Merged General Israel/Palestine discussion thread - Part 2

[Mycroft]

Ah, it feels good to finally get to the end of this thread. Now all I have to do is pick up my Zionist Hasbera paycheck and spend it on an evening out with my family.

 

[Jules Galen]

Israel is making a predictable pig's breakfast out it. Hamas is winning yards with every inch of further aggression from the israelis. They're the winners of this fight. Not in bodies (warm or cold) but of the leverage it gives them, at least in a short-term spec. The losers in this case are, as usual, the residents of Gaza who are under the spell of loaded 'myopica' and, well... basically believing the lie that they have less and less to add to this fight except their own blood.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Well...not that their "Blood" doesn't matter - it creates some epic photos that can be transmitted about the world and gain some sympathy. However, directly attacking Israel with those pathetic rockets like Hamas does? There's just got to be a better way. But...Israel keeps falling for the bait! I am amazed.

I think the Pals need to get a website up that describes the conditions in the West Bank and Gaza and have this website fact-checked by some very-credible authorities in order to insure the readers that what is presented is 100% the truth as best as it can be told. I believe such a project could gain a lot of sympathy for the Pals.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Ah, it feels good to finally get to the end of this thread. Now all I have to do is pick up my Zionist Hasbera paycheck and spend it on an evening out with my family.

I haven't received it yet, but I just got my payment from Big Pharma, so I'm good.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

And the thing about Jules is I don't even think he is sincere. He is just trolling.

I hope and believe that is indeed the case.

 

[Aridas]

The problem is that much of the rest of the world, me included I have to say, does not see civilians as "legitimate military targets" and they are quite angry at Israel.

Ignoring the rest of that post, this is ignoring the principle that was being pointed out. All of us seem to agree that, generally speaking, civilian targets are not legitimate targets. Where we seem to disagree is whether they're ever legitimate targets. One of the few generally accepted exceptions to the general rule, though, is when militaries are specifically trying to use the civilians as shields to stop counterattacks, or otherwise using them to violate the laws of war, which has been exactly what's been happening in Gaza. Failing to consider that as an exception to the general rule only encourages such actions to become more commonplace.

I wonder the reason why Pakistna did not use nukes against the US so far is because their arsenal is guarded by the US as well

No. The US helped Pakistan be able to guard their own nukes more effectively in indirect ways, but the US is not and has not guarded Pakistan's nukes for them.

->By the way, you should not lie

Right back at you, with the note that the evidence that you've lied in this thread repeatedly is overwhelming, whereas the evidence that I've lied is pretty much non-existent.

If you all can break away from playing with Kumar and Jules for a second, news is Israel just started a ground invasion of Gaza. Holding my breath.

www.idfblog.com/blog/2014/07/17/idf-begins-ground-operation-gaza/

Meh. Well, here's to hoping that the death toll and damage will be negligable on both sides.

 

[KumarS]

Double post

 

[KumarS]

I can't read your mind, but this statement comes across as disingenuous after you so recently cheered Palestinians getting nuclear weapons and some other comments you've made.

If Israel has nukes, why do you want to prevent the Palestinians from haivng some for self defence?

Ah, it feels good to finally get to the end of this thread. Now all I have to do is pick up my Zionist Hasbera paycheck and spend it on an evening out with my family.

I hope it is a fat check.
Personally, I would not support the side of the killers even for a fat check, but I agreeother people have differnt morality

Yep, Arafat wrote those letters as part of peace negotiations between him and Rabin, but they were never acted upon. To this date, almost 20 years later, the PLO charter remains unchanged, and this supposed recognition of Israel can only be found in these letters.

What "acted upon" should mean, exactly?
He wrote such letter proposing a peace based on a two-state solution on the 1967 borders.
Such letters were public.
What else do you need?

More about this ..
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Thursday said that the Palestinian people recognize Israel's right to exist and they hope the Israeli government will respond by "recognizing the Palestinian state on the borders of the land occupied in 1967." The PA president's comments came in a speech to the Dutch parliament in the Hague.
http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/We-recognize-Israel-they-should-recognize-Palestine

As much of a fan of Wikipedia as I am, it's unfortunate that on controversial topics it's often biased and inaccurate. Arafat didn't recognize Israel's right to exist within the '67 borders, he called upon Israel to withdraw to the '67 borders.

???????????????????
So the letters at the Jewish Library are a scam?
They have been written by someone else?
Arafat did not write such letters?

Read this article to learn how much teeth pulling it took to even get that much from Arafat, and note the reason the UN met in Geneva that year instead of New York is because the US wouldn't grant Arafat a Visa...because he wouldn't recognize Israel.

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_1967to1991_plo_israel_exist_1988.php

Oh, I see..
Then if the US said that Arafat did not recognize Israel it must be really so as, as we know, the US Government is fair, good-hearted and never lies..
I can also set up a site called www.palestinefacts.org writing down that the moon is a piece of cheese
I have brought you evidence that Arafat accepted Israel` s right to exist on the 1967 borders and you deny it as it does not fit in your anti Palestine mental frame.
I have brought more evidence that Abbas reiterated this in 2011 and you will not accept it either
As it does not fit in your anti-Palestine mental frame
But if you do not accept evidence from authoritative sites and keep denying what is written there, by quoting some cheesy site nobody has heard about,there is little room to talk.

And this is the actual text of Arafat's speech. He renounces terrorism too, he didn't mean that either.

http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/pal/pal5.htm

I see..
Again, it is up to you to decide what Arafat meant with his words and to change their meaning accord to your convenience.
How can there be a discussion if you take this strongly brainwashed point of view?

You're the only one who keeps adding "based on the '67 borders." Israel plans to keep Jerusalem and its surrounding areas. Israel has always negotiated based on a two-state solution, but Jerusalem is the Holy City to Judaism. Rational or not, they plan to keep it.

You are lying again.
Abbas repeatedly called for a recognition of the State of Palestine on the 1967 borders.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3820218,00.html
http://www.alternativenews.org/engl...67-borders-with-east-jerusalem-as-its-capital
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/12/15/94244.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-20179980

And I am not quoting some third-class propaganda website like you do.
I quote the BBC

"Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has insisted his aim is to establish a Palestinian state only alongside Israel's pre-1967 boundaries with the West Bank and Gaza. "
This was said back in 2012
This is a call for a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders which is what not I, but Abbas was talking about.
It is ISrael who did not accept.
You are lying

Yes, you don't know. Filling in the gaps of what you don't know is tedious, especially when you feel empowered to make all kinds of proclamations despite your ignorance.

Netanyahu backed a two state solution for the first time in 2009. Neteanyahu is the head of Likud, an Israeli political party that has always been against Palestinian independence. The news here is that by 2009 support in Israel for a two state solution was so strong that even the head of the political party that opposes Palestinian independence said he would support it under certain conditions.

I have showed you when the Palestinians accepted the two state solutions based on the 1967 borders.
I did what I needed to do.
Please show me now when Israel accepted the same

Yes, that's true, but nobody is suggesting Palestinians would only get 1%. Palestinians not getting 100%, however, is a common assumption.

And I can't think of any good reason why they should get 100%, can you? If it's 98%, 95% or even 90%, it's still an independent state and it's still a chance for them to get on with their lives and raise children who know something other than violence. Wouldn't you agree?

Strawman as Abbas asked for the 1967 borders

First, not at all true.

Second, you seem to have a neat rationalization for Palestinians never to negotiate. Without negotiation, there is no peace. Do you not want peace?

Negotiation is an useless word unless you want pease
The Palestinians (excluding Hamas) want pease and they have accepted a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has insisted his aim is to establish a Palestinian state only alongside Israel's pre-1967 boundaries with the West Bank and Gaza.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-20179980

The Isreali did not

You seem to think Palestinians have made more concessions than I do. Please educate me by listing all these concessions.

"Palestine for me is the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as the capital. This is Palestine," he added. "I am a refugee. I live in Ramallah. The West Bank and Gaza is Palestine. Everything else is Israel."
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-20179980

Quite clear.
I would say.

I think you are supporting the killing of children. As long as you refuse to look at what really drives this conflict, you support its continuation, and with it the blood and casualties, including children, that go along with it.

Stupid comment
You expect the Palestinians to accept passively whatever Israel wants to put in their throats
Abbas has already offered peace

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has insisted his aim is to establish a Palestinian state only alongside Israel's pre-1967 boundaries with the West Bank and Gaza.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-20179980

Israel so far has not accepted

It is Israel, the US, Hamas and all the people that do not want to read what is written in clear letters are the ones who are responsible for the deaths of the children
Even if they do not actively participate in the massacre
I back the peacefyl solution proposed by Abbas, therefore I am not guilty

 

[KumarS]

I think the Pals need to get a website up that describes the conditions in the West Bank and Gaza and have this website fact-checked by some very-credible authorities in order to insure the readers that what is presented is 100% the truth as best as it can be told. I believe such a project could gain a lot of sympathy for the Pals.

Useless as..
the Muslims already know what is happening there
the Americans are happy the more children are killed
the rest of the world does not care

 

[Eddie Dane]

This conflict is fascinating from a PR perspective.

it is amazing how fast the narrative changes from 'Israel gives Hamas 48 hours to stop firing rockets into civilian territories' to 'Over 70 civilians have been killed by Israeli actions in a conflict where both parties are shooting rockets at each other and started about three Israeli teenagers being killed.'

Hamas creates a situation where Israel cannot NOT react, and this reaction WILL kill civilians. It's a numbers game. if you launch 1000+ airstrikes without killing civilians, no matter how much care you take.

The ground offensive will provide lots of nice footage of Israelis barging through impoverished Gaza in modern battle-gear. And more civilians will die.

Public opinion shifts against Israel at the first kid killed. A picture is worth a thousand words. Dead kids are pictures, explanations about strategic necessity are words.

Israel might be better off just taking fire and relying on the wall + Iron dome and accept casualties as far as media strategy is concerned.

Better get working on Iron Dome the laser-edition to bring down the cost of non-violent defensive measures.

 

[Aridas]

If Israel has nukes, why do you want to prevent the Palestinians from haivng some for self defence?

Because, given history and many statements by Palestinian leaders, chances are excessively high that they would simply be used, but not for self defense.

I back the peacefyl solution proposed by Abbas, therefore I am not guilty

Meanwhile, I have grave doubts regarding whether what the article says about the solution proposed by Abbas would actually lead to peace, as it was, and thus do not support it as it was. Including strong incentives for continued peaceful relations on both sides, however, might make it more viable as a way to obtain peace.

Other than that, your delineation between guilty and not guilty is unlikely to stand up in any mildly objective court.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

The problem is that it's an intolerable situation regardless of death toll. We all know most of the missiles are stopped, but they're still highly dangerous, and some do in fact get through, and some of these do in fact do damage -- both to property, people, and, perhaps most importantly, psyche. 50% of Israeli children have PTSD. I don't blame them. They live under constant threat of bus bombings, rockets and gods know what. It's an intolerable situation. So Israel has to react. They can try nonviolent means (the barrier, the blockade, etc.) but of course the world community will react with hostility to these, too. They can try diplomacy and even withdrawals, but they've learned and continue to learn the hard way that this simply doesn't work.

So they strike, kill a lot of people, and HAMAS digs in to lick her wounds. Then a couple years pass, and they start shooting anew. Eventually Israeli patience runs out, and Gaza is struck again.

The more things change and so on.

 

[KumarS]

Hamas creates a situation where Israel cannot NOT react, and this reaction WILL kill civilians. It's a numbers game. if you launch 1000+ airstrikes without killing civilians, no matter how much care you take..

Unfortunately, many people in the Middle East and in the world see it differently.
Reading many comments, they ask themselves, why Israel is not simply Palestine` s proposal of going back to the 1967 borders and accept the two-state solution on 1967 borders offered to them long ago?
If they do not, it means they are criminals, along with the US and their supporters.

I have to say that I find this analysis quite understandable
And what is more important is that people look at Israel as a war crime country

BBC survey measures public opinion on 22 countries, places Israel in company of North Korea, ahead of only Iran, Pakistan.
http://www.jpost.com/National-News/Poll-Israel-viewed-negatively-around-the-world
An they are right!

And if you look at the Muslim countries in the region, numbers are alarming
Pakistan.. 9% viewing Israel positively
Indonesia..8%
Egypt.. 7%
And we do not want to talk about Iran, right?

And this is before Gaza

In the mean time, The United States is failing to prevent Iran to enlarge their program and the moderate Iraq Government is being overrun by the Islamic State, which is enlarging
You can threaten with nukes a country far away, but not your immediate neighbour.
If I were a Jew Israeli citizen living in Israel today, I would be very very scared

 

[KumarS]

The problem is that it's an intolerable situation regardless of death toll. We all know most of the missiles are stopped, but they're still highly dangerous, and some do in fact get through, and some of these do in fact do damage -- both to property, people, and, perhaps most importantly, psyche. 50% of Israeli children have PTSD.

They are not as lucky as the Palestinians, who are getting killed before developing PTSD

 

[Eddie Dane]

They are not as lucky as the Palestinians, who are getting killed before developing PTSD

Very few are killed and the rest probably suffer PTSD also.
Living in a warzone is bad for mental health.

 

[Eddie Dane]

Unfortunately, many people in the Middle East and in the world see it differently.
Reading many comments, they ask themselves, why Israel is not simply Palestine` s proposal of going back to the 1967 borders and accept the two-state solution on 1967 borders offered to them long ago?
If they do not, it means they are criminals, along with the US and their supporters.

I have to say that I find this analysis quite understandable
And what is more important is that people look at Israel as a war crime country

BBC survey measures public opinion on 22 countries, places Israel in company of North Korea, ahead of only Iran, Pakistan.
http://www.jpost.com/National-News/Poll-Israel-viewed-negatively-around-the-world
An they are right!

And if you look at the Muslim countries in the region, numbers are alarming
Pakistan.. 9% viewing Israel positively
Indonesia..8%
Egypt.. 7%
And we do not want to talk about Iran, right?

And this is before Gaza

In the mean time, The United States is failing to prevent Iran to enlarge their program and the moderate Iraq Government is being overrun by the Islamic State, which is enlarging
You can threaten with nukes a country far away, but not your immediate neighbour.
If I were a Jew Israeli citizen living in Israel today, I would be very very scared

Going back the 1967 borders is a political solution to a political problem in my opinion.

The immediate and urgent issue is bringing an and to the military crisis. That is, stop the current upsurge of violence in the form of a cease fire.
And then finally get this bunch of blockheads back to the negotiating table.

And that opens up about a thousand new challenges:
-Israel's distrust of an agreement
-The influence of the bat-crap crazy right in Israel
-The influence of whoever is giving Hamas/Islamic Jihad weapons this month
-The necessary compromises that will be rejected by hard-liners on both sides.
-Israel dragging it's feet or insulting it's counterparts by building more homes on disputed land (which they probably do to shut up their hard-liners for the duration of the talks)
-Etc.
-Etc
-Etc.

 

[KumarS]

Very few are killed and the rest probably suffer PTSD also.
Living in a warzone is bad for mental health.

This is why war should be avoided at all costs
I believe that Abbas and some moderate Israeli went great lenghts to find fair accord on the final status of the two-state solutions
Unfortunately, blockheads in Israel, in the US and in Gaza prevented this solution from taking place
Shame on them !

Going back the 1967 borders is a political solution to a political problem in my opinion.

The immediate and urgent issue is bringing an and to the military crisis. That is, stop the current upsurge of violence in the form of a cease fire.
And then finally get this bunch of blockheads back to the negotiating table.

And that opens up about a thousand new challenges:
-Israel's distrust of an agreement
-The influence of the bat-crap crazy right in Israel
-The influence of whoever is giving Hamas/Islamic Jihad weapons this month
-The necessary compromises that will be rejected by hard-liners on both sides.
-Israel dragging it's feet or insulting it's counterparts by building more homes on disputed land (which they probably do to shut up their hard-liners for the duration of the talks)
-Etc.
-Etc
-Etc.

The challenges are easily solvable if you want to solve them.
Accept a two-state solution on the 1967 borders with some limited land swaps mutually agreed upon, recognize East Jerusalem as the future capital of the Palestinian state.
I believe Abbas has even renounced claims on the right on return
Easy and practical right?
But for the blockheads in Gaza, Tel Aviv and Washington, and their moronic supporters, war is still a good option

 

[Eddie Dane]

This is why war should be avoided at all costs
I believe that Abbas and some moderate Israeli went great lenghts to find fair accord on the final status of the two-state solutions
Unfortunately, blockheads in Israel, in the US and in Gaza prevented this solution from taking place
Shame on them !



The challenges are easily solvable if you want to solve them.
Accept a two-state solution on the 1967 borders with some limited land swaps mutually agreed upon, recognize East Jerusalem as the future capital of the Palestinian state.
I believe Abbas has even renounced claims on the right on return
Easy and practical right?
But for the blockheads in Gaza, Tel Aviv and Washington, and their moronic supporters, war is still a good option

Wow.

A whole post by KumarS I agree with.

Maybe hanging out at a sceptics forum is giving you some new insights.

I'll have mint-tea in your honour this weekend.

 

[KumarS]

Wow.

A whole post by KumarS I agree with.

Maybe hanging out at a sceptics forum is giving you some new insights.

I'll have mint-tea in your honour this weekend.

Very good!
I am happy that we agree that Hamas, Israel, the US are all responsible.
Now, leaving aside Hamas (since we agree that they are guilty as well), I have not read may of your comments calling Israel and the US guilty of war crimes.
Or atrocities.
Call it as you want.
Nor I have heard you criticize other people writing comments in defence of the position of Israel, an opinion I have now understood you do not share.

May I know the reason why you are so silent and do not address comments like

Oh the Israelis would have loved something like this if they were as evil as you think they were. They'd have impaled the dead bodies and flaunted the corpses.

They accepted Egypt's cease-fire proposal. Hamas rejected it. How is that Israel sabotaging the peace process?

Incidentally and unsurprisingly, it looks like there has been such an offer! What are you going to try to change the subject to now, when yet another one of your arguments has been shown to be worthless?

(a lie of Aridas who said taht the Israeli accepted the two-state solution based on 1967 borders)

Good lord. Only 88 innocent people have been killed after 1000+ missiles have been fired, 100 tank shells, and 330 naval shellings? That's pretty damn impressive! Props to the IDF for its precision. They could easily take a page from the Russian's playbook of dealing with an insurgency in an urban area and flatten said urban area, but instead they show professionalism and skill. And for this they get attacked! Disgusting.

Yup. More accidental support of Israeli military action. This is getting good.

..and many more..

as all the comments above seem to me to whitewash, minimize, or even support the military actions of Israel, that now I have understood you do not support, is it right?
So why your silence?

 

[Jules Galen]

The problem is that it's an intolerable situation regardless of death toll.

No. It is perfectly tolerable for Israel. If it was not tolerable for Israel, then Israel would quit stealing land and give back the land they stole from the Palestinians.

So...until it becomes intolerable, Israel will keep squealing "We are the Victims" and keep stealing land.

Of course, Israel will have to keep killing Palestinians, and sometimes it gets out to the world. For example, consider this photo:

http://static01.nyt.com/images/2014/07/17/world/07GAZA-1/07GAZA-1-master675.jpg

Like I said, a squadron of F-16s and a dozen Merkava tanks can't undo the damage to Israel that this photo has caused. This photo is the payoff for all of Hamas BS pathetic rocket fire - for it captures a narrative of Israeli brutality against innocent children.

Too bad so many Pals had to die in order to catch the perfect Photo. Maybe the Pals will smarten up and tell Hamas to quit shooting those rockets. Maybe Israel will smarten up and quit taking the bait and hammering Gaza. But...I doubt it.

 

[Aridas]

Wow.

A whole post by KumarS I agree with.

Maybe hanging out at a sceptics forum is giving you some new insights.

Except for the very poorly justified US hatred, sure.