|
Stay on topic. I cannot put it more clearly then that. Derailments will be met with consequences. ~Nyovne |
Wow... USA's playing the diplomacy game so bad right now, not only PR for general folks (which will rise the amount of hate towards US's government) but as relation with other states.
USA does not respect the principle of democracy in this case. There were 107 countries voting FOR, ~10 against... wtf is left to say. They've been a bully for a while, now this shows it perfectly, if things don't go your way you cut financial support. I understand that's backed by a law, but a law like that should never exist in a civilized country.
I wonder why Germany voted against (at least they're acting civilized) and Great Britain ol' buddy of USA abstained from voting.
Hopefully UNESCO won't be affected by the financial cut, there are countries like China who can easily pump more money.
|
On November 02 2011 06:50 HackBenjamin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 06:37 Romulox wrote:
Winning land in a war is not stealing land, it's the way countries boundaries have been set since inception. Israel would be a lot smaller today if they haven't had to defend themselves over the past 60+ years from ALL SIDES. As most other people on this planet, I would love a Palestinian state (although I doubt how much it would actually help the situation) but it seems like an unattainable goal on both sides for now due to radical politics again on both sides. Also putting that picture up and writing "super abridged version" is really irresponsible IMO. If you're going to put up information like that, back it up with the details that caused that map to be changed or leave it to someone else who cares enough to back up his eye-catching picture with facts that directly relate to the cause of map change (ie. wars where Israel has to defend itself against 4 or more Arab nations at a time and details like the Palestinians would not accept any of the initial proposals by the UN) If I knew nothing on the situation this picture would have deffinitly put me firmly on one side of the argument without explaining either of them... Well I didn't really feel like writing out the history of the middle east today, but you go right ahead, I'll take my post down then.
Well maybe you shouldn't have put up the map if you were going to leave out ALL of the context. That's my only point man, if you want to present an argument, do it with facts not just a picture that has no context or explanation. "Israel and Palestine don't like eachother. Israel used to be small, Palestine used to be big. Now it's the opposite. Check out this picture" That's not helping anything expect if you consider lack of any relative information while still providing only one side of an argument helpful. That land used to be theirs, and they don't have it today, what an outrage (no facts needed)
|
..US sometimes look like Iran in a different land...
Our people support Palaestinians. I hope they manage to be free and create their own country.
|
Now Today Canada also follows suit with the States in cutting funding for UNESCO.. Such an embarrassment... and to think the U.S and Canada are supposed to be countries that other developing nations look to for guidance and help but instead we are doing the opposite and showing them how much we don't care.
|
On November 02 2011 07:14 QuackPocketDuck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 00:54 HackBenjamin wrote:Israel and Palestine don't like eachother. Israel used to be small, Palestine used to be big. Now it's the opposite. Check out this picture ![[image loading]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_pEfVJ93Cwa8/TDjQIyH5mGI/AAAAAAAAGmk/EA9TbmokMRE/s1600/israel-palestine-map.jpg) Make sense? Hate these stupid map concepts, why look at a map from 60 years ago and not 300 years ago or 1000? then we can give the whole land to Rome!  What has been conquered should just be left be as is, anything else only causes additional life loses.
There is a huge difference between land that has changed hands during the last 50-80 years and land that changed hands 200-1000 years ago. This can be a house where you or your parents grew up that you were driven from. Or it can be people who grow up on occupied land or in refugee camps since their parents lost their land. With no citizenship in the occupying nation and no home. It is an ongoing conflict that has not been resolved. Saying that Israel should continue their occupation isn't a solution to the conflict. The solution is to support a Palestinian state with 1967 borders which would force Israel away from their recent settlements on stolen land on the west bank. The only honest alternative to this would be to give every Palestinian Israeli citizenship which Israel would never do and which probably wouldn't work anyway.
|
On November 02 2011 07:22 Romulox wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 06:50 HackBenjamin wrote:On November 02 2011 06:37 Romulox wrote:
Winning land in a war is not stealing land, it's the way countries boundaries have been set since inception. Israel would be a lot smaller today if they haven't had to defend themselves over the past 60+ years from ALL SIDES. As most other people on this planet, I would love a Palestinian state (although I doubt how much it would actually help the situation) but it seems like an unattainable goal on both sides for now due to radical politics again on both sides. Also putting that picture up and writing "super abridged version" is really irresponsible IMO. If you're going to put up information like that, back it up with the details that caused that map to be changed or leave it to someone else who cares enough to back up his eye-catching picture with facts that directly relate to the cause of map change (ie. wars where Israel has to defend itself against 4 or more Arab nations at a time and details like the Palestinians would not accept any of the initial proposals by the UN) If I knew nothing on the situation this picture would have deffinitly put me firmly on one side of the argument without explaining either of them... Well I didn't really feel like writing out the history of the middle east today, but you go right ahead, I'll take my post down then. Well maybe you shouldn't have put up the map if you were going to leave out ALL of the context. That's my only point man, if you want to present an argument, do it with facts not just a picture that has no context or explanation. "Israel and Palestine don't like eachother. Israel used to be small, Palestine used to be big. Now it's the opposite. Check out this picture" That's not helping anything expect if you consider lack of any relative information while still providing only one side of an argument helpful. That land used to be theirs, and they don't have it today, what an outrage (no facts needed)
Something that can be said about a colossal number of countries, heh.
|
It's been 15 pages.
Has TeamLiquid sorted out the Middle East yet?
|
On November 02 2011 07:14 QuackPocketDuck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 00:54 HackBenjamin wrote:Israel and Palestine don't like eachother. Israel used to be small, Palestine used to be big. Now it's the opposite. Check out this picture Make sense? Hate these stupid map concepts, why look at a map from 60 years ago and not 300 years ago or 1000? then we can give the whole land to Rome! What has been conquered should just be left be as is, anything else only causes additional life loses.
Explain why Northern Cyprus Turkish Republic is not Recognised as a country(By many other countries).Those People have that land, and still not known as it is.
In 60's %34 of the people in Cyprus were Turkish, so Turkey claimed % 34 of the land(Containing inhabitable mountaneous areas). But still, Turkey is known as an invader. Your laws see us as invaders, so Israel should be recognised as an invader.
Btw The Cyprus thing is too deep lets dont discuss it here.
|
On November 02 2011 01:53 SnK-Arcbound wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 00:54 HackBenjamin wrote:On November 02 2011 00:47 konadora wrote:On November 02 2011 00:46 SirMilford wrote:On November 02 2011 00:44 konadora wrote:
uh, what kind of stupid law is that that forces a government to cut financial ties to a global organisation because of one country? on what basis? It would be from their relation with Israel almost certainly. sorry i'm not really into politics, but what was the relation between the US, israel and palestine? genuinely curious. The super abridged version? Israel and Palestine don't like eachother. Israel used to be small, Palestine used to be big. Now it's the opposite. Check out this picture Make sense? This is essentially what happened over the past 70 years. Israel has accepted every single peace treaty presented and the palestinians have denied every single peace treaty presented, even the one giving the palestinians 95% of the land. The reason why palestine doesn't have a state is because they refuse to make one. edit: and more on topic, the law came from one written back in 1990 if I remember correctly, so it's not like this is a surprise. I think the US should leave the UN and stop funding them anyways.
I hope you're joking. Israel has never agreed to give the Palestinian's anywhere close to 95% of the land. They won't even agree to the 1967 borders, which is why Obama caused such a stir a few months ago.
Don't state things like fact if you have utterly no idea what you're talking about. Or maybe you do know what you're talking about...
Wait... are you Alan Dershowitz?
EDIT: Also, people claiming that the IDF is the best trained army in the world make me laugh. War breeds a culture of military experience and understanding. Israel's "war" is jet planes versus people throwing stones.
|
Wow. I can't help but feeling that Nash was right with regards to this thread. The success of particular Jews has nothing to do with American foreign policy and I think that throwing around all these accusations of a Jewish kleptocracy is treading a thin line between thick-headed naievety and outright anti-semitism. I don't think I'm being unfair or playing a trump card. Review this thread yourselves and read the rest of my post before you disagree.
I'm not exactly the biggest supporter of Israeli policy with regards to Palestine, but is there nobody here that see's SOME of Israel's security concerns as legitimate? Are you really so partisan as to post an image that depicts a shrinking Palestine without regerence to the Arab aggression and UN resolutions that caused this to happen?
Israel has been attacked again and again and again by united Arab coalitions who outnumber them exponentially in both numbers and finances. They've been attacked from all sides by half a dozen governments all bent on their eradication. If Israel doesn't want to create yet another Arab state whose sole foreign-policy goal is to "wipe Israel off the map", then I think they are right to do so. Read Hamas's (the majority party of Palestine's) charter. It's terrifying:
Read it yourself on wikipedia: Hamas Charter
"The Charter identifies Hamas as the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine and declares its members to be Muslims who "fear God and raise the banner of Jihad in the face of the oppressors." The charter states that "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories."
Everything about the charter is anti-semitic, militant, and dogmaticly Islamist. Hamas and Fatah fight each other, the IDF, the Israeli population, and even use their own people as "civilian shields". To put this into context, I'm of Irish-Catholic descent, so I'm not exactly partial to apartheid and people denying others the right to self-determination. I've been to Belfast. I've seen the "peace walls." On the other hand, as a Canadian citizen, I'd think twice about letting Quebec seperate if the Bloc Quebecois had a constitution that called for the eradication of the Canadian state and it's replacement with a militantly French theocratic government.
tl;dr
This issue is way more complicated than the previous posters have let on. As much as the Palestinians don't like it, there needs to be peace before there can be justice with regards to the apartheid, and there needs to be justice before there can be a two-state solution. You can't just "ratify" a state into existence through the impostition of an inept international beuraucratic behemoth.
Edit: Most Canadians don't share my opinions on this matter.
Edit: Clarification. And for the record, when some Hamas supporters say they would like to change the charter, but can't because of internal reasons, that means they can't change it because Hamas members don't want it changed. It's still is relevant as ever.
|
On November 02 2011 07:50 blinken wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 01:53 SnK-Arcbound wrote:On November 02 2011 00:54 HackBenjamin wrote:On November 02 2011 00:47 konadora wrote:On November 02 2011 00:46 SirMilford wrote:On November 02 2011 00:44 konadora wrote:
uh, what kind of stupid law is that that forces a government to cut financial ties to a global organisation because of one country? on what basis? It would be from their relation with Israel almost certainly. sorry i'm not really into politics, but what was the relation between the US, israel and palestine? genuinely curious. The super abridged version? Israel and Palestine don't like eachother. Israel used to be small, Palestine used to be big. Now it's the opposite. Check out this picture Make sense? This is essentially what happened over the past 70 years. Israel has accepted every single peace treaty presented and the palestinians have denied every single peace treaty presented, even the one giving the palestinians 95% of the land. The reason why palestine doesn't have a state is because they refuse to make one. edit: and more on topic, the law came from one written back in 1990 if I remember correctly, so it's not like this is a surprise. I think the US should leave the UN and stop funding them anyways. I hope you're joking. Israel has never agreed to give the Palestinian's anywhere close to 95% of the land. They won't even agree to the 1967 borders, which is why Obama caused such a stir a few months ago. Don't state things like fact if you have utterly no idea what you're talking about. Or maybe you do know what you're talking about... Wait... are you Alan Dershowitz? EDIT: Also, people claiming that the IDF is the best trained army in the world make me laugh. War breeds a culture of military experience and understanding. Israel's "war" is jet planes versus people throwing stones.
Israel's superiority is its Technology. Its also known that they used chemical bombs (The one with Phosphorus) in 2009(Or 2008 Im not sure)
|
On November 02 2011 07:56 Ripps wrote:Wow. I can't help but feeling that Nash was right with regards to this thread. The success of particular Jews has nothing to do with American foreign policy and I think that throwing around all these accusations of a Jewish kleptocracy is treading a thin line between thick-headed naievety and outright anti-semitism. I don't think I'm being unfair or playing a trump card. Review this thread yourselves and read the rest of my post before you disagree. I'm not exactly the biggest supporter of Israeli policy with regards to Palestine, but is there nobody here that see's SOME of Israel's security concerns as legitimate? Are you really so partisan as to post an image that depicts a shrinking Palestine without regerence to the Arab aggression and UN resolutions that caused this to happen? Israel has been attacked again and again and again by united Arab coalitions who outnumber them exponentially in both numbers and finances. They've been attacked from all sides by half a dozen governments all bent on their eradication. If Israel doesn't want to create yet another Arab state whose sole foreign-policy goal is to "wipe Israel off the map", then I think they are right to do so. Read the Hamas (the ruling party of Palestine's )constitution. It's terrifying: Read it yourself on wikipedia: Hamas Charter"The Charter identifies Hamas as the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine and declares its members to be Muslims who "fear God and raise the banner of Jihad in the face of the oppressors." The charter states that "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories." Everything about the charter is anti-semitic, militant, and dogmaticly Islamist. Hamas and Fatah fight each other, the IDF, the Israeli population, and even use their own people as "civilian shields". To put this into context, I'm of Irish-Catholic descent, so I'm not exactly partial to apartheid and people denying others the right to self-determination. I've been to Belfast. I've seen the "peace walls." On the other hand, as a Canadian citizen, I'd think twice about letting Quebec seperate if the Bloc Quebecois had a constitution that called for the eradication of the Canadian state and it's replacement with a militantly French theocratic government. tl;dr This issue is way more complicated than the previous posters have let on. As much as the Palestinians don't like it, there needs to be peace before there can be justice with regards to the apartheid, and there needs to be justice before there can be a two-state solution. You can't just "ratify" a state into existence through the impostition of an inept international beuraucratic behemoth. Edit: Most Canadians don't share my opinions on this matter.
Holy shit, finally a proper post!
Every time a thread regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict pops up, an astounding amount of rubbish and misinformation follows along with it.
I realize this is the internet and you're all entitled to your opinions, but keep in mind unless you've experienced this conflict first hand, seen it with your own eyes or studied this subject professionally you probably don't know jack shit.
Kudos to Ripps for not talking out of his ass.
|
The best post on this thread: + Show Spoiler +On November 02 2011 07:56 Ripps wrote:Wow. I can't help but feeling that Nash was right with regards to this thread. The success of particular Jews has nothing to do with American foreign policy and I think that throwing around all these accusations of a Jewish kleptocracy is treading a thin line between thick-headed naievety and outright anti-semitism. I don't think I'm being unfair or playing a trump card. Review this thread yourselves and read the rest of my post before you disagree. I'm not exactly the biggest supporter of Israeli policy with regards to Palestine, but is there nobody here that see's SOME of Israel's security concerns as legitimate? Are you really so partisan as to post an image that depicts a shrinking Palestine without regerence to the Arab aggression and UN resolutions that caused this to happen? Israel has been attacked again and again and again by united Arab coalitions who outnumber them exponentially in both numbers and finances. They've been attacked from all sides by half a dozen governments all bent on their eradication. If Israel doesn't want to create yet another Arab state whose sole foreign-policy goal is to "wipe Israel off the map", then I think they are right to do so. Read the Hamas (the ruling party of Palestine's )constitution. It's terrifying: Read it yourself on wikipedia: Hamas Charter"The Charter identifies Hamas as the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine and declares its members to be Muslims who "fear God and raise the banner of Jihad in the face of the oppressors." The charter states that "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories." Everything about the charter is anti-semitic, militant, and dogmaticly Islamist. Hamas and Fatah fight each other, the IDF, the Israeli population, and even use their own people as "civilian shields". To put this into context, I'm of Irish-Catholic descent, so I'm not exactly partial to apartheid and people denying others the right to self-determination. I've been to Belfast. I've seen the "peace walls." On the other hand, as a Canadian citizen, I'd think twice about letting Quebec seperate if the Bloc Quebecois had a constitution that called for the eradication of the Canadian state and it's replacement with a militantly French theocratic government. tl;dr This issue is way more complicated than the previous posters have let on. As much as the Palestinians don't like it, there needs to be peace before there can be justice with regards to the apartheid, and there needs to be justice before there can be a two-state solution. You can't just "ratify" a state into existence through the impostition of an inept international beuraucratic behemoth. Edit: Most Canadians don't share my opinions on this matter.
Each time period on this map is either preceded or followed by a war. The Israeli boundaries have never altered until after a war, in none of which did they declare war first.
|
On November 02 2011 00:44 konadora wrote:
uh, what kind of stupid law is that that forces a government to cut financial ties to a global organisation because of one country? on what basis?
isn't the palestinian government a theocracy and terrorist organisation? that's the basis.
|
What the hell America?! 'yeah, we support a Two state solution'....... yeah right..........
|
On November 02 2011 08:07 Poyo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 07:56 Ripps wrote:Wow. I can't help but feeling that Nash was right with regards to this thread. The success of particular Jews has nothing to do with American foreign policy and I think that throwing around all these accusations of a Jewish kleptocracy is treading a thin line between thick-headed naievety and outright anti-semitism. I don't think I'm being unfair or playing a trump card. Review this thread yourselves and read the rest of my post before you disagree. I'm not exactly the biggest supporter of Israeli policy with regards to Palestine, but is there nobody here that see's SOME of Israel's security concerns as legitimate? Are you really so partisan as to post an image that depicts a shrinking Palestine without regerence to the Arab aggression and UN resolutions that caused this to happen? Israel has been attacked again and again and again by united Arab coalitions who outnumber them exponentially in both numbers and finances. They've been attacked from all sides by half a dozen governments all bent on their eradication. If Israel doesn't want to create yet another Arab state whose sole foreign-policy goal is to "wipe Israel off the map", then I think they are right to do so. Read the Hamas (the ruling party of Palestine's )constitution. It's terrifying: Read it yourself on wikipedia: Hamas Charter"The Charter identifies Hamas as the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine and declares its members to be Muslims who "fear God and raise the banner of Jihad in the face of the oppressors." The charter states that "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories." Everything about the charter is anti-semitic, militant, and dogmaticly Islamist. Hamas and Fatah fight each other, the IDF, the Israeli population, and even use their own people as "civilian shields". To put this into context, I'm of Irish-Catholic descent, so I'm not exactly partial to apartheid and people denying others the right to self-determination. I've been to Belfast. I've seen the "peace walls." On the other hand, as a Canadian citizen, I'd think twice about letting Quebec seperate if the Bloc Quebecois had a constitution that called for the eradication of the Canadian state and it's replacement with a militantly French theocratic government. tl;dr This issue is way more complicated than the previous posters have let on. As much as the Palestinians don't like it, there needs to be peace before there can be justice with regards to the apartheid, and there needs to be justice before there can be a two-state solution. You can't just "ratify" a state into existence through the impostition of an inept international beuraucratic behemoth. Edit: Most Canadians don't share my opinions on this matter. Holy shit, finally a proper post! Every time a thread regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict pops up, an astounding amount of rubbish and misinformation follows along with it. I realize this is the internet and you're all entitled to your opinions, but keep in mind unless you've experienced this conflict first hand, seen it with your own eyes or studied this subject professionally you probably don't know jack shit. Kudos to Ripps for not talking out of his ass.
No. Not really. He's taking information out of context. From the only thing he linked:
"British diplomat and former British ambassador to the UN Sir Jeremy Greenstock stated in early 2009 that the Hamas charter was "drawn up by a Hamas-linked imam some [twenty] years ago and has never been adopted since Hamas was elected as the Palestinian government in 2006 as part of their political program".[8] Mohammed Nimer of American University comments on the Charter, “It’s a tract meant to mobilize support and it should be amended... It projects anger, not vision.”[14] Pastor states that those who quote the charter rather than more recent Hamas statements may be using the Charter as an excuse to ignore Hamas.[6]"
In other words, his primary argument (and the only one doesn't have some kind of gross exaggeration or incorrectness, although it leaves out the reality of the situation) is about something that isn't even employed. The Irish-Catholic part got me. "Yeah some of my ancestors experienced this thing from a history and culture I know little to nothing about so that means I have understanding about it and I'm authoritative on the matter." Okay, well, one branch of my ancestors was brutally murdered in a genocide. That doesn't make me a master of analysis of genocide or an authority on it or a master of having experienced it, so I saw no point of mentioning the Irish thing. If you didn't experience it, there's no point of implying you somehow did vicariously or something...
isn't the palestinian government a theocracy and terrorist organisation? that's the basis.
While it is not nearly so extreme a situation as you imply it being, assuming it were as true as how you put it (I think they're only in command in Gaza btw), the US would have done so years ago, not now. The basis is that the pro-Israel lobby is overwhelmingly powerful in the US and can get US policy to be exactly what it wants. However, even something like that is no basis for cutting funding to UNESCO. This is called serious overreaction by the Israel lobby.
|
On November 02 2011 06:53 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 06:46 kat0 wrote:
I'm sorry but if you allow a loose cannon to be prime minister.......... Menachim Begin you mean? Well there I would agree with you. While he wasn't personally involved with Deir Yassin, I really don't think Irgun or Stern Gang leadership should have had anything to do with government, but then again Hamas formed government as well so I don't even know. Edit As to the OP. I don't know. I'm not sure that pulling funding is necessarily the best idea. Although it might make some conservatives happy. Perry seemed ready to axe all funding to the UN. While 20% will hurt, it's probably not devestating and Palestine is still part of UNESCO, so what does it accomplish really? Second Edit Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 06:50 HackBenjamin wrote:
Well I didn't really feel like writing out the history of the middle east today, but you go right ahead, I'll take my post down then. Well perhaps not, but even a little extra context would be better than your post which is decidedly one sided. I mean no matter how pro-Palestinian a person is, the story you're telling is that Israel invaded with armies every single time rather than at the very least allowing that in some cases Israel was attacked first by armies and then Israel invaded. Or other things like the green territory assumes that the land was entirely filled and populated by Arabs. Whereas the land had been very desolate for many years and many Arabs had moved there in the last century as there was growing economic prosperity and still other Arabs were immigrating at the same time as the Jews and yet one group is considered indigenous and the other foreign.
I didn't say any of those things. Re-read my post. Plus, the picture says "Palestinian loss of land", not "Israeli conquest" or "Israeli population growth", or anything like that. It doesn't allude to any invasions or anything. I certainly didn't provide any biased comments one way or another, and for you to draw these conclusions from this picture is really your own doing, therefore it's your own problem.
I posted a reply to a question. Granted, it could have been explained much more thoroughly, but as stated, I wasn't particularly interested in articulating the finer points of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because A) I'm not an expert on the subject, or historian, B) I'm not sure I could provide an answer that WASN'T biased, and C) I was in class. As stated, if someone would like to fully explain the situation in appropriate depth, free of bias, I'll take down the picture, but for now it serves it's purpose.
|
On November 02 2011 08:08 Durp wrote:The best post on this thread: + Show Spoiler +On November 02 2011 07:56 Ripps wrote:Wow. I can't help but feeling that Nash was right with regards to this thread. The success of particular Jews has nothing to do with American foreign policy and I think that throwing around all these accusations of a Jewish kleptocracy is treading a thin line between thick-headed naievety and outright anti-semitism. I don't think I'm being unfair or playing a trump card. Review this thread yourselves and read the rest of my post before you disagree. I'm not exactly the biggest supporter of Israeli policy with regards to Palestine, but is there nobody here that see's SOME of Israel's security concerns as legitimate? Are you really so partisan as to post an image that depicts a shrinking Palestine without regerence to the Arab aggression and UN resolutions that caused this to happen? Israel has been attacked again and again and again by united Arab coalitions who outnumber them exponentially in both numbers and finances. They've been attacked from all sides by half a dozen governments all bent on their eradication. If Israel doesn't want to create yet another Arab state whose sole foreign-policy goal is to "wipe Israel off the map", then I think they are right to do so. Read the Hamas (the ruling party of Palestine's )constitution. It's terrifying: Read it yourself on wikipedia: Hamas Charter"The Charter identifies Hamas as the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine and declares its members to be Muslims who "fear God and raise the banner of Jihad in the face of the oppressors." The charter states that "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories." Everything about the charter is anti-semitic, militant, and dogmaticly Islamist. Hamas and Fatah fight each other, the IDF, the Israeli population, and even use their own people as "civilian shields". To put this into context, I'm of Irish-Catholic descent, so I'm not exactly partial to apartheid and people denying others the right to self-determination. I've been to Belfast. I've seen the "peace walls." On the other hand, as a Canadian citizen, I'd think twice about letting Quebec seperate if the Bloc Quebecois had a constitution that called for the eradication of the Canadian state and it's replacement with a militantly French theocratic government. tl;dr This issue is way more complicated than the previous posters have let on. As much as the Palestinians don't like it, there needs to be peace before there can be justice with regards to the apartheid, and there needs to be justice before there can be a two-state solution. You can't just "ratify" a state into existence through the impostition of an inept international beuraucratic behemoth. Edit: Most Canadians don't share my opinions on this matter. Each time period on this map is either preceded or followed by a war. The Israeli boundaries have never altered until after a war, in none of which did they declare war first.
There was no war with the Palestinians between 1967 and 2000, although Egypt and Syria attacked them during this time. The Palestinian land losses between '67 and 2000 are due to illegal Israeli settlements.
|
I can see how Israelis would be afraid to live with Palestinians with all of the fighting that has gone on, but it seems to me that a country formed in the aftermath of racism to the point of genocide would understand another group of people's issues with being confined to ever decreasing areas of what was their homeland. The Israel/ Palestine division is the most blatant expression of racism on the planet and Israel needs to own up to the new age of acceptance.
|
There is quite a lot to say on this topic. I very much support Ripps in almost every position, but i do think that Israel will have to give up some of its territory at some point.
I saw a statistic that said only 30-40% of the population of Israeli territory is actually Hebrew. How is that sustainable? Because they have a significant better quality of life, statistically they will grow in population slower than their arab counterparts. Now there isn't really anything wrong with having a lot of Arabs in the country by itself, but is that really the point of the Apartheid? Furthermore, I just don't see that being sustainable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
