime” peace opportunity, “you can’t complain 25 years later when the doors weren’t all still open, and all the possibilities weren’t still there.”

“I think what’s happened there in the last twenty-five years is one of the great tragedies of the twenty-first century,” Clinton told New York Times journalist Andrew Ross Sorkin, in an interview for the newspaper’s DealBook Summit, promoting his new book, “Citizen: My Life After The White House.”  “All [young people in America] know that a lot more Palestinians have been killed than Israelis. And I tell them what Arafat walked away from, and they, like, can’t believe it,” said the former commander-in-chief.    Arafat “walked away from a Palestinian state, with a capital in East Jerusalem, 96% of the West Bank, 4% of Israel to make up for the 4% [of the West Bank to be annexed for Israeli settlements],” Clinton elaborated, repeating an account of the Oslo peace negotiations, to which the ex-president has returned repeatedly in recent interviews and remarks.

 

 

 

You believe Clinton? 😀

 

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

What offer?

only approving 19

21 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   I do, yes, YES 

Reclaiming Judea from the Muslim invaders .

They had the opportunity to live together peacefully .

They rejected it .

Live with the consequences 

Several historians in recent years have seen archives finally opened from the 1940s. This reveals that there was a premeditated ethnic cleansing of around 750000 Palestinians from what is now Israel (within its internationally recognized borders). There was no intention for the Palestinians to be left in place in peace.

9 minutes ago, placnx said:

Several historians in recent years have seen archives finally opened from the 1940s. This reveals that there was a premeditated ethnic cleansing of around 750000 Palestinians from what is now Israel (within its internationally recognized borders). There was no intention for the Palestinians to be left in place in peace.

 

    Yes, two Countries were formed and people from both sides moved across borders to be in their own country .

   Jews and Muslims swapped places (on the land) .

      Similar thing happened in India/Pakistan

23 hours ago, Donga said:

Do you have any idea of religious history? 

I put it to you the religious inhabitants Egypt wouldn't hold a candle to the pre-Islamic peoples of Egypt. 

 

  What the inhabitants of Egypt believed or not is irrelevant. Egypt's religion at the time is irrelevant.

11 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

    Yes, two Countries were formed and people from both sides moved across borders to be in their own country .

   Jews and Muslims swapped places (on the land) .

      Similar thing happened in India/Pakistan

 

And it was a catastrophe and directly caused all the problems since.

Off Topic post removed 

 

@Patong2021

3 hours ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

And it was a catastrophe and directly caused all the problems since.

 

   Palestinians refusing to accept Israel's existence has caused all the problems .

7 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Palestinians refusing to accept Israel's existence has caused all the problems .

 

2 + 2 = 5

3 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

 

2 + 2 = 5

 

   You can try and blame the other side for your own actions .

Like  wifebeater saying * She made me hit her , if she didn't answer back , then I would nt hit her,  its her fault *

28 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   You can try and blame the other side for your own actions .

Like  wifebeater saying * She made me hit her , if she didn't answer back , then I would nt hit her,  its her fault *

 2 + 2 = 7

1 minute ago, JBChiangRai said:

 2 + 2 = 7

 

.....................I can see why you rely on A.I so much 

1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Palestinians refusing to accept Israel's existence has caused all the problems .

Israel's government has been refusing to accept Palestine's existence for decades....

 

The current Palestinian authority has acknowledged Israel's existence long time ago.

3 minutes ago, candide said:

Israel's government has been refusing to accept Palestine's existence for decades....

 

The current Palestinian authority has acknowledged Israel's existence long time ago.

 

    Hamas, the rulers of Gaza, refuse to accept Israel's right to exist .

BTW , we were talking about what has caused all the problems since 1948 when the Palestinians refused to recognise an Israel state .

   Had the Palestinians accepted Israel in 1948 , there wouldnt have been any wars since then 

1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

    Hamas, the rulers of Gaza, refuse to accept Israel's right to exist .

BTW , we were talking about what has caused all the problems since 1948 when the Palestinians refused to recognise an Israel state .

   Had the Palestinians accepted Israel in 1948 , there wouldnt have been any wars since then 

1948 is long time ago! It's currently the Palestinian Authority which has recognised Israel, and Israel which still doesn't recognise Palestine. 🙂

On 12/24/2025 at 2:41 PM, candide said:

1948 is long time ago! It's currently the Palestinian Authority which has recognised Israel, and Israel which still doesn't recognise Palestine. 🙂

 

  Too late now .

That ship has sailed .