Israel is using a sledgehammer to crack nuts

[Pattszero]

Hamas didn't get a majority of the votes - don't be nailing every Gazan as a Hamas supporter - that's just nonsense. 

 

The same way as Blair didn't represent me when he went into Iraq. 

[ggold]

Hamas didn't get a majority of the votes - don't be nailing every Gazan as a Hamas supporter - that's just nonsense. 

 

The same way as Blair didn't represent me when he went into Iraq. 

 

Hamas didn't get a majority of the votes

 

Really! OK so they just kicked out the PA and Abbas couldn't do anything about it. Yeah right! I don't see anyone labelling all Palestinians as terrorists. But when you choose Hamas as you're government, you either kick them out or accept the consequences. 

[Pralaad]

Hamas didn't get a majority of the votes - don't be nailing every Gazan as a Hamas supporter - that's just nonsense. 
 
The same way as Blair didn't represent me when he went into Iraq.

If they did not, how is it that they are ruling with no opposition at all?

[Pattszero]

Laughable. 

 

No hope. 

 

Carry on - I've got a brick wall wanting to talk to me. 

[Morch]

 

 

Thai Visa, can we please have a dislike button PLEASE!

 

Oh, I think that would be very dangerous, especially threads like this.  

 

 

 

Could propose this to the Israelis and the Palestinians, though.  Would cost less lives and could charge both sides by the click.

Extra for un-like block defense systems and poster shields.
 

[Morch]

Laughable. 

 

No hope. 

 

Carry on - I've got a brick wall wanting to talk to me. 

 

Hamas did not win the Majority of votes is correct.   They did, however, win more seats.

 

The Palestinian election system is a bit messy.  Sort of like Thailand's PT having a parliamentary majority without actually having the majority of the popular vote.

 

One way or another, a lot of Palestinians did vote for them, and a lot would do so again.

[Johpa]

Yup - three psychotics - as that is what they would have to be to do what they did - murdered three young boys - and the Israeli response is to send in the big guns.  

 

200 people dead because of an over-reaction to three psychos - 

 

Well done Israel. 

 

Let's see what happens to the Israeli psychos that poured fuel down a seventeen year-old's throat and burnt him alive.    

 

 

I am in complete agreement with you that Netanyahu's response and arrogance in response to the death of the three Israeli youths was deplorable. The man, in my estimation, is an idiot.  But then the Hamas response of firing volleys of rockets into Israel was an equally idiotic response to the situation. Both sides are led by idiots, who (with apologies to the Bard) full of sound and fury, who are signifying nothing but mutual failure.

 

And yes, I do hope the Israeli psychos are given life sentences and there homes leveled. And then I would like to see a declaration that no more homes are leveled for any reason.

Edited July 15, 2014 by Johpa

[simple1]

 

Laughable. 

 

No hope. 

 

Carry on - I've got a brick wall wanting to talk to me. 

 

Hamas did not win the Majority of votes is correct.   They did, however, win more seats.

 

The Palestinian election system is a bit messy.  Sort of like Thailand's PT having a parliamentary majority without actually having the majority of the popular vote.

 

One way or another, a lot of Palestinians did vote for them, and a lot would do so again.

 

 

Yes, Hamas did not receive the majority of votes. Alledged number is Hamas took 44.45% of the vote, whilst Fatah received 41.43%, so total non Hamas votes was 55.37. From memory I recall that one of the reasons for the swing towards Hamas was deep rooted dissatisfaction with the level of corruption within the government of the day, not solely because Hamas denied the right of existance for the State of Israel. However, the political leader of Hamas had agreed for Abbas, in 2006, to negotiate with Israel on the basis of the 1967 borders, why was this position reversed?

[Scott]

Posts with no comment but only a link have been removed.   Please don't post a link without a comment as to what the link is about.  

[Ulysses G.]

 

 

Laughable. 
 
No hope. 
 
Carry on - I've got a brick wall wanting to talk to me.

 
Hamas did not win the Majority of votes is correct.   They did, however, win more seats.
 
The Palestinian election system is a bit messy.  Sort of like Thailand's PT having a parliamentary majority without actually having the majority of the popular vote.
 
One way or another, a lot of Palestinians did vote for them, and a lot would do so again.

 

 
Yes, Hamas did not receive the majority of votes. Alledged number is Hamas took 44.45% of the vote, whilst Fatah received 41.43%, so total non Hamas votes was 55.37.

 

Fatah are more reasonable than Hamas, but they are hardly good guys. They cheered on the recent kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teenagers that has caused this whole predicament and called it a "masterstroke" on their website. Here is the illustration that they posted. 
 

Edited July 16, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[dexterm]

The Zionist movement (which started well before 1948) is inclusive of both religious and secular Jews. Israel is the manifestation of the Zionist movement ... a homeland for the Jewish PEOPLE. 

 

Judaism is a religion not a race. Jews share every shade of DNA from fair haired blue eyed Russian Jews to jet black Ethiopian falashas.

 

In the 21^st century you can’t steal someone else’s land based on the belief in a popular book of fiction and hearing voices from imaginary supernatural friends telling you the land belongs to you.

 

In 1850 there were 14,000 Jews (4%) mainly in Jerusalem living peacefully alongside 334,000 Palestinians.

In 2014 there are 6 million Jews and 1.6 million Palestinians living in Israel..and 5 million Palestinian refugees outside Israel

 

Go figure who are the land robbers!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Jerusalem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict

[seedy]

 

Considering your first post on this topic included something to the effect that Israel "enslaved" the Palestinians,

excuse me if I take your "balanced" view with a grain of salt.

 

 

But that is what is happening. You can be enslaved via economic means as well as others.

 

 

[Ulysses G.]

In 1850 there were 14,000 Jews (4%) mainly in Jerusalem living peacefully alongside 334,000 Palestinians.

That was before the Arabs started attacking and murdering Jewish families on a frequent basis. Eventually the Jews started fighting back, so the UN offered both sides their own country as a solution. The Arabs said no and declared war on Israel. They were badly defeated, but still refuse to stop the violence and that is how they ended up in the pickle that have created for themselves, with no land and no country and not much hope for getting out of the downward spiral that they are in. Edited July 16, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Johpa]

In the 21^st century you can’t steal someone else’s land based on the belief in a popular book of fiction and hearing voices from imaginary supernatural friends telling you the land belongs to you.

 

You are absolutely correct, there is no way that today, in the 21st century, that a nation like Israel would be created.  Nonetheless, in the mid 20th century the tides of history did allow the nation-state of Israel to come into creation. And why people who do not have skin in the game get their panties all knotted up over Israel but not even a crease in their panties over equally and perhaps even greater historical inequities (as in the Kurdish situation) is the confusing part of all of this.  My only explanation is that there still exists that anti-semitic meme that has long maintained its existence within the western Christian cultural tradition. That meme does not forbid Anglo-Christians to capitalize upon historical forces to take land from indigenous people; it does not forbid Chinese from taking land from non-Han people; nor does it even forbid the Slavic Rus from taking land from countless indigenous cultures east of the Urals within modern historical times. But as for the perceived killers of their Christ a different set of values is employed.

[NeverSure]

 

The Zionist movement (which started well before 1948) is inclusive of both religious and secular Jews. Israel is the manifestation of the Zionist movement ... a homeland for the Jewish PEOPLE. 

 

Judaism is a religion not a race. Jews share every shade of DNA from fair haired blue eyed Russian Jews to jet black Ethiopian falashas.

 

In the 21^st century you can’t steal someone else’s land based on the belief in a popular book of fiction and hearing voices from imaginary supernatural friends telling you the land belongs to you.

 

In 1850 there were 14,000 Jews (4%) mainly in Jerusalem living peacefully alongside 334,000 Palestinians.

In 2014 there are 6 million Jews and 1.6 million Palestinians living in Israel..and 5 million Palestinian refugees outside Israel

 

Go figure who are the land robbers!

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Jerusalem

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict

 

 

I just used the "find" feature on all three of your links. NOT ONCE does any of them mention "Palestinians" until after WWII.

 

EVERY TIME they mention "Palestine" with any specificity, they call it a "region." And a region it has been for thousands of years and it included parts of several countries.

 

There NEVER WAS a country called "Palestine" nor a people called "Palestinians" until Arabs named it all that after WWII.

 

The modern press has fallen for the charade and dutifully calls a tiny part "Palestine" and some warlike nomads "Palestinians" when in fact they are flat-out charlatans. It is historical BS. 

 

The Israelis are the ones who have a history there. Their temple which was build about 4,000 years ago is buried under a current Muslim mosque on the Temple Mount in E. Jerusalem.

[seedy]

Using the logic of some posters here, we may yet hear of reparations being demanded from Mongolia for the excesses of Genghis Khan.

 

Oh, I lived there 4,000 years ago, so it is still my town - or country.

 

 

[Ulysses G.]

It has been well documented that the Jews have had a continual presence in the Palestine region for over 3,000 years. They are not exactly Johnny come latelys. 

Edited July 16, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[NeverSure]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

 

Using the logic of some posters here, we may yet hear of reparations being demanded from Mongolia for the excesses of Genghis Khan.

 

Oh, I lived there 4,000 years ago, so it is still my town - or country.

 

 

 

 

It has been well documented that the Jews have had a continual presence in the Palestine region for over 3,000 years. They are not exactly Johnny come latelys.  alt=whistling.gif>

 

Yes. There never was, ever, a country called Palestine or a people called Palestinians until those warlike Arab nomads hijacked those two names after WWII.

 

That's hardly going back to Genghis Khan.

 

I was alive the first time in all of history that anyone was called a Palestinian. I was alive when those Arabs named their piece of land Palestine when in fact Palestine is a region of several countries and has been for thousands of years.

 

Israel is in the historical Palestine as are other countries. The "Palestinians" are frauds.

[seedy]

Balfour in a letter to Rothschild uses the term Palestine when he gave the area as a Jewish homeland just after WW1

 

See 7 Pillars of Wisdom

[Jingthing]

Judaism is a religion not a race. 
...

It's really not that simple.

Judaism is a religion.

Jews are not a race.

BUT ...

Jews ARE a PEOPLE.

In the tribal sense  (with matrilineal descent, an anthropological term).

So you see Judaism the RELIGION, and BEING A JEW are NOT the same thing. 

Maybe this is DIFFERENT than the religion you might identify with.

 

http://www.jewfaq.org/whoisjew.htm

 

• In the Bible, Jews were called Hebrews or Children of Israel

• The terms "Jew" and "Judaism" come from the tribe or kingdom of Judah

• "Jew" now refers to all physical and spiritual descendants of Jacob

• A person can be Jewish by birth or by conversion

• Traditionally, Jewish status passes through the mother, not the father

...


Who is a Jew?

 

A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.

 

It is important to note that being a Jew has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do. A person born to non-Jewish parents who has not undergone the formal process of conversion but who believes everything that Orthodox Jews believe and observes every law and custom of Judaism is still a non-Jew, even in the eyes of the most liberal movements of Judaism, and a person born to a Jewish mother who is an atheist and never practices the Jewish religion is still a Jew, even in the eyes of the ultra-Orthodox. In this sense, Judaism is more like a nationality than like other religions, and being Jewish is like a citizenship. See What Is Judaism?

 

 

 

Another way to look at this is that Jews are an  ETHNORELIGIOUS group:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnoreligious

 

 Examples of ethnic groups defined by ancestral religions are the Jews, the Assyrians, the Armenians, the Druze of the Levant, the Copts of Egypt, the Yazidi of northern Iraq, the Zoroastrians of Iran and India, and theSerer of Senegal, the Gambia, and Mauritania.^[1]

 

 

Edited July 16, 2014 by Jingthing

[seedy]

I tend to side with Karl Marx when he said - and I paraphrase ...

 

Organized religion is the opiate of the masses.

[Jingthing]

I tend to side with Karl Marx when he said - and I paraphrase ...

 

Organized religion is the opiate of the masses.

Yes, but Karl Marx had Jewish parents.

An unusual case indeed!

http://www.jewcy.com/jewish-religion-and-beliefs/was_karl_marx_really_jewish

 

Therefore, Karl Marx only counts as a Jew on the slimmest of halachic opinions. And if there was an expulsion process for the Tribe, he would probably be first on the list. His hatred of Jews arose more from his own confusion about his heritage, and his inability to repay his debts, than from a legitimate concern for the human race. 

 

 

Edited July 16, 2014 by Jingthing

[Morch]

 

 

Considering your first post on this topic included something to the effect that Israel "enslaved" the Palestinians,

excuse me if I take your "balanced" view with a grain of salt.

 

 

But that is what is happening. You can be enslaved via economic means as well as others.

 

 

 

 

That is not what's happening at all. Unless you want to expand this to all economic related injustices all over the world.

 

While thinking of this, do ponder about the Palestinians refugees in Arab/Muslim countries being used as cheap labor force without most civic rights, or about demonstrations carried out not long ago in the West Bank over PA bringing in foreign workers (from Serbia, if memory serves) instead of hiring locally. May also dig a bit and find just how Hamas leaders thrive when their people suffer, or how much Aid budget disappears from the PA's accounts.

 

Somehow, the term "enslaved" is not all that often used in most related situations these days. It is a pity people twist words and meaning to score some cheap points.

[Ulysses G.]

Balfour in a letter to Rothschild uses the term Palestine when he gave the area as a Jewish homeland just after WW1

 

 

As mentioned many times. It was region - like the Mojave Desert region - at that point in history, not a nation. it was a Jewish nation thousands of years ago, but there has never been an independent country called Palestine governed by Arabs.

[simple1]

 

 

 

Laughable. 
 
No hope. 
 
Carry on - I've got a brick wall wanting to talk to me.

 
Hamas did not win the Majority of votes is correct.   They did, however, win more seats.
 
The Palestinian election system is a bit messy.  Sort of like Thailand's PT having a parliamentary majority without actually having the majority of the popular vote.
 
One way or another, a lot of Palestinians did vote for them, and a lot would do so again.

 

 
Yes, Hamas did not receive the majority of votes. Alledged number is Hamas took 44.45% of the vote, whilst Fatah received 41.43%, so total non Hamas votes was 55.37.

 

Fatah are more reasonable than Hamas, but they are hardly good guys. They cheered on the recent kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teenagers that has caused this whole predicament and called it a "masterstroke" on their website. Here is the illustration that they posted. 
 

 

 

Does the cartoon represent a consensus of opinion within the Palestinian population?

 

An Israeli district court judge metes out scathing criticism of Palestinian Media Watch director Itamar Marcus’s expert witness testimony on incitement in Palestinian media,

 

http://972mag.com/judge-dismisses-credibility-of-palestinian-media-watch-testimony/78900/

 

 

 

[Morch]

Using the logic of some posters here, we may yet hear of reparations being demanded from Mongolia for the excesses of Genghis Khan.

 

Oh, I lived there 4,000 years ago, so it is still my town - or country.

 

 

 

The same applies to both sides of the conflict.  The Jews/Israelis claim a connection to the land based on history.  The Palestinians claim the same.

 

The difference is in the time frame and so-called strength of claim.  In effect it does matter much, things are what they are - not very likely that the clock will be moved back.

 

The Jews/Israelis benefited from a certain geo-political constellation which allowed them to come to their own. The Palestinian could have either accepted the UN partition plan or win a war, they rejected the first, failed the second. They can now wait it out (like the Jews did for a very long time), or keep on trying to win by force (which doesn't seem to go anywhere), or make the best of it, cut their loses and build a new life.

 

 

 

 

 

[Ulysses G.]

Does the cartoon represent a consensus of opinion within the Palestinian population?

 
I have no idea, but that illustration was on Fatah's website, so there is a pretty good chance that it represents a consensus of Fatah's opinion which is the point of my post.

Edited July 16, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[Morch]

 

 

Laughable. 

 

No hope. 

 

Carry on - I've got a brick wall wanting to talk to me. 

 

Hamas did not win the Majority of votes is correct.   They did, however, win more seats.

 

The Palestinian election system is a bit messy.  Sort of like Thailand's PT having a parliamentary majority without actually having the majority of the popular vote.

 

One way or another, a lot of Palestinians did vote for them, and a lot would do so again.

 

 

Yes, Hamas did not receive the majority of votes. Alledged number is Hamas took 44.45% of the vote, whilst Fatah received 41.43%, so total non Hamas votes was 55.37. From memory I recall that one of the reasons for the swing towards Hamas was deep rooted dissatisfaction with the level of corruption within the government of the day, not solely because Hamas denied the right of existance for the State of Israel. However, the political leader of Hamas had agreed for Abbas, in 2006, to negotiate with Israel on the basis of the 1967 borders, why was this position reversed?

 

 

The Hamas victory was indeed related to the negative sentiment among the Palestinians on corruption issues plaguing the PA. This didn't work out to well, bottom line, now the Palestinians got two corrupted leaderships instead of one.

 

A couple of years before the elections, Hamas leadership changed its position some, and called for a long term truce with Israel (time span offered was 10 years), in which Hamas will hold its fire in return to full Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines.  This was born out of leadership perception that the balance of forces was not ripe for a complete "liberation" of Palestinian lands, and that it would be more practical to manage it in stages, with the full victory left to future generations. Mind, there was no clear announcement of ending the fight, more taking a break until conditions allow going at it again. These offers were rejected by Israel.

 

During the elections these offers were touted by Hamas - domestically, this undermined the PA's line that they were the only ones that can broker a deal with Israel, while the Hamas will lead to war and destruction of the Palestinians. It also served to ease fears of foreign aid funds pouring in, another card played by the PA. Shortly after the elections, aid funds were indeed cut to a trickle, and Hamas government had to go along with letting Abbas (who was still the president) run the negotiations with Israel. This did not work out too well, as Abbas was in no position to make decisions, and the Hamas not being really interested in making concessions. Foreign donor nations weren't buying into it as well. Things went sour between the Hamas and the Fatah, and the rest is what it is now.

 

During this time, Israel did not accept any of the proposals, seeing as they were just breathers and not peace offers. It certainly didn't help things when it assassinated Hamas leaders Yassin and Rantissi, and to some extent was also trying to play the PA against the Hamas (not that this needed much help).

 

In short, there was no real change in ideology, as far as Hamas is concerned. More of a strategical change to further its policies along more practical lines. Calling it pragmatism, opportunism or realism, is anyone's choice. What it was not is a missed chance, there was nothing of an essence to it.

[kblaze]

 

Balfour in a letter to Rothschild uses the term Palestine when he gave the area as a Jewish homeland just after WW1

 

 

As mentioned many times. It was region - like the Mojave Desert region - at that point in history, not a nation. it was a Jewish nation thousands of years ago, but there has never been an independent country called Palestine governed by Arabs.

 

 

And do you, like Netanyahu, believe that there should never be?

[Ulysses G.]

As far as I know, Netanyahu is open to a two-state solution if the Palestinians agree to, sign and stick to a peace treaty - which they have refused repeatedly up till now - and so am I. The Israelis have traded land for peace already. 

Edited July 16, 2014 by Ulysses G.