Merged General Israel/Palestine discussion thread - Part 2

[Jonnyclueless]

I'll be damned. Hamas posts their twitter accounts. Who would have thought?

Hamas: You killed my Child!

IDF: I gave you warning...Didn't you get my Tweet?

Hamas: No...my smartphone's battery was uncharged.

I doubt they use tweets. Do you understand what a text message is? And most Palestinians have cell phones. They also have plenty of big shopping malls and other things that don’t help the whole ‘poor destitute’ image trying to be portrayed to get sympathy in a world where every movie plot is poor people are the good guys and the wealthy people are the bad guys. Again, they phone in the area, they send text messages, they drop leave lets and the roof knock. What warning does Hamas give when launching rockets into civilian areas (as opposed to Military target like IDF targets)? Please tell us.

Except...all those times when some Jews came along one day and took the Arabs land.

Which never happened.

And...those 200 Nuclear Israeli Weapons are quite an Insurance Policy, too...don't ya' think?

This is not the conspiracy theory forum.

So...giving back Land that you stole is all noble and stuff?

No land was ever stolen. Claiming a lie is certainly not nobel. Maybe if people would be more concerned about educating their people instead of telling this lie there would be some progress. But so long as all funding goes towards attacking Jews, that’s not going to happen. The teachers in the schools says they would love to teach things like Math, but the war against the Jews is too important so that must be taught for now.

Maybe if Hamas had more Land, they could move those missiles away from the kids?

They have plenty of area away from civilians to launch missiles at innocent civilian targets. Maybe if they stopped intentionally trying to kill innocent civilians then there would be no need to retaliate. There would be no need to inspect all shipments for missiles and weapons. And one of the points of giving them Gaza was to give them more land. Did that stop the rocket attacks? Nope, it increased them. But here you sit trying to convince us that if West Bank had a little more land that Hamas in Gaza would stop firing rockets at innocent civilians. How stupid do we look to you?

Why would some jerk be shooting at my Child? What...does he think I tried to steal his land, burn down his house, and kill his kids...or something?

Because your child is not of the same religion or culture. And because he can’t justify this as an excuse to the rest of the world he claims you stole his land even though you didn’t.

And tell me, if someone took your land, your response would be not to shoot at them, but to shoot at children? You are certainly a disturbing person. But again, it’s funny how you seem to have no problem with other Arabs taking land. You seem to have no problem with how Jordan treats Palestinians. You seem to raise no complain about real genocide going on between Arabs. But if Jews are involved, well then you won’t stand for that. All killing even of innocent children is justified.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Isn't it interesting how the boy who was burned to death was a Palestinian returning to his homeland? Oh wait, let's pretend that didn't happen....

 

[Jules Galen]

Isn't it interesting how the boy who was burned to death was a Palestinian returning to his homeland? Oh wait, let's pretend that didn't happen....

Yeah..because Gawd help us that Palestinians should get all "Uppity" and think that they have a right to live in Palestine, or something.

I mean...ya' let a Palestinian Kid live in Palestine, and the next thing ya' know he's dating all the Jewish girls! Ya' just got to draw the line somewhere!

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I love how Jules unwittingly justified every Israeli military operation against Gaza since the withdrawal (for then to feebly try to dodge by saying that oh, okay, so there have been withdrawals, but they're withdrawing for the wrong reasons!).

Thank you for playing.

 

[Jules Galen]

I love how Jules unwittingly justified every Israeli military operation against Gaza since the withdrawal (for then to feebly try to dodge by saying that oh, okay, so there have been withdrawals, but they're withdrawing for the wrong reasons!).

Thank you for playing.

Wow...I am embarrassed! Looks like I have been totally pwned by the superior intellect.

 

[Aridas]

"Context" on one position on the list, from late last night (GRAPHIC).

Sorry, can't read the language that the link uses. Also, no, the video doesn't seem to deal with why the sad event shown happened in the first place. Certainly, killing a three year old is reprehensible. Knowingly putting and leaving one in the line of fire is just as, if not more reprehensible, though. Your "context" totally ignores the information that's actually important for determining who's most at fault.

 

[Aridas]

Ahem..
This thread is about Israel and Palestine and the question of the land theft is central to this issue.
May I know why some people feel uneasy to talk about the land theft by the Israeli against the Palestinians?
Or maybe you think that stealing land belonging to another people is perfectly fine?

Right, so you're trying to change the subject to one where just about everyone agrees with your position that Israel is in the wrong. It's not that there's uneasiness, it's that there's not much to discuss. Furthermore, you're trying to imply that I'm was liar when I said that Israel is wrong anytime they to break their agreements about land. Frankly, you're just making it look more and more like you're unable to make a valid case when you cannot respond to the points made.

Yeah..
Maybe they were terrorists.
3 year old terrorists

As opposed to knowingly put in the line of fire by terrorists? Again, the list provides no context at all. Yes, innocent Palestinians are dying. At no point has that been disputed by me. Why they're dying is important to know before specific judgement can be made regarding who deserves the most blame.

 

[Childlike Empress]

UN report, July 11:

Since the start of the military operation on 7 July, the Israeli military has carried out over 700 air raids, fired more than 1,100 missiles and 100 tank shells, and conducted some 330 naval shellings. These have resulted in the killing of 114 Palestinians, of whom more than two thirds (88 people) are civilians, including 30 children and 17 women, according to preliminary data collected by the Protection Cluster from various sources. Additionally, 680 Palestinians were injured, nearly two thirds of whom are children (221) and women (225), according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health (MoH).

Oh, and to be fair and balanced...

Indiscriminate rocket firing by armed groups from Gaza has targeted main Israeli population centres, and resulted in at least three civilian injuries.

 

[Childlike Empress]

UN report, July 12:

As the Gaza emergency enters its fifth day, the civilian population in the Gaza Strip continues to bear the brunt of casualties: at least 70 per cent of the Palestinian fatalities (89 of 126) are believed to be civilians, of whom 30 per cent (27 of 89) are children, while nearly two thirds of all injuries (500 of 910) have been children and women. These figures, along worrisome reports about the circumstances of some incidents, have raised concerns about the respect to the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution in attack under International Humanitarian Law.

... 7,000 Children in need of psychosocial support ...

... 395,000 People affected due to damage to WASH infrastructure ...

... 36 Schools damaged by shelling ...

Oh, and to be fair and balanced...

Indiscriminate rocket firing by armed groups from Gaza continues to target main Israeli population centres, resulting in at least seven injuries.

 

[Aridas]

Oh, and to be fair and balanced...

Those statistics about damages caused that you list are much more worth seeing, if more for the sake of what should come after this unfortunate conflict. I do very much hope that their infrastructure and the incoming support will be able to handle the aftermath well, much as I would not call the report particularly balanced when categories of issues aren't actually being shown for both sides. That report looks like it's primarily and directly concerned with the group that is in need of much, much more humanitarian aid, though, which is not a surprise at all, and highlights several actions taken by the Israelis that very much should be investigated much more closely. Frankly, I certainly agree with that.

Either way, thank you for posting information that's much more meaningful than that list.

 

[KumarS]

Oh, and to be fair and balanced...

Indiscriminate rocket firing by armed groups from Gaza continues to target main Israeli population centres, resulting in at least seven injuries.

This is very important.
If we do not say this, then we are branded as pro-Hamas!

 

[KumarS]

Because the active aggressors were Palestinians,

Excuse me?????
True that both Israel and Hamas are wrong as they do not want the two-state solution but..

Israel is putting a harsh blockade on Gaza, Hamas is putting no blockade on Israel
Israel killed so far 120+ civilians in Gaza, Hamas has wounded 7
Israel is taking land in the West Bank, Hamas is taking no land
and the aggressors are the Palestinians?

 

[KumarS]

When they are the ones actually breaking their land agreements, there's much to criticize.

Resolution 446 (1979): 'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".

Resolution 452: " ... 'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".

Resolution 465: " ... 'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_UN_resolutions_concerning_Israel_and_Palestine

..and the one who break land agrements is the Palestinians

 

[Aridas]

Excuse me?????
True that both Israel and Hamas are wrong as they do not want the two-state solution but..

Israel is putting a harsh blockade on Gaza, Hamas is putting no blockade on Israel

And why would the Hamas blockade what is likely their primary access to the rest of the world? Have the Israeli people been encouraging terrorists to attack Palestinians, for example? The Palestinians certainly seem to be doing that... and have used their children to carry out suicide bombings, no less.

Israel killed so far 120+ civilians in Gaza, Hamas has wounded 7
Israel is taking land in the West Bank, Hamas is taking no land
and the aggressors are the Palestinians?

The active aggressors, yes, here, in case your bias is truly blinding you that much. They were, after all, the ones who fired how many rockets at Tel Aviv and rejected a peaceful solution before Israel responded militarily? It is curious, though, how you think that Israel must be solidly bound by an agreement when the other party is a group that refuses to acknowledge their legitimacy to be part of the agreement in the first place and officially wants to control the land fully.

Either way, from the Hamas Charter -

Article Thirteen: Peaceful Solutions, [Peace] Initiatives and International Conferences
[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad: “Allah is the all-powerful, but most people are not aware.”

As noted before, I certainly do oppose Israel building settlements in land that they had previously agreed to give to the Palestinians, but, frankly, the Hamas were the ones who decided that the land agreement was null and void in the first place, by the look of it, for relatively recent events.

 

[Aridas]

You do that like I wasn't agreeing that Israel has been in the wrong on the issue.

Resolution 465: " ... 'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program".

Incidentally, thank you for bringing up a resolution where the US, in fact, not only did not shield Israel in the UN, but also voted against them. It didn't shield Israel in the other two that you mentioned, either. Would you be kind enough to retract your claim that the US shields Israel from all resolutions against them?

..and the one who break land agrements is the Palestinians

You say that like you somehow think that the issue is completely one sided.

 

[KumarS]

And why would the Hamas blockade what is likely their primary access to the rest of the world?

It is not
Hamas can go out from sea and land (Egypt)

Have the Israeli people been encouraging terrorists to attack Palestinians, for example?

Yes!
They are killing people right now in Gaza, in case you are not paying attention
And the main terrorist here is the government of Tel Aviv
Take note

The active aggressors, yes, here, in case your bias is truly blinding you that much. They were, after all, the ones who fired how many rockets at Tel Aviv and rejected a peaceful solution before Israel responded militarily?

The rockets fired to Israel did enormously less damage than the rockets fired to Gaza
And what exactly" "peaceful solution" was offered to Hamas?
Did Isreal offer to give back what they stole and accept a Palestinian State? When?

It is curious, though, how you think that Israel must be solidly bound by an agreement when the other party is a group that refuses to acknowledge their legitimacy to be part of the agreement in the first place and officially wants to control the land fully.

Tu quoque argument.
The behaviour of Hamas is not binding Israel to refuse to accept the two-state solution

ItEither way, from the Hamas Charter -/QUOTE]

Butbutbut HAMAS!!

As noted before, I certainly do oppose Israel building settlements in land that they had previously agreed to give to the Palestinians, but, frankly, the Hamas were the ones who decided that the land agreement was null and void in the first place, by the look of it, for relatively recent events.

Tu quoque argument.
The behaviour of Hamas is not binding Israel to refuse to accept the two-state solution

You do that like I wasn't agreeing that Israel has been in the wrong on the issue.

First you say that Israel has been in the wrong, then you condemn only and only Hamas for everything

Incidentally, thank you for bringing up a resolution where the US, in fact, not only did not shield Israel in the UN, but also voted against them. It didn't shield Israel in the other two that you mentioned, either. Would you be kind enough to retract your claim that the US shields Israel from all resolutions against them?

Forty-one times during the last forty years, the United States has said no, one way or another, to the Palestinian struggle for human rights.

Forty-one times, in votes at the UN Security Council, the United States has been the only country to use its veto to override the votes of every other member.
http://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/campaigns/no-more-us-vetoes-at-the-un

Ambassador Charles W. Yost cast the first U.S. veto in 1970, regarding a crisis in Rhodesia, and the U.S. cast a lone veto in 1972, to prevent a resolution relating to Israel. Since that time, it has become by far the most frequent user of the veto, mainly on resolutions criticising Israel; since 2002 the Negroponte doctrine has been applied for the use of a veto on resolutions relating to the ongoing Israel-Palestinian conflict. This has been a constant cause of friction between the General Assembly and the Security Council. On 18 February 2011, the Obama administration vetoed resolutions condemning Israeli settlements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_veto_power#United_States

You say that like you somehow think that the issue is completely one sided.

Please re read my posts.
I said clearly that Hamas is wrong on their position on Israel (+the rockets and killings)

 

[Aridas]

It is not
Hamas can go out from sea and land (Egypt)

True enough.

Yes!
They are killing people right now in Gaza, in case you are not paying attention
And the main terrorist here is the government of Tel Aviv
Take note

They are killing people, yet, their actions are not specifically to cause fear. Their actions are specifically to end the attacks on Israeli property and the people on Israeli property. There's a difference when it comes to "terrorist" being applicable. If, in the course of that, their reasons change, it may become reasonable call them terrorists, not really before then, though.

The rockets fired to Israel did enormously less damage than the rockets fired to Gaza

That's irrelevant to who was the one who initiated the violence. Is there something hard to figure out about that?

And what exactly" "peaceful solution" was offered to Hamas?

To stop the attacks before Israel was forced to defend itself militarily, by the sound of it.

Did Isreal offer to give back what they stole and accept a Palestinian State? When?

In short, you don't have a case.

Tu quoque argument.
The behaviour of Hamas is not binding Israel to refuse to accept the two-state solution

The behavior of Hamas actually is making it exceedingly undesirable and frankly, unwise for Israel to make concessions of nearly any kind to them... and if one party refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the other party in the first place, it becomes rather impossible to make agreements with them, regardless of desire. Your attempt at an argument fails, utterly, when these points are considered.

Butbutbut HAMAS!!

What part of pointing out that your argument about Hamas taking no land is meaningless in the face of the "we would take that land if we could" which is written in their very charter, before touching everything else, leads you to think that that I was somehow throwing up "Hamas" as a smokescreen? YOU MADE A CLAIM ABOUT THEM, all I did was point out a gaping flaw in how meaningful your claim was. End of story. That you are evidently unable to dispute it validly shows the weakness of your position, it seems.

First you say that Israel has been in the wrong, then you condemn only and only Hamas for everything

And... how long have the Hamas been in power? When were those UN resolutions passed? What have I actually said? Answer those questions and the point that you're trying to make can easily be seen to fall apart.

Forty-one times during the last forty years, the United States has said no, one way or another, to the Palestinian struggle for human rights.

So, to be quite clear, you refuse to acknowledge that your claim was false and only then make a more correct claim.

Please re read my posts.
I said clearly that Hamas is wrong on their position on Israel (+the rockets and killings)

Please pay attention to the issues actually at hand and what has actually been said. You might realize that you're not actually addressing the point. Maybe. For ease's sake, I'm going to point out that you aren't, to save you that part of the work.

 

[KumarS]

They are killing people, yet, their actions are not specifically to cause fear.

Even if true, and I do not think it is, this matters nothing for the victims

Their actions are specifically to end the attacks on Israeli property and the people on Israeli property.

If Israel were interested in end the attacks on Israeli property and the people on Israeli property they would first need to give back what they have stolen

There's a difference when it comes to "terrorist" being applicable. If, in the course of that, their reasons change, it may become reasonable call them terrorists, not really before then, though.

As I said, you have no reason to assume that Israel is interested in a fair peace until they do not give back what they have stolen

That's irrelevant to who was the one who initiated the violence. Is there something hard to figure out about that?

Who initiated the violence is a chicken-and-egg problem since violence has been around since 1948, probably earlier

To stop the attacks before Israel was forced to defend itself militarily, by the sound of it.

False.
They never tried to return waht they have stolen, in first place

In short, you don't have a case.

??
I have asked you: Did Isreal offer to give back what they stole and accept a Palestinian State? When?

The behavior of Hamas actually is making it exceedingly undesirable and frankly, unwise for Israel to make concessions of nearly any kind to them... and if one party refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the other party in the first place, it becomes rather impossible to make agreements with them, regardless of desire. Your attempt at an argument fails, utterly, when these points are considered.

How does Hamas behaviour prevent Israel to give up what they have stolen and accept the two state solution?
Please explain in detail

What part of pointing out that your argument about Hamas taking no land is meaningless in the face of the "we would take that land if we could" which is written in their very charter, before touching everything else, leads you to think that that I was somehow throwing up "Hamas" as a smokescreen?

Tu quoque argument.
I will ask you once again: How does Hamas behaviour prevent Israel to give up what they have stolen and accept the two state solution?
Please explain in detail

And... how long have the Hamas been in power? When were those UN resolutions passed? What have I actually said? Answer those questions and the point that you're trying to make can easily be seen to fall apart.

??
We are not talkin about Hamas here. I do not dispute that Hamas does bad things. What you dispute is that Israel does steal land and does not accept the two state solution!

So, to be quite clear, you refuse to acknowledge that your claim was false and only then make a more correct claim.

Please pay attention to the issues actually at hand and what has actually been said. You might realize that you're not actually addressing the point. Maybe. For ease's sake, I'm going to point out that you aren't, to save you that part of the work.

??
We were talking that the US has used its veto power to prevent Israel being sanctioned at the US
The evidence I have provided support this claim

 

[KumarS]

Nevertheless, just because Hamas is "BAAAAAD" does not give Israel an excuse to steal land on the West Bank and practice apartheid.

This sums it up completely
Thank you

 

[Ziggurat]

What? You don't think most of the world knows that Hamas are nothing but a bunch of Psychotic Retards?

Nevertheless, just because Hamas is "BAAAAAD" does not give Israel an excuse to steal land on the West Bank and practice apartheid.

The current conflict isn't in the West Bank. It's in Gaza. Israel gave Gaza back to the Palestinians. That's where Hamas is in control. That's where they're launching rockets from.

Regardless of what you think the end result should look like, regardless of what you think is fair, the fact of the matter is that when Israel did what you wanted them to do (give land back to the Palestinians), the violence simply got worse. Palestinians didn't take that opportunity to try to reconcile with Israel, show them that land-for-peace can work, they used it as a chance to launch more missiles. Given that, why on earth should the Israelis give back any land in the West Bank? Because you think that it's the right thing to do? That simply isn't a good enough reason, much as you might wish it to be.