Israel launches air strikes on Gaza

Fearless said:
Bollox

Clealry you haven't read the instruction manual that is Hamas's unchanged charter.
Click to expand...

Attitude to Israel:

Hamas's charter uncompromisingly seeks Israel's destruction. However, Hamas's Ismail Haniya, the Palestinian prime minister, has spoken of a long-term truce with Israel if Israel withdraws from territory occupied in 1967.


The Hamas armed wing, the Izzedine al-Qassam brigades, has participated in an informal ceasefire since 2005, but claims the right to retaliate against what it calls Israeli attacks.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5016012.stm
 
reddevilcanada said:
Attitude to Israel:

Hamas's charter uncompromisingly seeks Israel's destruction. However, Hamas's Ismail Haniya, the Palestinian prime minister, has spoken of a long-term truce with Israel if Israel withdraws from territory occupied in 1967.


The Hamas armed wing, the Izzedine al-Qassam brigades, has participated in an informal ceasefire since 2005, but claims the right to retaliate against what it calls Israeli attacks.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5016012.stm
Click to expand...

What will Israel have to hand to Palestinians when their "long-term" truce expires? let me think...
 
The Palestinians need to change their whole worldview, to forgive and move on. Yes, many Palestinians have been killed and injured and that is tragic but instead to forgive and seek peace they are trying to erase their enemy. Palestinians need to stop educating their children that Jews are pigs who deserve to die. They have this unique chance to teach the young generation about the evil of war, about the mistakes they made and about hope and a better future, but no, instead they are calling out for more candidates for suicidal missions. And the ceasefire and the so called "peace" will only hold on until they regroup, organize themselves a start again. The whole mindset of the Palestinian population is poisoned by this pointless anti-semitic hatred. As long as their mentality does not change neither will their current situation.
 
Mihajlovic said:
The Palestinians need to change their whole worldview, to forgive and move on. Yes, many Palestinians have been killed and injured and that is tragic but instead to forgive and seek peace they are trying to erase their enemy. Palestinians need to stop educating their children that Jews are pigs who deserve to die. They have this unique chance to teach the young generation about the evil of war, about the mistakes they made and about hope and a better future, but no, instead they are calling out for more candidates for suicidal missions. And the ceasefire and the so called "peace" will only hold on until they regroup, organize themselves a start again. The whole mindset of the Palestinian population is poisoned by this pointless anti-semitic hatred. As long as their mentality does not change neither will their current situation.
Click to expand...

As long as the illegal military occupation and the barbarism towards them continues, there will be suicide bombers unfortunately :( You cannot ask them to stop violence if your own terrorism goes on
 
reddevilcanada said:
the truce doesn't have an expiry date as long as the occupation is ended
Click to expand...

Hudna (هدنة) is an Arabic term meaning "truce" or "armistice" as well as "calm" or "quiet", coming from a verbal root meaning "calm". It is sometimes translated as "cease-fire". In the Lisan al-Arab (Ibn al-Manzur's definitive dictionary of classical Arabic, dating to the 14th century) it is defined as follows:

"hadana: he grew quiet. hadina: he quieted (transitive or intransitive). haadana: he made peace with. The noun from each of these is hudna."
A particularly famous early hudna was the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah between Muhammad and the Quraysh tribe.

According to Umdat as-Salik, a medieval summary of Shafi'i jurisprudence, hudnas with a non-Muslim enemy should be limited to 10 years: "if Muslims are weak, a truce may be made for ten years if necessary, for the Prophet made a truce with the Quraysh for that long, as is related by Abu Dawud" ('Umdat as-Salik, o9.16).
 
reddevilcanada said:
As long as the illegal military occupation and the barbarism towards them continues, there will be suicide bombers unfortunately :( You cannot ask them to stop violence if your own terrorism goes on
Click to expand...

But this is exactly what they have to do. Ahmanijad`s Iran is not occupied yet he is constantly proclaiming that Israel should be wiped out. Same goes for Syria and the Hizbolah in Lebanon. I see it as an overlapping political/ religious problem. The Jews actually only need to settle in the occupied parts because they are waiting for the Messiah (this of course some use an political instrument as well) so in their view it is a religiously justified `occupation`- but in doing so they represent no harm for the Palestinians.

However the Palestinians according to Islam believe that the whole world should be Islamic, no matter what the cost is, the enimosity towards the `people of the book` is clearly defined and it looks like the means always justify the end. Their war is `religiously justified` while for the secular Israel it is more a political than religious question.
 
holyland red said:
Hudna (هدنة) is an Arabic term meaning "truce" or "armistice" as well as "calm" or "quiet", coming from a verbal root meaning "calm". It is sometimes translated as "cease-fire". In the Lisan al-Arab (Ibn al-Manzur's definitive dictionary of classical Arabic, dating to the 14th century) it is defined as follows:

"hadana: he grew quiet. hadina: he quieted (transitive or intransitive). haadana: he made peace with. The noun from each of these is hudna."
A particularly famous early hudna was the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah between Muhammad and the Quraysh tribe.

According to Umdat as-Salik, a medieval summary of Shafi'i jurisprudence, hudnas with a non-Muslim enemy should be limited to 10 years: "if Muslims are weak, a truce may be made for ten years if necessary, for the Prophet made a truce with the Quraysh for that long, as is related by Abu Dawud" ('Umdat as-Salik, o9.16).
Click to expand...


you're over-reacting and to the word 'truce', Hamas have made it clear that they will recognize Israel's right to exist, and they must do so, if Israel get back to the pre-'67 borders. Simple as that mate.
 
Mihajlovic said:
But this is exactly what they have to do. Ahmanijad`s Iran is not occupied yet he is constantly proclaiming that Israel should be wiped out. Same goes for Syria and the Hizbolah in Lebanon. I see it as an overlapping political/ religious problem. The Jews actually only need to settle in the occupied parts because they are waiting for the Messiah (this of course some use an political instrument as well) so in their view it is a religiously justified `occupation`- but in doing so they represent no harm for the Palestinians.

However the Palestinians according to Islam believe that the whole world should be Islamic, no matter what the cost is, the enimosity towards the `people of the book` is clearly defined and it looks like the means always justify the end. Their war is `religiously justified` while for the secular Israel it is more a political than religious question.
Click to expand...

Justifying this conflict being religious in not only dangerous but more to the point, baseless.
 
reddevilcanada said:
you're over-reacting and to the word 'truce', Hamas have made it clear that they will recognize Israel's right to exist, and they must do so, if Israel get back to the pre-'67 borders. Simple as that mate.
Click to expand...

Rubbish.
Recognizing Israel to exist while maintaining a "right of return" are contradictory.
 
Mihajlovic said:
But this is exactly what they have to do. Ahmanijad`s Iran is not occupied yet he is constantly proclaiming that Israel should be wiped out. Same goes for Syria and the Hizbolah in Lebanon. I see it as an overlapping political/ religious problem. The Jews actually only need to settle in the occupied parts because they are waiting for the Messiah (this of course some use an political instrument as well) so in their view it is a religiously justified `occupation`- but in doing so they represent no harm for the Palestinians.

However the Palestinians according to Islam believe that the whole world should be Islamic, no matter what the cost is, the enimosity towards the `people of the book` is clearly defined and it looks like the means always justify the end. Their war is `religiously justified` while for the secular Israel it is more a political than religious question.
Click to expand...


we have to be rational here, The Jews believing that God has given them the land they illegally occupy isn't good enough, the Palestinians can bring religious justifications as well, we know there will never be a solution if everyone tries to get what they believe God has only given them.


Your interpretation of Islam is entirely false. What you are saying is what the extremists would say when they try to justify their entirely unislamic actions. There are muslim extremists and muslim moderates, the views you're stating are those of the extremists who are a very small minority in the Muslim world.
 
holyland red said:
Rubbish.
Recognizing Israel to exist while maintaining a "right of return" are contradictory.
Click to expand...

Is the 'right of return' in their current charter?

They have said if Israel withdraws, they will recognize it's right to exist and hence there will be no aggression. Their charter will be no longer in effect if Israel do their part.
 
we have to be rational here, The Jews believing that God has given them the land they illegally occupy isn't good enough, the Palestinians can bring religious justifications as well, we know there will never be a solution if everyone tries to get what they believe God has only given them.
Click to expand...

I agree with that, I support the separation of religion and politics therefore a solution should be a political one. I am just saying that those settlers certainly dont represent any danger to the Palestinians.

Your interpretation of Islam is entirely false. What you are saying is what the extremists would say when they try to justify their entirely unislamic actions. There are muslim extremists and muslim moderates, the views you're stating are those of the extremists who are a very small minority in the Muslim world.
Click to expand...

It is not false. In Islam the world is divided in the `house of Islam` and the `house of War` and only the Islamic states who submitted to Islam and have the Sharia live in the `house of Islam`. The rest of the world is in a state of war (or rebellion) with the will of Allah! This is why the rest of the world must either submit to Islam or be conquered. And then when the whole world is under Islam and accpet the Sharia, then there will be peace.

You`re wrong that this view is represented by extremists. The prophet Mohammed is for every true muslim the only example of how to live and what to do. And you know exactly how far Mohammed has gone in proving that Islam is the only right religion.
 
Fearless said:
Please read - Why it's not an illegal occupation....

http://www.jcpa.org/art/brief1-1.htm
Click to expand...

I quote

"We must expel Arabs and take their places."
-- David Ben Gurion, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.


"There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?"
-- Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp. 121-122.

"Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."

-- David Ben Gurion, quoted in The Jewish Paradox, by Nahum Goldmann, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1978, p. 99.

"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country."
-- David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.

"If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel."
-- David Ben-Gurion (Quoted on pp 855-56 in Shabtai Teveth's Ben-Gurion in a slightly different translation).

Edit: Ben Gurion was the first Prime Minister of Israel.
 
Mihajlovic said:
I agree with that, I support the separation of religion and politics therefore a solution should be a political one. I am just saying that those settlers certainly dont represent any danger to the Palestinians.



It is not false. In Islam the world is divided in the `house of Islam` and the `house of War` and only the Islamic states who submitted to Islam and have the Sharia live in the `house of Islam`. The rest of the world is in a state of war (or rebellion) with the will of Allah! This is why the rest of the world must either submit to Islam or be conquered. And then when the whole world is under Islam and accpet the Sharia, then there will be peace.

You`re wrong that this view is represented by extremists. The prophet Mohammed is for every true muslim the only example of how to live and what to do. And you know exactly how far Mohammed has gone in proving that Islam is the only right religion.
Click to expand...


Building settelments in the occupied territories is illegal. End of.

Your understanding of Islam is completely wrong. What you're saying is what the extremists preach. Their interpretation of Islam is a completely false interpretation with which the majority of the Mulsim world disagree.
 
Fearless said:
You - and I -can play the quote game all over again.

The facts are the facts.

It is neither an occupation, or an illegal one at that.
Click to expand...

What we agree to is of no relevance.

Do you disagree with the first Prime Minister of Israel?
 
Mihajlovic said:
In Islam the world is divided in the `house of Islam` and the `house of War` and only the Islamic states who submitted to Islam and have the Sharia live in the `house of Islam`. The rest of the world is in a state of war (or rebellion) with the will of Allah! This is why the rest of the world must either submit to Islam or be conquered. And then when the whole world is under Islam and accpet the Sharia, then there will be peace.
Click to expand...

:confused:

Which sites do you get this rubbish from?
 
reddevilcanada said:
Building settelments in the occupied territories is illegal. End of.

Your understanding of Islam is completely wrong. What you're saying is what the extremists preach. Their interpretation of Islam is a completely false interpretation with which the majority of the Mulsim world disagree.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about! We can see through histpry and today how peaceful Islam really is. If that is really the case how come Christians are being killed all over in the Islamic world, on every continent? Where are the hundreds of churches and synagoges in Saudi Arabia etc. etc.? Show me how many Islamic countries give unlimited freedom for Christians and Jews to espress their faith? When I went to the Emirates there was one building (in Dubai) where all faiths had to congregate in one place! You will see golden towers and skycrapers everywhere but no churches whatsoever. Do a test if you`re brave and go to Riad, Islamabad, Tehran, Kabul, Abu-Dabi, open up your Bible and start preaching- seriously what do you think how many minutes will you live?
 
Sultan said:
I have studied Islam for 25 years.

My 2 daughters and a nephew have got Islamic degrees from well renowned universities.
Click to expand...

Well then you should know best that those terms were coined by muslim scholars to describe the situation concerning the religion of Islam in the world.
 
reddevilcanada said:
fantastic logic

how is the occupation legal? because Israel says so?
Click to expand...

An occupation centres on whether or not the land in question is a souvereign country - such as Iraq.

There was no Palestine, in fact, in 1967, Gaza was under the questionable authority of Eygpt (who were about to attack Israel) and the West Bank was under the rule of Jordan, who banned any Jews from going anywhere near Jerusalem.

I assume you never knew this?
 
Mihajlovic said:
Well then you should know best that those terms were coined by muslim scholars to describe the situation concerning the religion of Islam in the world.
Click to expand...

I do.

The conditions which these terms refer to are not in existence in the present world.
 
Sultan said:
:confused:

Which sites do you get this rubbish from?
Click to expand...

The Iraqi Ayatollah Ahmadi Husseini Al-Baghdadi explains what the true goal of Islam is, watch this video from May,2006.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPTioW1LPh8

"Jihad initiated by Muslims which means raiding the world in order to spread the word that "there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the prophet of Allah" throughout the world..."
 
Mihajlovic said:
The Iraqi Ayatollah Ahmadi Husseini Al-Baghdadi explains what the true goal of Islam is, watch this video from May,2006.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPTioW1LPh8

"Jihad initiated by Muslims which means raiding the world in order to spread the word that "there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is the prophet of Allah" throughout the world..."
Click to expand...


He's nuts! voice of Islam? What a joke...
 
reddevilcanada said:
Is the 'right of return' in their current charter?

They have said if Israel withdraws, they will recognize it's right to exist and hence there will be no aggression. Their charter will be no longer in effect if Israel do their part.
Click to expand...


You'll find that no Arab has ever given up that "right". not Arafat, not even "Israeli" Arabs and certainly not Hamas.
The only exception I can think of would be Hana Siniora, a Palestinian trying to promote a reasonable solution to the conflict. However, he is not more politically relevant than I am. Perhaps in 20 years and 1000's more victims on both sides his ideas would filter through the wall of hatred and illusions that prevents Palestinians from finally joining hands in search of a better future for the region.
 
Sultan said:
What we agree to is of no relevance.

Do you disagree with the first Prime Minister of Israel?
Click to expand...

Some of your quotes are accurate, but presented out of context. What BG could do, and the Palestinians never have, was understanding the rational of the other side. Of course the Palestinians saw us as occupiers and aggressors, while the Jews have always felt this was their promised land. The situation would not have been that complicated if we did not have two national movements claiming a tiny piece of land is exclusively theirs. Unfortunately, a reasonable solution to the conflict has not been found in time to keep fecking religion out of the equation and now we have those nutters to deal with.
 
Sultan said:
He's nuts! voice of Islam? What a joke...
Click to expand...

But Sultan, when is the voice of the moderate and reasonable Muslim going to prevail? Honestly do you see that happening in the next decade or even century? I know these are hard questions but is there any solution offered by any scholars? I was hoping that in my country, when all the old politicians die out, that the new generation is going to learn and radically change their way of thinking but in many cases I still see the fight going on between Serbs, Croats, etc. And I`m talking about the young people, teenagers. I think that in the Islamic countries the situation is even worse, especially in Palestina where chidren are growing up being indoctrinated with fundamentalist dogmas.

And most of all do you believe that in the Islamic mindset there is ever going to be a separation between the religion and the state? How would that ever be compatible with the teachings of your religion at all?
 
Mihajlovic said:
But Sultan, when is the voice of the moderate and reasonable Muslim going to prevail? Honestly do you see that happening in the next decade or even century?
Click to expand...

How would you define a reasonable/moderate Muslim?


I know these are hard questions but is there any solution offered by any scholars? I was hoping that in my country, when all the old politicians die out, that the new generation is going to learn and radically change their way of thinking but in many cases I still see the fight going on between Serbs, Croats, etc. And I`m talking about the young people, teenagers. I think that in the Islamic countries the situation is even worse, especially in Palestina where chidren are growing up being indoctrinated with fundamentalist dogmas
Click to expand...
.

They are not religious fundamentalist dogmas, it's generally nationalism draped in Islam. Children are being indoctrinated by both Israelis' and Palestinians (see link).

http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0999/9909019.html

And most of all do you believe that in the Islamic mindset there is ever going to be a separation between the religion and the state? How would that ever be compatible with the teachings of your religion at all?
Click to expand...

There is no clash within Islam with modernisation. Religion don’t have to clash, change can occur through Islam, it's not just some backward belief. Muslims can have Islamic culture and a liberal democracy if they want it, as long as it doesn’t contradict their belief in Islam.
 
Mihajlovic said:
However the Palestinians according to Islam believe that the whole world should be Islamic, no matter what the cost is, the enimosity towards the `people of the book` is clearly defined and it looks like the means always justify the end. Their war is `religiously justified` while for the secular Israel it is more a political than religious question.
Click to expand...

The Palestine issue was never primarily religious. Fatah - Arafat's organisation - was secular, not religious.
 
holyland red said:
Don't be daft. Hamas is strong enough to prevent rocket launching from the GS, as it proved in recent clashes with Fatah.
Click to expand...

This seems rather disingenuous on your part - the fact that Hamas 'wiped the floor' with its opposition (to quote a later post of yours) does nothing to suggest Hamas could prevent all attacks on Israel.

After all, the alliance forces 'wiped the floor' with the Iraqi resistance during the illegal invasion (and arguably continue to do so during the occupation) yet their opponents regularly cause death and injury through their attacks.

To assume that the occupying/controlling power's control is absolute could only be employed in making a rhetorical/political point rather than a factual one.
 
Fearless said:
You - and I -can play the quote game all over again.

The facts are the facts.

It is neither an occupation, or an illegal one at that.
Click to expand...

Only if you ignore all of the mountain of evidence to the contrary - as you are doing - and as all those Israelis (and their supporters) who have perpetuated and intensified the conflict over the decades have done.

I suggest you look at the UN and Amnesty views upon the situation - quoting chapter & verse regarding the illegality of the occupation.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
This seems rather disingenuous on your part - the fact that Hamas 'wiped the floor' with its opposition (to quote a later post of yours) does nothing to suggest Hamas could prevent all attacks on Israel.

After all, the alliance forces 'wiped the floor' with the Iraqi resistance during the illegal invasion (and arguably continue to do so during the occupation) yet their opponents regularly cause death and injury through their attacks.

To assume that the occupying/controlling power's control is absolute could only be employed in making a rhetorical/political point rather than a factual one.
Click to expand...

Most of the thousands of short range rockets fired at Israel were launched from the Notrthern tip of the GS, near the town of Beit-Hanoun, which means that it doesn't take full control of the entire GS in order to stop the fire.

You're of course "employed in making a rhetorical/political point rather than a factual one", so you come up with this pompous shit and moronic analogy to an occupying force facing guerilla warfare in Iraq.
_41828852_gaza_rockets2_map416.gif
 
One of the major problems seems to have been that although all sensible people have insisted upon a 2 state solution for many decades - Israel has done everything in it's power over that time to ensure such a viable solution never comes to pass.

The '80's invasion of Lebanon has been unopposedly ascribed to the need for Israel to avoid growing international agreement to the PLO's proposal for a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Israel went to war because it did not like the particular form of a likely peace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.