vbnautilus 48 Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 OMG Palestine committed war crimes too! ZOMG!1!!!!1Yes, but in general this has not been in dispute. Whether or not Israel has clean hands has been debated in this thread, and this new evidence does speak to that. Link to post Share on other sites
antistuff 0 Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 I want my own Country too.Now.it worked for the israelis. Link to post Share on other sites
antistuff 0 Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 i don't recall the palestinians having much of a say when the west created israel out of relative thin air.granted, the two groups have basically been fighting for thousands of years over the same general area, but the creation of israel in the 20th century was the first time that outside groups just came in, took a bunch of land, and gave it to one side. if i was a palestinian, i'd be pretty pissed off, too. i mean, land is a big part of what pretty much every war in history has been about in some manner or another, so it's not like their "instigation" lacks precedent.it's going to be pretty much impossible to fix that quagmire with any sort of even semi-permanence unless both sides are willing to cede a bit of jerusalem to the other, and i just don't see either side willing to do that for the foreseeable future.but israelis look more like white people than palestinians, so it's more likely that palestinians are at fault. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Yes, but in general this has not been in dispute. Whether or not Israel has clean hands has been debated in this thread, and this new evidence does speak to that.No the question is would Israel have dirty hands if their children and innocent civilians weren't attacked on a regular basis by the palestinians and others.Overreacting isn't as bad an action as unprovoked attacks.I have a friend who lived on a kibbutz for 2 years, she has pictures of herself going on field trips with the kids to museums and such. She has an AK-47 and the other teacher had an Uzi. they don't go on field trips without serious firepower to protect their kids.Far as I'm concerned, Israel would have to do some pretty bad things before I think they deserve blame. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 No the question is would Israel have dirty hands if their children and innocent civilians weren't attacked on a regular basis by the palestinians and others.Overreacting isn't as bad an action as unprovoked attacks.I have a friend who lived on a kibbutz for 2 years, she has pictures of herself going on field trips with the kids to museums and such. She has an AK-47 and the other teacher had an Uzi. they don't go on field trips without serious firepower to protect their kids.Far as I'm concerned, Israel would have to do some pretty bad things before I think they deserve blame.qft. and it's not like everyone just decided to give Israel land for no reason. it was an apology for the Holocaust (and the Pogroms, the Inquisition, etc, etc) Link to post Share on other sites
checkymcfold 0 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 qft. and it's not like everyone just decided to give Israel land for no reason. it was an apology for the Holocaust (and the Pogroms, the Inquisition, etc, etc)of course not. what it is, though, is the first time that countries outside the region came in and defined legal boundaries in an area which, at best, has been otherwise in dispute for thousands of years. the palestinians were not involved in the formation of the UN partition plan or any other part of that process and did not ok the final definition of israel's boundaries. to that end, the palestinians are not "instigators" any more than any group that wasn't allowed any form of legal defense when someone came in and took their land. they're fighting for what was theirs before the UN said it wasn't. that's not instigation.does israel have an ultimate right to exist? sure, i'd say. the problem is that the manner in which its present borders were defined was kind of stupid, and largely led to the disenfranchisement of a lot of a-rabs that are now running around blowing shit up. basically, your argument is that because non-palestinians screwed over jews a lot in history, that the palestinians should have to pay in order to make up the debt. that's ridiculous, tbh. russia, germany, and austria owe israel that kind of debt, even if you're going to begin trying to make that kind of argument. not the people of gaza.it's also a pretty profound mistake to assume that the militant wings of hezbollah, hamas, and al qaeda are the same thing as palestinians in general. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 of course not. what it is, though, is the first time that countries outside the region came in and defined legal boundaries in an area which, at best, has been otherwise in dispute for thousands of years. the palestinians were not involved in the formation of the UN partition plan or any other part of that process and did not ok the final definition of israel's boundaries. to that end, the palestinians are not "instigators" any more than any group that wasn't allowed any form of legal defense when someone came in and took their land. they're fighting for what was theirs before the UN said it wasn't. that's not instigation.does israel have an ultimate right to exist? sure, i'd say. the problem is that the manner in which its present borders were defined was kind of stupid, and largely led to the disenfranchisement of a lot of a-rabs that are now running around blowing shit up. basically, your argument is that because non-palestinians screwed over jews a lot in history, that the palestinians should have to pay in order to make up the debt. that's ridiculous, tbh. russia, germany, and austria owe israel that kind of debt, even if you're going to begin trying to make that kind of argument. not the people of gaza.it's also a pretty profound mistake to assume that the militant wings of hezbollah, hamas, and al qaeda are the same thing as palestinians in general.whatever claim of injustice the Palestinians had in 1948 they have long since abdicated it with a prolonged reign of terror, sneak attacks on yom kippur, etc. also, that land was never "theirs" it was disputed. that is a big difference.it is also a profound mistake to assume Palestinians are interested in sharing. they have had opportunities to do so and they have repeatedly chosen to escalate the conflict instead. Link to post Share on other sites
vbnautilus 48 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Far as I'm concerned, Israel would have to do some pretty bad things before I think they deserve blame.How bad? Like using civilians as human shields? "Sometimes the force would enter while placing rifle barrels on a civilian's shoulder, advancing into a house and using him as a human shield. Commanders said these were the instructions and we had to do it," one soldier said.I just think important to recognize that both sides have reason to feel grievously wronged. Link to post Share on other sites
All_In 0 Posted July 16, 2009 Author Share Posted July 16, 2009 Oh, this looks fun. Let me try. OMG Palestine committed war crimes too! ZOMG!1!!!!1Obviously, any idiot can go find a link to reflect the viewpoint that you appreciate.Have you ever considered hanging around long enough to actually participate in a discussion here? It seems like your MO is to just post articles or links, or excerpts from articles and blogs you like, then leave without defending your point of view. Are you scared you won't be able to keep up? Are you intimidated by smart regular posters like Henry? I'm just curious why you seem so scared to discuss your views with everyone.the israeli army is the occupier, the one who stole their country. they have an overwhelmingly more deadly military/weapons.by all international LAWS they are responsible for the safety of those they are occupying. By international law an occupied people have the right to resist, that is not terrorism.the ENTIRE WORLD sides with the palestinians, it is usually only israel and the US that stick together.it is disgusting tat israel treats the UN with such disdain and contempt. it was the UN that was responsible for it's creation in the first place.as for sticking around, i usually do, try and keep up. Link to post Share on other sites
All_In 0 Posted July 16, 2009 Author Share Posted July 16, 2009 Overreacting isn't as bad an action as unprovoked attacks.I have a friend who lived on a kibbutz for 2 years, she has pictures of herself going on field trips with the kids to museums and such. She has an AK-47 and the other teacher had an Uzi. they don't go on field trips without serious firepower to protect their kids.Far as I'm concerned, Israel would have to do some pretty bad things before I think they deserve blame.u fail to realize it is a resistance, the zionists stole their land. the zionists started it.really, it's not that hard to follow, why do some here get so easily confused?oh the horror, the kids can't go to the museum without an AK...the palestinians have been herded into refugee camps for decades! u think they can go to museums?and gaza is the world's largest prison, the whole world agrees, except for the US and israel. think about that. Link to post Share on other sites
All_In 0 Posted July 16, 2009 Author Share Posted July 16, 2009 qft. and it's not like everyone just decided to give Israel land for no reason. it was an apology for the Holocaust (and the Pogroms, the Inquisition, etc, etc)then they should have taken german land. how ridiculous you sound, a country as an apology, lol.does israel ever help those who are experiencing their own holocaust? Link to post Share on other sites
All_In 0 Posted July 16, 2009 Author Share Posted July 16, 2009 whatever claim of injustice the Palestinians had in 1948 they have long since abdicated it with a prolonged reign of terror, sneak attacks on yom kippur, etc. also, that land was never "theirs" it was disputed. that is a big difference.it is also a profound mistake to assume Palestinians are interested in sharing. they have had opportunities to do so and they have repeatedly chosen to escalate the conflict instead.it was their land, there are families that have lived there for generations.resistance is not terror.it has been israel that has broken the peace more than the palestinians, overwhelmingly so. look it up. Link to post Share on other sites
Nimue1995 1 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Do you think after a hundred years or so, they'll give up and assimilate like the Native Americans have done? Countries have been invading and occupying other countries for centuries. The idea that there's something wrong with that is a relatively new concept. Link to post Share on other sites
All_In 0 Posted July 16, 2009 Author Share Posted July 16, 2009 Do you think after a hundred years or so, they'll give up and assimilate like the Native Americans have done? Countries have been invading and occupying other countries for centuries. The idea that there's something wrong with that is a relatively new concept.slavery being wrong is also a relatively new concept.women as equal to men is a relatively new (and not universal in application) concept.I could go on, but the point is that just because it is relatively new doesn't mean it is not a worthy ideal.I honestly don't think they'll 'assimilate'. First, the native americans have not assimilated, they are, for the most part, herded into their own refugee camps and have forcibly lost most of their culture (a prerequisite for assimilation?). They have a suicide rate many times higher than the rest of the population, alcoholism is rampant, malnutrition, poverty, terrible education, etc.Second, they cannot 'assimilate', as they are in refugee camps, and not allowed the right of return to their homes in what is now called israel. This is so israel can continue to be an apartheid state for jews. btw, that is what palestinians, etc mean when they say the destruction of israel; the end of apartheid laws, similar to s. africa, not the actual destruction of the land and people. the right of return and the end of israel's apartheid laws are one and the same.I am also puzzled by what you mean when you say 'assimilate'. does that entail the destruction of their culture so they can become jewish? just giving up and letting israel do whatever they want? what might be a better question is, do u think israel will ever accept the right of return for the palestinians, and if not, why? Link to post Share on other sites
SlapStick 0 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 More War Crimes..http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20090714/tod-h...ia-7f81b96.html Link to post Share on other sites
Nimue1995 1 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 More War Crimes..http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20090714/tod-h...ia-7f81b96.html Lol, have they actually identified the substance that's supposed to have the aphrodisiac effect? Guys have been looking for it since time began and unless I'm mistaken, they've come up empty. But maybe the Israelies are onto something. But you'd think they'd market it instead of trying to make the Palastinians horny. They'd make billions on it I'm sure.Edit: They'd have to be distributing it to the young Palastinian women because I've never met a young guy of any culture that wasn't horny. Link to post Share on other sites
solderz 0 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 More War Crimes..http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20090714/tod-h...ia-7f81b96.html That is hilarious. Unless there is X in that gum, it's bs, obviously. Holy shit these people are bat shit crazy. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 More War Crimes..http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20090714/tod-h...ia-7f81b96.html I rest my case. Think I am done with this thread now. Link to post Share on other sites
checkymcfold 0 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 whatever claim of injustice the Palestinians had in 1948 they have long since abdicated it with a prolonged reign of terror, sneak attacks on yom kippur, etc. also, that land was never "theirs" it was disputed. that is a big difference.it is also a profound mistake to assume Palestinians are interested in sharing. they have had opportunities to do so and they have repeatedly chosen to escalate the conflict instead.as to the first paragraph--sixty years may seem like a long time in a contemporary setting, but in the scope of history, it's not. israel is still an extremely young country, and a large segment of the palestinian population remembers what it was like to have a homeland before the west decided to take it away from them.as to the second, you're still making the mistake of calling palestinians some weird, unified, whole, for one thing. for another, arafat and the PLO wasn't under any obligation to sign any specific treaty. it's hardly my (or your) place to decide whether they should sign a specific agreement or not. it's their call--that's how democracy works. Link to post Share on other sites
QED 4 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 resistance is not terror.Terrorism is terrorism regardless of whatever you may or may not think the motivation behind it is. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 as to the first paragraph--sixty years may seem like a long time in a contemporary setting, but in the scope of history, it's not. israel is still an extremely young country, and a large segment of the palestinian population remembers what it was like to have a homeland before the west decided to take it away from them.as to the second, you're still making the mistake of calling palestinians some weird, unified, whole, for one thing. for another, arafat and the PLO wasn't under any obligation to sign any specific treaty. it's hardly my (or your) place to decide whether they should sign a specific agreement or not. it's their call--that's how democracy works.What exactly did the Palestinian senate say when their land was 'taken away'?What about the Palestinian President?I'm curios because I don't remember what the government of palistine did when the west came in and said you no longer have a country. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 it was their land, there are families that have lived there for generations.resistance is not terror.it has been israel that has broken the peace more than the palestinians, overwhelmingly so. look it up.Technically, it was Israel's land taken from them by others. The people living there were just the only people living there at the time. And a large number of them were Jews.Also, you keep pretending that the Jews are living in the homes of the palestinians who are 'herded into refugee camps'.There are probably about 90% of the structures around that were there when the Jews regained their homeland.They make up about 5% of the buildings that exist now.Israel made that land something wonderful. It was nothing before they came.They speak of it in the Bible when they say the land will be turned into green lands with flowers and food growing. You know, out of the barren sand that was their before the Jews turned it into a beautiful country.The arabs neighbors are the real cause of the refugee status of the palestinians.but Aljazliar hasn't explained that to you, so you don't know it. Because you are a useful idiot Link to post Share on other sites
vbnautilus 48 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Technically, it was Israel's land taken from them by others. The people living there were just the only people living there at the time. And a large number of them were Jews.Oh yeah, so what did the Israeli Senate say when it was 'taken from them by others'? Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Oh yeah, so what did the Israeli Senate say when it was 'taken from them by others'?"oy vey iz mir"The religious leaders were largely in charge at the time since they were a captured servant state of Rome, but I think Josphepus has the order of events written down somewhere. But I would be willing to put up the social structure and it's relation to the modern understanding of a nation state against the same set up the palestinians had in 1948 and see which one wins the title: 'An actual country' Link to post Share on other sites
El Guapo 8 Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Do any of you actually click on any of the links that All In posts? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now