|
Dershowitz is a dangerous man, a scoundrel.
In March 2002, Dershowitz published an article in The Jerusalem Post entitled "New Response to Palestinian Terrorism." In it, he wrote that Israel should announce a unilateral cessation in retaliation, at the end of which it would "announce precisely what it will do in response to the next act of terrorism. For example, it could announce the first act of terrorism following the moratorium will result in the destruction of a small village which has been used as a base for terrorist operations. The residents would be given 24 hours to leave, and then troops will come in and bulldoze all of the buildings." The list of targets would be made public in advance.[35] The proposal attracted criticism from within Harvard University and beyond.[36] James Bamford argued in The Washington Post that it would violate international law.[37] Norman Finkelstein wrote that "it is hard to make out any difference between the policy Dershowitz advocates and the Nazi destruction of Lidice, for which he expresses abhorrence—except that Jews, not Germans, would be implementing it."
|
See this is the typical, naive western view that is based on the fact that we were able to end our centuries of wars. The same wont happen in the middle east. First of, the Arabs as a whole would never be content with anything short of the complete destruction of the state of Israel. It is an abomination in their eyes. It is a joke to assume that not building a few settlements will change that (I generally dont agree with those settlements btw).
You missed alot of info there, mate. Read up on the two state solutions, who supported it and who didn't. Now you can go ahead and say "well fatah n stuff only said that so they could get suicide bombers in", but this strawman-argument kinda goes for literally any "solution" short of genocide, and is pretty much invalid.
There were chances for peace. Not with hamas, i agree, there never will be - but Netanyahu doesn't want that peace. They don't want a two state solution. That's why he sent settlers behind the rolling tanks, instead of stopping them. A two-state solution implies that Israel would need to go back to pre-67 borders. If it were an option, why send settlers? Just to rob them of their homes again? If you actually try to think unbiased for a moment, you gather that this is a huge indicator for what Israel wants.
You have the typical german view (as expressed vividly by you and another guy here), Israel wants peace, is a peaceful country, yadayada - it's bullshit. Netanyahu allowed settlers to move, fully accepting that this is one of the biggest factor in fueling the conflict. And he still doesn't back down on that. He doesn't want pre-67 borders. He doesn't want to stop the blockade of Gaza (edit: maybe worded it wrong, i meant embargoes), literally keeping "his prisoners" in the stoneage.
While i agree that Israel has huge problems down there with arabs/islamists, what do you think happens next? Let's talk hypothetically. They take the rest of whats left of the land there, only works via genocide (palestines have no place to go). No option. They somehow re-settle palestines, take the whole land - then you have a mexican standoff with all the other nations down there, ergo, still no peace. Etc, etc.
The only way Israel might get peace is to take their dick of the table, and start a more humble approach. Keeping firm on whatever was promised back in the day, but other than that, keep humble. They can only wave their dick around for so long, they can't overcome the whole middle east by themselves.
|
On July 26 2014 00:29 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 00:08 Broetchenholer wrote:On July 25 2014 20:32 bluzi wrote:On July 25 2014 19:42 EtherealBlade wrote:On July 25 2014 18:28 bluzi wrote:On July 25 2014 09:39 DinoMight wrote:On July 25 2014 09:25 Nyxisto wrote:On July 25 2014 08:57 WhiteDog wrote:On July 25 2014 08:50 Nyxisto wrote:On July 25 2014 08:45 WhiteDog wrote:
[quote]
You linked a source about empty school, putting doubt on the UN credibility in this matter and on the specific school that has been bombarded. What's the point in talking about empty school ? It is propaganda and you're part of it. The school was not empty, as UN staff had to be evacuated, and the neighbouring schools hosted 1.5k refugees. The UN needs to keep their shit together, they simply can not have weapons stored in close proximity to so many people. They did,they said they will control all their facilities, and they controlled the one that was bombarded by Israeli (before the attack). They now found two school with rockets, released a statement about it and evacuated the school. What should they do ? The only thing you are doing is, something that would be unacceptable in any other conflict, putting doubt on the UN. It is something that the media, and people, only do about Israel : when the UN, or any other international agency, release a paper or the result of investigation on Israel, it is always okay to criticize it. No, if Israeli forces deliberately attack a school and there were no military combatants or weapons in the building then it's illegitimate and needs to be condemned. What I don't do is sitting around in my room, mouth drooling, just waiting for the newest sensational headline what the IDF has done wrong now. All asymmetrical modern wars look like the conflict between Palestine and Israel, and a lot of them look even worse. And although the Hamas is not carrying people literally around in front of them, leading members of the Hamas have repeatedly stated that civilians are not supposed to leave the bombed areas. It is also a fact that they have fired rockets out of areas that contained civilians and civil infrastructure. The fact that rockets have been found in UN buildings is yet another example of how the Hamas operates. You are missing the point. This is not a war. As much as Israel tries to make it seem like a war, it's not. This is a bunch of terrorists firing rockets into Israel, and Israel responding by bombing the general population of Gaza. You say they're using them as human shields, that they're supposed to stay in these areas... Gaza is one of the most densely populated strips of land on Earth (Gaza City is more densely populated than New York City). There is nowhere else for them to go that isn't also being bombed. The whole thing is almost the size of Washington DC and has 1.8 million people living in it. you are not only missing the point , you dont even know the facts ..... what do you mean by bunch of terrorists its their GOVERMENT , they gaza ppl elected them over Fatah! its their MISSILES going towards ISRAEL GENERAL POPULATION , for more then a decade (on sederot) , and now they shoot it across all the land (over 100 a day of balitic missiles), what would you do ? tell me , what line of action would you take , if your Washington DC was bombed by anyone ? let me guess , you would ship several navi carriers do half across the globe then conquer an entire country which the terrorists came from , and everyone will cheer because you are fighting a good cause! you know why Egypt is closing the borders on the south side ? because they provide guns and terror equipment to the Sinai Area , please for once in this thread , someone can give me one good way to act ? dead pepole is never ok , and never encouraged , but please one suggestion on what to do when your major cities (Tel Aviv) is being bombed. Maybe they could choose to negotiate and surrender to the Palestinian demands (1967 or 1948 borders, it doesn't matter because Israel doesn't have legitimacy for either but that's another discussion). But of course that won't happen, instead they build even more illegal settlements. It's easier to pull off a massacre in Gaza or Lebanon every now and then and blame it on the rockets. Again , you dont anwer a simple question when i repsond , what will your countries will do if being bombed by rockets ? I gave the example of what the US will do if being attacked by a terror organziation. you can read what Russia did in Chechenia and so on. why is Egypt closing the border ? you are just not willing to see the other side , which makes your points so biased , i for one think the Gaze ppl are in a bad spot , and i whish i could help them get rid of hamas , get a country (which we tried to do several times) and try and develop something which isnt a terror city. i believe that if the average person can live a normal life he will not want to wager war , no one here in israel is happy about killing civilians ,we have internal debate on the legitmacy of the bombing every day because we do have morals , but you just dont understand nor you will ever know what its like to have bomb falling on you from the skies all the time , or 4 states around you attacking in an ambition to kill your entire population. again : GAZA has no settlements and no israely ppl/army inside of it for several years now , Gaza!=west bank. If Germany were the target of terrorists from another nation, they would try to get this nation to use police against those terrorists. If Germany were the target of a nation that was using rocket attacks on them, they would maybe probably drop dead on the spot, they would not even have the means to fight back and i doubt they would try to. If germany had cornered 1,8 million people into a a corner of 360m² (Berlin 3,4m on 890m²), made those people prisoner and stripped them from most means to create a real life, and the history between germany and that land was full of violence and no real tries to stop that violence by germany, the german population would have overthrown their government peacefully 20 years ago. If you would have given the palestinians what they wanted 20 years ago, guess how much you would have to defend yourself now? Knowing that, why are you not stopping the settlers to destroy palestine villages and create their own homes there? Why have you not done that? As long as you answer war with war, you will have to live in fear that you are one of 28 dead in 13 years from rockets. So, maybe don't do that? See this is the typical, naive western view that is based on the fact that we were able to end our centuries of wars. The same wont happen in the middle east. First of, the Arabs as a whole would never be content with anything short of the complete destruction of the state of Israel. It is an abomination in their eyes. It is a joke to assume that not building a few settlements will change that (I generally dont agree with those settlements btw). And even the disolution of the state of Israel would most likely not satisfy them. Just look at what is happening in the whole middle east. The conflict in Israel is a piece of cake compared to what happens in the rest of the region. All the killings between Shia, Sunni, Kurds etc in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, you name it. Israel is an island of peace in comparison. If this state was dissolved, the jews would be fucked. Another exodus would be the only possible consequence.
Casual racism at work that's interestingly politically correct in Western circles (compare that with anti semitism...)
You realise the entire region was basically held as a protectorate/colony, then divided again after WWI and WWII? That the Ottomans agonised for over a century over most of the land, only for their rule to be followed by French and British imperialists? Then we've seen Israeli invaders, and now US led invaders. And you really blame the Arabs for the wars "they have caused"?
You "generally don't agree with settlements", well that's the typical Israeli far right narrative on international forums. Condemn their people when they burn the New Testament, when the settlers go hunting Palestinians, launch "investigations" when civilians die under police operations, then the next day, approve the building of more illegal settlements, and bulldoze the house of the indigenous, because at the end of the day THEY are not content until they seized entire Palestine.
Israel an "island of peace", led by extreme right expansionist politicians for some time now - something's wrong with the picture.
|
On July 26 2014 00:29 Redox wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 00:08 Broetchenholer wrote:On July 25 2014 20:32 bluzi wrote:On July 25 2014 19:42 EtherealBlade wrote:On July 25 2014 18:28 bluzi wrote:On July 25 2014 09:39 DinoMight wrote:On July 25 2014 09:25 Nyxisto wrote:On July 25 2014 08:57 WhiteDog wrote:On July 25 2014 08:50 Nyxisto wrote:On July 25 2014 08:45 WhiteDog wrote:
[quote]
You linked a source about empty school, putting doubt on the UN credibility in this matter and on the specific school that has been bombarded. What's the point in talking about empty school ? It is propaganda and you're part of it. The school was not empty, as UN staff had to be evacuated, and the neighbouring schools hosted 1.5k refugees. The UN needs to keep their shit together, they simply can not have weapons stored in close proximity to so many people. They did,they said they will control all their facilities, and they controlled the one that was bombarded by Israeli (before the attack). They now found two school with rockets, released a statement about it and evacuated the school. What should they do ? The only thing you are doing is, something that would be unacceptable in any other conflict, putting doubt on the UN. It is something that the media, and people, only do about Israel : when the UN, or any other international agency, release a paper or the result of investigation on Israel, it is always okay to criticize it. No, if Israeli forces deliberately attack a school and there were no military combatants or weapons in the building then it's illegitimate and needs to be condemned. What I don't do is sitting around in my room, mouth drooling, just waiting for the newest sensational headline what the IDF has done wrong now. All asymmetrical modern wars look like the conflict between Palestine and Israel, and a lot of them look even worse. And although the Hamas is not carrying people literally around in front of them, leading members of the Hamas have repeatedly stated that civilians are not supposed to leave the bombed areas. It is also a fact that they have fired rockets out of areas that contained civilians and civil infrastructure. The fact that rockets have been found in UN buildings is yet another example of how the Hamas operates. You are missing the point. This is not a war. As much as Israel tries to make it seem like a war, it's not. This is a bunch of terrorists firing rockets into Israel, and Israel responding by bombing the general population of Gaza. You say they're using them as human shields, that they're supposed to stay in these areas... Gaza is one of the most densely populated strips of land on Earth (Gaza City is more densely populated than New York City). There is nowhere else for them to go that isn't also being bombed. The whole thing is almost the size of Washington DC and has 1.8 million people living in it. you are not only missing the point , you dont even know the facts ..... what do you mean by bunch of terrorists its their GOVERMENT , they gaza ppl elected them over Fatah! its their MISSILES going towards ISRAEL GENERAL POPULATION , for more then a decade (on sederot) , and now they shoot it across all the land (over 100 a day of balitic missiles), what would you do ? tell me , what line of action would you take , if your Washington DC was bombed by anyone ? let me guess , you would ship several navi carriers do half across the globe then conquer an entire country which the terrorists came from , and everyone will cheer because you are fighting a good cause! you know why Egypt is closing the borders on the south side ? because they provide guns and terror equipment to the Sinai Area , please for once in this thread , someone can give me one good way to act ? dead pepole is never ok , and never encouraged , but please one suggestion on what to do when your major cities (Tel Aviv) is being bombed. Maybe they could choose to negotiate and surrender to the Palestinian demands (1967 or 1948 borders, it doesn't matter because Israel doesn't have legitimacy for either but that's another discussion). But of course that won't happen, instead they build even more illegal settlements. It's easier to pull off a massacre in Gaza or Lebanon every now and then and blame it on the rockets. Again , you dont anwer a simple question when i repsond , what will your countries will do if being bombed by rockets ? I gave the example of what the US will do if being attacked by a terror organziation. you can read what Russia did in Chechenia and so on. why is Egypt closing the border ? you are just not willing to see the other side , which makes your points so biased , i for one think the Gaze ppl are in a bad spot , and i whish i could help them get rid of hamas , get a country (which we tried to do several times) and try and develop something which isnt a terror city. i believe that if the average person can live a normal life he will not want to wager war , no one here in israel is happy about killing civilians ,we have internal debate on the legitmacy of the bombing every day because we do have morals , but you just dont understand nor you will ever know what its like to have bomb falling on you from the skies all the time , or 4 states around you attacking in an ambition to kill your entire population. again : GAZA has no settlements and no israely ppl/army inside of it for several years now , Gaza!=west bank. If Germany were the target of terrorists from another nation, they would try to get this nation to use police against those terrorists. If Germany were the target of a nation that was using rocket attacks on them, they would maybe probably drop dead on the spot, they would not even have the means to fight back and i doubt they would try to. If germany had cornered 1,8 million people into a a corner of 360m² (Berlin 3,4m on 890m²), made those people prisoner and stripped them from most means to create a real life, and the history between germany and that land was full of violence and no real tries to stop that violence by germany, the german population would have overthrown their government peacefully 20 years ago. If you would have given the palestinians what they wanted 20 years ago, guess how much you would have to defend yourself now? Knowing that, why are you not stopping the settlers to destroy palestine villages and create their own homes there? Why have you not done that? As long as you answer war with war, you will have to live in fear that you are one of 28 dead in 13 years from rockets. So, maybe don't do that? See this is the typical, naive western view that is based on the fact that we were able to end our centuries of wars. The same wont happen in the middle east. First of, the Arabs as a whole would never be content with anything short of the complete destruction of the state of Israel. It is an abomination in their eyes. It is a joke to assume that not building a few settlements will change that (I generally dont agree with those settlements btw). And even the disolution of the state of Israel would most likely not satisfy them. Just look at what is happening in the whole middle east. The conflict in Israel is a piece of cake compared to what happens in the rest of the region. All the killings between Shia, Sunni, Kurds etc in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, you name it. Israel is an island of peace in comparison. If this state was dissolved, the jews would be fucked. Another exodus would be the only possible consequence.
Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay.
But, you don't actually need that. Just check what happens if you give them what they want. I wouldn't stop the blockade of gaza right now either. That would be stupid. However, i would take back all those settlements, stop embargoing anything that is not a weapon, let them build up and help their moderate forces and who knows, maybe something will happen. Saying it won't work and then bombing them into oblivion because you didn't even try is not gonna work either, so what do you use? Your elections.
It wouldn't have happenend if we didn't have to change our ways, but it did happen. Now tell me, what speaks against
|
Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay.
Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about.
edit
I was pointing out that your post made sense and that the Pro-Israeli lobbyism in America is very powerful.
Ah. Well, thank you, i guess. ^^
|
On July 25 2014 10:32 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2014 08:50 Evil_Monkey_ wrote:Good point and don't forget the influence of pro-Israeli lobbyists on policy either. On July 25 2014 03:21 m4ini wrote:On July 25 2014 03:18 mdb wrote:On July 25 2014 03:08 m4ini wrote:On July 25 2014 02:58 xDaunt wrote:Any sane Western government is going to support Israel. Regardless of whether you think Israel has wronged Palestine, the bottom line is that Israel is a fundamentally Western country than can be a reliable partner in trade and other affairs. You can't say that for Palestine. Obviously not. Want me to explain why that is, or do you just play dumb? hey buddy why dont you stop calling people dumb? and stop acting like you are the only one who understands whats going on gaza and can "explain stuff". If i feel the need to call someone dumb, i will do so. Luckily, i didn't. I asked him if he plays dumb. Wanna stop calling me buddy and stop backseatmoderating? Not to mention that it's ridiculous to say "well Israel is a good trading partner, Palestine isn't - well no shit, since they can't rebuild their infrastructure thanks to prohibition of building materials and control over their exports. And i'm pretty sure xDaunt knows that. Even though i don't entirely disagree when he says "israel is more reliable" - for now. But honestly, the reason why israel gets the support that it does is not because of the trading. It's to get a foothold over there. Not entirely sure, were you answering to my post, or using my post to answer?
I was pointing out that your post made sense and that the Pro-Israeli lobbyism in America is very powerful.
|
The Onion, on point as always:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/israels-hamas-disregard-for-palestinian-life-align,36531/
Israel’s, Hamas’ Disregard For Palestinian Life Aligning Nicely
Admiring their mutual indifference toward Gazan civilians and families during the ongoing conflict, sources confirmed Thursday that global political leaders, observers on the ground, and the international community at large agreed that Israel’s and Hamas’ respective disregard for Palestinian life have actually lined up pretty nicely.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about.
this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><;
|
On July 26 2014 02:35 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about. this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><;
Lets be clear, one of those nations would likely try to forcibly remove them from the region. How many deaths that resulted in is unknown. But they don't get to stay in the region if they are not armed.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 26 2014 02:38 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 02:35 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about. this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><; Lets be clear, one of those nations would likely try to forcibly remove them from the region. How many deaths that resulted in is unknown. But they don't get to stay in the region if they are not armed.
nope, that's not true and don't think for a second that it is. People and countries in the region want the Palestine to have their land back but a two state solution would do just fine but Israel isn't interested in that. I could write much more but rather we focus back on the present conflict.
|
On July 26 2014 02:40 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 02:38 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:35 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about. this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><; Lets be clear, one of those nations would likely try to forcibly remove them from the region. How many deaths that resulted in is unknown. But they don't get to stay in the region if they are not armed. nope, that's not true and don't think for a second that it is. People and countries in the region want the Palestine to have their land back but a two state solution would do just fine but Israel isn't interested in that. I could write much more but rather we focus back on the present conflict.
It is very unlikely that any modern nation can exist without some sort of armed military. If you are talking about de-escalation, I am with you. If you are talking about becoming a pacifist nation with no active military in any way, history has proven time and time again that is impossible in any part of the world.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 26 2014 02:44 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 02:40 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:38 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:35 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about. this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><; Lets be clear, one of those nations would likely try to forcibly remove them from the region. How many deaths that resulted in is unknown. But they don't get to stay in the region if they are not armed. nope, that's not true and don't think for a second that it is. People and countries in the region want the Palestine to have their land back but a two state solution would do just fine but Israel isn't interested in that. I could write much more but rather we focus back on the present conflict. It is very unlikely that any modern nation can exist without some sort of armed military. If you are talking about de-escalation, I am with you. If you are talking about becoming a pacifist nation with no active military in any way, history has proven time and time again that is impossible in any part of the world.
well, I was mostly responding to his point that 8 million people will be wiped out if they laid down their arms but that wouldn't be the case if the original conflict was resolved (2 state solution, stopping settlements etc...). If we are talking in general, then I don't see the problem of having some armed military so long as they are used for protection and not to invade other countries or be aggressive with.
|
On July 26 2014 02:46 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 02:44 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:40 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:38 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:35 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about. this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><; Lets be clear, one of those nations would likely try to forcibly remove them from the region. How many deaths that resulted in is unknown. But they don't get to stay in the region if they are not armed. nope, that's not true and don't think for a second that it is. People and countries in the region want the Palestine to have their land back but a two state solution would do just fine but Israel isn't interested in that. I could write much more but rather we focus back on the present conflict. It is very unlikely that any modern nation can exist without some sort of armed military. If you are talking about de-escalation, I am with you. If you are talking about becoming a pacifist nation with no active military in any way, history has proven time and time again that is impossible in any part of the world. well, I was mostly responding to his point that 8 million people will be wiped out if they laid down their arms but that wouldn't be the case if the original conflict was resolved (2 state solution, stopping settlements etc...). If we are talking in general, then I don't see the problem of having some armed military so long as they are used for protection and not to invade other countries or be aggressive with.
That wasn't the point you made at first, mate.
Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew?
If they lay down their weapons right now (as you stated, you were not talking about the conflict already being resolved, which would make your point pointless anyway, and also no need for the israelis to lay down the weapons in the first place, since, yay, peace anyway), everybody who does not flee, will be dead in a matter of time.
Edit: not to mention, to resolve the conflict down there, you need to do more than just getting palestine on your side, so even if the gaza conflict is settled, there's still a couple of nations around you just waiting for you to turn your back on them.
Don't be so naive, it's not like they didn't already try ffs
|
On July 26 2014 02:46 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 02:44 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:40 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:38 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:35 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about. this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><; Lets be clear, one of those nations would likely try to forcibly remove them from the region. How many deaths that resulted in is unknown. But they don't get to stay in the region if they are not armed. nope, that's not true and don't think for a second that it is. People and countries in the region want the Palestine to have their land back but a two state solution would do just fine but Israel isn't interested in that. I could write much more but rather we focus back on the present conflict. It is very unlikely that any modern nation can exist without some sort of armed military. If you are talking about de-escalation, I am with you. If you are talking about becoming a pacifist nation with no active military in any way, history has proven time and time again that is impossible in any part of the world. well, I was mostly responding to his point that 8 million people will be wiped out if they laid down their arms but that wouldn't be the case if the original conflict was resolved (2 state solution, stopping settlements etc...). If we are talking in general, then I don't see the problem of having some armed military so long as they are used for protection and not to invade other countries or be aggressive with.
Agreed and the two state solution is the only real solution remaining. The problem being that both sides have vastly different ideas on what that would look like and both are unwilling to back down.
People seem to forget that this conflict rose out of the failings of a peace plan and the vacuum that created. Then people went out and murdered some teenagers with the sole purpose of insighting violence and the other side responded in kind. Both sides have fanatics that want the violence, they want the war for reasons beyond our understanding.
The solution, sadly is more complex that we even realize. But I have no skin in the game, since I am not from and have no relatives in that section of the world. There are times that I think we don’t do them any favors by stopping the violence, since both sides seem incapable of making reasonable demands of the other.
|
Agreed and the two state solution is the only real solution remaining. The problem being that both sides have vastly different ideas on what that would look like and both are unwilling to back down.
The more i think about it, the less i would agree to that. Not as long as radicals roam around in that area (including syria and other bordering countries).
Sadly, but honestly? The more i think about it, for something even remotely peaceful (Israel won't ever have "peace" in the middle east) to happen, one of the parties has to leave.
Not to mention, as long as both parties categorically rule out a two state solution, it's not a real solution anyway. Even if magically the two state solution gets agreed to (whatever conditions on either side, just hypothetically), sooner or later the spiral will go out of control again. A single person who lost somebody innocent and seeking revenge (on either side) is enough to spark it again (as already proven).
|
On July 26 2014 03:04 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +Agreed and the two state solution is the only real solution remaining. The problem being that both sides have vastly different ideas on what that would look like and both are unwilling to back down.
The more i think about it, the less i would agree to that. Not as long as radicals roam around in that area (including syria and other bordering countries). Sadly, but honestly? The more i think about it, for something even remotely peaceful (Israel won't ever have "peace" in the middle east) to happen, one of the parties has to leave.
Israel will not leave unless they are forced out, which isn't happening. Its been tried and failed. A two state solution is possible, but both sides need to agree that they have to exist next to each other. Right now they can't seem to do that.
|
On July 26 2014 03:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 03:04 m4ini wrote:Agreed and the two state solution is the only real solution remaining. The problem being that both sides have vastly different ideas on what that would look like and both are unwilling to back down.
The more i think about it, the less i would agree to that. Not as long as radicals roam around in that area (including syria and other bordering countries). Sadly, but honestly? The more i think about it, for something even remotely peaceful (Israel won't ever have "peace" in the middle east) to happen, one of the parties has to leave. Israel will not leave unless they are forced out, which isn't happening. Its been tried and failed. A two state solution is possible, but both sides need to agree that they have to exist next to each other. Right now they can't seem to do that.
See my edit, even if that magically would happen somehow, and both governments find an agreement - it's nothing more than having peace on a big barrel of explosives, with a single incident being enough to light the fuse again.
edit: the problem is that even though hamas-support has dropped, there's still people out there who would continue terroristic attacks, even if the hamas (hypothetically speaking) would find an agreement.
This may sound awful now, but i sincerly don't have the idea of people in the middle east being reasonable.
edit:
And yes, it's been tried and failed. It's just ridiculous to assume that if they lay down the weapons now, nothing bad will happen. It already happened.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
^ should work on dispelling that imo.
On July 26 2014 02:56 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 02:46 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:44 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:40 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:38 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:35 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about. this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><; Lets be clear, one of those nations would likely try to forcibly remove them from the region. How many deaths that resulted in is unknown. But they don't get to stay in the region if they are not armed. nope, that's not true and don't think for a second that it is. People and countries in the region want the Palestine to have their land back but a two state solution would do just fine but Israel isn't interested in that. I could write much more but rather we focus back on the present conflict. It is very unlikely that any modern nation can exist without some sort of armed military. If you are talking about de-escalation, I am with you. If you are talking about becoming a pacifist nation with no active military in any way, history has proven time and time again that is impossible in any part of the world. well, I was mostly responding to his point that 8 million people will be wiped out if they laid down their arms but that wouldn't be the case if the original conflict was resolved (2 state solution, stopping settlements etc...). If we are talking in general, then I don't see the problem of having some armed military so long as they are used for protection and not to invade other countries or be aggressive with. That wasn't the point you made at first, mate. Show nested quote +Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? If they lay down their weapons right now (as you stated, you were not talking about the conflict already being resolved, which would make your point pointless anyway, and also no need for the israelis to lay down the weapons in the first place, since, yay, peace anyway), everybody who does not flee, will be dead in a matter of time. Edit: not to mention, to resolve the conflict down there, you need to do more than just getting palestine on your side, so even if the gaza conflict is settled, there's still a couple of nations around you just waiting for you to turn your back on them. Don't be so naive, it's not like they didn't already try ffs
umm nope, that wasn't my first post lol, you misquoted. This was my first:
this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><;
On July 26 2014 02:59 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 02:46 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:44 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:40 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:38 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:35 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about. this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><; Lets be clear, one of those nations would likely try to forcibly remove them from the region. How many deaths that resulted in is unknown. But they don't get to stay in the region if they are not armed. nope, that's not true and don't think for a second that it is. People and countries in the region want the Palestine to have their land back but a two state solution would do just fine but Israel isn't interested in that. I could write much more but rather we focus back on the present conflict. It is very unlikely that any modern nation can exist without some sort of armed military. If you are talking about de-escalation, I am with you. If you are talking about becoming a pacifist nation with no active military in any way, history has proven time and time again that is impossible in any part of the world. well, I was mostly responding to his point that 8 million people will be wiped out if they laid down their arms but that wouldn't be the case if the original conflict was resolved (2 state solution, stopping settlements etc...). If we are talking in general, then I don't see the problem of having some armed military so long as they are used for protection and not to invade other countries or be aggressive with. Agreed and the two state solution is the only real solution remaining. The problem being that both sides have vastly different ideas on what that would look like and both are unwilling to back down. People seem to forget that this conflict rose out of the failings of a peace plan and the vacuum that created. Then people went out and murdered some teenagers with the sole purpose of insighting violence and the other side responded in kind. Both sides have fanatics that want the violence, they want the war for reasons beyond our understanding. The solution, sadly is more complex that we even realize. But I have no skin in the game, since I am not from and have no relatives in that section of the world. There are times that I think we don’t do them any favors by stopping the violence, since both sides seem incapable of making reasonable demands of the other.
It's a rather complex war, yes but I still believe that removing the blockade to allow medical supplies and get the eco going as well as halting settlements is the best first step to show willingfulness for peace. Once things have settled down, the two state solution can be proposed and worked towards. It's the only way this conflict will be settled imo.
|
On July 26 2014 03:10 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 02:56 m4ini wrote:On July 26 2014 02:46 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:44 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:40 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:38 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:35 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about. this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><; Lets be clear, one of those nations would likely try to forcibly remove them from the region. How many deaths that resulted in is unknown. But they don't get to stay in the region if they are not armed. nope, that's not true and don't think for a second that it is. People and countries in the region want the Palestine to have their land back but a two state solution would do just fine but Israel isn't interested in that. I could write much more but rather we focus back on the present conflict. It is very unlikely that any modern nation can exist without some sort of armed military. If you are talking about de-escalation, I am with you. If you are talking about becoming a pacifist nation with no active military in any way, history has proven time and time again that is impossible in any part of the world. well, I was mostly responding to his point that 8 million people will be wiped out if they laid down their arms but that wouldn't be the case if the original conflict was resolved (2 state solution, stopping settlements etc...). If we are talking in general, then I don't see the problem of having some armed military so long as they are used for protection and not to invade other countries or be aggressive with. That wasn't the point you made at first, mate. Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? If they lay down their weapons right now (as you stated, you were not talking about the conflict already being resolved, which would make your point pointless anyway, and also no need for the israelis to lay down the weapons in the first place, since, yay, peace anyway), everybody who does not flee, will be dead in a matter of time. Edit: not to mention, to resolve the conflict down there, you need to do more than just getting palestine on your side, so even if the gaza conflict is settled, there's still a couple of nations around you just waiting for you to turn your back on them. Don't be so naive, it's not like they didn't already try ffs umm nope, that wasn't my first post lol, you misquoted. This was my first: Show nested quote +this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><; Show nested quote +On July 26 2014 02:59 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:46 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:44 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:40 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 02:38 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2014 02:35 BigFan wrote:On July 26 2014 01:15 m4ini wrote:Do you really, really think, that if israel would drop their weapons right now and vow to never use them again, that a neighbour ( not palestine) would come in with their army and kill every single jew? Do you really think that? Syria just marching in and killing 8 million israeli. Okay. Actually, yes. Even though i criticise Netanyahu etc alot - that's the one thing i'm pretty certain about. this is a joke, right? You really think other countries in the area would kill 8 million people if weapons were laid down. I'm not sure if I should be taking your comment as a joke or facepalming hard ><; Lets be clear, one of those nations would likely try to forcibly remove them from the region. How many deaths that resulted in is unknown. But they don't get to stay in the region if they are not armed. nope, that's not true and don't think for a second that it is. People and countries in the region want the Palestine to have their land back but a two state solution would do just fine but Israel isn't interested in that. I could write much more but rather we focus back on the present conflict. It is very unlikely that any modern nation can exist without some sort of armed military. If you are talking about de-escalation, I am with you. If you are talking about becoming a pacifist nation with no active military in any way, history has proven time and time again that is impossible in any part of the world. well, I was mostly responding to his point that 8 million people will be wiped out if they laid down their arms but that wouldn't be the case if the original conflict was resolved (2 state solution, stopping settlements etc...). If we are talking in general, then I don't see the problem of having some armed military so long as they are used for protection and not to invade other countries or be aggressive with. Agreed and the two state solution is the only real solution remaining. The problem being that both sides have vastly different ideas on what that would look like and both are unwilling to back down. People seem to forget that this conflict rose out of the failings of a peace plan and the vacuum that created. Then people went out and murdered some teenagers with the sole purpose of insighting violence and the other side responded in kind. Both sides have fanatics that want the violence, they want the war for reasons beyond our understanding. The solution, sadly is more complex that we even realize. But I have no skin in the game, since I am not from and have no relatives in that section of the world. There are times that I think we don’t do them any favors by stopping the violence, since both sides seem incapable of making reasonable demands of the other. It's a rather complex war, yes but I still believe that removing the blockade to allow medical supplies and get the eco going as well as halting settlements is the best first step to show willingfulness for peace. Once things have settled down, the two state solution can be proposed and worked towards. It's the only way this conflict will be settled imo.
Hm, i thought you were the guy i was responding to in the first place, nvm then.
|
You are presumng that the politicians of Isreal want peace, only that they are confused about how to show sincerity. Since they continue to divede up the west bank, to the point that they have effectively cut the west bank in half, it is safe to say that their actions show they desire no peace, only to give the diplomatic show of doing so to appease western spectators.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
