Those peacefull Palistinians.....
- Thread starter Twin Fist
- Start date
LuckyKBoxer
Master Black Belt
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,390
- Reaction score
- 39
funny how when people who choose to live in an earthquake zone, hurricane zone, tornado zone, flood zone, or fire zone are effected they are victims who need everyones help... yet when someone who lives in what you are deciding to term a war zone.... no war there btw Israel owns it. Terrorist problem sounds more like it..then they are part of the problem?? interesting.. which makes me wonder would you consider the people who died in 911 in the towers as part of the problem? hrmm
Well, it's the 'West Bank' it is not considered Israel, or the Israely government would not be able to shut the Palestinian population out at the boarder everytime the wind blows.
The settlers are by their nature, as mentioned above, not exactly innocent lambs. That are in fact more like instigators, finger in your eye type of people. It's a sticking point in Israely politics that they continue to allow settlements in area like the Westbank, Gaza strip and previously the Golan Hights as well, I am sure, even though the public conscensus has come to the conclusion that this is not right.
I don't consider Palestinians as being angels, however their counterparts are non either.
Killing a family in their beds is not something anybody can condone. But chances are if they would have been approached during day light they would have covered the area with a spray of machine gun...because, yes, those settlers are not a bunch of meek pioneers (which does not go together anyhow) but, like I said, pretty much finger in your eye instigators. Making a point.
The settlers are by their nature, as mentioned above, not exactly innocent lambs. That are in fact more like instigators, finger in your eye type of people. It's a sticking point in Israely politics that they continue to allow settlements in area like the Westbank, Gaza strip and previously the Golan Hights as well, I am sure, even though the public conscensus has come to the conclusion that this is not right.
I don't consider Palestinians as being angels, however their counterparts are non either.
Killing a family in their beds is not something anybody can condone. But chances are if they would have been approached during day light they would have covered the area with a spray of machine gun...because, yes, those settlers are not a bunch of meek pioneers (which does not go together anyhow) but, like I said, pretty much finger in your eye instigators. Making a point.
LuckyKBoxer
Master Black Belt
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2008
- Messages
- 1,390
- Reaction score
- 39
ok well I was under the impressiont hat Israel did in fact "own" or control those areas and the issue was other then who owned it, but rather who should live there?
I think the ownership of those above mentioned strips is still something of a sticky point, why else would they still be marked on all the new maps.
It's a politicum, it does no longer reflect reality, true, but the reality is also not quiet reflected in legal means. Jerusalem is still divided, moving east as a jew is risky. Many years ago there was some sort of uproar about a Jewish business man wanting to build an appartment building in east Jerusalem - for Jewish inhabitants.
To me the situation is much like the American settlers moving into Indian territories. On many levels actually, from the support of the powerful to the results on an individual level.
Israel does control the area, true enough. As to the matter of who should live there....I have the impression the settlers are ther with the intention to displace the Arabic (AKA Palestinian) population. Supposedly there are 2 different set of rules for those 2 groups: The Jewish settlers can build anything, any where, any time, the others don't and often find their houses crumbling under a rocket. I don't know if it is indeed true, but the hint of impropriety makes for good fuel.
Israel controls the border with the WB. The territory, like Gaza, was aquired in the '67 and '73 wars. However, they are not part of Israel. They are usually reffered to as 'occupied' or 'disputed'.
The government's attitude towards the settlers varies depending as to who is in power, but in the event of an actual peace agreement and the formation of a Palestinian State, a lot of those setllers will be forcibly removed from the WB. Look at the withdrawal from Gaza.
And while the WB is a lot more stable than Gaza, it's actually one of the fastest growing economies in the region, there are still extremists on both sides who like nothing better than to stir the pot.
The government's attitude towards the settlers varies depending as to who is in power, but in the event of an actual peace agreement and the formation of a Palestinian State, a lot of those setllers will be forcibly removed from the WB. Look at the withdrawal from Gaza.
And while the WB is a lot more stable than Gaza, it's actually one of the fastest growing economies in the region, there are still extremists on both sides who like nothing better than to stir the pot.
Several news sources reported that "members of Hamas" handed out candy in Rafah. I have yet to see any verified sources; so far the only reputable news sources have only said 'reportedly'.
But let's say it happened...for the sake of argument...
Is the average Palestinian handing out candy? The entire nation is just convulsed with joy?
Again, I am not saying that murdering babies is just fine and dandy, or that there are not Palestinians who celebrated the news of the murders. I *am* saying that the average Palestinian isn't interested in murdering Jewish settlers in the disputed territories, or those settlers would all be dead.
So I have to reject that reasoning.
Well, if they claim it, why all that nonsense...
Truth is, it's not been undisputed or verified or ratified or signed off on in any treaty.
Unlike Pommern, and East Prussia which had been lingering in a simmilar fate of unfinalized ownership, apparently the natives object to the conquerers.
Maybe if things were finalized things could settle to something that would qualify for normal in many parts of the world.
It's a lot of the Zionistic BS that plays into the settlement politics.
I instinctively want to argue with that, John, as the re-invention of Israel is 'our' fault in the first place.
For it was the Jewish people that 'lost' quite some time ago (tho' it has to be said that some small number of Jews have still lived in the region for all the intervening centuries).
But given that the British Empire played that "You lost so it's ours" game quite successfully I'd feel something of a historical hypocrite to so argue. After all, possession by conquest is one of the oldest games in the book.
For it was the Jewish people that 'lost' quite some time ago (tho' it has to be said that some small number of Jews have still lived in the region for all the intervening centuries).
But given that the British Empire played that "You lost so it's ours" game quite successfully I'd feel something of a historical hypocrite to so argue. After all, possession by conquest is one of the oldest games in the book.
You keep talking like this is a game and people are just being poor sports. The people that live there don't want to be put into refugee camps, so that Israeli families can settle. Is that so hard to understand? Can't some of this just be a reaction, to being displaced?
Sean
OP
Twin Fist
Grandmaster
- Thread Starter
- #33
losing has consequences.
when the arabs LOST, they lost that land. They should learn to wage war better.
This is the same as the confederate states shelling the north, and setting off car bombs north of the mason dixon line TODAY.
I am gonna guess you would be less forgiving of that..,...........
when the arabs LOST, they lost that land. They should learn to wage war better.
This is the same as the confederate states shelling the north, and setting off car bombs north of the mason dixon line TODAY.
I am gonna guess you would be less forgiving of that..,...........
It's a lot of the anti-Semitic BS that plays into the settlement politics. Israel is the ONLY nation in history asked by so many to "return" land that they took, after they were ATTACKED.
Actually, it isn't the same at all. The North didn't decide to settle the south into camps; so, Northerners could settle that land.
Sean
I don't put it on anti semitic BS. I am putting it on BS.
The sad fact is, nobody wants those poor bastard Palestinians. I think Jordan has washed their hands of it, the rest of the world has no use for them, unless of course to fuel the entifada...
Israel would like them gone rather yesterday than today.
Fact is, you can't right a wrong with another wrong. The people who live there now are pawns on international politics.
I keep thinking id Israel just draw the borders the way they actually read as of now and gave those palestinians Israely pasports and all that jazz, quit treating them as nondesirables things could change dramatically.
But then again, I think Nostradamus foresaw the end of the world when there is peace in the Middle East....
Being anti-semitic, and being against Israeli occupation of disputed land is not the same thing, Don.
Sean
In my book, when you use the word Zionist, as if it is a slur, that crosses the line.
I have never done that; however, I will keep that in mind.
Sean
If a Palistinian were to use the term as a slur, it would make sense that they were saying Pro-Israel.
Sean
