It was about 12% in 1918 - how does that equate to a legitimate claim for a Jewish state?
Israeli - Palestinian Conflict
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
No, you are trying to find fault with perfectly correct English because you are trying to find fault with me in any way you can.
You have a persecution complex.
Not so sure about that, blockading Gaza and encroaching on territoy by building settlements is more than a feeling.
1918 has no significance to the re-establishment of Israel, which happened in 1948.
Here's a wild idea, don't indiscriminately kill hundreds of women and children. Surely there's another way?
You mean it doesn't suit you to face the iniquity of no Palestinian self-determination after the fall of the Ottoman empire until mass immigration had overturned the demographics to get the right result.
Must... resist..
No of course, I'm not trying to imply that Israel are innocent. What I mean is, Hamas' rockets give Israel a demonstrable, tangible event to respond to. They can, however tenuously, claim that they are retaliating to. While there is no tangible pressure or threat from the wider world, the only thing that can break this current cycle (which unfortunately leads where we all know it leads) is Hamas stopping. Then Israel have no excuse and hopefully international pressure will scale up drastically. With no rockets from Gaza, Israel wouldn't be "retaliating" to anything, they'd have to accept peace. Something needs to give a break to the fighting so that proper talks can begin and I'm pretty sure that something is Hamas. We'd be unrealistic to expect Israel to stop fighting while there are still rockets being fired at it, with no pressure, why would they?
You really are insufferable. If the sentence didn't make sense, and if decry and repudiate really meant something other than what I was trying to say, I'd have re-worded it. Now, because I point out the obvious, ranging from your attempts (along with those of others) to extend my own religious views beyond the context I've mentioned them in and your snide comment calling for me to put the thesaurus away when the sentence I typed out is demonstrably perfect English, I have a persecution complex.
Even if I did have a persecution complex, it wouldn't change the fact that you really are trying to find fault with me in any way you can. Perhaps out of a desire to avoid the actual issue or out of a dislike for the religion I profess, I don't know.
Really? - I'll take your word (certainly ahead of someone quoting the bible repeatedly). It's depressing that you, with on the spot knowledge, thought my summary was accurate. At the post WWI peace conference, Churchill thought that the Palestine solution decided there would create 50 years of conflict. It seems he was at least 100 years too optimistic.
Meanwhile, in the real world...
What's the point in challenging it? Cognitive dissonance is a weird thing.
You have an usually high opinion of yourself to think there is a concerted effort to criticize you. What do you think is more likely, that a group of us anti-Christian bigots targeted you as our next victim or that perhaps you were wrong?
Why didn't they create a Palestinian state when they could've done it themselves? Why have they always rejected peace among themselves and with Israel?
Sometimes low hanging fruit isn't worth picking.
Now I have a high opinion of myself. I am not trying to claim internet martyrdom; I'll simply move on once I've had enough of the discussion (something martyred Christians cannot do).
Yes there has been a concerted effort to criticise me. I don't know what you'd find so unnatural about this. There are all sorts of things I make a concerted effort to criticise. One such example being historic revisionism. That's life. People of like minds tend to band together around similar causes.
Does the Bible count as historic revisionism? 'Cos it does to me.
If fact, I'd probably call it the definitive example.
If fact, I'd probably call it the definitive example.
How could they have 'done it themselves' when the British reneged on MacMahon and then offered the Zionists a homeland in Palestinian territory?
Your ipse dixit will hardly classify as little more than amusement.
(something Baruch Spinoza cannot do)Damnit! Nearly got you.
Unfortunately I don't think there is any reasonable solution to this conflict. A ceasefire from Hamas has no effect on Israeli oppression of the Palestinians, which would continue and eventually lead to some other form of retalliation from their ranks, leading to response from Israel. Israel is in a position where they can currently accept peace only on their terms, which will be rejected by any Palestinian delegation. This is likely due to US support. The international community needs to treat both parties as naughty children and haul them by their ears to the negotiating table and tell them no one's getting any dinner until it's all sorted out amicably.
The bible has no place in this thread.
Yawn... Go to the religion thread
This, exactly. Like you said, it likely relies on US co-operation (unfortunately). I do think that the key to any of it is a ceasefire, though. At that point things can be put in place to grab their ears. As it is now Israel can keep their ear lubricated (so it's hard to grab, right?) with Hamas' rockets. It's hard to pull them to a negotiating table while they're still shooting at each other.
Have you not noticed that it's repeatedly the same people attempting to bring my own religious affiliation into this discussion? The same people who are making the goading comments and the self-contradictory ones such as asking me: "What does the bible have to do with reality?", and then saying, "The bible has no place in this thread."
I won't be going to another thread to carry on the conversation, but I wish those who won't let it rest, would.
I despair.
What do you mean? That reality has to involve the current policies and that there is no alternative?
OK lads, this discussion needs to end or find itself a more suitable home.
I can't think of any other alternative within the current battle going on. It is impossible to send troops into Gaza to attempt to find and arrest (as Silva suggested) Hamas rocket launching combatants. Any attempt of Israel to weed out Hamas combatants through missile strikes will kill innocents, who are not Israel citizens. As mentioned in this thread, Israel values the lives of it's soldiers and citizens more than it does the inhabitants of Gaza.
The only alternative is both sides coming to the table to find a common ground solution to the decades long issue.
Getting back to the issue, anyone who decides that their political views are more important than the lives of others is a horrible bastard.
I reckon we all agree that that's the solution. There are a couple of steps that need to happen to facilitate that, though. In the current situation it's going to be hard to drag both parties to a negotiation.
You wouldn't explain the relevence to the topic, as a result, you were all asked to stop taking the thread off topic.
It's not but if it is it's only because Israel let Hamas muscle out the secular resistance groups in Palestine, when it suited Israel for this to happen. It certainly did not start as a religious conflict.
No, it constitutes hypocrisy and abuse of administrative power. How do I report him for the abuse? The fact he's already deleted my post but not others constitutes abuse.
Why are my comments being deleted while Mockney's continued criticism of my beliefs being permitted?
I'm not sure that is the case though? It's more removing the threat of rockets is more imortant than the lives of others. Which to be fair, if the threat was large enough and the options limited, is about the normal reaction.
I deleted one, comment and have since pulled a pint of Guinness and and pint of Smithwicks here at work.
YOU brought religion into the discussion, one more post from YOU on the topic of faith and you have a week off from this discussion.
What you need to understand, Rumpy, is that this is a private forum and we'll administer it as we please.