Why they should? They (Muslims) killed thousands of people in 2001 plus they kept attacking american citizens over the years, why they should?
Kinell...just saw this. Tone it down a bit....will ya.
Why they should? They (Muslims) killed thousands of people in 2001 plus they kept attacking american citizens over the years, why they should?
Kinell...just saw this. Tone it down a bit....will ya.
Should they sit back and watch their wives and children getting killed ? Like Mandela said and I quote him : "When a man is denied the right to live the life he believes in he has no choice but to become an outlaw."
No need to be facetious, sanctions are very powerful as we saw in South Africa.
In response to Raoul's earlier post, here's what I proposed as an outline for an agreement 7 years, and many hundreds of casualties, ago:
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/israel-launches-air-strikes-on-gaza.156149/page-5#post-3316196
This is the face of what is called here "Israeli aggression".
If the response was proportionate I dont think they will, am from Pakistan and our army is finally conducting an operation against the taliban in our border. Almost the whole country is behind the army.
When the americans were attacking with their drones, it was the opposite and the loss of the innocent lives wasnt making it worth it.
You propose kicking a number of Palestinians out of Israel, you do nothing for the Palestinian refugees and you get to keep your settlements
I understand that but for that solution to work you would have to make some concessions as otherwise they would never agree to demilitarize. Will be beyond stupid as well. But maybe work a deal where the arabs around you do the same as well.
That's the thing. Let's say a deal like that was possible right now. How could we do that with our borders with Syia and Lebanon with Hezbullah? And let's even say everything was fine and quiet, how do you know it will still be that way in a year's time? We've seen how volatile the arab countries can be.
We can dream of a military free zone, but it just can't be a reality for Israel for the forseeable future.
In response to Raoul's earlier post, here's what I proposed as an outline for an agreement 7 years, and many hundreds of casualties, ago:
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/israel-launches-air-strikes-on-gaza.156149/page-5#post-3316196
This is the face of what is called here "Israeli aggression".
Why they should? They (Muslims) killed thousands of people in 2001 plus they kept attacking american citizens over the years, why they should?
Such a shame and disgrace that the Arab powers in the region don't unite on this issue and tell Israel to feck off, and give the Palestinians the help they need.
Why they should? They (Muslims) killed thousands of people in 2001 plus they kept attacking american citizens over the years, why they should?
And stupid.Portuguese living in US and Christian
I never voted left of Likud. An agreement along the lines mentioned in the other post would win the support of the vast majority of Israelis. The only reason this may surprise you is that you may feed on biased media.
I support death sentence for hate-crime murderers, whether Arab or Jewish.
I don't share Livni's trust in Abbas.
Those three papers are extremely left-wing oriented, is that even debatable?
I just did a quick Wiki search- "never left of Likud" means you are to the right of 56% of Israelis- I don't know much about these parties but I classified all these as more conciliatory than Likud:
Kadima, Hatnuah, Yesh Atid, Meretz, Hadash, Taal, and Balad, with 68 (=56% votes) members in your PR-system parliament.
Also, I don't see how voting for Likud (or worse) will help with what you claim is your ideal end to the conflict- it's in Likud's interests to keep this conflict going for as long as possible- even Hamas does not benefit as much as right-wing Israeli parties do from the status quo.
The Guardian has always had an Israeli minister, often a hardliner, write a piece explaining why they think the bombings are right. Also, none of those papers are anywhere close to extreme- and they aren't rags or propaganda outlets or whatever you called them- they are very good newspapers with a high standard of journalism. Haaretz has recently started charign for all their articles and I miss reading their stuff.
I think we'll have to disagree on how impartial the Guardian and Independent are regarding the ME conflict, leftist or not. For me, Ha'aretz is even worse for being an Israeli newspaper that clearly promotes a post-Zionist agenda.
You write for it don't you!
Thick as shitWhy they should? They (Muslims) killed thousands of people in 2001 plus they kept attacking american citizens over the years, why they should?
Why they should? They (Muslims) killed thousands of people in 2001 plus they kept attacking american citizens over the years, why they should?
@Fearless: Suppose the entire power assymetry was reversed (that Palestine had most of the land, the arms, the dipllomatic backing, and the finances)
The Israeli people have given Naftali Bennet's party enough seats to be part of the government.
Having avoided negotiations with ben-Guiron and his Labour succcessors since they were too extreme, then seen the rise of Likud, then Netanyahu, and now Jewish Home, the new Arab pretext to avoid talks would be that Barak/Livni/Peres (whom they are supposedly willing to deal with) now has Bennet in their coalition.
In the next flare-up, the Palestinians then bomb indiscrimnately everyone associated with Jewish Home and a few Likud leaders. Would you think that is a fare punishment for the Israelis (who have voted for Bennet), since you think that voting for Hamas entitles Gazans to similar retribution? Genuine question.
Hence someone forcing them to compromise. Its the only viable solution.
He has a choice about blowing up buses full a school children though doesn't he? Or are you saying Mandela would support what Hamas is doing because I'm struggling to see that as anything other than nonsense.
The international community isn't going to do anything about this until a Palestinian leader, supported by his or her people, chooses non violence, takes the moral high ground and the long view and exposes Israel's position by offering a viable solution. That is the lesson from South Africa. It works but it takes decades.
Tell that to the people of Tibet, 65 years of peaceful protest has lead to....the non exsitance of Tibet.
True but would they have done any better against China through armed struggle or just got a lot of their kids killed as well?
No one is kicked out. Borders redrawn to minimise friction between the two peoples, with as few as possible people (all Jews!) evicted from their homes. Refugees will be settled in their respective nation states.
You oppose it because you will only be satisfied when Jewish Israel is eliminated. Plain and simple.
I had a little think-about when someone mentioned on a previous page that International community won't allow Israel to slaughter millions.
Israel are clearly in a position of power here. The question they have to ask themselves is how do they see this conflict ending? Forget about international pressure for a minute. Are they or any number of them ok with killing millions of Palestinians for their own homeland? I know people can be terribly patriotic and jingoistic but surely no type of homeland (holy or otherwise) is worth that.
Even if they succeed with hoarding more and more land with their settlements, can they realistically live on forever next to a hostile neighbor? Only solution from their side seems to be driving Palestinians away to other countries somehow.
I have to tell you that when sirens become your morning wakeup call, explosions become the daily soundtrack and going into a safe room is something you do a couple of times a day - and also realizing it's far, far worse for people living closer - you kind of lose any sort of sympathy to the other side and simply want something to done to make sure it's over, for good. Whatever means necessary.
I know, it doesn't sound great, but there you have it. Even left winged parties in Israel are supporting the strike on Gaza.
I have to tell you that when sirens become your morning wakeup call, explosions become the daily soundtrack and going into a safe room is something you do a couple of times a day - and also realizing it's far, far worse for people living closer - you kind of lose any sort of sympathy to the other side and simply want something to done to make sure it's over, for good. Whatever means necessary.
I know, it doesn't sound great, but there you have it. Even left winged parties in Israel are supporting the strike on Gaza.
Apart from making consessions to the palestinians and making peace with them there is no other solution. A two state solution will be a disaster even worse than India-pakistan one and continuing on the current path will be no good because uncle wont be around forever to shield them, they should make peace a long time before the arabs start getting the upper hand sometime down the future, else the roles will get reversed or they'll finish each other off.
Oh my days how do you cope.I have to tell you that when sirens become your morning wakeup call, explosions become the daily soundtrack and going into a safe room is something you do a couple of times a day - and also realizing it's far, far worse for people living closer - you kind of lose any sort of sympathy to the other side and simply want something to done to make sure it's over, for good. Whatever means necessary.
I know, it doesn't sound great, but there you have it. Even left winged parties in Israel are supporting the strike on Gaza.
This is what is bothering me. I'm seeing this graphic pictures on facebook and reports of children and innocent civilians being killed. I keep telling myself these pictures must be fake and the Israelis are only targeting terrorists.
Then I hear people like you and others not deny that innocent civilians and children are being killed but rather give a reason as to why it is necessary. Really pathetic if that is your justification for killing innocent people.
Just because you do not see the point in peaceful protest, does not mean you sanction terrorism, (a legitimate armed response is not plausible against such opposition in both cases).
Truth is, there is not much that can be done to deter a greater powers will.
If the plot is so obvious, and the Palestinians are dead certain to lose everything why haven't they ever considered acknowledging Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state in pre-1967 borders. You don't hold what's been termed here a "bargaining chip" that long.
Just because you do not see the point in peaceful protest, does not mean you sanction terrorism, (a legitimate armed response is not plausible against such opposition in both cases).
Truth is, there is not much that can be done to deter a greater powers will.