So why do people hate Israel? - Page 78




 
--
 
June 20th, 2012  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayManKiller3
Their settlement building is not defence, that is correct, but their occupancy of these areas is as long as they are attacked. This is why the PLO needs to stop sitting on their hands and realize they should do whatever they can to get themselves recognized. They should not at all step off of the negotiation table. When the world see that it is only Israel that is unwilling to proceed with this solution, even U.S will have a hard time supporting them. The negroponte doctrine U.S has adopted would not cover this. For the PLO to be pushing negotiations desperately and Hamas stop violence, would put Israel into a corner. This is very obvious, but for some reason they choose not to take this option.


Your B scenario is not likely to happen and as far as I am aware most of the community only backs the 1967 border with a independent controlled Jarusalem (something Israel probably won't agree to as they consider it their capital). I don't see even U.S agreeing with something like that.


I agree with the rest of what you said though.

I blame the incompetence of the Palestinian leaderships (especially Hamas) more than I do Israel for the hardship they are having right now.
Bollocks, you are now justifying the Germans occupying France because of the French resistance.
June 20th, 2012  
RayManKiller3
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Bollocks, you are now justifying the Germans occupying France because of the French resistance.

Horrible example you are putting what I said against. The justification for Germany occupying France would be because of France declaring war on them, not because of the resistance that occured after they occupied, even though France didn't get a chance to attack. What happens during occupancy is what should be watched. Occupancy, is usually required for demilitarization, annexation, and puppet lifting, but occupany is not the 2. Not that I am siding with the Germans on this, but in terms of security, occupying France was justified (for them). The difference is Germany was an aggressive state that took over Poland by force for land grabs, which is why France declared war.

You are only looking at one peice of the pie, which is the occupation of France, disregarding why France declared war.

I don't agree with Israel on a lot of stuff it does, but it do have a justified defence concern, even if the rockets don't kill anyone, it still does damage to property and worry the Israeli people. The state has no borders and they make no attempt to stop the rocket attacks, allowing Israel to provide it's own way to defend itself.
June 20th, 2012  
MontyB
 
 
Oh you are siding with the Germans on this one only this time they are flying an Israeli flag.

I would also suggest that you are also putting the cart before the horse as had it not been for the influx of European refugees after WW2 the Palestinians would have had the entire area as their nation as was promised by the British during WW1 before they decided to promise the same bit of land to every man and his dog.

Once France was defeated and had signed the surrender documents they were no threat to Germany therefore had the resistance not been killing Germans surely by your logic the Germans would have gone home and for the record France did attack Germany look up the Saar Offensive.
--
June 20th, 2012  
RayManKiller3
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Oh you are siding with the Germans on this one only this time they are flying an Israeli flag.

Once France was defeated and had signed the surrender documents they were no threat to Germany therefore had the resistance not been killing Germans surely by your logic the Germans would have gone home and for the record France did attack Germany look up the Saar Offensive.

Yes my mistake, I didn't read about the Saar Offensive.

You are correct, they would have no longer needed to go on with France, that is why I said "to them" in paratheses. They can, however, see it as a security concern especially considering the next one they had to watch out for was Britain and it's commonwealth. Like I said, I am not siding with them, but it can be seen to some as a justified defence Germany had done if they chose not to look at the bigger picture.

I only realize Israel's occupancy because there is no recognized state border and arm shipments do come into those areas and they do use it against them. Israel has a policy of retaliation. As long as Hamas or any other terrorist decided to attack Israel using those places as a spot to launch from without that state (PLO) trying to intervene, Israel will be justified in retaliation. Again this is the same logic U.S used against Afghanistan when people criticized it because terrorists aren't a state, but an organization of people.
June 20th, 2012  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayManKiller3
Their settlement building is not defence, that is correct, but their occupancy of these areas is as long as they are attacked.
So now you say that the Israeli civil occupation is justified because the Palestinians are resisting that occupation?,......

I dunno whether you are just plain "thick", or you just don't think what you are saying. Do you ever just stop and think through what you are trying to say before you post it? On top of which, you completely ignore the fact that civil occupation by an aggressor of any militarily occupied areas is completely illegal,... for any reason.
June 20th, 2012  
Yossarian
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
So now you say that the Israeli civil occupation is justified because the Palestinians are resisting that occupation?,......

I dunno whether you are just plain "thick", or you just don't think what you are saying. Do you ever just stop and think through what you are trying to say before you post it? On top of which, you completely ignore the fact that civil occupation by an aggressor of any militarily occupied areas is completely illegal,... for any reason.

Same here, how can the Palestinians just sit this out with boots crashing through their front doors?

The minute they cease to resist is the minute what small bit they have left dissapears off the map.

And I can already see that if they were forced to live in official Israel then their second class status would remain, if they could at all.

It's kinda hard to be concerned about someone else from another country's defense when they are bulldozing your home or business to build another settlement, restricted roadways and checkpoints included.
June 20th, 2012  
RayManKiller3
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
So now you say that the Israeli civil occupation is justified because the Palestinians are resisting that occupation?,......

I dunno whether you are just plain "thick", or you just don't think what you are saying. Do you ever just stop and think through what you are trying to say before you post it? On top of which, you completely ignore the fact that civil occupation by an aggressor of any militarily occupied areas is completely illegal,... for any reason.

I said the occupancy of areas is justified as long as they are attacked. This implies that they are not the aggressor. I said I disagree with their settlement building, which no country recognize anyways.


Quote:
Same here, how can the Palestinians just sit this out with boots crashing through their front doors?

The minute they cease to resist is the minute what small bit they have left dissapears off the map.
You are right, they should resist, but not the methods they have been using which brings them no where. Hamas made it really difficult for the west to push Israel due to it being labeled a terror organization and the PLO's relation with it.

They need do it through legal means. No small bits will disappear off the map... No country recognize their settlements and no country recognize any borders other than the 1967 and/or 1947 borders (with most recognizing the former).

Palestine have no need to fear so much as to use terror tactics when it comes to their existence. If they stuck with a much more longer sighted approach, it would have pushed Israel into a corner.
June 20th, 2012  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
So how about this one then?
Netanyahu proved Israel doesn't want peace
Netanyahu shows to the world that Israel wants neither an agreement nor a Palestinian state, and for that matter not peace, either.

By Gideon Levy | Sep.25, 2011 | 12:48 AM | 61



Tweet
On Friday night Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu once again proved himself to be an excellent elucidator, this time in the service of the Palestinians: He demonstrated to the world, better than even Mahmoud Abbas, why they had no recourse but to appeal to the United Nations. If there is one clear take-home message from his Hezekiah and Isaiah speech, it is this: The Palestinians (and the world ) can no longer expect anything from Israel. Nothing.
Netanyahu was particularly persuasive when he explained that a Palestinian state would endanger Israel - narrow waist, just hundreds of meters from Israeli cities, thousands of rockets - one giant blah-blah that willfully ignores the possibility of peace. A Palestinian state, perhaps, but absolutely not in our time, and not in our school of thought.
Our school of thought seemed especially deluded Friday night. Every decent Israeli must be ashamed of their prime minister, who stands before the world and tries to sell it the same old shopworn, even rotten goods that are long past their expiration date, expounding on ancient, irrelevant chapters of history and attempting to market cheap sentimentality like a beggar who exposes his wounds, both real and imaginary, to passersby. And the beggar is in fact a regional power.
Netanyahu, peddler of emotions, did not shrink from or forget anything, save reality. Abraham the patriarch, Hezekiah, Isaiah, pogroms, the Holocaust, 9/11, the children, the grandchildren and, of course, Gilad Shalit - all fodder for the tear wringer that assuredly didn't bring forth a single tear anywhere on the planet, with the possible exception of a few Jewish nursing homes in Boca Raton, Florida. There, perhaps, people were still moved by this kitschy death speech.
Netanyahu needed thousands of years of history to obscure reality, but Abbas' sense of history proved to be much more developed: He had no need to call up distant memories to elicit sympathy; all he needed was to soberly depict current events in order to attempt to shape a new history. The world and the auditorium cheered for Abbas because he spoke like a 21st-century statesman, not like a co-opted archaeologist of centuries past. Abraham or Ibrahim, Hezekiah or Netanyahu, Benjamin or Jacob-Israel, Jew or Judea - our prime minister's Bible and Holocaust stories should have made Israelis sitting down to their Friday night dinner feel awkward and uncomfortable. Is that all we have to sell to the world? Is that all we have to say? Is that what is being said on our behalf? Is that what we look like?
The faces said it all. Sitting around the table of Netanyahu's cheerleading squad (all of them Ashkenazi men, of course ) were two kippa-wearers, two generals, two former Russians, three current beard-wearers - a depressing and threatening group portrait of Israel's extreme right, class of 2011. The table of the Israeli delegation, even more than Netanyahu himself, revealed the true face of the most denounced country in the world today, with the exception of Iran and North Korea. They clapped, politely and obediently, not including Avigdor Lieberman and his loyal servant, Daniel Ayalon.
Israel's real face was also seen in Israel; Lieberman wasn't the only one to call Abbas' judicious, impressive address an "incitement speech." Joining the chorus, as usual, was Tzipi Livni - the Israeli alternative - who "didn't like the speech."
What was there not to like about Abbas' speech, apart from his silly mistake in failing to mention the Jews, together with the Christians and Muslims, to whom this precious land belongs? What in his speech was anything but true and very painful? "Enough" of the occupation? Ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem and the Jordan Valley? Obstructing checkpoints on the way to the hospital, and settlements that are a barrier to peace? What was incorrect, damn it? "A difficult speech," the chorus of Israeli commentators sang immediately afterward; indeed, a difficult speech describing an even more difficult reality - but what do they know about reality? And not a soul asked: Why isn't Israel reciting the travelers' prayer for the Palestinians, for their journey to statehood.
On Friday night the final curtain fell on Netanyahu's masked ball of a two-state solution. Hiding behind the curtain are darkness and gloom. And in that lies an event of historical performance: It proved to the world that Israel wants neither an agreement nor a Palestinian state, and for that matter not peace, either. See you at the next war.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition...peace-1.386558

With 24,800,000 hits I am sure I can get this thread to 1000 pages if I really have to, but are you prepared to believe the Israeli's themselves or do you know better than them as well?
Netanyahu is not the right guy for peace, nor is the leadership of Hamas. I prefer Peres. But as long as the Palestinians keep shooting rockets at Israel, they will choose someone like Netanyahu.
June 20th, 2012  
VDKMS
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yossarian
Same here, how can the Palestinians just sit this out with boots crashing through their front doors?

The minute they cease to resist is the minute what small bit they have left dissapears off the map.

And I can already see that if they were forced to live in official Israel then their second class status would remain, if they could at all.

It's kinda hard to be concerned about someone else from another country's defense when they are bulldozing your home or business to build another settlement, restricted roadways and checkpoints included.
Rubbish. The Israelis allready have reached out for peace to the Palestinians. They unilaterally destroyed the settlements in Gaza, drew back their military and gave the land back to the Palestinians and instead of another hand to augment the peace the Palestinians shot rockets at Israel.

And you are blaming Israel? They will not let this happen again with the West Bank. So blame the Palestinians, they screwed it up again.
June 20th, 2012  
Yossarian
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by VDKMS
Rubbish. The Israelis allready have reached out for peace to the Palestinians. They unilaterally destroyed the settlements in Gaza, drew back their military and gave the land back to the Palestinians and instead of another hand to augment the peace the Palestinians shot rockets at Israel.

And you are blaming Israel? They will not let this happen again with the West Bank. So blame the Palestinians, they screwed it up again.

Both sides are guilty of screwing the pooch, multiple times.

This topic seems like falling in love, one person can fall for another but the most difficult thing in the world is to have both persons fall in love with each other at the same exact time.

So is the timing for either party here to fall into the mindset of any productive negotiations at the same moment as the other.

As for continued annexing this seems unwise to justify any Israel application of force for any Israeli effort to declare justification.
 


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