Israel invades the gaza strip.

[DeanNim]

I see. So the Arab Muslims have a right to 22 states extending from the Atlantic (North Africa) to the Pacific (Malaysia), and absolutely must have one more. But the Jews do not have a right to self-rule in even the tiny strip of land their forefathers have lived in for 4000 years. Yes, that makes perfect sense.

to Malaysia ? excuse me???

and #prayforIsrael is the most disgusting trend i've ever seen on twitter.

[Flonne]

to Malaysia ? excuse me???

and #prayforIsrael is the most disgusting trend i've ever seen on twitter.

What are you even talking about at this point.

[DeanNim]

What are you even talking about at this point.

The fact that arab muslims dont have the rights to malaysia, singapore, indonesia, thailand ??????

And seriously, the Palestinians didn't even have any say when Israel was formed. you think that THAT is fair ?

[SaptaZapta]

The fact that arab muslims dont have the rights to malaysia, singapore, indonesia, thailand ??????

Sorry, you're right, Indonesia. Totally invalidates my earlier post ... not.

And seriously, the Palestinians didn't even have any say when Israel was formed. you think that THAT is fair ?

I'm not saying Muslims have no right to their current states. I am saying they don't really need another. They have plenty of room for their brethren that left Israel when it was made. There was no need to keep them in refugee camps for decades (Gaza was under Egyptian rule until 1967. The West Bank belonged to Jordan. Neither was willing to show proper Arab hospitality to their brothers), and get to the situation we have today.
Jews have no other home. The UN voted to give them one in this area, and plenty of Arab representatives were allowed to speak on the matter. The UN actually voted in 1947 to split it between Jews and Arabs. The Jews agreed. The Arabs were unwilling to share, and when the British (who were holding the area as a Mandate since WWI) left in 1948, they attacked. They lost.

[DeanNim]

Sorry, you're right, Indonesia. Totally invalidates my earlier post ... not.



I'm not saying Muslims have no right to their current states. I am saying they don't really need another. They have plenty of room for their brethren that left Israel when it was made. There was no need to keep them in refugee camps for decades (Gaza was under Egyptian rule until 1967. The West Bank belonged to Jordan. Neither was willing to show proper Arab hospitality to their brothers), and get to the situation we have today.
Jews have no other home. The UN voted to give them one in this area, and plenty of Arab representatives were allowed to speak on the matter. The UN actually voted in 1947 to split it between Jews and Arabs. The Jews agreed. The Arabs were unwilling to share, and when the British (who were holding the area as a Mandate since WWI) left in 1948, they attacked. They lost.

1) no the arab muslims still dont have any (political)rights to the countries in the pacific. afaik, the arab muslims only have the middle east(and north africa).

2) most of the jews that is in israel might have ancestors from there but they themselves are not from there, you'd expect the arab states to not see this as religious threat when jews from all over the world were suddenly given land located spot-on in the middle east ????

[ImagineAll]

you sir, are retarded.



thank you for taking the words right out of my mouth. hamas wouldnt be doing what he is doing to the pomegranatehole we call israel if it had never existed in the first place.

bottom-line is : anyone who is pro-israel is retarded and need to start accessing the situation and the root cause better.

Seriously...? Just wow.

[DeanNim]

Seriously...? Just wow.

yes because like i said, the arabs would've probably been ok with it if the jews were actual jews that were born and lived there. but they werent... majority came from scattered places.

[SaptaZapta]

1) no the arab muslims still dont have any (political)rights to the countries in the pacific. afaik, the arab muslims only have the middle east(and north africa).

2) most of the jews that is in israel might have ancestors from there but they themselves are not from there, you'd expect the arab states to not see this as religious threat when jews from all over the world were suddenly given land located spot-on in the middle east ????

1) "Only" North Africa and the Middle East... ok. Look at your world map. See how big that area is. See if you can locate the sliver of land that is Israel/Palestine at all. Think really hard why the people from that tiny sliver of land can't find homes in all that huge area.

2) No, but I'd expect them to come to terms with it after over 60 years. Also, religious threat? In what way?

[DeanNim]

1) "Only" North Africa and the Middle East... ok. Look at your world map. See how big that area is. See if you can locate the sliver of land that is Israel/Palestine at all. Think really hard why the people from that tiny sliver of land can't find homes in all that huge area.

2) No, but I'd expect them to come to terms with it after over 60 years. Also, religious threat? In what way?

1) The 'christian' world is larger, why not place them there ? most of them were from europe anyways.

2) Jews and muslims have been in a long running 'war' with each other for thousands of years. 60 years is a miniscule length to expect a long running tension to be solved.

[Words]

thank you for taking the words right out of my mouth. hamas wouldnt be doing what he is doing to the pomegranatehole we call israel if it had never existed in the first place.

bottom-line is : anyone who is pro-israel is retarded and need to start accessing the situation and the root cause better.

Yeah, that's not what I meant. It's not only Israel who's at fault, Arabs are too. When Israel was created all they had to do was accept it tolerantly and learn to live with them. It's impossible for me to see why that can't be done. All justifications one might have to support one group or the other are based on intolerance and a narrow view of the world. They (both) could and should live together.

[SaptaZapta]

1) The 'christian' world is larger, why not place them there ? most of them were from europe anyways.

Jews are not Christians.
Christians and Jews have been in a longer running war than Jews and Muslims, actually. Centuries upon centuries of anti-Semitisim in the form of pogroms, inquisition, blood-libel, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", the Dreyfus case (google "J'accuse") and finally that little altercation in Europe in the 1940's, have convinced both the Jews and the World that they need a place where they can rule and defend themselves.

2) Jews and muslims have been in a long running 'war' with each other for thousands of years. 60 years is a miniscule length to expect a long running tension to be solved.

Muslims haven't even existed for thousands of years.
But yes, it's a long-running on-and-off dispute. However, there was no need to use the Palestinians as pawns in this game. The Arab countries could have taken them in, while still carrying on the Jihad against Israel. Having these poor people live in refugee camps for generations as an excuse for continued hostilities on Israel ("we must get these people's home back") and to make them desperate enough for suicide bombings and such, is absolutely unforgivable.

[DeanNim]

Jews are not Christians.
Christians and Jews have been in a longer running war than Jews and Muslims, actually. Centuries upon centuries of anti-Semitisim in the form of pogroms, inquisition, blood-libel, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion", the Dreyfus case (google "J'accuse") and finally that little altercation in Europe in the 1940's, have convinced both the Jews and the World that they need a place where they can rule and defend themselves.

Woops, my mistake, the 'muslims' pre-muhammad are also part of 'christianity' and the religious dispute sort of branched off and continued until now.

Muslims haven't even existed for thousands of years.
But yes, it's a long-running on-and-off dispute. However, there was no need to use the Palestinians as pawns in this game. The Arab countries could have taken them in, while still carrying on the Jihad against Israel. Having these poor people live in refugee camps for generations as an excuse for continued hostilities on Israel ("we must get these people's home back") and to make them desperate enough for suicide bombings and such, is absolutely unforgivable.

I think it should've been pretty clear that the arab countries do not want any more jews on-top of the population that they already had(again, religious threat). and what about the palestinians that were killed by the jews ? The UN shouldn't have meddled with the arabs in the first place.

[SaptaZapta]

I think it should've been pretty clear that the arab countries do not want any more jews on-top of the population that they already had(again, religious threat). and what about the palestinians that were killed by the jews ? The UN shouldn't have meddled with the arabs in the first place.

Again, what is this "religious threat" you speak of?

Also, the area was under British rule, after the Turks were defeated in WWI. The British interefered everywhere. They brought in a Saudi sheik to rule over trans-Jordan, which was populated by Palestinians. Jordan still has a Palestinian majority, but whenever they rebel, the King there puts it down. (google "black september") And the British brought the issue of the area between the sea and the river to the UN to resolve, because there were already areas of Jewish majority here. The UN voted to give those areas to the Jews for self-rule, and the rest to the Arabs.
That the Arabs didn't want the Jews here was known, but the Jews had no other place to go. This is their only homeland, no matter how long most of them had been exiled from here. They came and settled peacefully, in empty areas, or purchased property fair and square. When they were attacked they defended themselves.

[DeanNim]

Again, what is this "religious threat" you speak of?

Also, the area was under British rule, after the Turks were defeated in WWI. The British interefered everywhere. They brought in a Saudi sheik to rule over trans-Jordan, which was populated by Palestinians. Jordan still has a Palestinian majority, but whenever they rebel, the King there puts it down. (google "black september") And the British brought the issue of the area between the sea and the river to the UN to resolve, because there were already areas of Jewish majority here. The UN voted to give those areas to the Jews for self-rule, and the rest to the Arabs.
That the Arabs didn't want the Jews here was known, but the Jews had no other place to go. This is their only homeland, no matter how long most of them had been exiled from here. They came and settled peacefully, in empty areas, or purchased property fair and square. When they were attacked they defended themselves.

Religious threat as in how the muslims in general are under constant impression that the christians and jews are going to take over their land. And the muslims won their own war when they took over the middle east, and im guessing that is why so many are against jews having their own country there. And it didnt help that majority of the jews weren't even born there.

[SaptaZapta]

Religious threat as in how the muslims in general are under constant impression that the christians and jews are going to take over their land. And the muslims won their own war when they took over the middle east, and im guessing that is why so many are against jews having their own country there. And it didnt help that majority of the jews weren't even born there.

The Muslims won some and lost some, over the past 1400 years, what with the crusades and all. Do you say they have a right to Spain as well, since they conquered that once?
In the last round before the establishment of Israel, the Turks lost WWI and the Christians (French and British) took over this area.

Anyway, you know what, suppose for the sake of discussion that the UN made a mistake, 67 years ago.
Does this mean it would be justified, now, to uproot six million people, most of whom were born here*, in order to return 1.7 million people to a home most of them have never seen, because their grandparents left it of their own free will?
Yes, free will.
Israel, inside the 1967 borders, currently has 20% Arab population. That's about 1.5 million people. These are Arabs who stayed in 1948, and their offspring. They weren't massacred, they weren't deported. Those who stayed were given full citizenship and continue to live happily in their ancestral homes - or wherever else they choose - and practice their religion freely. The ones that ran because they were sure the Jews would do unto them as they would have done had they been victors... well, they made a mistake and they and their children and children's children are paying for it now. It makes absolutely no sense nor justice to make the Jews pay now for the Arabs' mistakes in 1948.

Instead of dwelling on past mistakes and injustices, a solution needs to be found for the existing situation. Israel exists and its citizens deserve to live peacefully on where they are (by and large. Minor population exchanges are possible). Gaza's denizens are living in mostly intolerable conditions, due to overcrowding and no real means of self-support. They need to be given decent lives.
How to solve all that, with ancient grudges and new hatred on all sides, and cynical leaders/politicians using it all to their benefit? Unfortunately, nobody knows.

*as of 2006, 66% of Israeli Jews were born in Israel. Over 40% had an Israeli-born parent. I'm looking for more recent data, but these percentages have been on the rise steadily since 1948.

[MuscleWizard]

I'm going to flip flop a little bit here on what I said before, but realize I'm merely asking a question (not just to you, but everyone else as well). What makes an American life worth more than an Israeli or a Palestinian life? If we have the capacity and the means to aid in the situation are we not under a moral obligation to intercede? Does the buck stop at only providing aid to our own citizens? As much as I am opposed to the idea of us policing every little issue in the world, are we also just expected to sit idle while thousands upon thousands of innocents are killed?

Food for thought.

It has nothing to do with the value of life.
It has to do with the fact that it's not our problem, and jumping in on two nations settling an account that's been open for literally ever, is not our problem.

Seriously, israel and palestine have been fighting tooth and claw for centuries, let them settle it.

[Satellite]

If I recall right, when US has previously interfered into conflicts they haven't solved it but usually just made it worse.

[snowie72]

you sir, are retarded.



thank you for taking the words right out of my mouth. hamas wouldnt be doing what he is doing to the pomegranatehole we call israel if it had never existed in the first place.

bottom-line is : anyone who is pro-israel is retarded and need to start accessing the situation and the root cause better.

Its a shame you have to insult me to try and get your point across.. :(

Now you're trying to blame the current generation of Israeli people on the mistakes made by the governments which placed when there back after WWII. As other people have stated since your last reply, many Arab nations could of accepted the Palestine people. Look around the worlds at nations who have offered misplaced populations asylum, Gaza is only around 500k People.. I'm sure after more than 40 years they could have integrated the Palestine people into the surrounding nations.

[KhainiWest]

Deannim sounding specifically republican about this issue.

Iron knee

[DrRusty]

I don't understand.

I said we should interfere, and Curtiss and Imagineall downvoted my post. Then I said let them go at it, and Curtiss and Imagineall still downvoted my post

You guys are retarded rofl.