So why do people hate Israel? - Page 145




 
--
 
July 18th, 2013  
ScarabVenom
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
You're wrong. It was a retaliation of the countless rocket attacks of Hamas. Israel does not provoke anything. They only defend themselves from 1948 up untill now.
Oh please, you really believe that or just trolling?

1956, was Egypt really the aggressor? Yeah, we did go around bullying France, Great Britain and Israel so they can attack us. If Israel wasn't really the aggressor, why did the US force Israel to leave the Sinai and in around 6 months Israel was gone?

1967, I will only quote what Menachim Begin said "The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We decided to attack him" word of the Israeli prime minister which you should listen to since you're a fan of Israel isn't enough? They go steal other nation's territory and yeah, they're just defending themselves. Israel "defend itself" using their military power not peace. The way Israel "defends itself" is by occupying surrounding territories to have distance between neighboring nations and the state.

Speaking of self-defense, I was quite surprised when I knew (yeah, I just knew recently) that the Holocaust memorial is on April the 7th. Yet, on April the 8th of 1970 they bombed an Egyptian primary school and killed young children. <---self-defense. The holocaust is a tragedy and may those who died get treated nicely by their God but, right the next day after the Holocaust they go bomb a school? Well, that shows something.

14th of July, 1967 Israel goes to the center of the Suez canal raising their flag demanding their "right" to half of the Suez canal. Israel builds settlements in the Sinai such as the settlements of Yamet. They intended to stay and all under the halo of self-defense.

After the 1973 war, Israel tried to keep the Egyptian city of Taba but failed due to proven history of it being Egyptian territory. Why did they try to take the Egyptian city?

If you want to listen to something, please listen to everything not just what you want to listen to.
July 18th, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
You still completely avoided the fact that the video has no absolutely relevance as to whether the boy died or not. I have (and no doubt you have also) known men to be still talking lucidly entering the triage and taken to surgery who subsequently died of their wounds.
You're kidding, right? The video was about the killing of the boy by IDF soldiers. The makers said they cut the last piece of film because it was "unbearable" and "in accordance with our ethical charter" because the child was dying from a stomach wound. It tuned out that the child wasn't dying but lifted his arm and leg and looked at the camera! If the child had a stomach wound it would be screaming from pain. If the pain would have been too much the child would have passed out. Either way it would have been impossible to lift his arm and look at the camera. As someone with a military background you know how painful a stomach wound is.
They also filmed lots of ambulances taking away "injured" men but none came to the rescue of the "wounded" child and father? Pallywood at its best.

Quote:
It is a matter of record by many highly respected International aid agencies that Israel provoked the Gazans with a siege restricting all the day to day necessities of life, in retaliation for having been pressured into retreating from Gaza.
The problem lies with Hamas, not Israel. They know how to lift the blockade : stop the rocket attacks, recognize Israel and remove the "destruction of Israel" from their covenant, it's that simple. And they start to get it because they promised to talk about it and their farmers (from 300-1,500 metres to 100 meters) and fishermen (from three nautical miles to six) are already getting more space to work on. But another problem arose. One that you do not mention. The closing of the Rafah crossing with Egypt and the destruction of many tunnels by the Egyptian forces. Tunnel owners (desperate that their business would collaps) that they were responsible for some rocket attacks on Israel, hoping Israel would tighten the blockade, which they did.

Quote:
Israel's childishly simplistic attempts at guile in these matters does not extend beyond easily disproven lies. The fact that they continue to shamelessly lie in the face of all the physical evidence is an indication of their complete and utter disregard for World opinion and complete lack of any form of self respect, they are in fact, no more than pathological liars and moral sociopaths.

Just stop your lying and accept the truth. Israel is currently the worlds worst rogue state and it is the home to the world's largest collection of pro-active war Criminals.
The usual rubbish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Explain to me how this is a Palestinian problem?
At that time there were no "Palestinians", they were all Arabs. They attacked Israel to destroy it, not to "liberate Palestine".

Quote:
The answer is that all those Jew that were "expelled" from Arab countries simply moved in and took over Palestinian land and continue to do so today.
More Jews were expelled from Arab countries than Arabs fled for Israeli and Arab troops. Where should they have gone? There was only one Jewish state and that was Israel. 586.000 Jews choosed that country. Do not forget that in 1947 the Egyptian delegation to the UN told the General Assembly : "The lives of one million Jews in Muslim countries will be jeopardized by partition." The threat became a brutal reality.

Quote:
You can play rounders all day but the simple reality is that it is Jewish "settlers" that are expanding the borders of Israel daily and they are doing it at the expense of the Palestinians.
Israel meets all of its obligations to the Palestinian population in Area C, as required by the Oslo Accords and derived from Israel's security control of the area and her authority over infrastructure, land, and planning.

Israel approved 47 road related projects sponsored by the international community for the Palestinian community in Area C (18 projects are completed)
98% of Palestinians in Areas A, B and C are connected to electricity.
Teacher salaries, training, school materials, etc. all fall under the authority of the PA, including in Area C.
Since 2010 the Civil Administration has invested more than 5 million ₪ in medical care for Palestinians, as well as over 2 million ₪ for medical training exchanges for Palestinian doctors.
There are 22 valid master plans in Area C and more than 20 new master plans that are currently being developed in conjunction with the PA.
In addition to their domain suffix (.ps), private Palestinian users in Judea and Samaria have access to Internet with speeds of up to 8 megabits. According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, 53% of average Palestinian households in Judea and Samaria have computers and soon roughly 40% of children over the age of 10 will have access to the Internet.
In 2011 Israel provided the Palestinians with 53 MCM of water 22 MCM more than stipulated by the Oslo Accords.
And there is so much more that Israel does for the Palestinians. You can read it here.

Quote:
So explain to me why an Ethiopian/American/German, Moroccan etc. etc. Jew who have never seen Palestine has more right to land in Palestine than a Palestinian family who roots to the region go back 1000 years?
(Please note I do not accept that a gene which your own source says 70% of the world has is a viable answer)
First explain to me why those Jews were expelled. Some Jewish communities were living there for thousands of years. They had nowhere to go but Israel.
The "Palestinians" lived in the Ottoman Empire. That was gone and a tiny piece was named Israel with the approval of the International Community. 160.000 Arabs accepted the new Israeli citizenship and 3 were elected to the Knesset. Did the "Palestinians" promised citizenship to Jews who were living in what should have become their part of the former Ottoman Empire? NO! Let alone that Jews were able to be choosen to a "Palestinian" parliament. Worse, they expelled or killed the Jews who were living there. Including Jews from communities that lived there from almost the beginning of Jerusalem! Jordan destroyed all the synagogue in the annexed "West Bank".

Quote:
Surely you would agree that those Jews evicted from Arab lands have a case against the countries they were evicted from and not the Palestinians?
Sure! Israel is doing all it can to bring justice to it. Today, nearly half of Israel's native population descends from the Jewish refugees of the Arab world and their rights must be recognized alongside any discussion of the rights for Palestinian refugees and their descendants. (last sentence was copied from here.)

Quote:
Basically you are doing little more than supporting ethnic cleansing and I find that hard to accept in anyone.
If it was about etnic cleansing then there wouldn't be living 1,617,000 Arabs in Israel. That's more than Jews living in all the Arab world. Trying to destroy Israel en kill all the Jews that is etnic cleansing.

Quote:
Still I will leave you with something I saw while on vacation...


Don't you find it odd that the Palestinians are capable of distinguishing Zionism from Israel yet Israel cant.
Nice try. read this article that British based Arabic newspaper Al Quds al-Arabi published : There is no apartheid in Israel. Use Google translate if you have to.
July 18th, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScarabVenom
Oh please, you really believe that or just trolling?
I firmly believe this.

Quote:
1956, was Egypt really the aggressor? Yeah, we did go around bullying France, Great Britain and Israel so they can attack us. If Israel wasn't really the aggressor, why did the US force Israel to leave the Sinai and in around 6 months Israel was gone?
In 1955 alone 260 Israeli citizens were killed by Fedayeen raids and Egypt, which got a significant amount of new Il-28 bpmbers and MiG 15 fighters started to intrude into Israeli air space. At that time, the IAF planes were inferior to the new Egyption ones. Israel would be helpless against a new Arab attack so they took the opportunity to fight along the British and French which guaranteed Israel's safety. The French gave Israel air protection.
Pressure to stop the fighting was more related to the French and British than the Israelis. Israel was satisfied with the destruction of the Egyptian air force by the British and French. The British got a 500 million$ US loan and the Soviet leader Nicolai Bulganin had threatened to destroy London and Paris with nuclear missiles. (Air Wars and Aircraft page 54)

Quote:
1967, I will only quote what Menachim Begin said "The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We decided to attack him" word of the Israeli prime minister which you should listen to since you're a fan of Israel isn't enough? They go steal other nation's territory and yeah, they're just defending themselves. Israel "defend itself" using their military power not peace. The way Israel "defends itself" is by occupying surrounding territories to have distance between neighboring nations and the state.
Well, the start of the 1967 war lies with Russia. On may 13, according to US government records, Moscow warned Cairo and Damascus that israel planned to launch an invasion of their countries on the 17th, using 13 brigades. This was an untrue report, transmitted through Sami Sheraf, the head of the KGB in Cairo and intended to make Nasser feel more dependent of Moscow. Nasser ordered two divisions into the Sinai. On the 16th Nasser ordered UN troops in the Sinai to withdraw from patrols to their two base camps. UN Secretary General U Thant said that if his exppeditionary forces could not carry out its assigned duties, he would withdraw them alltogether. Nasser was shocked but dared not back down. By the 19th, war war had still not come, and Egyptian and Israeli units faced each other accros the border. Egyptian forces had also taken over Sharm esh-Sheikh, at the Red Sea entrance, from UN troops, closing the Strait of Tiran. This gave Israel a casus belli of sorts. (Weapons p.522)

Quote:
Speaking of self-defense, I was quite surprised when I knew (yeah, I just knew recently) that the Holocaust memorial is on April the 7th. Yet, on April the 8th of 1970 they bombed an Egyptian primary school and killed young children. <---self-defense. The holocaust is a tragedy and may those who died get treated nicely by their God but, right the next day after the Holocaust they go bomb a school? Well, that shows something.
Please tell everything!
Speaking about the incident, Egyptian commander Abdelatim Ramadan said: "Actually, two targets were hit by the Israelis. The first target was a group of military bases about 30 km. from the Suez Canal, which were targeted before, on the night of 1819 December 1969. The second target was the Bahr El-Baqar primary school. [ ... ] There comes a time to acknowledge an important fact in this area, that at those black days of Israeli bombing, the military targets were mixed with civilian targets. We can even say that in many cases the military targets were hiding behind civilian targets." ("The War of Attrition as Reflected in Egyptian Sources" (1995), p. 107, by Mustafa Kabha)

Quote:
14th of July, 1967 Israel goes to the center of the Suez canal raising their flag demanding their "right" to half of the Suez canal. Israel builds settlements in the Sinai such as the settlements of Yamet. They intended to stay and all under the halo of self-defense.
Yes, as long as there was not a plan in place that gave Israel protection they would use that as a buffer zone. Again you forget to mention that after the peace deal all Israeli settlements ware dismantled (they did the same with the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza).

Quote:
After the 1973 war, Israel tried to keep the Egyptian city of Taba but failed due to proven history of it being Egyptian territory. Why did they try to take the Egyptian city?
Taba was located on the Egyptian side of the armistice line agreed to in 1949. During the Suez Crisis in 1956 it was briefly occupied but returned to Egypt when Israel withdrew in 1957. Israel reoccupied the Sinai Peninsula after the Six-Day War in 1967, and subsequently a 400-room hotel was built in Taba. Following the 1973 Yom-Kippur War, when Egypt and Israel were negotiating the exact position of the border in preparation for the 1979 peace treaty, Israel claimed that Taba had been on the Ottoman side of a border agreed between the Ottomans and British Egypt in 1906 and had, therefore, been in error in its two previous agreements. Although most of Sinai was returned to Egypt in 1982, Taba was the last portion to be returned. After a long dispute, the issue was submitted to an international commission composed of one Israeli, one Egyptian, and three outsiders. In 1988, the commission ruled in Egypt's favour, and Israel returned Taba to Egypt in 1989. (Signing of Agreement With Israel Turns Over Last of Sinai to Egypt)

Quote:
If you want to listen to something, please listen to everything not just what you want to listen to.
Right on.
--
July 19th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
You're kidding, right? The video was about the killing of the boy by IDF soldiers.
Only a Nazi like yourself would attempt such a flimsy excuse. You have lots and lots of words, but not a single word of what you have said disproves that the boy died of his wounds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
The problem lies with Hamas, not Israel.
Hamas is the democratically elected government and as such has every right to defend the illegal occupation of all Palestinian land. Israel whines about Hamas, yet you completely fail to mention that it was only after 40 years of ongoing Israeli Crimes against humanity that the Palestinians finally decided that they needed a party who would actively resist the illegal Israeli occupation of their land. Compared with Israel's murderous government they present a model of absolute tolerance and determination to rid their land of a criminal regime.

You totally ignore the fact that the Israelis have no right either legally or morally to even be there. Their blockade is internationally condemned, the Gazans have every right to attempt to defend themselves against murderous occupier of their land, Israel is there illegally and all that they do is illegal. For a start the blockade is judged as constituting "Collective punishment" a crime against humanity and otherwise contrary to several International laws.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
The usual rubbish.
Pure fact, facts that you cannot disprove.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
At that time there were no "Palestinians", they were all Arabs. They attacked Israel to destroy it, not to "liberate Palestine".
Stop being obtuse. It has been shown that these people were known and referred to as Palestinians from at least the 5th century BCE. The British administrators used the term Palestine, and believe it or not, people living in Palestine are Palestinians by default. It interests me how you connect the expulsion of Jews from other Arab countries to attacking Israel, they never went near Palestine where the illegal state of Israel is located.
July 19th, 2013  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Nice try. read this article that British based Arabic newspaper Al Quds al-Arabi published : There is no apartheid in Israel. Use Google translate if you have to.
The question is should I believe you or should I believe the Israeli's themselves as they say:


Oddly enough I don't really believe either of you but as I have to pick a side here I guess I will take the lesser of two evils and stick with the side offering stats, interesting though how you equate Zionism to Israel as a whole.
July 19th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Nice try. read this article that British based Arabic newspaper Al Quds al-Arabi published : There is no apartheid in Israel. Use Google translate if you have to.
Not even the Israelis believe that
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haaretz 16/07/2013
By Roy Isacowitz | 17:06 17.07.13
An apartheid of hearts, minds and international law.

Israel does not have to precisely replicate South Africa to conform to the international definition of an apartheid regime. It’s time for those who object to the Israel apartheid analogy to understand this
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (ICSPCA), which preceded the Rome Statute, defined apartheid as “inhumane acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them.” (If Friedman wants to quibble over the term “racial,” he should take a look at his Israeli ID card, which conflates nationality with race and religion.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
July 19th, 2013  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
Only a Nazi like yourself would attempt such a flimsy excuse. You have lots and lots of words, but not a single word of what you have said disproves that the boy died of his wounds.
In the film there's no proof whatsoever that the boy even did have a wound. No blood, no screaming from pain. The father even had 12 wounds from Israeli gunfire but no blood to be seen! But there's more. The Palestinian cameraman Talal Abu Rahma claimed the boy died at 3 p.m but Mohammed Tawil, a doctor at Gaza's Al-Shifra Hospital, said the boy (who was to be buried as Muhammad al-Durrah) was admitted at 10 a.m. (the incident started at 2 p.m.). He also claimed the IDF soldiers fired 400 rounds at the two but he wall at the site of the incident clearly shows only eight holes.
You better do your homework.

Quote:
Hamas is the democratically elected government and as such has every right to defend the illegal occupation of all Palestinian land. Israel whines about Hamas, yet you completely fail to mention that it was only after 40 years of ongoing Israeli Crimes against humanity that the Palestinians finally decided that they needed a party who would actively resist the illegal Israeli occupation of their land. Compared with Israel's murderous government they present a model of absolute tolerance and determination to rid their land of a criminal regime.
First of all, Abbas had the legal power to remove the Hamas government, which he did. He did that to protect the Palestinian state and he was right. The West Bank goes well, Gaza is very problematic. You know, Hamas' democracy is the same as Morsi's: 1 person , 1 vote, ....1 time. As in Iran.

The occupation is legal because of the lack of prior sovereignty over these territories (the "Palestinians" were not a "High Contracting Party" as required by Article 2 of the Convention). The Arabs refused to be the legal occupants of the territories given to them while Israel accepted theirs. Abbas would call it later a huge blunder on part of the Arabs. Ever wondered why the Arab negotiating party was called "Arab Higher Committee" and not Palestinian Higher Commitee? Did you know that the commitee's chairman was Haj Amin al-Husseini? You know, Hitler's friend and holocaust supporter, who started the first riots against the Jews not to free Palestine but to join Syria. He also opposed joining with Jordan, populated by a majority of Arab Palestinians. Your view of Israel is very biased and very wrong.

Quote:
You totally ignore the fact that the Israelis have no right either legally or morally to even be there. Their blockade is internationally condemned, the Gazans have every right to attempt to defend themselves against murderous occupier of their land, Israel is there illegally and all that they do is illegal. For a start the blockade is judged as constituting "Collective punishment" a crime against humanity and otherwise contrary to several International laws.
Israel isn't there where it shouldn't be. Israel has good relations with the Palestinian government who only rule part of their territory (West Bank). The Oslo accords gave the Palestinians their first state ever. Do not forget that Egypt, an Arab country, also participates in the blockade. So we have two countries doing the same blockade and only one gets the blame. When Israel destroys smuggling tunnels it's an outrage. Whe Egypt destroys tunnels no one cares. Arabs are allowed to do anything (100.000 killed in Syria alone, a lot of killing in Iraq) it's bunsiness as usual but when Israel defends itself by way af a retaliation and kill a few militants the media is full of outrage. Very biased view.

Quote:
Pure fact, facts that you cannot disprove.
You call unlogical reasoning facts???????

Quote:
Stop being obtuse. It has been shown that these people were known and referred to as Palestinians from at least the 5th century BCE. The British administrators used the term Palestine, and believe it or not, people living in Palestine are Palestinians by default. It interests me how you connect the expulsion of Jews from other Arab countries to attacking Israel, they never went near Palestine where the illegal state of Israel is located.
Palestine was never an Arab state until after the Oslo accords. The Romans didn't call it Palestine but renamed "Provincia Judea" into "Provincia Syria Palaestina". people living there , before being expelled by the Romans, called themselves "Yehudim" the ones who took their place "Syrians". That's why the cleric Haj Amin al-Husseini wanted "Palestine" to be part of Syria, not independent. The people you refer to are Greek immigrants who's society perished. The UN called it Palestine because the UN was made of mostly christian states. They all were told that Jesus lived in Palestine, an abridgement of Province Syria Palestine. The people living in "Palestine" didn't call it that way. For them they were part of Syria. That's why the jews coming from Europe called themselves Palestinians and the "Palestinians" Syrians until Arafat told them to use the word Palestinians.
Israel was attacked in 1948 by the following states : Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon (one battle) supported by volunteers from Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Pakistan and Sudan. It is not because you call Israel illegal that the same is true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
The question is should I believe you or should I believe the Israeli's themselves as they say:


Oddly enough I don't really believe either of you but as I have to pick a side here I guess I will take the lesser of two evils and stick with the side offering stats, interesting though how you equate Zionism to Israel as a whole.
That's not a fact, that's an opinion. fact is that all Israeli citizens (Jew, Arab, etc) have the same constitutional right. Wether you like it or not doesn't matter. There are many court verdicts in favor of Arabs. There are Arab judges and in 2007 there even was a muslim Arab minister. So stop whining.
July 19th, 2013  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
In the film there's no proof whatsoever that the boy even did have a wound. No blood, no screaming from pain. The father even had 12 wounds from Israeli gunfire but no blood to be seen! But there's more. The Palestinian cameraman Talal Abu Rahma claimed the boy died at 3 p.m but Mohammed Tawil, a doctor at Gaza's Al-Shifra Hospital, said the boy (who was to be buried as Muhammad al-Durrah) was admitted at 10 a.m. (the incident started at 2 p.m.). He also claimed the IDF soldiers fired 400 rounds at the two but he wall at the site of the incident clearly shows only eight holes.
You better do your homework.
Your "Zionazi inspired homework" may be alright for you, as it is a matter of public record how they lie and distort the facts to suit themselves. I'm more interested in the known facts. None of what you have said proves the boy did not die, or even creates any doubt. You can count marks on stonework, you can lie and submit your Zionist hasbara , but it has nothing whatsoever to do with the boys death, a view generally supported outside of Israel. The simple fact that the Muhammad al Durrah cannot be found, nor any evidence of him being alive after the incident 12 years ago is good evidence that he was killed in the incident.

The French defamation case was definitely settled on June 26, 2013, by the French Court of Appeals: Karsenty was convicted of defamation and fined €7,000 by the Paris Court of Appeals. [6] Karsenty's version, which described the killing of young Mohammed Al Durah as "staged", was rejected by the French Court's final decision. So in view of the evidence and it's interpretation by "experts" the French court seems to support the cameraman's side of events.

The most telling evidence to support his death being that after the insult of Israeli lies about the matter Jamal al Durrah (his father) consented to having the body exhumed for forensic testing by an independent arbiter,... the Israelis never took up the option. Because they knew it was the boy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
First of all, Abbas had the legal power to remove the Hamas government, which he did. He did that to protect the Palestinian state and he was right.
So now you are against democracy? (not surprising) Whatever story you make up, Hamas is still the legally elected government, bought into being by Israel's history of more than 40 years of murder and war crimes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
The occupation is legal because of the lack of prior sovereignty over these territories (the "Palestinians" were not a "High Contracting Party" as required by Article 2 of the Convention). The Arabs refused to be the legal occupants of the territories given to them while Israel accepted theirs.
Thank you, Israel could not accept anything as no one gave them anything. You know this has all been settled before, Israel is a land of Illegal European immigrants who flooded the land of Palestine after the Brits were driven out as a result of Zionist terror campaign against the legitimate administrators of Palestine. They then started an admitted campaign of ethnic cleansing that continues to this day in direct contravention of a number of International laws.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Israel isn't there where it shouldn't be.
Quote me a credible source stating that European Jews and their descendants have a legal "right" to occupy any part of Palestine. (or anywhere else).
July 20th, 2013  
ScarabVenom
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
I firmly believe this.



In 1955 alone 260 Israeli citizens were killed by Fedayeen raids and Egypt, which got a significant amount of new Il-28 bpmbers and MiG 15 fighters started to intrude into Israeli air space. At that time, the IAF planes were inferior to the new Egyption ones. Israel would be helpless against a new Arab attack so they took the opportunity to fight along the British and French which guaranteed Israel's safety. The French gave Israel air protection.
Pressure to stop the fighting was more related to the French and British than the Israelis. Israel was satisfied with the destruction of the Egyptian air force by the British and French. The British got a 500 million$ US loan and the Soviet leader Nicolai Bulganin had threatened to destroy London and Paris with nuclear missiles. (Air Wars and Aircraft page 54)
Which part of that is from the book and which part is from you? Second, please tell me where you got the 260 Israeli citizens number. 5th of April, 1956 Israel kills 58 civilians. On 3rd of November, the UN reports 275 civilians killed by IDF.


Quote:
Well, the start of the 1967 war lies with Russia. On may 13, according to US government records, Moscow warned Cairo and Damascus that israel planned to launch an invasion of their countries on the 17th, using 13 brigades. This was an untrue report, transmitted through Sami Sheraf, the head of the KGB in Cairo and intended to make Nasser feel more dependent of Moscow. Nasser ordered two divisions into the Sinai. On the 16th Nasser ordered UN troops in the Sinai to withdraw from patrols to their two base camps. UN Secretary General U Thant said that if his exppeditionary forces could not carry out its assigned duties, he would withdraw them alltogether. Nasser was shocked but dared not back down. By the 19th, war war had still not come, and Egyptian and Israeli units faced each other accros the border. Egyptian forces had also taken over Sharm esh-Sheikh, at the Red Sea entrance, from UN troops, closing the Strait of Tiran. This gave Israel a casus belli of sorts. (Weapons p.522)
So, Egyptians did stuff on their territory disliking the UN forces. Yitzhak Rabin, the Israeli army chief of staff said "I do not believe that Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent into Sinai on May 14 would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it." General Mattityahu Peled, a member of Israel's general staff, said "the thesis according to which the danger of genocide weighed on us in June 1967, and that Israel struggled for its physical existence is only a bluff born and developed after the war." The UN forces were stationed along the border between Egypt and Israel following the 1956 war. Israel refused the stationing of UN troops on its soil, while Egypt accepted them. Egyptians had the right to withdraw them at any point. Speaking of the belli of sorts, if you're going to put law as your tool here then, accept the fact that also according to the UN law, all territories seized after the 1967 war are occupied territories making Israel an aggressor.
Quote:
Please tell everything!
Speaking about the incident, Egyptian commander Abdelatim Ramadan said: "Actually, two targets were hit by the Israelis. The first target was a group of military bases about 30 km. from the Suez Canal, which were targeted before, on the night of 1819 December 1969. The second target was the Bahr El-Baqar primary school. [ ... ] There comes a time to acknowledge an important fact in this area, that at those black days of Israeli bombing, the military targets were mixed with civilian targets. We can even say that in many cases the military targets were hiding behind civilian targets." ("The War of Attrition as Reflected in Egyptian Sources" (1995), p. 107, by Mustafa Kabha)
You have [...] up there, I would like to humbly ask what they stand for...second thing, there were 2 targets, cool, 1 was in 18 December 1969? As in 5 months before what we were talking about, I don't see where they are related. Third thing, let's say we'll agree on the military targets behind civilians thing, your source claims in many cases. Since we're speaking of 1 case which is the 8th of April incident, do you have valid proof that the school was somehow hiding a military base?
Quote:
Yes, as long as there was not a plan in place that gave Israel protection they would use that as a buffer zone. Again you forget to mention that after the peace deal all Israeli settlements ware dismantled (they did the same with the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza).
Honestly, how many buffers does Israel need? They had the entire Sinai as a buffer zone yet, they care so much about the half of the canal? The 100 meters? That gives a lot of security right there. And I have never denied the settlements being dismantled, I was basically basing an argument as they intended to stay in the Sinai. What made them leave it, I wonder?

Quote:
Taba was located on the Egyptian side of the armistice line agreed to in 1949. During the Suez Crisis in 1956 it was briefly occupied but returned to Egypt when Israel withdrew in 1957. Israel reoccupied the Sinai Peninsula after the Six-Day War in 1967, and subsequently a 400-room hotel was built in Taba. Following the 1973 Yom-Kippur War, when Egypt and Israel were negotiating the exact position of the border in preparation for the 1979 peace treaty, Israel claimed that Taba had been on the Ottoman side of a border agreed between the Ottomans and British Egypt in 1906 and had, therefore, been in error in its two previous agreements. Although most of Sinai was returned to Egypt in 1982, Taba was the last portion to be returned. After a long dispute, the issue was submitted to an international commission composed of one Israeli, one Egyptian, and three outsiders. In 1988, the commission ruled in Egypt's favour, and Israel returned Taba to Egypt in 1989. (Signing of Agreement With Israel Turns Over Last of Sinai to Egypt)
Yeah yeah, I know the story. Israel claims alot so, I stopped really caring about the claims. But the commission ruled in Egypt's favor, not just because they love Egypt, right?
Quote:

Right on.
Sure.
July 20th, 2013  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
That's not a fact, that's an opinion. fact is that all Israeli citizens (Jew, Arab, etc) have the same constitutional right. Wether you like it or not doesn't matter. There are many court verdicts in favor of Arabs. There are Arab judges and in 2007 there even was a muslim Arab minister. So stop whining.
Indeed but it is the opinion of Israeli Jews which weighs a little higher than a Belgian-Spaniard on issues that deal with Israel and it would appear that 56% of Israelis accept that despite legal equity Muslims in Israel suffer from institutional discrimination.
As for who is whining I would suggest that we are just pointing out why they are disliked and mistrusted you are the one whining that it not right.
 


Similar Topics
Israel rightfully own the West Bank .
Israel strikes Beirut suburb, tightens blockade
A conversation with Iranian dissident (MUST READ)
Palestinians
American racism