EPTPalestine accepted into UNESCO, US pulls funding - Page 25
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Stay on topic. I cannot put it more clearly then that. Derailments will be met with consequences. ~Nyovne | ||
|
bonse
125 Posts
| ||
|
BlackFlag
499 Posts
On November 04 2011 19:36 RageBot wrote: No, but if 1,000 Israelis would have done that, and Israel did nothing to stop them, I don't think anyone would blame Russia for tearing Israel apart. Do you know how your country came into beeing and what happened in British Mandate Palestina before? There were dozens of assasinations of British (mainly solidiers and officers) and other Terrorist Attacks. There are many of the first Israeli statesman who had a terrorist past. If the british would have been like you, there would have never been an Israeli state, worse, they would've killed the Jews in Palestine as revenge and vengeance for their own dead. | ||
|
BioNova
United States598 Posts
I have nothing against Jewish people, or their right to believe what they want. I do think their elected officials are making things worse in the long run. Another series of ships were boarded today. The blockade is 4 years on now. It was the U.N.(as much as I dislike the notion myself) that paved the way for the Jewish State, has defended it economically and otherwise. Why does the State continue to shit away it's good graces? I don't care personally if Politicians get dragged through the street and get 'ghadaffi'd'. I do care about the citizenry of both sides. Zealots either seem oblivous of the theory of blowback, or they count on it(provacatuers). If you want peace, you need a coke and a smile, not more bulldozers, guns, molotovs' and rocks. | ||
|
ozzy1346
United States38 Posts
| ||
|
gayfius173
48 Posts
On November 02 2011 00:57 konadora wrote: holy... how on earth did that even happen and no one raised the issue over the course of decades? I find it interesting to note that, and not to start a religious conversation here), the bible pretty much predicts that israel would have its land returned to it after they had lost it, and over the course of the last 3/4th century, as this picture clearly indicates, look whats happened. | ||
|
InRaged
1047 Posts
Senators predict massive U.S. withdrawal from international organizations Following the State Department's announcement that it had cut off U.S. funding from UNESCO in response to its overwhelming vote in favor of accepting the Palestinian bid for full membership, senators from both parties predicted the United States would cut funding or even withdraw from several other international organizations the Palestinians seek to join. As The Cable reported last month, the Obama administration is required by existing U.S. law to cut off funding for any international organization that grants the Palestinians full membership. Membership in UNESCO also grants the Palestinians membership in the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). The United States is not a member of UNIDO, but will be forced to stop contributing to WIPO. But that's only the tip of the iceberg. The Palestinians could seek membership in more prominent international organizations, which could result in the United States defunding or even withdrawing from institutions such as the World Health Organization and the International Atomic Energy Agency. The AP reported today that the Palestinian Authority was examining seeking membership in 16 more U.N. organizations. While leading senators in both parties acknowledge that such an outcome would be negative for U.S. interests and influence, they have no intention of intervening to change the law. To the contrary, several top senators in both parties told The Cable they support the policy and will work to enforce it, despite the consequences. [cut] But isn't the United States just spiting itself by withdrawing from organizations in order to punish them for recognizing the Palestinians? "Not really," Graham replied. "The world has to make a decision... If the U.N. is going to be a body that buys into Palestinian statehood ... then they suffer. It's a decision they make." http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/11/01/senators_predict_massive_us_withdrawal_from_international_organizations There's more in article | ||
|
henkel
Netherlands146 Posts
| ||
|
Zokkar
Israel128 Posts
On November 02 2011 00:54 HackBenjamin wrote: 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 ![[image loading]](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_pEfVJ93Cwa8/TDjQIyH5mGI/AAAAAAAAGmk/EA9TbmokMRE/s1600/israel-palestine-map.jpg) Make sense? Check out this video: | ||
|
HellRoxYa
Sweden1614 Posts
On November 05 2011 23:04 Zokkar wrote: Check out this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3jbErYwTDw What exactly is the point of that video? | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On November 06 2011 01:36 HellRoxYa wrote: What exactly is the point of that video? It's pretty obvious : Israelis always view themselves as victims, and showing them in red, surrounded by all that green (green for islam, green for evil) they are like the last light of hope in this part of the world. | ||
|
Seldentar
United States888 Posts
On November 02 2011 00:54 bonifaceviii wrote: One drawn up by AIPAC. As for Palestine and the UN/UNESCO, it's definitely a moral victory but does very little in terms of resolving anything. Should they have done it? Hell yeah, it's free PR for the Palestinian government and now the US looks like the bad guy. The US already gets enough hate from foreigners as it is. I swear there's some immutable universal law (really a psychological law) that says "thou shalt hate on the big dog and relentlessly seek to bring it down no matter the cost." If that law was replaced with "thou shalt work together with all of humanity to bring up the race as a whole," then this world would be a much better place and we wouldn't have too many problems. It works the same way with individuals. An old friend of mine was one of the nicest people I've ever known, and nobody ever hated on him until he became somebody (he became very famous in Australia). I suppose it's a survival instinct and we're wired to hate on those who become better and/or stronger than us. In the case of America it's arguably just stronger and not necessarily better. | ||
|
Seldentar
United States888 Posts
On November 05 2011 07:07 gayfius173 wrote: I find it interesting to note that, and not to start a religious conversation here), the bible pretty much predicts that israel would have its land returned to it after they had lost it, and over the course of the last 3/4th century, as this picture clearly indicates, look whats happened. Haha, very interesting point. Strong prediction. It would be interesting if it became a tug of war, and soon Pakistan began regaining the land and then it cycles so on and so forth. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On November 06 2011 05:57 Seldentar wrote: Haha, very interesting point. Strong prediction. It would be interesting if it became a tug of war, and soon Pakistan began regaining the land and then it cycles so on and so forth. It's not a prediction, it's a self fulfilling prothecy : listen, the bible said we will eventually got back to "our" land, let's claim it ! | ||
|
Deleted User 183001
2939 Posts
On November 05 2011 07:07 gayfius173 wrote: I find it interesting to note that, and not to start a religious conversation here), the bible pretty much predicts that israel would have its land returned to it after they had lost it, and over the course of the last 3/4th century, as this picture clearly indicates, look whats happened. Even considering religious mythology has any legitimacy, the problem is that the land isn't "returned". People who come from northern/eastern Europe are not descendants of the land. Meaning, the land was always inhabited by the people who had been living there, whom by the modern era had largely become Muslim. This doesn't negate the fact that the "descendants of Abraham" (again, assuming for the sake of your argument that Abraham was a real person and that the Hebrews all descended from his clan) were living there fine and dandy until religious terrorists started pouring in from Europe, killing and bombing Brits and Palestinians left and right and following a policy basically described as ethnic cleansing until they got their way. So essentially, the Jewish mythological belief has been proven since the emergence of the Hebrew people in Canaan, because those people, the "descendants of Abraham" have consistently been there. Just because many eventually converted to Christianity and then to Islam doesn't mean that they're different people, so your statement doesn't really hold much ground. Additionally, just because some people in Europe converted to Judaism doesn't mean the land is inherently theirs, especially considering that the ancient pagan beliefs were specified to the Hebrew people who originated in Canaan, and not to Europeans in modern-day Germany, Russia, Poland, and elsewhere. That said, as stated previously, ancient religious mythology has no legitimacy, so any way you put it, the creation of Israel has no justification than religious fanatics following a crazy ideology just stealing land from other people. It's like saying because Iranians today don't follow various ancient pagan religions or Zoroastrianism, that land belongs to such people and not to them. Btw, many ancient Semitic pagan religions were exactly the same as with Jewish beliefs in this regard, where their patron god "gave" them their land. Ancient Assyrian religion is exactly the same where Ashur mandated that the land belongs to them, and Assyrians to this day belief the whole of northern Iraq and southeastern Turkey and parts of Syria will be their land. The difference with the Jewish case is that the Assyrians in those regions actually came from the land originally. The overwhelming majority of the Israelis did not come from Israel before the last 30-80 years. Meaning that Assyrians have more claim to their land than Israelis do to theirs from an ancient "religious" standpoint. It would be interesting if it became a tug of war, and soon Pakistan began regaining the land and then it cycles so on and so forth. Indeed it would be quite interesting if the native inhabitants of the land were to reclaim it from foreigners who took it from them (btw, I think you mean Palestine, not Pakistan). | ||
|
hifriend
China7935 Posts
| ||
|
Flamingo777
United States1190 Posts
| ||
|
TwoPac
United States163 Posts
| ||
|
fluidin
Singapore1084 Posts
On November 09 2011 12:20 TwoPac wrote: Palestine needs to learn it can't win in the long run. Politically, the US will veto any claim for Palestine to become a state and Militarily, Israel can wipe out what's left of Palestine without trying or needing U.S help. This does not help the issue in the long term and sooner or later, if Palestine doesn't get off it's high horse and settle for less, there will be no trace of Palestine. I have to agree with this statement. I propose we get off our high horses and look at the situation practically. Stop thinking about what's right and wrong, or what's fair and unfair, for a moment. Who are the ones suffering from this crisis most? It's not the Israelites, neither is it the rest of the Arab world, not even the Hamas ruling party. It's the Palestinian civilians that are suffering the most. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I daresay they would rather just coexist peacefully than have some drawn out conflict that will prolong their suffering. Even if I'm wrong, they would just be selfishly foolish in this endeavor, for their coming generations will face undeserving suffering. On the table, Israel has all the cards. They are superior politically, militarily, and economically. Face this fact. The world is an unfair place, you cannot expect both parties to negotiate equally when one has so much of an advantage over the other. Yes, I concur, it might have been unfair, yada yada, but that is not the way the world works. If what we are truly trying to do is lobby for peace; then stop pursuing those ideological notions and deal with issues practically. Palestine has to give sufficient ground in any (if) upcoming negotiations. That is likely the most efficient way to deal with issues as they stand. I say, swallow that pride (and "injustice") in hope of a better future. | ||
|
Brosaurus
United States12 Posts
1917 The British Empire conquered what is now Israel, Palestine, and Jordan from the Ottoman Empire. This created the British Mandate for Palestine. 1920s The increasing influx of Jewish immigrants from Europe created animosity between the Jewish settlers and the Muslim and Christian Palestinians. 1933 The Nazis agreed to the Haavara Agreement which allowed for 50,000 Jews and $100 million Jewish assets be transferred to Palestine. This allowed the Jewish community to create a growing economy within Palestine 1930s-1940s Large amounts of Jews arrive in Palestine to escape prosecution in Germany. The British signed the White Paper of 1939 which curtailed Jewish immigration from Europe. 1945 The Allies defeat Nazi Germany allowing holocaust survivors immigrate to Palestine. 1947 The rising tension between the Jews and Palestinians grew into the formation of Jewish terrorist organizations and Arab revolts. This along with the damage of WWII became to much for the British and they evacuated from the region. This left the UN to create a partition that created the borders below. ![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.svg/200px-UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.svg.png) The Jewish community agreed to the partition but the borders were denied by the Arab League 1948 The Jewish community declared the formation of Israel. The next day, Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria invade Israel starting the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The Israeli army was better equipped than the Arab league and soon expanded its borders. When the ceasefire was established Egypt annexed the Gaza strip and Jordan annexed the West bank created new borders. ![[image loading]](http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/images/israel49.gif) Interestingly the British supported the Arab league believing that the Jews would soon become communist and ally with the USSR. 1949 Israel became a member state of the U.N. The US, USSR, and most of Europe voted in their favor. Great Britain Abstained and the Arab states voted against. 1956 Egypt under Nasser became less friendlier with Europe and drifted towards the Soviet Union. They then nationalized the Suez Canal. Great Britain, France, and Israel created a secret alliance and planned to have Israel invade the Sinai peninsula. France and Great Britain would then enter under the pretense of protecting Israel, but in reality protect their interests in the Suez Canal. Canada, backed by the US, proposed that the French and British leave the canal under the care of a UN peacekeeping mission. The British, French, and Israelis refused until the USA threatened to sell off British assets which would tank the British economy. All three parties quickly left the peninsula and the Canal was returned to Egypt. The "Suez Crisis" is noted by historians as the turning point in the 20th century where France and Britain stopped being world powers and the US and USSR become the dominant powers. 1964 The PLO was created to "Liberate Palestine" from Israeli land. 1967 Arab-Israeli ties continued to deteriorate to the point where Egypt closed down the Suez Canal and started to mobilize its military. Israel made a preemptive strike against Egypt and its allies Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria decimating their militaries and occupying the Sinai. This was later called the Six-Day war. 1970 The more conservative Anwar Sadat succeeds the secular Nasser. Sadat kicked out Soviet advisers and grew its military. 1973 Eqypt under Sadat and Syria made a surprise attack on the Israeli forces in the Sinai resulting in the Yom Kippur war. Later that year a peace treaty was signed. 1976 Israeli commandos rescue 77 hostages from PLO hijackers on a plane in Uganda. 1978 Menacham Begin's party defeats the Labor party in the Israel elections. Begin meets with Egypt's Anwar Sadat and sign the Camp David Accords giving back the Sinai to Egypt in return for Egypt recognizing Israel as a state. 1978 PLO launches an attack in Israel killing 35 civilians. Israel under Begin responds by invading Lebanon and attacking PLO bases in southern Lebanon. Meanwhile Begin encourages Jewish settlers to settle in the West Bank. 1982 PLO launches more attacks resulting in Israel invading Lebanon a second time to destroy the PLO. | ||
|
neoghaleon55
United States7435 Posts
Could someone explain the logic behind this without resorting to passion. I've asked about a dozen people and they all replied something ridiculous like "if Palestine becomes recognized, all hell would break lose." | ||
| ||
