Israeli/Palestinian Ceasefire. What does it really mean? - Page 5




View Poll Results :Okay, so What do you think it all means? How much hope is there?
Accomplishes nothing at all. Nothing changes. 0 0%
Isn't likely to work, but you always hope. 12 66.67%
I have no idea. 4 22.22%
Pretty sure this is the start of peace. 2 11.11%
This is it!! Israel and Palestine will make permanent peace!! No question about it!! 0 0%
Voters: 18. You may not vote on this poll

 
--
Boots
 
February 14th, 2005  
MadeInChina
 
well, being called heathen by the missionaries doesnt solve the probelm eihter

the world's greatest empire now colonized by barbarians and subdued into a time of struggle, complicated by the long skirt catholics that brain wash us - a peking official

yup, a little religious and mostly nationalistic feeling that produced the boxer rebellion

anyways, how many palis are there living in the remaining land they settled in
February 14th, 2005  
SHERMAN
 
 
2 million, I think...
February 14th, 2005  
rocco
 
a few million live in jordan, which is palestine.,..

palestine is jordan, and jordan is palestine...
--
Boots
February 14th, 2005  
Peter Pan
 
The contention that there was no state of Palestine is true, but then the same is applicable to the contention that there was no State called Israel. Ottomans lost all their territory in Syria, Palestine, Arabia, and Mesopotamia after the tereaty of Versailles. Then the great carving occured of erstwhile Ottoman lands, resulting in the messy affairs of the Middle East in which the carving was done to suit the Imperialist powers whims and fancies. Iraq is an ideal example of no thought being given to the ethnic and religious divides when forming the State.

Technically speaking The Balfour Declaration is no authority that it is mandatory that there be a Jewish homeland. Morally speaking, no other nation can 'donate' land as per their wishes. Therefore, the whole issue is rather open ended. Biblical truth cannot be taken as legal rights. It is as odd as it would be if Turkey should demand that all lands belonging to the Ottoman Empire should be their by right! Or Italians demanidn that the Roman Empire be restored to them!

However, that is history.

In the present situation, both Israel and Palestine States must coexist and the boundary negotiated. The only problems would be the right of the Palestinian to go back to the land they were originally from. That Isreal would not accept.

Now, it is for the Palestinians to soft pedal this demand and maybe things will work out. Or else....back to Square One.
February 15th, 2005  
godofthunder9010
 
 
It seems reasonable that Israel and her allies should at least conpensate the Palestinians for the value of the lands lost to them, based on its estimated real value at the time it was lost.

It is always interesting to explore a nation's "right" to certain lands. Italy cannot demand their ancient empire back because they don't have the muscle to back it up -- Italy would have to overwhelmingly defeat France, Great Britain, Switzerland, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria ... etc. They are not capable of such a feat at the present time.

On the other side of the coin, we have China. They claim that if the Qing Dynasty contolled it, then it rightfully belongs to China. Thusly, Tibet was just an enforcement of China's national rights. The difference? China has the muscle to enforce that claim many many times over and nobody is in a position to stop then.

Isn't it interesting that we are no better now than we were at anytime in history? "If I can kick your ass, I am right and you are wrong."

Israel's claim to the Holy Land may be questionable in the same terms, but just like China, they have the muscle to backup their claim, so they are right.
February 15th, 2005  
rocco
 
only a few of the arabs who left israel during 1948, mostly because arabs influenced them to, actually owned land, many were squatters, and regardless, just as many, and more jews were kicked out of every arab country... thats why there are 0 jews living in iraq, yemen etc... why should israel compensate? when there was a transfer of people, israel assimilated all the refugee jews into its society, whereas the arabs have kept their own in refugee status for 50 years to keep the political wound open...
letting in millions of arabs mostly of which came back to their "ancient homelands" from palestine would destroy democracy in israel for the israeli's... thats the most stupid idea available... it would be like lebanon all over again, where muslims would have a majority and destroy the entire nation, but rather instead of massacring christians, it would be jews this time.
israel has a large muslim population with equal freedoms, yet saudi arabia and other arab countries dont let jews set foot on their lands, and if they do, and when they do we got nick berg and danial pearl things happening to them...
allowing arabs back 50 years later is suicide
February 15th, 2005  
Peter Pan
 
Quote:
Isn't it interesting that we are no better now than we were at anytime in history? "If I can kick your ass, I am right and you are wrong."

Israel's claim to the Holy Land may be questionable in the same terms, but just like China, they have the muscle to backup their claim, so they are right.
That is precisely the God's Own Truth.