1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians

Mr. Incognito

I see no difference between Israel and Nazi party germany with their genocide and death camps.

They have systematically rounded the Palestinians into camps, cut off food and water supplies, electricity and controlled their movements with checkpoints. When they predicably revolt, they are bombed and shot with high tech weopanry and THEN Israel has the audacity to claim the moral high ground.

It makes me sick.

Israel is a horrible, bigoted nation full of horrible bigoted hypocrites. This has nothing to do with anti semitisim, the same ugliness is happening in Iraq, and Africa where indigenous people are being oppressed. If History had any sense of humour the Palestinians will rise up and surround Israel, and then when the last bastions of Israeliis are surrounded and cut off and resort to suicide attacks the Palestinians can bomb them as terrorists.

IRISH RAIL

Keith186 wrote: »

Unfotunately this is sort of a catch 22 situation.

Israeli ****ers take their land and oppress them, some people take it into their own hands because they think it's the only way it will work is by violence and the way things are there they have little options. Jews have plenty of money in the American economy and the US feel obliged to support them, if Palestinians where of a Christian faith the Israeli's wouldn't get away with this.

So the Palestinians are ****ed unless HAMAS stop firing rockets & if you were one of them why would you bother?

muslims have plenty of money in the us economy as well
you fail to see this is a war against terrorism not religion
I would bother because I would not want retaliation but rather a FULL ceasefire by both sides not the mickey mouse one hamas tries to pass off it engaged in and then maybe the ensuing peace could have a more permanant ring about it.

Boston

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I see no difference between Israel and Nazi party germany with their genocide and death camps.

The lack of both a genocide and death camps would be the first thing I notice.

IRISH RAIL

that post looks like it came straight from a hamas website

Don Diego

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

And dont Israelis also have a choice? Isnt it they who keep committing terrorist atrocities against the Palestinian people?

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The same could be said in reverse could it not? If the Israelis didnt engage in terrorist acts against the Palestinians then things might be better.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

What about if you were part of a group who stole another peoples lands to create your own, waged war against all of its neighbours, stole land from all of its neighbours and continue to occupy land illegally and are in violation of more UN resolutions than any other country.... would you assume they had it coming??

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

The Saint

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Um the problem with the 2001 Durban conference was regarding the equation of Zionism with racism ( I suggest you go back further in the thread and see the discussion on the Aparthied analogy, some see it as applicable others not in semantics but in practice. Nothing to do with the right of Israel to exist). There is nothing anti-semitic about the arguement. I'm willing to discuss this further if you like.

The Arab Peace Initiative was offered a year later. You did not address the peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan; 2 of the 3 countries that went to war with Israel in 48, 67 and 73. Hmm, maybe they want to pull out of those treaties and join the Arab League in their quest to destroy Israel. Well....I'm going to say, maybe not.

It would also appear that Obama and brown see the Arab Peace Initiative as a good opportunity for peace.

On a visit to the Middle East last July, the president-elect said privately it would be “crazy” for Israel to refuse a deal that could “give them peace with the Muslim world”, according to a senior Obama adviser.

A bipartisan group of senior foreign policy advisers urged Obama to give the Arab plan top priority immediately after his election victory. They included Lee Hamilton, the former co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Democrat former national security adviser. Brzezinski will give an address tomorrow at Chatham House, the international relations think tank, in London.

Brent Scowcroft, a Republican former national security adviser, joined in the appeal. He said last week that the Middle East was the most troublesome area in the world and that an early start to the Palestinian peace process was “a way to psychologically change the mood of the region”.

Advisers believe the diplomatic climate favours a deal as Arab League countries are under pressure from radical Islamic movements and a potentially nuclear Iran. Polls show that Palestinians and Israelis are in a mood to compromise.

Ross and Daniel Kurtzer, a former American ambassador to Israel, accompanied Obama on a visit to Israel last July. They also travelled to Ramallah, where Obama questioned Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader, about the prospects for the Arab plan.

According to a Washington source Obama told Abbas: “The Israelis would be crazy not to accept this initiative. It would give them peace with the Muslim world from Indonesia to Morocco.”

Well it seems (if reprots are true) that many US officials, many of them Jewish, see this as a great opportunity for peace. I agree. This seem like the best opportunity for a comprehensive agreement to many of the issues in the Middle East. I'm going to go along with these people rather than your analysis if you don't mind.

If you have any relevant arguement for this I will debate but what you've come up with as an arguement is nonsense.

Don Diego

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So by your (very twisted) logic.. Israel has a right to defend itself but Palestine doesn't? Nonsense.

In five months of a ceasefire, Gaza was starved and strangled. Hamas offered to renegotiate the ceasefire if the siege was lifted. Israel declined and then unleashed hell.

I hope one day you can see the truth.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

The Saint

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

I see no difference between Israel and Nazi party germany with their genocide and death camps.

Sorry and I don't know if I'll get banned for this but what you said is full of sh1t. While I'm more than sympathetic about the Palestinian situation and the disgusting way that they are treated there has not been an extermination of the people in the Occupied Territories like there was with the Jews during WWII. While they might be somewhat analogous to the Warsaw ghetto they are certainly nothing like the Nazi death camps.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

IRISH RAIL

Don Diego wrote: »

So by your (very twisted) logic.. Israel has a right to defend itself but Palestine doesn't? Nonsense.

In five months of a ceasefire, Gaza was starved and strangled. Hamas offered to renegotiate the ceasefire if the siege was lifted. Israel declined and then unleashed hell.

I hope one day you can see the truth.

I suggest you see some truth
Hamas never kept to the ceasefire continually firing rockets into Israel thruought the six month lull
Israel did want to keep the agreement and eygpt tried to convince hamas to do the same
but I guess the palestinian propaganda got to you before the common sence

Dudess

The Saint wrote: »

While I'm more than sympathetic about the Palestinian situation and the disgusting way that they are treated there has not been an extermination of the people in the Occupied Territories like there was with the Jews during WWII. While they might be somewhat analogous to the Warsaw ghetto they are certainly nothing like the Nazi death camps.

Agreed. It's unreasonable to compare Israel's treatment of the Palestinians to the Holocaust - extremely unreasonable.

marco murphy

Gaza is governed—if that is the correct word—by a terrorist militia whose charter states that "Israel will continue to exist until Islam obliterates it, just as it obliterated others before it" and "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors." Spot the side that is committed to terrorism.

Where did you read the charter?

The Saint

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So this happened after Israel twice rejected a comprehensive peace agreement with the 22 members of the Arab Leage while laying seige to Gaza and continuting the occupation and settlement expansion in the West Bank in contravention of international law.

By the by, I think that any anti-semetism or any form of racism are unacceptable and if they were made at that conference they are equally dispicable. However I don't think equating Zionism with racism is inherently racist as Zionism is a political ideology.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

The Saint

IRISH RAIL wrote: »

I suggest you see some truth
Hamas never kept to the ceasefire continually firing rockets into Israel thruought the six month lull
Israel did want to keep the agreement and eygpt tried to convince hamas to do the same
but I guess the palestinian propaganda got to you before the common sence

I presume you'll admit that Israel have violated ceasefires with Hamas as well as Fatah previously in the past (although technically Hamas did not violate a ceasefire as it had expired).

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Manic Moran

Perestroika wrote: »

You check out the quotes online from different professors about this, they have all categorically denied any wrong doing. No justification.

"'Twasn't me, Guv. You got the wrong bloke. I'm as honest as the day is long. The longer the daylight, the less I do wrong." Really, would you expect them to admit it if they were?

If Hamas find a University that researches for the Israeli military, does that make it a legitimate target?

Research is one thing. You could make the argument, but unless it is something which an only have military value, you're probably pushing it. Manufacture or storage is another. I'm sure that military-capable research is done at most universities around the world. Take the DARPA challenge of creating autonomous land vehicles. The goal is to automate the military logistical process, but the technology will also have unquestionable benefits to the civilian world as well. Most entrants are universities such as Berkeley or Stanford. You can just walk onto the campus. On the other hand, I think you would find it much harder to just walk onto a manufacturing facility such as Anniston Tank Depot, the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant or Hawthorne Munitions Storage Facility for valid reason.

NTM

The Saint

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Israel under international law is obligated to abide by the Geneva Conventions, the UN charter and UN security council resolutions. Please, I'd really love to know what you see as a good peace offer from the Arab states would look like. I'd also like for you to lay out the legitimate security concerns Israel would have with such a comprehensive agreement. I wonder if the Palestinians would put such security concerns on an agreement and whether they would be deemed legitimate and acceptable?

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Look, I think you're clever enough to recognise rhetoric as opposed a legitimate security threat. As I've said earlier and no one seems to want to engage with, Isreal has full peace agreements with the two main protagonists in every war Israel has engaged with and there have been few issues since. People are basically saying the same thing that was said back when those agreements were made. You can't trust the Arabs, they want to wipe Israel off the map, blah, blah. Further conflict has not transpired with any country that it has signed a peace agreement with. Israel hasn't gone to war with Syria directly in nearly 36 years. Israel and Syria have had on and off negotiations that have broken down over fairly minor (although significant reasons, access to water resources in the Sea of Galilee) so it's clear that an agreement is very likely if Israel accepts to abide by its international obligations. Time for a resolution no?

The Saint

Manic Moran wrote: »

Research is one thing. You could make the argument, but unless it is something which an only have military value, you're probably pushing it. Manufacture or storage is another. I'm sure that military-capable research is done at most universities around the world. Take the DARPA challenge of creating autonomous land vehicles. The goal is to automate the military logistical process, but the technology will also have unquestionable benefits to the civilian world as well. Most entrants are universities such as Berkeley or Stanford. You can just walk onto the campus. On the other hand, I think you would find it much harder to just walk onto a manufacturing facility such as Anniston Tank Depot, the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant or Hawthorne Munitions Storage Facility for valid reason.NTM

I can't find anything to say that the university was used for munitions manufacturing or storage. If military development is a legitimate reason to target universities surely MIT should be the no.1 target in the US given its long history in the field or R&D in weapons and weapons related activities and since many departments in many universities were largely funded by the Pentagon.

IRISH RAIL

The Saint wrote: »

I presume you'll admit that Israel have violated ceasefires with Hamas as well as Fatah previously in the past (although technically Hamas did not violate a ceasefire as it had expired).

your propoganda has failed you again if you do your reasearch you will see there has been a lot of rocket and mortor fire since june 19
thats why the crossings were closed off because of rocket fire

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e003.htm

have a look for yourself and if you think its propoganda reasearch the dates with other news agencys. Hamas never ever stopped firing rockets or mortars

The Saint

IRISH RAIL wrote: »

your propoganda has failed you again if you do your reasearch you will see there has been a lot of rocket and mortor fire since june 19
thats why the crossings were closed off because of rocket fire

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e003.htm

have a look for yourself and if you think its propoganda reasearch the dates with other news agencys. Hamas never ever stopped firing rockets or mortars

Jesus buddy, please don't start sh1t about "my propoganda" and that crap. I've not mentioned "Isreali appologist" stuff about those I've been debating with and I'd prefer not to have that crap dragged into the debates that I've been having. It's pointless and detracts from the arguements.

Anyway, why have food, medicine and food supplied been blocked?

Anyway, as I was saying, I wasn't just talking about this episode. There have been many ceasefires broken by both sides over the years just as Israel has broken them with Hamas.

Nice neutral source you got there anyway.

Jesus1222

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesus1222
This is a fair appraisal of the situation. For anybody who is confused about the situation or thinks they might misunderstand it, read it. It's far removed from the official narrative you'll be given on Sky and BBC.

http://tinyurl.ie/382

Frankie Lee wrote: »

You're wasting your time, these people will conveniently ignore facts that go against their argument.

True but for those who are undecided we can show them articles by serious journalists that pick apart what they will see on Sky News.

Manic Moran

The Saint wrote: »

I can't find anything to say that the university was used for munitions manufacturing or storage.

IDF are claiming manufacturing at least. Past precedent as claimed by Fatah indicates the place was once both used for manufacturing and storage, so the Israeli claim is not outlandish.

NTM

Nodin

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You earlier made a number of claims which I answered here
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=58406494&postcount=389
I await your answers with interest.

donegalfella wrote: »

If Palestinians genuinely want to protect their children, they shouldn't be engaging in terrorist acts against a neighbouring state.
.

Perhaps if they weren't cut off and being colonised by that state, there would be sufficient difference between "peace" and open hostility for them to decide to choose the former.

turgon

Apparently only something like 10 people have been killed by Hama rockets in the past few years. In three days Israel has claimed 80 civilians. That is the definition of disproportionate.

I know Im trying to be objective here, but in fairness Israel is like a bad schoolboy. Except instead of having a loving and caring teacher to tell it when it errs and to help it along, its mentor, America, licks its ass the more times it kills. The problem is that attacks of this scale only continue because the US Government fails to have a rational and objective view of the crisis, instead defaulting to supporting Israel. Im sure Israel could nuke the whole of Gaza, and the US would still be feeding them more plutonium.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Nodin

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Why next thing they'll be getting favourables arms deals and running a covert nuclear programme, shielded by some superpower...