Israel prepares for ground military operation, 98 dead in Gaza Strip airstrikes

[Johpa]

The actions of Israel and their allies the US (who is controlled as we know by Jews) show clearly that they are the ones who are the Terrorists. They are in power and do no but really no step towards reconciliation at all. Why do hundreds of Palestiniens need to die in retiliation for 3 dead Israelis. Why this excess? Why treat the Palestiniens as worth less than dogs for years? A little gesture would certainly be helpful to ease the anger on the side of the Palestiniens. But no, we are the ones in power and if we want to kill hundred thousands in retiliation for 3 dead of us we will do it! <deleted> Israeli and the US!

 

I actually agree with you in the sense that Israel, being the more powerful player, needs to be the party to make the gestures towards reconcilliation and less towards retaliation. And at times Israel has made those gestures, as when they forcibly removed Israeli settlements from Gaza in the hope of exchanging land for peace. The Palestinian political leadership squandered that opportunity yet, as the more powerful player, Israel should remain obligated to take the lead step when possible.  But alas, your own opinion is muddied by your blatantly anti-semitic fantasies which lead you to imagine that the US is controlled by the Jews, which is simply a new take on the Protocols of Elders of Zion. Can you look in the mirror and see Vichy? Your hatred towards Israel and the US is really just a manifestation of your hatred of Jews.

[Morch]

The actions of Israel and their allies the US (who is controlled as we know by Jews) show clearly that they are the ones who are the Terrorists. They are in power and do no but really no step towards reconciliation at all. Why do hundreds of Palestiniens need to die in retiliation for 3 dead Israelis. Why this excess? Why treat the Palestiniens as worth less than dogs for years? A little gesture would certainly be helpful to ease the anger on the side of the Palestiniens. But no, we are the ones in power and if we want to kill hundred thousands in retiliation for 3 dead of us we will do it! <deleted> Israeli and the US!

 

Them Jews....always controlling things. Who's "we" that are in the know?  Sad this is what this topic comes to.

 

Israel cleared out of the Gaza Strip for a quite some time now. Why are most of the attacks on Israel originating from the area it cleared, rather than from the West Bank? Why is the PA (who runs the West Bank, where them illegal settlements are) does not go the same way Hamas (who controlled the Gaza Strip, with no Israeli presence) does?

 

So far there aren't hundreds of dead Palestinians in the current round of hostilities, you added the number of injured on top. Making it "hundreds thousands" later in your post, does not make it any more of a truth. Instead of asking about retaliation, maybe should ask why the three Israelis had to die in the first place?

 

What little gesture did you have in mind? Something like withdrawing from the Gaza Strip? Israel done that, did not seem to improve things all that much. Then again, how about the Palestinians making a wee gesture (and I do not mean flipping the bird) to ease anger on the Israeli side?

[OZEMADE]

 

And by the way, it's regrettable that you also haven't expressed the smallest amount of sympathy for the victims who were bombed at the charitable organization for the disabled.

Did it even happen? I have not found anything to verify it. It is a claim by some Palestinians with no other evidence that I can find. They have been known to exaggerate and outright lie about such things.

 

Any place the Israelis know that any form of weapons are stored in will be bombed. All of these places are given a short notice to move from the house, ie a phone call  to get out we are going to bomb you. That has been stated by all media sources to date. The only places that are not notified are ones that rocket launchers are spotted from and they are immediately struck, no warning. It is envisaged that the Israelis are about to launch a ground invasion, that wont be pretty as they have some unbelievable destructive weapons and military power. If they keep firing these rockets the Israeli forces will definitely go to war, it's a matter of days now if not hours.

[Ulysses G.]

That article originated in The Telegraph, which decidedly not impartial when in comes to the ME, and particularly Israel.

Oh come on. Like a major newspaper is going to make up something like this. Besides, It was reported in all kinds of media, including the video released by Hamas, boasting about it.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztDX8l7WFjE
 
Extremists from Hamas fanatical Qassam Brigades boasted that they had launched the long-range, M-75 rockets from the Gaza Strip to the Israeli city of Dimona hoping to damage or destroy the reactor, about 47 miles away. But the Iron Dome which has had a remarkable success rate of about 90 percent during the recent conflict and the terrorists poor targeting prevented the reactor from being damaged. http://nypost.com/2014/07/10/day-of-bombardment-in-israel-nears-nuclear-reactor/
 
Hamas rockets strike at Israels nuclear reactor
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/middleeast/article4142806.ece
 
Palestinian militants extended their rocket barrage against Israel to threaten its Dimona nuclear plant
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-09/israel-pm-says-gaza-offensive-to-intensify-as-rockets-fly.html

[Morch]

The usual dribble about Palestinians.

 

Forged on the rock of certitude.

 

That they had no territorial rights in the first place.

 

It's a terrible delusion.

 

That five million Europeans thought they could descend like locusts.

 

And evict the indigenous population, at the point of a gun.

 

And not be content with the land they first had handed to them. 

 

They grabbed more, ever more. 

 

These people who have no territorial claim. 

 

Beyond a fairy story written three thousand years ago, 

 

 

 

Nice story.

 

Only in 1947, the population (both Arab and Jewish) amounted to about 2 millions (perhaps a bit more).

Them said "locusts" (nice hate imagery there) did not reach the 5 million mark for quite some time after that.

 

The ones who were not satisfied with the original UN resolution were the Arabs, who started the war and were defeated.

 

[cup-O-coffee]

 

 

Only one problem with all that. There is barely a smidgen of truth in his post and lots of unjustified anger which could be easily construed as hate. Geography is far from his only error.

 
What he said and what I said is about as certifiable as what you are saying.

 

Wrong. Most of what he said is easily proven wrong and you referred to it as "truth" which means that you agree with him. You are entitled to your own opinions - no matter how misguided they may be - but not your own facts. As I said before, all of his points have already been refuted on this forum, but it never hurts to do it again.

1). "As usual Israel and its great army are doing war against civilians."

Israel is targeting Hamas terrorists that are shooting hundreds of rockets into civilian areas of Israel and they are warning civilians to leave the area before they do it. They drop pamphlets, make phone calls to the occupants of buildings and drop a warning missile first to warn everyone that a real bomb is next. In fact, Israel does everything they can to avoid civilian casualties - while the Palestinians target civilians on purpose.
What other country would take these measures when combating vicious terrorists that have been elected and supported by the very civilians that they are hiding behind?
 
2)  "it does not respect even basic international laws"
 
It respects a lot of international laws, but disagrees with others, like a lot of other countries. Britain, the USA, Russia and Australia have all been accused of breaking international laws, along with loads of other countries. The Palestinians break international laws routinely. 
 
3)   "it wants to completely annex Palestine and does want peace at all, other wise it will not continue to steel land to make new settlements"
 
If Israel wanted to get rid of all the Palestinians, they could have done it long ago. They have beaten them in military conflicts over and over again. They could have easily driven them out of the area completely and - IMO - probably should have. If Israel "does not want peace", why have they offered peace deal after peace deal, for the last 60 years, which the Arabs have always refused? 
As far as the settlements go, Israel has dismantled them before and traded land for peace. There is no reason to think that they are not willing to do it again, if the other side will finally sign a peace deal and stick to it. 
 
4) "The result is an apartheid system with ghettos like gaza which has and will have a boomerang effect."
 
Not even close. Actually, 20% of the citizens are Palestinian Arabs with full voting rights and representation in the government. In fact, an Arab sits on the Supreme Court of the land. Calling Israel out for "Apartheid" shows that you don't know what "Apartheid" is. The Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are not citizens of Israel and don't want to be. In fact, they are the enemy.
 
4) "its lobby is so powerful that they never get international sanctions and are not sue for crime against humanity."
 
Huh? Israel has UN resolutions passed against it constantly. In fact, in 2013 the hypocritical U.N. General Assembly adopted a total of 21 resolutions singling out Israel for criticism and only 4 resolutions on the rest of the world combined - which of course is completely ridiculous.
There were zero UNGA resolutions on gross and systematic abuses committed by China, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Zimbabwe, nor on many other major perpetrators of grave violations of human rights.

 

 

chuckle... yes, Ulysses G. whatever... whatever.
 

[Morch]

 

 

 

 

There is no Palestine. It was a mandated British territory no more. Jordan doesn't lay claim to the West Bank, So Israel has every right to build on those lands. You also seem to forget that even Egypt is not interested in supporting Hamas. And Abbas has said Hamas are wrong. If Israel were waging war on the civilians, there would be a lot more deaths than have been reported. They would not bother with clinical strikes they would bomb the whole area. It is Hamas that are waging war on their own civilians, by using them as human shields.  But I guess it's OK for Arab to kill Arab as in Syria. 

 

 

I would also say, considering Hamas want to destroy Israel, If it were not as strong as it is, It would be Israeli women and children who would be slaughtered. How can it be a crime against Humanity to fight and stop terrorists?

 

 

Hey come on. Even Obama called on Israel to stop allowing more illegal settlements.

 

Fighting terrorists - absolutely agree with you. But there has to be some rules. Or do you suggest anything goes? 

 

Countries should abide by certain internationally agreed rules, and there are limits to what is acceptable.

 

Would you have been so supportive if Britain had adopted the same tactics in Ireland, or the Spanish in their Basque country?

 

Hamas cannot be expected to be treated as a serious political party whilst they call for the destruction of Israel. Anyone engaging in terrorist activities must expect to be killed. But, the acceptable collateral damage and the tactics employed are debatable.

 

 

I am sure if you asked an Irishman, he would probably say the british did worse, The potato Famine and  colonisation. Even bringing Scottish protestants to control Ireland. It's just that the British have had a few years to paper over their atrocities!

 

It also seems that Israel is expected to accept a terrorist nation on it's door step. Name another country that has or would accept such a situation. The Palestinian question is as much the making of surrounding arab nations  as it was anything to do with the occupation of East Jerusalem or West Bank. So let the Arabs absorb these stateless peoples.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure Israel will manage to paper over all it's atrocities too, just give them time. It's a trait of all countries. At the moment they're quiet happy to simply tell the rest of the world to bugger off. 

 

The Belgians had the worst reputation among the colonials - chopping hands off and kidnapping the wives of workers who failed to hit quotas. The French, British, Americans, Russians, Japanese, Chines, all have their skeletons in the cupboard. So what. Does that justify Israel acting how it pleases?

 

Israel has been attacked from all sides and has every right to protect itself. However, it does not have the right to exterminate all who oppose it by any means it sees fit. There has to be some rules. Similarly, look at the very revealing maps of Palestinian and Israeli land areas since 1946 posted by another poster. Quite revealing.

 

The arabs were wrong to try and destroy Israel at its founding and to permit and facilitate terrorist attacks from their lands. That does not mean it's right for Israel to do as it pleases either. 

 

Why should Israel or any country expect to be able to seize land from others? Why should other countries be expected to give people their land so Israel can take more land over. 

 

 

While the Israeli mainstream sure does its best to gloss over sins of the past, there are voices who do not deny them and do not justify them. It is not quite a singular and unified national stance as some imagine. Does not necessarily mean that all of those recognizing them wrongs are in favor of shutting down the country and buggering off to wherever their ancestors came from.

 

But seriously - "exterminate"? For real? When did this happen? Was under the impression that population figures in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank were actually going up, but could be wrong. And "any means it sees fit"? Does Israel carry out carpet bombing on the Gaza Strip? Does it carry out chemical weapon attacks on civilians?  Israel does a lot of things wrong and a lot of wrong things. No need to get overboard with the hyperbole, though.

 

The map you referred to is bogus. In 1947, the Palestinians (well...they weren't called that back then, but lets not go there) did not own all of the relevant land - some of it was under Jewish ownership, and some was owned by rich Arab families from surrounding countries. The large tract of land making Israel's south is mainly desert land which, while being a home to some Bedouin tribes, was not fully populated, certainly not by many Palestinians. All this without getting into the simple fact that there was no Palestinian rule over anything back then, as the area was still under the British Mandate. The way such silliness as this is being repeated as fact accounts for a lot of misguided views.

 

Back to the topic - we are dealing now with the situation in Gaza Strip, from which Israel withdrew some years ago.  Why then, are most of the attacks against Israel originating from the Gaza Strip, which is not occupied by Israel and in which there are no illegal Israeli settlements? Before saying this has to do with the conflict in its entirety, consider that there are no similar attacks being carried out from the West Bank, parts of it which are occupied by Israel, and where practically all of the illegal Israeli settlements exist.
 

[Pralaad]

 

 

 

Only one problem with all that. There is barely a smidgen of truth in his post and lots of unjustified anger which could be easily construed as hate. Geography is far from his only error.

 
What he said and what I said is about as certifiable as what you are saying.

 

Wrong. Most of what he said is easily proven wrong and you referred to it as "truth" which means that you agree with him. You are entitled to your own opinions - no matter how misguided they may be - but not your own facts. As I said before, all of his points have already been refuted on this forum, but it never hurts to do it again.

1). "As usual Israel and its great army are doing war against civilians."

Israel is targeting Hamas terrorists that are shooting hundreds of rockets into civilian areas of Israel and they are warning civilians to leave the area before they do it. They drop pamphlets, make phone calls to the occupants of buildings and drop a warning missile first to warn everyone that a real bomb is next. In fact, Israel does everything they can to avoid civilian casualties - while the Palestinians target civilians on purpose.
What other country would take these measures when combating vicious terrorists that have been elected and supported by the very civilians that they are hiding behind?
 
2)  "it does not respect even basic international laws"
 
It respects a lot of international laws, but disagrees with others, like a lot of other countries. Britain, the USA, Russia and Australia have all been accused of breaking international laws, along with loads of other countries. The Palestinians break international laws routinely. 
 
3)   "it wants to completely annex Palestine and does want peace at all, other wise it will not continue to steel land to make new settlements"
 
If Israel wanted to get rid of all the Palestinians, they could have done it long ago. They have beaten them in military conflicts over and over again. They could have easily driven them out of the area completely and - IMO - probably should have. If Israel "does not want peace", why have they offered peace deal after peace deal, for the last 60 years, which the Arabs have always refused? 
As far as the settlements go, Israel has dismantled them before and traded land for peace. There is no reason to think that they are not willing to do it again, if the other side will finally sign a peace deal and stick to it. 
 
4) "The result is an apartheid system with ghettos like gaza which has and will have a boomerang effect."
 
Not even close. Actually, 20% of the citizens are Palestinian Arabs with full voting rights and representation in the government. In fact, an Arab sits on the Supreme Court of the land. Calling Israel out for "Apartheid" shows that you don't know what "Apartheid" is. The Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are not citizens of Israel and don't want to be. In fact, they are the enemy.
 
4) "its lobby is so powerful that they never get international sanctions and are not sue for crime against humanity."
 
Huh? Israel has UN resolutions passed against it constantly. In fact, in 2013 the hypocritical U.N. General Assembly adopted a total of 21 resolutions singling out Israel for criticism and only 4 resolutions on the rest of the world combined - which of course is completely ridiculous.
There were zero UNGA resolutions on gross and systematic abuses committed by China, Cuba, Egypt, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Zimbabwe, nor on many other major perpetrators of grave violations of human rights.

 

 

chuckle... yes, Ulysses G. whatever... whatever.
 

 

 

For someone who claims to know so much, you sure speak so little.

[Ulysses G.]

What he said and what I said is about as certifiable as what you are saying. Being able to support what we are all saying depends upon the character of the person, and his or her willingness to focus on an implied or suggested truth, or to focus on refuting that implied or suggested truth, whilst resisting the temptation to digress into ad hominem argumentum...

You have posted a lot, only said nothing.

It seems to be a habit.

[Morch]

 

look at the very revealing maps of Palestinian and Israeli land areas since 1946 posted by another poster. Quite revealing.

That map has already been discredited by Morch. Very little of that land was controlled by Palestinian Arabs - ever!

In 1947 the area was under the British Mandate. So the left hand map would be misleading.  It was not all under Palestinian ownership even, not to mention rule.  Kinda funny from a website with the word "truth" in its title...

How about this one. It is actually based on factual information.
 

 

 

A minor clarification, for the sake of accuracy - I did not state that "very little" of the land was controlled by Palestinian

Arabs. The reference was mainly about land ownership, which included Jewish and other Arab landowners. That none

of the sides "controlled" anything in 1947 is a moot point considering the Brits were still around.

 

This new map posted also muddies the waters, as it depicts Israel's handing back of the Sinai peninsula to Egypt.

While this had to do with a peace agreement, it does not have much to do with the Palestinians.

 

Another observation, often overlooked, is that while under the UN resolution of 1947 Arabs and Jews seemingly got

somewhat equal shares of the land, the Jewish part included a large tract of land which was basically desert (with a

not very large population of Bedouins, not to be confused with Palestinians - these things can get a bit tricky, even

for Arabs). For those needing a reference, in the map above this covers the roughly triangle area where "ISRAEL" is.

 

[Morch]

Another world flashpoint, when are governments going to learn. Isis may be coming so I hope Israel is well prepared.

 

ISIS does not even control the whole of Syria, and then there's Jordan between Iraq and Israel.  The problem ISIS poses for Israel is not necessarily a military one as such, if the worst comes to pass. There will be countless refugees on top of the the present ones, and a look on the map shows where they are likely to head.

 

[Pattszero]

 

The usual dribble about Palestinians.

 

Forged on the rock of certitude.

 

That they had no territorial rights in the first place.

 

It's a terrible delusion.

 

That five million Europeans thought they could descend like locusts.

 

And evict the indigenous population, at the point of a gun.

 

And not be content with the land they first had handed to them. 

 

They grabbed more, ever more. 

 

These people who have no territorial claim. 

 

Beyond a fairy story written three thousand years ago, 

 

 

 

Nice story.

 

Only in 1947, the population (both Arab and Jewish) amounted to about 2 millions (perhaps a bit more).

Them said "locusts" (nice hate imagery there) did not reach the 5 million mark for quite some time after that.

 

The ones who were not satisfied with the original UN resolution were the Arabs, who started the war and were defeated.

 

 

 

That's marvelous - 

 

You have just skewed the reality of the massive pre and post war influx of  white Europeans into the country. 

 

It's estimated that European settlement numbered 1 million in the late 30's alone. 

 

But you pick out the year of 1947 for comparison? Why? 

 

To win an argument? Where the vast majority of European settlers had been in the country ten years or less? 

[Clutch]

These people who have no territorial claim. 
 
Beyond a fairy story written three thousand years ago,

That and the fact that they have been living there for more than 3,700 years, that the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people and that the Jewish people settled and developed the land - as well as winning 4 or 5 wars against overwhelming odds.

3,700 years ago? 4 'OR' 5 wars?
And, Jesus was a carpenter, or at least that's what I'm told. Alibaba and the 30 thieves is a good read too.

[Pralaad]

 

 

These people who have no territorial claim. 
 
Beyond a fairy story written three thousand years ago,

That and the fact that they have been living there for more than 3,700 years, that the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people and that the Jewish people settled and developed the land - as well as winning 4 or 5 wars against overwhelming odds.

3,700 years ago? 4 'OR' 5 wars?
And, Jesus was a carpenter, or at least that's what I'm told. Alibaba and the 30 thieves is a good read too.

 

 

May be you should stop reading kids books and try books for grown ups, including history

 

By the way, its 40 thieves not 30,

[Pattszero]

 

 

These people who have no territorial claim. 
 
Beyond a fairy story written three thousand years ago,

That and the fact that they have been living there for more than 3,700 years, that the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people and that the Jewish people settled and developed the land - as well as winning 4 or 5 wars against overwhelming odds.

3,700 years ago? 4 'OR' 5 wars?
And, Jesus was a carpenter, or at least that's what I'm told. Alibaba and the 30 thieves is a good read too.

 

 

It's fantastical that people in this day and age are still using the bible as justification for land grabs and war.  

[Pralaad]

 

 

 

These people who have no territorial claim. 
 
Beyond a fairy story written three thousand years ago,

That and the fact that they have been living there for more than 3,700 years, that the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people and that the Jewish people settled and developed the land - as well as winning 4 or 5 wars against overwhelming odds.

3,700 years ago? 4 'OR' 5 wars?
And, Jesus was a carpenter, or at least that's what I'm told. Alibaba and the 30 thieves is a good read too.

 

 

It's fantastical that people in this day and age are still using the bible as justification for land grabs and war.  

 

 

Were you under the impression wars started because of a pretty girl or an oil reserves?

[Morch]

 

 

 

 

Hey come on. Even Obama called on Israel to stop allowing more illegal settlements.

 

Fighting terrorists - absolutely agree with you. But there has to be some rules. Or do you suggest anything goes? 

 

Countries should abide by certain internationally agreed rules, and there are limits to what is acceptable.

 

Would you have been so supportive if Britain had adopted the same tactics in Ireland, or the Spanish in their Basque country?

 

Hamas cannot be expected to be treated as a serious political party whilst they call for the destruction of Israel. Anyone engaging in terrorist activities must expect to be killed. But, the acceptable collateral damage and the tactics employed are debatable.

 

 

I am sure if you asked an Irishman, he would probably say the british did worse, The potato Famine and  colonisation. Even bringing Scottish protestants to control Ireland. It's just that the British have had a few years to paper over their atrocities!

 

It also seems that Israel is expected to accept a terrorist nation on it's door step. Name another country that has or would accept such a situation. The Palestinian question is as much the making of surrounding arab nations  as it was anything to do with the occupation of East Jerusalem or West Bank. So let the Arabs absorb these stateless peoples.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure Israel will manage to paper over all it's atrocities too, just give them time. It's a trait of all countries. At the moment they're quiet happy to simply tell the rest of the world to bugger off. 

 

The Belgians had the worst reputation among the colonials - chopping hands off and kidnapping the wives of workers who failed to hit quotas. The French, British, Americans, Russians, Japanese, Chines, all have their skeletons in the cupboard. So what. Does that justify Israel acting how it pleases?

 

Israel has been attacked from all sides and has every right to protect itself. However, it does not have the right to exterminate all who oppose it by any means it sees fit. There has to be some rules. Similarly, look at the very revealing maps of Palestinian and Israeli land areas since 1946 posted by another poster. Quite revealing.

 

The arabs were wrong to try and destroy Israel at its founding and to permit and facilitate terrorist attacks from their lands. That does not mean it's right for Israel to do as it pleases either. 

 

Why should Israel or any country expect to be able to seize land from others? Why should other countries be expected to give people their land so Israel can take more land over. 

 

 

How far back do you want to go? When the colonial powers kicked out the Ottoman empire, they proceeded to divide the middle eastern countries between themselves. The Brits gave Palestine to the Jews.  In The 1948 war of independence, The Grand Mufti told the Arabs to leave, they would return with a big army and push the Jews into the sea!

 

IMO, The Arabs refused to take responsibility for the Arabs of Israel because They would use the Palestinians as a way Justify their aims towards Israel. That is why there are refugee camps in countries surrounding Israel. Not because Israel kicked out the Arabs, as some would claim. Try to understand that until the State of Israel was founded, the Arabs were stateless. It was British Mandated Palestine. It was controlled by them, there was no national government that could be called Palestinian. There never was. Prior to that there was no Palestine.

 

3 wars later and the Arabs did not succeed in kicking the Jews into the sea, They nearly succeeded in the October war, But again they were out manoeuvred by Israel. Since 1973 The peace with Egypt and Jordan have sidelined the Palestinian question. Jordan was the only Arab country to absorb the Palestinians, and most of its citizens are Palestinian. It would make more sense for the Palestinians to be part of Jordan, Than end up relying on Israel to support it as a second state. The reality is a Palestinian state would not be viable. it would be a failed state if left to it's own devices. It would need Israeli willingness to succeed as a state.

 

It is interesting that on the face of it Arab countries are demanding a Palestinian state! Or is this just Lip service now. The situation in the middle east is one of Arab Killing Arab in the name of Islam. Israel's enemies of old are talking with Israel in regard to Iran, Egypt is worried about Hamas.Then there is Syria and Iraq.

 

The point is the Palestinians were a tool for other Arab nations to beat Israel with. Maybe that Priority is no longer, because those nations seem to be fighting for survival, or worried about their Arab neighbours intentions.

 

You are right Israel should have kicked them out long ago. The Palestinians should have accepted what was offered long ago. But their agenda is still one of wanting all of Israel for their own. On that basis I don't see a Palestinian state being  created. It may well be that when the Wall along the west Bank is completed Israel will tell them, they are on their own. Just don't think of attacking Israel.

 

 

It is interesting to note that the Arab spring has not been about Israel. Some have mentioned ISIS. I really don't think ISIS are interested in attacking Israel. They want their fundamental Islamic caliphate more. And Syria Jordan and Lebanon know better than to let them come close to the Israeli boarder. 

 

 

Back in 1948 some Arabs were told by their leaders to run away and that they would be able to return later on.  Back in 1948 some Arabs were told by the fledgling IDF to clear off and promised they would be allowed to return later on.  Back in 1948 some Arabs were kicked off by the Israeli forces, not always very nicely and according with accepted conduct.  Back in 1948 some Arabs took off on their own, without no one advising them to, or applying a metaphorical boot. Back in 1948 Some Arabs chose to stick around anyway, because it was their home and they didn't have anywhere to go.

 

Can argue as to how many each version accounts for, or what was their relative effect. Worth to bear in mind they were all present, though, and not stick with a single simplified story, that's how myths are created.

 

Another such myth is Jordan being a great place for a Palestinian state.  Jordan is Jordan. Making it a Palestinian state by virtue  of military powers signing an agreement is just to repeat the things  which made the Middle East the mess it is today. Other than not being very fair toward the Jordanians, and not really acceptable to the Palestinians (or to the international community) - it is not really in the best interests of Israel as well. The Hashemites are doing a proper job of plugging Israel's eastern border from most of the effects caused by the troubles in Syria and Iraq - no extra refugees to deal with, no terrorist attacks (almost) and a nice buffer zone in case ISIS makes a move. A hostile Palestinian state will do non of the above, if not worse. While this was a fantasy of some Israeli right wingers at the time, I do not believe many hold on to it presently.

[Pattszero]

I'm perfectly aware of the "many" issues that start wars. 

 

Anyone that uses the bible as a pretext now should be ashamed of themselves.  

[Pralaad]

I'm perfectly aware of the "many" issues that start wars. 

 

Anyone that uses the bible as a pretext now should be ashamed of themselves.  

 

So pretty girl or oil reserves is an honorable reason?

 

By the way, do you know what Arabs scream when they kill someone, going to kill someone, want to kill someone or celebrate the death of someone?

[Pattszero]

 

I'm perfectly aware of the "many" issues that start wars. 

 

Anyone that uses the bible as a pretext now should be ashamed of themselves.  

 

So pretty girl or oil reserves is an honorable reason?

 

By the way, do you know what Arabs scream when they kill someone, going to kill someone, want to kill someone or celebrate the death of someone?

 

 

Yes I do,  so they are equally at fault.  

 

Does that make you feel better? 

 

Now, the point is, these Europeans invaded the country under a false pretence.

 

Anyone using biblical justification for this invasion is a clown. 

[Morch]

 

 

The usual dribble about Palestinians.

 

Forged on the rock of certitude.

 

That they had no territorial rights in the first place.

 

It's a terrible delusion.

 

That five million Europeans thought they could descend like locusts.

 

And evict the indigenous population, at the point of a gun.

 

And not be content with the land they first had handed to them. 

 

They grabbed more, ever more. 

 

These people who have no territorial claim. 

 

Beyond a fairy story written three thousand years ago, 

 

 

 

Nice story.

 

Only in 1947, the population (both Arab and Jewish) amounted to about 2 millions (perhaps a bit more).

Them said "locusts" (nice hate imagery there) did not reach the 5 million mark for quite some time after that.

 

The ones who were not satisfied with the original UN resolution were the Arabs, who started the war and were defeated.

 

 

 

That's marvelous - 

 

You have just skewed the reality of the massive pre and post war influx of  white Europeans into the country. 

 

It's estimated that European settlement numbered 1 million in the late 30's alone. 

 

But you pick out the year of 1947 for comparison? Why? 

 

To win an argument? Where the vast majority of European settlers had been in the country ten years or less? 

 

 

1947 was the year the original UN resolution regarding Israel was made.
Part of the considerations when dividing the land had to do with population figures.

 

Your simplistic description of events, if it can even be called that, might lead to the misguided

view that there was a mass immigration amounting to 5 millions. Which did not, in reality, happen.

 

the late 1930's figure you give does not seem in line with the 1939 White Paper:

 

 

Evidence that His Majesty's Government have been carrying out their obligation in this respect is to be found in the facts that, since the statement of 1922 was published, more than 300,000 Jews have immigrated to Palestine, and that the population of the National Home has risen to some 450,000, or approaching a third of the entire population of the country. Nor has the Jewish community failed to take full advantage of the opportunities given to it. The growth of the Jewish National Home and its acheivements in many fields are a remarkable constructive effort which must command the admiration of the world and must be, in particular, a source of pride to the Jewish people.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/brwh1939.asp

 

By 1947, the Jews numbered around 630,000.

[Pralaad]

 

 

I'm perfectly aware of the "many" issues that start wars. 

 

Anyone that uses the bible as a pretext now should be ashamed of themselves.  

 

So pretty girl or oil reserves is an honorable reason?

 

By the way, do you know what Arabs scream when they kill someone, going to kill someone, want to kill someone or celebrate the death of someone?

 

 

Yes I do,  so they are equally at fault.  

 

Does that make you feel better? 

 

Now, the point is, these Europeans invaded the country under a false pretence.

 

Anyone using biblical justification for this invasion is a clown. 

 

 

Well i am glad we have established one fact that killing in the name of God would be wrong, Justifying the kills in the name of God is wrong,and most of all, screaming the name of God while you are killing is wrong.

 

Lets discuss the next?

 

Does Israel occupy Gaza? Will agree its a no.

 

So Is Hamas & Co entitled to a land which according to you, their grand grand grand father owned? If they are, would that mean Jews are entitled to land owned by their grand grand grand grand father?

 

Also what claims say Yasser Arafat would have to the land? when in fact he was Egyptian from Egypt

[Pattszero]

I'm quite aware of the 1947 resolution. 

 

I'm pointing out to you that there was a vast influx of white Europeans settlers into the territory immediately pre and post war.

 

These people had no right or claim on the land. 

 

And here is the truly laughable part.

 

It was the white settlers and colonists that forced the resolution through.

 

It was a shameful resolution,  and would have zero chance of passing today.   

[Pattszero]

@pralaad - 

 

Please be aware that you have just set yourself up for a humiliating riposte.

 

Have a look at your most recent post and edit it while you can.  

[Pralaad]

@pralaad - 

 

Please be aware that you have just set yourself up for a humiliating riposte.

 

Have a look at your most recent post and edit it while you can.  

 

feel free to answer, or is it too hard  when its broken down like for a 5 year old

[Morch]

I'm quite aware of the 1947 resolution. 

 

I'm pointing out to you that there was a vast influx of white Europeans settlers into the territory immediately pre and post war.

 

These people had no right or claim on the land. 

 

And here is the truly laughable part.

 

It was the white settlers and colonists that forced the resolution through.

 

It was a shameful resolution,  and would have zero chance of passing today.   

 

You keep pointing that out without bothering to substantiate the claim.  You do not define what are considered, as per your "argument", per and post war.

 

Other than that, even if one was to except what you suggest - how does it reflect on the current situation? Do you propose turning back the clock? Bringing back the Ottomans?  Would that apply to every similar event in human history and if so

how far back does it go?

 

The world is not always just. Life is not always fair.

 

Digging into the past can be very interesting, it does not always carry much rewards when trying to sort out events at the present.

[cup-O-coffee]

 

For someone who claims to know so much, you sure speak so little.

 

 

True... and True.
 

[NeverSure]

 

 

I'm perfectly aware of the "many" issues that start wars. 

 

Anyone that uses the bible as a pretext now should be ashamed of themselves.  

 

So pretty girl or oil reserves is an honorable reason?

 

By the way, do you know what Arabs scream when they kill someone, going to kill someone, want to kill someone or celebrate the death of someone?

 

 

Yes I do,  so they are equally at fault.  

 

Does that make you feel better? 

 

Now, the point is, these Europeans invaded the country under a false pretence.

 

Anyone using biblical justification for this invasion is a clown. 

 

 

"Anyone using biblical justification for this invasion is a clown."

 

It amazes me how so many people use the UN treaties and declarations to describe "war crimes" until they don't like a UN decision and then they cry bloody murder.

 

I don't need "Biblical justification." The UN gave land to Israel after WWII and that's the end of that story. If Israel, now a sovereign nation, wants to invite or allow more people into ITS country, up to them. BTW about 20% of the population in Israel is Arab and mostly Muslim.

 

If a whole bunch of bigger and more established countries wanted to start the Six Day War against Israel, then they should have expected some ramifications. That's not to mention the other wars started against Israel since WWII.

 

Many countries are sitting on land they won as spoils of war. I wouldn't have blamed Israel if, after being attacked a few times, they took everything the so-called "Palestinians" are sitting on in addition to land they did take, just to establish a security zone.

 

Again, don't fret your pretty head about "fairy tales." Just concentrate on real current history starting in 1947.

[Jingthing]

The position that demonizes Zionism / Israeli Jewish statehood as being exactly equivalent to horrendous colonialism such as Belgium in Africa fails to admit there are MAJOR differences.

 

For example:

 

1. Yes, accept it or not, there is a deeply important connection between the Jewish people and the land of Israel. It is based on REAL HISTORY ... where the Jewish people did originally come from. All Jews know that. We say -- NEXT YEAR IN JERUSALEM. Jews can be entirely secular and feel this connection. Even though Jews have ethnic diversity among Jews, there is an undeniable TRIBAL aspect to the Jewish people .. that's not wrong or right, it's just the way it is. Key word: ETHNORELIGIOUS

 

Did Belgium have any connection like that in Africa or even claim it? OF COURSE NOT!

 

2. The thousands of years of persecution of Jewish people in many countries of the world. This was not the only reason for the idea of Zionism to gain in popularity, but it was certainly a part of it, and this feeling was there WELL BEFORE the holocaust.

 

Were the Belgiums a persecuted minority group? OF COURSE NOT!

 

3. Were Jews attracted to Israel to virtually enslave  non-Jews? Were Jews attracted by unusually rich natural resources? No and no. If it was for natural resources, the Jews would have gone to SAUDI, yes?

 

Again, different than Belgium. 

 

Look at the death rates of "natives" in Africa caused by Belgium compared to what has happened in Israel. Not comparable in the slightest.

 

So please don't play games and act like the Jewish connection in Israel isn't a UNIQUE situation, which merits looking at in its own right.  Of course nobody is suggesting Palestinians don't have grievances as they surely do. 

[Pattszero]

 

 

 

I'm perfectly aware of the "many" issues that start wars. 

 

Anyone that uses the bible as a pretext now should be ashamed of themselves.  

 

So pretty girl or oil reserves is an honorable reason?

 

By the way, do you know what Arabs scream when they kill someone, going to kill someone, want to kill someone or celebrate the death of someone?

 

 

Yes I do,  so they are equally at fault.  

 

Does that make you feel better? 

 

Now, the point is, these Europeans invaded the country under a false pretence.

 

Anyone using biblical justification for this invasion is a clown. 

 

 

"Anyone using biblical justification for this invasion is a clown."

 

It amazes me how so many people use the UN treaties and declarations to describe "war crimes" until they don't like a UN decision and then they cry bloody murder.

 

I don't need "Biblical justification." The UN gave land to Israel after WWII and that's the end of that story. If Israel, now a sovereign nation, wants to invite or allow more people into ITS country, up to them. BTW about 20% of the population in Israel is Arab and mostly Muslim.

 

If a whole bunch of bigger and more established countries wanted to start the Six Day War against Israel, then they should have expected some ramifications. That's not to mention the other wars started against Israel since WWII.

 

Many countries are sitting on land they won as spoils of war. I wouldn't have blamed Israel if, after being attacked a few times, they took everything the so-called "Palestinians" are sitting on in addition to land they did take, just to establish a security zone.

 

Again, don't fret your pretty head about "fairy tales." Just concentrate on real current history starting in 1947.

 

 

That's not the end of that story - the UN at that time was a weak glove puppet to the white colonial masters, allied with the US with its extensive history of land grabbing and riding roughshod over indigenous people.

 

To some extent it still is - only now the post-war stitch up that forms the permanent members of the security council is under pressure from the emerging countries.  It's time for a root and branch reform of that white man's invention - and the removal of the veto. 

 

The counties that wield the veto can only be relied upon for one thing - acting in their own narrow interest.

 

White man's guilt, white man's burden - never mind the little brown people - grab the land and hand it to the white Europeans.  

 

Sickening - and pitiful that educated people can't see the UN, especially at that time, for what it was. 

 

The Guilty White Man's Club.