What a filthy work !

[numinus]

So Numinus Israel has the right to defend itself but Palestinians don't - sounds fair and reasonable.

Nonsense. The palestinians -- (or the goat-herder organization hiding behind them) are the AGGRESSORS. It has always been this way since god knows when.

The jews entered palestine en-masse after the horrors of the holocaust. They BOUGHT land (and established the proto-typical kibbutz) from arab landlords -- remnants of the upper class ottomans who occupied the land previously. They had an understanding with the present british 'administrator' of the mandate which culminated in the balfour declaration -- a promise which the british blatantly reneged.

And why do you suppose britain reneged on the promise? They did so because the palestinian arabs went ape-sh!t with the prospect of having jews for neighbors. And the british were too busy kissing arab ass to protect their interests in the middle east.

You hate Palestinians so much you want to blame them for their civilian deaths rather than the people actually dropping the bombs!

I've never met a palestinian in my whole life. I couldn't possibly hate them.

What a sick joke! The Israelis massacred the Palestinians - but in a very peaceful and neighbourly way.

At the end of WW2 the Palestinians were a clear majority in what is now Israel. The Israeli terrorists attacked the Palestinians.
link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Irgun_attacks
The Israelis attacked the Palestinians and ethnically cleansed them from their homeland. The Israelis received some of their weapons from Stalin, who was initially sympathetic.

What?

The igrun was established primarily to negate widespread violence committed on the jews in the first place. It was NECESSARY the moment it became clear that the 'british administrators' of the mandate would not lift a finger to protect them from wanton violence perpetrated by the arabs. This was immediately after the holocaust -- when they were meekly herded to the slaughter by the MILLIONS.

At some point, even a dog would say enough is enough.

Yea the Palestinians should disarm while the vast Israeli military machine continues to grow. Does this seem fair to anyone? Only someone with a deep hatred of Palestinians could accept this. Please keep posting Numinus you provide a great example of Israeli bigotry.

Of course it is.

Any state ought to have a military. Its purpose is to defend the state from external threats. The flipside of this coin is that the state is accountable for the actions of its military to the community of nations and international law that governs them.

Who exactly is hamas or hezbollah accountable to, hmmmm? Take the recent fracas with lebanon, for example.

Some members of hamas were elected officials of the lebanese government. Lebanon allowed hamas to operate within lits territory. When they kidnapped israeli soldiers, who should israel have spoken to?

The lebanese government said that it had no authority over the armed segment of hamas and it couldn't give back the kidnapped prisoners. Nor would it allow israel to enter its territory to get their soldiers back. In the mean time, sit back and enjoy the show being aired on international media -- the after-torture-and-beheading street party going on in beirut.

If this happened in any other country, their civilian and military armed forces would be tripping over themselves trying to recover foreign personnel. And regardless of whether the kidnapped victim is recovered or not, generals' heads will certainly roll.

But not in the 'sovereign' state of lebanon -- when hamas or hezbollah are concerned, right? In fact, I'm beginning to think that these goat-herders don't want a state of their own. Being a rouge organization certainly has certain 'advantages' -- especially if its main objective is the annihilation of israel. Why bother with a country of their own if the prospect of something infinitely more enjoyable is forthcoming, eh?

 

[numinus]

Muslims are not people, its ok to kill them and take there land...just think how the right would be if Palistinans where Christian.....

What nonsense are you talking about????

If anyone is confronted by an UNJUST AGGRESSOR, one has a right to defend himself -- that includes ANY AND ALL MEANS NECESSARY TO DETER THE AGGRESSION.

Now, apply this principle in this conflict. If your aggressor is hiding behind women and children while perpetrating UNJUST AGGRESSION, how is anyone supposed to respond, hmmmm?

If, for arguments sake, civilians were hurt in the ensuing violence, who is criminally liable for them, eh?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

What nonsense are you talking about????

If anyone is confronted by an UNJUST AGGRESSOR, one has a right to defend himself -- that includes ANY AND ALL MEANS NECESSARY TO DETER THE AGGRESSION.

Now, apply this principle in this conflict. If your aggressor is hiding behind women and children while perpetrating UNJUST AGGRESSION, how is anyone supposed to respond, hmmmm?

If, for arguments sake, civilians were hurt in the ensuing violence, who is criminally liable for them, eh?

And people who lived in Palestine are fighting back a aggressor...deal with it.

 

[Fisher of Men]

Alain Remy, the French consul general in Jerusalem, said the Palestinians have received $3 billion in foreign aid in 2008. This was stated in an AP article dated 12/23/2008.

Pandora, this is not true. I just searched for the quote - it comes from some anonymous contributor to WkiAnswers. It's worthless.

Do you also have issue with the support America gives to Egypt and other middle eastern countries?

The only reason we give money to Egypt is as a bribe to get them to make peace with Israel. We shouldn't have to bribe Egypt, Israel should deserve the peace by compromising more. The only foreign aid I favor is aid to genuinely poor countries (though I understand some economists think this aid is counterproductive).

 

[Fisher of Men]

Nonsense. The palestinians -- (or the goat-herder organization hiding behind them) are the AGGRESSORS. It has always been this way since god knows when.

Laughable! You must live surrounded by morons or bigots. Who else would accept these lies without pointing out your errors?

Israel was never the aggressor? What?

So Irgun terrorism was in no way an act of aggression? That would be news to the hundreds of people blown up by Irgun bombs！

So the women raped and the people massacred back when Israel was founded - that was their own fault? The Israelis had no aggressive intent when the Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from their homes?

I am glad you keep posting numinus, the whole forum can see that too often Zionism = irrational bigotry.

 

[Fisher of Men]

I am so glad you brought up Lebanon Numinus. Here's some more pictures that do not represent Israeli aggression.

not aggression:

definitely no aggressive intent:

This young burn victim should be relieved, the Israelis had no aggressive intentions when they bombed his home.

I'm sure this aggression was in no sense aggressive!

quote: Israel prepares major escalation of Lebanon aggression
By Patrick Martin
28 July 2006
The Israeli government issued orders Thursday to mobilize as many as 40,000 additional reserve soldiers in preparation for an escalation of its war of aggression against Lebanon. The action was taken by the security cabinet of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in response to mounting demands from the military brass and the media for a full-scale invasion of south Lebanon.

The large-scale reserve call-up is but one indication that Israel is preparing a massive escalation of violence against the Lebanese population. Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon gave an interview to Israel’s Army Radio in which he said that the Israeli air force should bomb Lebanese towns and villages before the ground forces enter in order to cut Israeli casualties.

link: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/jul2006/leba-j28.shtml

 

[Pandora]

Pandora, this is not true. I just searched for the quote - it comes from some anonymous contributor to WkiAnswers. It's worthless.

The only reason we give money to Egypt is as a bribe to get them to make peace with Israel. We shouldn't have to bribe Egypt, Israel should deserve the peace by compromising more. The only foreign aid I favor is aid to genuinely poor countries (though I understand some economists think this aid is counterproductive).

I searched for the dollar amount that we gave to other countries and all I could find is Israel, as though that was the only county we give money to. If the link I gave was bad, I am sorry.

Are you suggesting we give zero dollars to Palestine and other middle eastern countries?

 

[Fisher of Men]

Maybe not 0 Pandora, really poor countries should receive small amounts of aid - maybe to improve their health care systems.

 

[Pandora]

Maybe not 0 Pandora, really poor countries should receive small amounts of aid - maybe to improve their health care systems.

We cannot even afford our health care system. The money we give to Palestine ends up being used for war not for the kids of the country. I personally do not think we should be giving money away while we are so far in debt ourselves but when we do give it away it should be in the way of food not money and some how making sure kids get that food.

 

[Fisher of Men]

We cannot even afford our health care system. The money we give to Palestine ends up being used for war not for the kids of the country. I personally do not think we should be giving money away while we are so far in debt ourselves but when we do give it away it should be in the way of food not money and some how making sure kids get that food.

That's a good point Pandora. A lot of the money we give is wasted.

 

[Pandora]

That's a good point Pandora. A lot of the money we give is wasted.

Glad we can agree on something

 

[numinus]

And people who lived in Palestine are fighting back a aggressor...deal with it.

No, they are not.

If one were to indulge you on this, then the civilians within a city hundreds of kilometers within israel cannot possibly be considered an aggressor. The aggressor would be the israeli army openly approaching at their doorstep.

And these incursions are necessary in the first place because rocket fire is coming from civilian neighborhoods in the occupied territories. Those are facts. Deal with it.

Honestly now? What exactly would you want them to do? Your country went to war in afghanistan (and rightly so) for something much much less.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

No, they are not.

If one were to indulge you on this, then the civilians within a city hundreds of kilometers within israel cannot possibly be considered an aggressor. The aggressor would be the israeli army openly approaching at their doorstep.

And these incursions are necessary in the first place because rocket fire is coming from civilian neighborhoods in the occupied territories. Those are facts. Deal with it.

Honestly now? What exactly would you want them to do? Your country went to war in afghanistan (and rightly so) for something much much less.

I would say, well F we are on there land, maybe we should get the hell out , and then talk about our security....

But in your view the Palestinians should just take it , just have a nation take there land, take there homes, cut off there food, there way to work, there ability to rebuild...and just sit there and take it...If I was a Palestinian and I lived there before and lost my home. I should shoot evry Israel troop I could, fire rockets at them and do anything in my power to show them that they can not just take my land..Israel is the aggressor..Its Illgal land, it does not belong to them...it belongs to the people there before Israel was a nation...the Palestinians.

 

[numinus]

Laughable! You must live surrounded by morons or bigots. Who else would accept these lies without pointing out your errors?

Is that a question? No, they are not lies -- they are standard history.

Israel was never the aggressor? What?

Correct. As I recall, it was the combined armies of syria, lebanon, egypt, jordan and iraq who made a military incursion in palestine a few days after the declaration.

Therefore, the aggressors were the countries named.

So Irgun terrorism was in no way an act of aggression? That would be news to the hundreds of people blown up by Irgun bombs！

No. I didn't say irgun was legitimate. It was a para-military group whose formation was necessary when an entire ethnic group was faced with lawless violence -- something that the british administrators of the palestinian mandate was incapable (or simply neglected) to deter.

You have your constitutional right to bear arms, do you not?

So the women raped and the people massacred back when Israel was founded - that was their own fault?

What is this nonsense??? It is tit for tat. Rape and massacre were the specialty of the palestinian arabs back then.

Prior to 1948, arabs were the majority ethnic group in the palestinian mandate. Jews trickled in the mandate trying to escape the holocaust. The reason british position became untenable and prompting their withdrawal from the mandate is because the lawless violence perpetrated by the arab majority was widespread and beyond placating. And since the jews were suddenly willing to fight back, they saw the situation would spiral out of control -- as it certainly did.

The Israelis had no aggressive intent when the Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from their homes?

Ethnically cleansed? Your opinions don't even abide by simple logic. How can a small minority 'ethnically cleanse' a territory as large as the palestinian mandate from its overwhelming arab majority, eh? A fledling state that didn't even have enough time to put together a functioning government apparatus and surrounded by hostile arab nations, were guilty of ethnic cleansing, eh?

What nonsense.

I am glad you keep posting numinus, the whole forum can see that too often Zionism = irrational bigotry.

Good. I will do so until you are capable of using some logic in that bigoted skull of yours.

 

[numinus]

I would say, well F we are on there land, maybe we should get the hell out , and then talk about our security....

They already did. Its quite logical really. They are surrounded by hostile arab nations to the south, north and west and the red sea to the east. THERE IS NO FALL-BACK POSITION. THERE IS NO RETREAT.

The only way they could secure their continued existence is through peace with their arab neighbors, and arabs aren't going to give it to them anytime soon. In the meantime, it is tactically sound to maintain some sort of buffer where the arabs cannot operate to launch aggression.

Clear?

But in your view the Palestinians should just take it , just have a nation take there land, take there homes, cut off there food, there way to work, there ability to rebuild...and just sit there and take it...If I was a Palestinian and I lived there before and lost my home. I should shoot evry Israel troop I could, fire rockets at them and do anything in my power to show them that they can not just take my land..Israel is the aggressor..Its Illgal land, it does not belong to them...it belongs to the people there before Israel was a nation...the Palestinians.

Nonsense.

THERE WAS NEVER A PALESTINIAN STATE.

From the time of the ottoman empire up to modern state of israel, there never occured even the merest hint of palestinian nationhood. Palestine was in the grip of some backward feudal set up where entire villages were owned by foreign landlords.

They didn't own the land, they worked it for some foreign arab landlord using medieval agricultural methods. They were ignorant peasants because it was in the best interest of their arab landlord that they remained ignorant. That is how some of the zionists came to palestine. They bought land from the arab landlords (which they happily agreed to since they thought they sold worthless land) and established the proto-typical kibbutz.

If there ever were a palestinian arab land claim in the former palestinian mandate, it would be jerusalem -- not because it is their home but because it is their holy place.

You are making emotional appeals with no factual or logical basis.