The British were being aggressive against the Jews in the years following WWII? Really? No they weren't.
You're funny. So, Zionist terrorists can bomb hotels, target innocent civilians (in this case British) until they get their own country and it's all good, according to you. But when the Arabs do it, they're the ones who are in the wrong. Clearly you are biased.
And Israel is "all inclusive", "human rights?" You need a wake up call,
buddy.
No, what I said was that, on balance, Israel stacks up as "better" than her enemies. And that INCLUDES things like Human Rights, and tolerance for others. As for your links, Harroon Siddiqui? Really?!? Further, your wiki link is disputed for it's neutrality, and a couple others seem to be "self-serving (an anti-racist group takes a poll that finds racism on the rise? Wow, shocking).
Israel has been the side that continually has strived for a peaceful coexistence with it's neighbours. They have given land for peace in the past, they have removed settlements in the past, ALL in an effort to secure a lasting peace with their Arab neighbours. It has all been for naught. the loan exceptions being Egypt and Jordan. Is it any wonder the prevailing attitude is one of skepticism and hostility?
I'm not quite sure how to respond Milo as it was pretty clear in my post that I didn't choose a side and merely suggested a perspective to consider the whole conflict from. Your comments about my post obviously assumed that I am on the Palestinian side. If you read my post again more closely you may realize that I made no proclamations on who I think is right or wrong in this situation.
This kind of reminds me about 9/11 and how Americans were simply worried about who had done it so they'd know who to attack/retaliate against. There was pretty much no discussion on why the "terrorists" were attacking. Personally, I think the why is more important since simply seeking revenge on your "enemies" isn't necessarily going to stop future wars/attacks. Understanding why they attacked could at least possibly lead to future peace.
EDIT: Maybe that's just how I am though. If someone hurts me or is mean to me, my first reaction is always to ask why they'd want to do that to me, not to seek revenge.
No, what I said was that, on balance, Israel stacks up as "better" than her enemies. And that INCLUDES things like Human Rights, and tolerance for others. As for your links, Harroon Siddiqui? Really?!? Further, your wiki link is disputed for it's neutrality, and a couple others seem to be "self-serving (an anti-racist group takes a poll that finds racism on the rise? Wow, shocking).
Those aren't the only sources for what life is like in Israel. All you have to do is open your eyes. A good example was in August when a Jewish woman married an Arab man in Israel. Hundreds of right wing extremists protested their wedding, much like those nutbar Westboro Baptists do in USA. The difference is that in Israel the extremists are also running the country.
Those aren't the only sources for what life is like in Israel. All you have to do is open your eyes. A good example was in August when a Jewish woman married an Arab man in Israel. Hundreds of right wing extremists protested their wedding, much like those nutbar Westboro Baptists do in USA. The difference is that in Israel the extremists are also running the country.
No, the extremists are NOT running Israel, they are running Gaza, to say nothing of Iraq, Iran, Syria (sort of), and it looks like Libya soon, too. Israel is a democracy, unlike most of her neighbours, so the wing-nuts get to voice their opinions, however ludicrous. In the neighbouring States, those folks are either in power, or they are silencing the voices of reason.
No, the extremists are NOT running Israel, they are running Gaza, to say nothing of Iraq, Iran, Syria (sort of), and it looks like Libya soon, too. Israel is a democracy, unlike most of her neighbours, so the wing-nuts get to voice their opinions, however ludicrous. In the neighbouring States, those folks are either in power, or they are silencing the voices of reason.
Here's a good one I dug up from a few years ago. UN observer, a Canadian, killed by Israeli bombing a UN observation post in Lebanon. Even a Canadian Forces board of inquiry blamed the IDF. Of course, Israel says it was a "mistake", just like Qibya, and the UN schools they bombed during this current attack. All "mistakes." They sure make a lot of mistakes. Do you at least admit the IDF makes a lot of mistakes?
I missed it when did the UN become aggressive towards Israel.
During the 2011 G-20 Cannes summit, Sarkozy was overheard saying to U.S. President Barack Obama, "I cannot bear Netanyahu, he's a liar". To this Obama reportedly responded, "You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him every day." Journalists covering the event were requested to sign an agreement not to report the incident.[197][198]
Easy for Hamas to avoid "mistakes" when they declare that every Jew is a legitimate target in their eyes. Sort simplifies the whole process, doesn't it?
I am getting off the merry-go-round at this point, feel free to go round on your own. I'll be back when Hamas finishes reloading (or Al Qaeda crosses into the Golan from Syria).
Never said that. Of COURSE Israel is to blame for that incident. It was their ordnance after all.
The report, released Jan. 31, blamed the Israeli Defence Forces for the incident, but also found the Israeli military refused to provide documents other than a summary of its own internal investigation, "which lacked sufficient detail to explore certain issues to their fullest extent." The report said the UN also refused to provide documents requested for the investigation.
From Wiki . . .
On 25 July 2006 four unarmed United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) peacekeepers from Austria, China, Finland and Canada were killed in an Israeli air strike on a UN observation post in southern Lebanon. According to the UN, the four had taken shelter in a bunker under the post, which was a three story building inside a patrol base in Khiyam./COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc]4[/COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc It had been shelled 14 times by Israeli artillery over a period of 6 hours. An Israeli plane then dropped a bomb, destroying the post. During the bombardment, the post called an Israeli liaison officer ten times to call off the bombardment. According to a UN official who had seen the preliminary report, an Israeli official promised to halt the bombing each time./COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc]5[/COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc UN military personnel on the ground along the Israel-Lebanon border reported that the munitions hitting the UNTSO position were precision-guided./COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc]6[/COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc
A UNIFIL rescue team was immediately dispatched to the scene. They recovered the bodies of three observers from the rubble under artillery fire from the IDF./COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc]7[/COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc Attack in the vicinity continued as rescuers tried to reach those killed or injured, UNIFIL said. UNIFIL said there had been at least 14 incidents of fire close to the post since afternoon. Daniel Ayalon, Israel's ambassador to the United States, said that "UNIFIL obviously got caught in the middle" of a gunfight between Hezbollah guerillas and Israeli troops."We do not have yet confirmation what caused these deaths. It could be (Israel Defense Forces). It could be Hezbollah," he said./COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc]8[/COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc
So, Israel is to blame . . . but, as in all things in war, it is never cut and dried as to the "why"?
I'm certainly not an Israeli apologist nor am I fan of some of their policies but that is plain and simply hogwash.. Hint: I also believe in a two state policy however launching rockets at random targets does little to help the situation, in fact gives Israel the excuse to move in at will..
I sometimes wonder who is in control in the Arab occupied lands, hint again: no one is.
I'm certainly not an Israeli apologist nor am I fan of some of their policies but that is plain and simply hogwash.. Hint: I also believe in a two state policy however launching rockets at random targets does little to help the situation, in fact gives Israel the excuse to move in at will..
I sometimes wonder who is in control in the Arab occupied lands, hint again: no one is.
lol yeah i figured this would get some people riled up.
EDIT: did you at least consider the links provided in the article though?
Certainly not riled up but do you really believe that or are you just trying to sir this (old) pot? FU Trigs!
i agree with the article in stating that the isreal-palestine issue is "a racist, colonial occupation." i agree with the article that "isreal is not defending itself - it is defending its occupation."
and i also enjoyed the amnesty international links with multiple examples of how isreal has continued to try and expand "their" land by "perpetuat[ing] ceaseless brutality upon those who don't belong" (i.e. the palestinians).
EDIT: i barely make it through the video clip, but i rarely even watch clips like that. i prefer to read and interpret myself.
Supposing I agree with your stated supposition, (and I don't) what is the difference with what the European explorers and colonists did to the NA Indian and Eskimo population? Answer me that.. Human existence is rife with examples over the millennia..
I like how he fails to answer her question, and immediately goes on to his tired anti-Israel tropes.
The caller asked how many missile launches were acceptable before counter attacks are warranted. Instead of answering he went off on a tangent against the State of Israel. That is not logic, it's talk radio crap that he would likely excoriate ANY American politician for doing.
As for the notion that the land is Israel's because their religion says so, lets destroy that myth right now . . . the land is Israel's because they fought a WAR over it and WON. You can debate the reasons behind that war all you want, but the bare bones of it is that Israel declared their independence, their neighbours tried to destroy their fledgling country (repeatedly), and they LOST.
And as for the land belonging to "the Palestinians" because they were living there before Israel declared independence, well, who was there before the Palestinians? And what about the people before them? You can go on and on in this manner ad infinitum in the Middle East, which is part of the problem.
Put simply, Israel staked their claim and have defended it by force of arms. The country is THERE. The only LOGICAL solution is to accept it's existence and move toward a peaceful, TWO STATE coexistence. Part of that solution would also have to involve the Arab nations that border Israel and the PA territories as they have all, to one degree or another, exacerbated the situation through their OWN less than stellar treatment of the Palestinians.
Supposing I agree with your stated supposition, (and I don't) what is the difference with what the European explorers and colonists did to the NA Indian and Eskimo population? Answer me that.. Human existence is rife with examples over the millennia..
generally there is no difference except that this colonization is happening in our modern times now after we have (or should have) a better understanding of what actions like this can do to another culture/race/group of people.
what europeans did to the native indians, for example, was simply horrible. it was a complete and utter tragedy in the true sense of the word. i've said this before (maybe not on this forum) but i don't understand how natives in north america can just walk around and act like everything is fine. i'd be outraged at how my entire culture and way of thinking was systematically destroyed forever.
now i acknowledge that the europeans thought they were helping the "savages" and possibly in a sense this can be argued, but it's a cop out plain and simple.
colonization is one of the most destructive forces in all of human history. entire civilizations have been completely decimated and we north americans are just as guilty of it as countries like isreal who are doing it now.
a solution for isreal-palestine is still possible i think at least - it's obviously not an easy solution and i don't think i have any great ideas, but it's possible.
in respect to north america and native peoples, i really don't know what to do. it may be too late now. giving some land back. giving tax breaks. all that crap is just a little band-aid solution to the overall issue. native peoples cannot get their complete culture back now. it's impossible because we greedy "civilized" people chewed it up and shit it back on their heads.
I like how he fails to answer her question, and immediately goes on to his tired anti-Israel tropes.
The caller asked how many missile launches were acceptable before counter attacks are warranted. Instead of answering he went off on a tangent against the State of Israel. That is not logic, it's talk radio crap that he would likely excoriate ANY American politician for doing.
As for the notion that the land is Israel's because their religion says so, lets destroy that myth right now . . . the land is Israel's because they fought a WAR over it and WON. You can debate the reasons behind that war all you want, but the bare bones of it is that Israel declared their independence, their neighbours tried to destroy their fledgling country (repeatedly), and they LOST.
so might makes right? i'm glad you aren't king of the world
And as for the land belonging to "the Palestinians" because they were living there before Israel declared independence, well, who was there before the Palestinians? And what about the people before them? You can go on and on in this manner ad infinitum in the Middle East, which is part of the problem.
okay, this is kind of dumb. if their was another group that was there before the palestinians and they also were claiming their right to their land, then yes i think they would have some right to the land as well. since there isn't this argument is pretty pointless.
Put simply, Israel staked their claim and have defended it by force of arms. The country is THERE. The only LOGICAL solution is to accept it's existence and move toward a peaceful, TWO STATE coexistence. Part of that solution would also have to involve the Arab nations that border Israel and the PA territories as they have all, to one degree or another, exacerbated the situation through their OWN less than stellar treatment of the Palestinians.
i agree that this is the most peaceful solution to isreal coming in and killing everyone and taking their land. but why was isreal allowed to start a war and declare independence, but palestine (who is too poor to wage a proper war against isreal) is not allowed to fight and should just have to give up? aren't they entitled to fight for their land as well in whatever manner they see fit? are you saying that isreal won the land fairly but palestine is "cheating" or something in their attempt to reclaim it?
okay, this is kind of dumb. if their was another group that was there before the palestinians and they also were claiming their right to their land, then yes i think they would have some right to the land as well. since there isn't this argument is pretty pointless.
Israel claims that "their" people were there first. This is where you bring religion back into it before I say that ethnic Jews, as opposed to religious Jews were there.
i agree that this is the most peaceful solution to isreal coming in and killing everyone and taking their land. but why was isreal allowed to start a war and declare independence, but palestine (who is too poor to wage a proper war against isreal) is not allowed to fight and should just have to give up? aren't they entitled to fight for their land as well in whatever manner they see fit? are you saying that isreal won the land fairly but palestine is "cheating" or something in their attempt to reclaim it?
you do realize the hypocrisy of your statement?
Israel did not start the war. They declared unilaterally that they were sovereign along specific boundaries. Their neighbours were the ones who declared war, along with forcing "their" Palestinian populations to move
elsewhere. That conveniently gets glossed over.
Well, if you are willing to say that the Palestinians are not cheating via the Intifada and other acts, then Israel is not cheating in defending themselves, and we are back to square one.
If it comes to a fight, Israel wins. That is why the rocket attacks are so stupid. All they do is give the extremists in Israel an excuse to fight back. Gandhi and MLK were better revolutionaries than Arafat.
And, with respect to colonialism, the entire Middle East was partitioned as part of the Post War treaty-fest. There was even a proposed "Palestinian" state next to the Jewish one. The Arabs, of course, rejected it.
Lets say you own a house. It's a nice house, with enough room for your kids to play in the backyard. They like to do that, and they like to play with your dog back there, too.
Your neighbour likes to play in his yard, but he likes to set off firecrackers. He'll toss them around the yard at any time of the day . . . you never really know when. sometimes they land in your yard and scare your kids. One time, a firecracker landed next to your dog and a trip to the vet was needed.
Wouldn't you have something to say to that neighbour? Wouldn't you look for some help? Wouldn't you think about building a higher fence?
Comments
No, what I said was that, on balance, Israel stacks up as "better" than her enemies. And that INCLUDES things like Human Rights, and tolerance for others. As for your links, Harroon Siddiqui? Really?!? Further, your wiki link is disputed for it's neutrality, and a couple others seem to be "self-serving (an anti-racist group takes a poll that finds racism on the rise? Wow, shocking).
Cute, but I am not as crazy as you think.
Prophet22
I'm not quite sure how to respond Milo as it was pretty clear in my post that I didn't choose a side and merely suggested a perspective to consider the whole conflict from. Your comments about my post obviously assumed that I am on the Palestinian side. If you read my post again more closely you may realize that I made no proclamations on who I think is right or wrong in this situation.
This kind of reminds me about 9/11 and how Americans were simply worried about who had done it so they'd know who to attack/retaliate against. There was pretty much no discussion on why the "terrorists" were attacking. Personally, I think the why is more important since simply seeking revenge on your "enemies" isn't necessarily going to stop future wars/attacks. Understanding why they attacked could at least possibly lead to future peace.
EDIT: Maybe that's just how I am though. If someone hurts me or is mean to me, my first reaction is always to ask why they'd want to do that to me, not to seek revenge.
Those aren't the only sources for what life is like in Israel. All you have to do is open your eyes. A good example was in August when a Jewish woman married an Arab man in Israel. Hundreds of right wing extremists protested their wedding, much like those nutbar Westboro Baptists do in USA. The difference is that in Israel the extremists are also running the country.
off topic though
fyp. . .
No, the extremists are NOT running Israel, they are running Gaza, to say nothing of Iraq, Iran, Syria (sort of), and it looks like Libya soon, too. Israel is a democracy, unlike most of her neighbours, so the wing-nuts get to voice their opinions, however ludicrous. In the neighbouring States, those folks are either in power, or they are silencing the voices of reason.
Here's a good one I dug up from a few years ago. UN observer, a Canadian, killed by Israeli bombing a UN observation post in Lebanon. Even a Canadian Forces board of inquiry blamed the IDF. Of course, Israel says it was a "mistake", just like Qibya, and the UN schools they bombed during this current attack. All "mistakes." They sure make a lot of mistakes. Do you at least admit the IDF makes a lot of mistakes?
I missed it when did the UN become aggressive towards Israel.
UN officer reported Israeli war crimes before deadly bombing: widow - Ottawa - CBC News
I am getting off the merry-go-round at this point, feel free to go round on your own. I'll be back when Hamas finishes reloading (or Al Qaeda crosses into the Golan from Syria).
Mazel Tov.
The report, released Jan. 31, blamed the Israeli Defence Forces for the incident, but also found the Israeli military refused to provide documents other than a summary of its own internal investigation, "which lacked sufficient detail to explore certain issues to their fullest extent." The report said the UN also refused to provide documents requested for the investigation.
From Wiki . . .
On 25 July 2006 four unarmed United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO) peacekeepers from Austria, China, Finland and Canada were killed in an Israeli air strike on a UN observation post in southern Lebanon. According to the UN, the four had taken shelter in a bunker under the post, which was a three story building inside a patrol base in Khiyam./COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc]4[/COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc It had been shelled 14 times by Israeli artillery over a period of 6 hours. An Israeli plane then dropped a bomb, destroying the post. During the bombardment, the post called an Israeli liaison officer ten times to call off the bombardment. According to a UN official who had seen the preliminary report, an Israeli official promised to halt the bombing each time./COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc]5[/COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc UN military personnel on the ground along the Israel-Lebanon border reported that the munitions hitting the UNTSO position were precision-guided./COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc]6[/COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc
A UNIFIL rescue team was immediately dispatched to the scene. They recovered the bodies of three observers from the rubble under artillery fire from the IDF./COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc]7[/COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc Attack in the vicinity continued as rescuers tried to reach those killed or injured, UNIFIL said. UNIFIL said there had been at least 14 incidents of fire close to the post since afternoon. Daniel Ayalon, Israel's ambassador to the United States, said that "UNIFIL obviously got caught in the middle" of a gunfight between Hezbollah guerillas and Israeli troops."We do not have yet confirmation what caused these deaths. It could be (Israel Defense Forces). It could be Hezbollah," he said./COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc]8[/COLOR][COLOR=#0066cc
So, Israel is to blame . . . but, as in all things in war, it is never cut and dried as to the "why"?
Sarkozy is pretty right wing himself, and even he is saying he can't trust Netanyahu.
I'm certainly not an Israeli apologist nor am I fan of some of their policies but that is plain and simply hogwash.. Hint: I also believe in a two state policy however launching rockets at random targets does little to help the situation, in fact gives Israel the excuse to move in at will..
I sometimes wonder who is in control in the Arab occupied lands, hint again: no one is.
lol yeah i figured this would get some people riled up.
EDIT: did you at least consider the links provided in the article though?
Certainly not riled up but do you really believe that or are you just trying to sir this (old) pot?
i agree with the article in stating that the isreal-palestine issue is "a racist, colonial occupation." i agree with the article that "isreal is not defending itself - it is defending its occupation."
and i also enjoyed the amnesty international links with multiple examples of how isreal has continued to try and expand "their" land by "perpetuat[ing] ceaseless brutality upon those who don't belong" (i.e. the palestinians).
EDIT: i barely make it through the video clip, but i rarely even watch clips like that. i prefer to read and interpret myself.
The caller asked how many missile launches were acceptable before counter attacks are warranted. Instead of answering he went off on a tangent against the State of Israel. That is not logic, it's talk radio crap that he would likely excoriate ANY American politician for doing.
As for the notion that the land is Israel's because their religion says so, lets destroy that myth right now . . . the land is Israel's because they fought a WAR over it and WON. You can debate the reasons behind that war all you want, but the bare bones of it is that Israel declared their independence, their neighbours tried to destroy their fledgling country (repeatedly), and they LOST.
Put simply, Israel staked their claim and have defended it by force of arms. The country is THERE. The only LOGICAL solution is to accept it's existence and move toward a peaceful, TWO STATE coexistence. Part of that solution would also have to involve the Arab nations that border Israel and the PA territories as they have all, to one degree or another, exacerbated the situation through their OWN less than stellar treatment of the Palestinians.
generally there is no difference except that this colonization is happening in our modern times now after we have (or should have) a better understanding of what actions like this can do to another culture/race/group of people.
what europeans did to the native indians, for example, was simply horrible. it was a complete and utter tragedy in the true sense of the word. i've said this before (maybe not on this forum) but i don't understand how natives in north america can just walk around and act like everything is fine. i'd be outraged at how my entire culture and way of thinking was systematically destroyed forever.
now i acknowledge that the europeans thought they were helping the "savages" and possibly in a sense this can be argued, but it's a cop out plain and simple.
colonization is one of the most destructive forces in all of human history. entire civilizations have been completely decimated and we north americans are just as guilty of it as countries like isreal who are doing it now.
a solution for isreal-palestine is still possible i think at least - it's obviously not an easy solution and i don't think i have any great ideas, but it's possible.
in respect to north america and native peoples, i really don't know what to do. it may be too late now. giving some land back. giving tax breaks. all that crap is just a little band-aid solution to the overall issue. native peoples cannot get their complete culture back now. it's impossible because we greedy "civilized" people chewed it up and shit it back on their heads.
so might makes right? i'm glad you aren't king of the world
okay, this is kind of dumb. if their was another group that was there before the palestinians and they also were claiming their right to their land, then yes i think they would have some right to the land as well. since there isn't this argument is pretty pointless.
i agree that this is the most peaceful solution to isreal coming in and killing everyone and taking their land. but why was isreal allowed to start a war and declare independence, but palestine (who is too poor to wage a proper war against isreal) is not allowed to fight and should just have to give up? aren't they entitled to fight for their land as well in whatever manner they see fit? are you saying that isreal won the land fairly but palestine is "cheating" or something in their attempt to reclaim it?
you do realize the hypocrisy of your statement?
Israel did not start the war. They declared unilaterally that they were sovereign along specific boundaries. Their neighbours were the ones who declared war, along with forcing "their" Palestinian populations to move
elsewhere. That conveniently gets glossed over.
Well, if you are willing to say that the Palestinians are not cheating via the Intifada and other acts, then Israel is not cheating in defending themselves, and we are back to square one.
If it comes to a fight, Israel wins. That is why the rocket attacks are so stupid. All they do is give the extremists in Israel an excuse to fight back. Gandhi and MLK were better revolutionaries than Arafat.
Lets say you own a house. It's a nice house, with enough room for your kids to play in the backyard. They like to do that, and they like to play with your dog back there, too.
Your neighbour likes to play in his yard, but he likes to set off firecrackers. He'll toss them around the yard at any time of the day . . . you never really know when. sometimes they land in your yard and scare your kids. One time, a firecracker landed next to your dog and a trip to the vet was needed.
Wouldn't you have something to say to that neighbour? Wouldn't you look for some help? Wouldn't you think about building a higher fence?
Just as logical as the radio guy . . .