Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians
Options
Comments
-
I'm not so sure that this is completely true.
Egypt, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon invaded Israel with 20,000 troops on the day it declared itself a state. They invaded over borders which the UN had defined as.
The number of Arab troops rose to 60,000, a number which Israel did not match for three months. The war lasted for nine months, hardly an easy win. Israel lost 1% of its population in that time, 6000 troops. In comparision to Irelands current population, that would be 40,000 killed0 -
youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Where the West Bank needs to be referenced it will be. It's a bigger part of the conflict as a whole than Gaza, literally and politically. Much bigger.
See the exchange above about disengagement. It's perfectly valid to reference the West Bank, particularly the issue of settlements.
I dont think settlements have much to do with gaza at the moment.
my point was a lot of people are running to the settlement argument when it has nothing to do with rockets from hamas or thier political ideoligism sp?0 -
absolutely digusted with this. i ****ing hate israel and their sympathisers.0
-
IRISH RAIL wrote: »I dont think settlements have much to do with gaza at the moment.
my point was a lot of people are running to the settlement argument when it has nothing to do with rockets from hamas or thier political ideoligism sp?
What happens in the West Bank does have everything to do with what going on in Gaza. The ongoing colonization of Palestinians land in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is part of the problem.
Also, when people say Israel left Gaza, its pefectly valid to point out that they took more land in the West Bank.0 -
IRISH RAIL wrote: »I dont think settlements have much to do with gaza at the moment.
my point was a lot of people are running to the settlement argument when it has nothing to do with rockets from hamas or thier political ideoligism sp?
It is relevant. Those saying that if Hamas stopped firing rockets Israel will leave them in peace ignore the fact that the west bank has done exactly that and have a leadership acceptable to the Israelis, yet they are still caged in and attacked with settlements increasing. So why should Gaza think they would be treated any differently?0 -
Advertisement
-
youcrazyjesus! wrote: »No is is you who is doing that and it is plain for all to see, you insisting that CAMERA was an inbiased source is the proof of this. I regard them as relatively unbiased and have linked to the likes of The Guardian, the New York Times, The Independent. You link to CAMERA and MEMRIT or whatever and insist, even when you find out otherwise post-googling, that they are unbiased. It's laughable.
You have used sources I don’t agree with also.youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Israel violated the ceasefire, had no intention of honouring it, Hamas had every intention of honouring it and improving the lives of people in Gaza. It would have brought them alot of kudos with Gaza residents if they had been successful, therefore it had to be stopped. Israel carried out assassinations in this time too, was this not a violation? The Guardian and CNN boths say Israel broke the ceasefire.
See below for a New York Times report.
Hamas officials say it was their understanding at the time that two weeks after the June 19 accord took effect Israel would open the crossings and allow the transfer of goods that had been banned or restricted after June 2007, when Hamas waged a violent takeover of Gaza.
Their job, the Hamas officials said, was to stop the rocket attacks on Israel not only from its own armed groups, but also from others based in Gaza, including Islamic Jihad and Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades.
It took some days, but they were largely successful. Hamas imposed its will and even imprisoned some of those who were firing rockets. Israeli and United Nations figures show that while more than 300 rockets were fired into Israel in May, 10 to 20 were fired in July, depending on who was counting and whether mortar rounds were included. In August, 10 to 30 were fired, and in September, 5 to 10. .
So, 10 rockets a month are considered OK? If Israel fired 10 rockets a month on Gaza, would you say all is peachy in the middle east?youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Do you know anything about the situation or just run to Google anytime you need something to back up your opinion that Israel is always right?
Because the last time I checked, the wall was built across the West Bank. West Bank != Gaza. Here's a map.
Oh, come on, please… I never said “The Gaza wall”, I consider the west bank as part of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and the wall was mentioned to make a point in regards to the conflict.
By the way, there actually was a wall in Gaza, between Egypt and Gaza. I think the Palestinians destroyed it at some stage.youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Hamas don't own the tunnels. Read up on the subject. A BBC report says:
This is really funny. I suppose there are deeds to the tunnels, and Hamas do not control anything in the area…youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Source please. They perhaps wanted to distribute it themselves, not the way it should be done imo, but I understand their reasoning even if I don't agree with it.
A few incidents:
http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUSL0983878
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2804youcrazyjesus! wrote: »This is the 5th or 6th time I've asked for sources for this. I'm sure it's likely, I've just yet to see anybody bothering their arse to provide sources. Gaza is very highly density, any open patch of ground is likely to be near something like a school or a mosque, given 50% of the population of Gaza are children. Unfortunately Israel's invasion kills people randomly anyway. It wouldn't matter whether it's true or not.
Here is a video showing Hamas firing from a school:
http://www.videosift.com/video/Hamas-firing-mortars-froma-school-drone-video
There are more.
In addition, I would say that it does matter, because it clearly shows Hamas are using their own children as human shields, thus having a major role in why they die.
Yes I'm sure they did. It's an unfortunate result of a power struggle. If the result of the election had been respected by everyone it would never, ever have happened.youcrazyjesus! wrote: »They refused an Egyptian one alright because it was as one sided as having Hamas stop rockets while Israel's continues it's direct occupation. The conditions of a ceasefire are clear, and I believe fair, from the Palestinians point of view. Israel withdraws, stops assassinations, opens border crossing = no more rockets, from Hamas at least. Hamas should be given some time to restore their control of Gaza though, seeing as the civilian government infrastructure has been destroyed. Hamas are not the only militant group in Gaza, and I'd imagine feelings are running a little bit high after 700 murders.
So, stop killing us and attacking us, give us a few months to stop firing rockets and attacking you, give us a few more months to calm down because we are very upset, and then we will see… Very tempting.
And Israel is actually supposed to believe and trust Hamas. They have always kept their word (recent ceasefire anyone?)youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Can you imagine the reaction in Israel or Britain to 700 terrorist murders? There'd be full scale war. Tens of thousands would die in retaliation.
I can imagine the reaction in any other country if they had 3000 rockets fired at them in a year…youcrazyjesus! wrote: »They also announced they're willing to talk and to change the climate that fosters the conflict. All Israel has to do, according to Hamas, is respect international law and return to it's 1967 borders. It's a fair solution imo.
So, Israel has to dismantle settlements, rearrange its borders, and all that while Hamas doesn’t really commit to anything.
I assume that in the months (maybe years) it would take Israel to implement such changes Hamas would just sit patiently and wait… Utopia here we come…
The fact is – Israel left Gaza, and it expected at least a similar step of good will from the Palestinians. What it got in response we all know…0 -
youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Israel and Hamas Rebuff UN Cease-Fire Call
"Israel rejects" beats "Hamas rejects" by 3 to 1 on Google News. A fair account of the situation. Hamas need to be consulted, I would have thought that would be first on anyone's list. They shouldn't have rejected it though I agree.
Nice of you to prove the media is biased...0 -
IRISH RAIL wrote: »I dont think settlements have much to do with gaza at the moment.
my point was a lot of people are running to the settlement argument when it has nothing to do with rockets from hamas or thier political ideoligism sp?
Because somebody was insisting that Israel wants to disengage from the Palestinians and I was responding to it. It's as simple as that.
When people are looking at Israel's actions, settlements and their behaviour dealing with settlements are a pretty damn good indicator of what they're up to. Who are you to tell people not to reference them.0 -
youcrazyjesus! wrote: »How on earth to they want to "disengage" themselves if they are building settlements on West Bank land as we speak?
More absolute bollox.
Actually, I don't think any new settlements have been built in the west bank in the last couple of years.0 -
munchester29 wrote: »Nice of you to prove the media is biased...
Stop making these childish quips, it adds nothing to the debate. It's quite a stupid tactic.0 -
Advertisement
-
youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Stop making these childish quips, it adds nothing to the debate. It's quite a stupid tactic.
Not a quip, and it is important to one aspect of the debate, which is how the media is biased towards the Palestinians.
You gave a perfect example for this bias (assuming your calculations are correct).0 -
IRISH RAIL wrote: »ive put up sources on how hamas rule the tunnels and the small number of independant ones they charge a gratuity (if that is the correct word )
Eh....they are the democratically elected government so if you want you can call it tax.....0 -
munchester29 wrote: »You have used sources I don’t agree with also.
No, and I believe mods have explained this to you reading back, using right-wing propaganda websites, designed for that very purpose, does not equate to using respectable, conservative British newspapers. There is simply no comparison. If you continue to insist that they do then you'll only continue making a fool out of yourself.So, 10 rockets a month are considered OK? If Israel fired 10 rockets a month on Gaza, would you say all is peachy in the middle east?
*Sigh*
Can you please follow what you're posting? It's fast becoming pointless responding to you. You jump around from topic to topic as soon as a reply is made and you ignore completely the point subsequently. Usually when you've been proved flat wrong.
You said that Hamas was firing rockets all through the ceasefire and it was all one sides right? I posted evidence that Hamas reduced rocket attacks to almost nil and jailed people who were firing rockets right? Right. So, they were trying to establish control and protect Israel, as per the agreement. Now, this contradicts completely your assertion that the
ceasefire was all one-sided and that Hamas continued firing rockets all the way through the ceasefire. There is more than just Hamas in Gaza. The IDF themselves say they militants from other groups who fire rockets at them from Gaza. Your point is completely, totally and utterly ill-founded.Oh, come on, please… I never said “The Gaza wall”, I consider the west bank as part of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and the wall was mentioned to make a point in regards to the conflict.
That's clearly what you meant.
Even at that, you were completely wrong as usual.
Hamas is to abandon its use of suicide bombers, who have killed almost 300 Israelis, in any future confrontations with Israel, its activists have told The Observer.
(
Also interesting in this article, more proof that you're peddling nonsense:
As Hamas toned down its rhetoric, Israel increased pressure on the Palestinians, particularly in Gaza. Two militants were killed in an airstrike near Gaza City yesterday and five men and a five-year-old boy were killed on Friday night.
Each day hundreds of artillery shells are fired by Israel at northern Gaza.
Hamas is keen to gain acceptance from the international community
Hamas declared a ceasefire last year.
Hamas now finds itself turning from poacher to gamekeeper. Islamic Jihad and the Fatah-linked Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade have said they will continue to attack Israel. But Hamas fears that if armed groups are carrying out attacks and firing missiles, it will make its government look weak. Hamas hopes to persuade other groups to stop their attacks but insists it will be be prepared to use force.
'The concept of the two-state solution is now the cornerstone of their thinking. I doubt we will see the old Hamas again,'
)By the way, there actually was a wall in Gaza, between Egypt and Gaza. I think the Palestinians destroyed it at some stage.
It's called a border. And yes, out of desperation.This is really funny. I suppose there are deeds to the tunnels, and Hamas do not control anything in the area…
Of course they exert some control over them, it's in the article I myself posted up. My point was they do not have complete control of the tunnels, nor do they want it, nor do they control them on a day to day basis. They are a vital humanitarian lifeline for the people of Gaza. Again, this is response to your point which states that Hamas use the tunnels only for weapons. Hamas do not own all of the tunnels, they do not control all of the tunnels and it's mostly civilian supplies which come through them. The truth once again proves your deep level of ignorance on the subject as a whole.
What does this prove?
This is another propaganda website. Please quote from respectable sources if you want to be taken seriously.
A grainy, unsourced footage from an Israeli drone on a type of site well known for (quite interesting in fact, I watch them and appreciate the close up view you get off military operations but nontheless unsourced material) posting up videos that come direct from military sources is prood of absolutely nothing except your continuing inability to accept reality.In addition, I would say that it does matter, because it clearly shows Hamas are using their own children as human shields, thus having a major role in why they die.
In the major atrocities in the last few days there is no indication Hamas was involved. They are hardly jumping out from behind a group of them to fire or literally surrounding themselves with children while they run around. Although you would suggest they do the idea is ridiculous. Civilians are dying because of the criminal Israeli assault on Gaza as a whole, not because Hamas, may, or may not, be defending Gaza within shouting distance of a school or building. It's an extremely densely populated area.And Israel is actually supposed to believe and trust Hamas. They have always kept their word (recent ceasefire anyone?)
Israel has not kept it's word, according to CNN and The Guardian Israel broke the ceasefire, according to the New York Times Hamas made very credible efforts to end rocket fire while Israel went back on it's side of the deal. Repeatedly making statements in the face of facts from well-sourced material proves something of you.So, Israel has to dismantle settlements, rearrange its borders, and all that while Hamas doesn’t really commit to anything.
Oh, except peace and security for Israel, and a decent existence for Palestinians. Ignore the international law angle too.0 -
I can imagine the reaction in any other country if they had 3000 rockets fired at them in a year
Just to point out,
Israel have killed more Palestine children alone in the last 10 days than Hamas have killed Israelis with these 15 billion firecrackers ahh I mean rockets that they have fired into Israel in the last 5 YEARS.0 -
munchester29 wrote: »Not a quip, and it is important to one aspect of the debate, which is how the media is biased towards the Palestinians.
This is completely false.You gave a perfect example for this bias (assuming your calculations are correct).
It's a childish quip and you make many of them instead of debating, citing sources or even making arguments. Your assertions, given your inability to cite from respectable sources, your ridiculous illogical arguments and your constant self-contradiction, mean absolutely nothing. Academic studies have shown you to be wrong.
Because the slaughter is so unjustifiable and the injustice of it so clear, this time around there has been better balance in the media. You confuse this with bias towards the Palestinians because you are so used to it being different.0 -
munchester29 wrote: »Not a quip, and it is important to one aspect of the debate, which is how the media is biased towards the Palestinians.
You gave a perfect example for this bias (assuming your calculations are correct).
Is it possible; for arguements sake, to say that maybe you yourself are biased towards one side over the other and
would it also be possible to say that maybe this is clouding your judgement of the issue?
Could it also be possible to say that certain sections of the media are showing biased towards the Palestinians for a reason?
You fail to mention the USA's constant biased towards Israel?:eek:
For you info, I think terriorists are scum, no matter what their nationality, colour or creed and I think that a powerfully backed nation state acting in retaliation, targeting both the guility and innocent alike, are also terriorist in their intent as they are terriorising the innocent to get to the guility! (and to win voters in the hardline sections of their own society:eek::mad:)0 -
munchester29 wrote: »Actually, I don't think any new settlements have been built in the west bank in the last couple of years.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/israel-relaunches-plan-for-west-bank-settlement-in-snub-to-us-876807.html0 -
munchester29 wrote: »Actually, I don't think any new settlements have been built in the west bank in the last couple of years.
You have got to be joking at this point:
Barak approved settlement expansion despite Road Map
Thats from November of last year. I am pretty sure I posted it earlier. I am also pretty sure, other posters posted similar proof of Israel colonial expansion.
Israel has constantly built colonies. They keep on doing it again and again and again. Your going to need to do a lot better than pretending this isn't the case, as its pretty well known that Israel is constantly expanding there colonies in the West Bank.0 -
youcrazyjesus! wrote: »*Sigh*
Can you please follow what you're posting? It's fast becoming pointless responding to you. You jump around from topic to topic as soon as a reply is made and you ignore completely the point subsequently. Usually when you've been proved flat wrong.
Don’t lose your temper… Saying you proved me wrong when you submit no real proof except for your own views doesn’t make you right.youcrazyjesus! wrote: »You said that Hamas was firing rockets all through the ceasefire and it was all one sides right? I posted evidence that Hamas reduced rocket attacks to almost nil and jailed people who were firing rockets right? Right. So, they were trying to establish control and protect Israel, as per the agreement. Now, this contradicts completely your assertion that the
ceasefire was all one-sided and that Hamas continued firing rockets all the way through the ceasefire. There is more than just Hamas in Gaza. The IDF themselves say they militants from other groups who fire rockets at them from Gaza. Your point is completely, totally and utterly ill-founded.
Please don’t put words in my mouth. I never said it was one sided. Naturally, Israel has reacted to the Hamas attacks.
Your evidence that Hamas reduced rocket attacks to almost nil and jailed people who were firing rockets proves nothing. Not even one rocket should have been fired, and the Palestinians have always used a “revolving door” system when they “jail” other terrorist group members who commit terrorist acts when they are not supposed to. They usually free them very quickly.
Saying Hamas was trying to protect Israel is kind of an insult to anyone’s intelligence.
I doubt Israel really knows who exactly is doing the firing from Gaza, and in any case – as Hamas is the Palestinian government it is their responsibility to stop such attacks, and they had enough time since they took control of Gaza to do that. The fact they didn’t speaks volumes.youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Even at that, you were completely wrong as usual.
Hamas is to abandon its use of suicide bombers, who have killed almost 300 Israelis, in any future confrontations with Israel, its activists have told The Observer.
I could also say “Israel is to abandon the settlement and drop the blockade and stop killing Hamas terrorists”. Does that make everything all right?
The sentence you are quoting implies a future action, not an action that was already taken.
In addition – even from this sentence it is obvious that Hamas plans on continuing attacking Israel (“…in any future confrontations…”)
And you probably consider this as one of your proofs…youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Of course they exert some control over them, it's in the article I myself posted up. My point was they do not have complete control of the tunnels, nor do they want it, nor do they control them on a day to day basis. They are a vital humanitarian lifeline for the people of Gaza. Again, this is response to your point which states that Hamas use the tunnels only for weapons. Hamas do not own all of the tunnels, they do not control all of the tunnels and it's mostly civilian supplies which come through them. The truth once again proves your deep level of ignorance on the subject as a whole.
With all the tunnels they have there (there are reports of hundreds if not thousands of tunnels), you would assume there would be no humanitarian crisis, what with all the aid being smuggled through the tunnels instead of weapons…
Try to think about what you say…youcrazyjesus! wrote: »What does this prove?
It proves what I was asked to prove, that Hamas seizes supplies and aid meant for the Palestinian people for their own use.youcrazyjesus! wrote: »This is another propaganda website. Please quote from respectable sources if you want to be taken seriously.
Seems every site you don’t like is a propaganda site…
According to wikipedia:
“Canada Free Press is a Canadian website, which publishes conservative news stories, features, and editorials. It is published in Toronto”
Haven’t seen anything that would indicate it is a propaganda site. Except for the fact that you are against it…youcrazyjesus! wrote: »A grainy, unsourced footage from an Israeli drone on a type of site well known for (quite interesting in fact, I watch them and appreciate the close up view you get off military operations but nontheless unsourced material) posting up videos that come direct from military sources is prood of absolutely nothing except your continuing inability to accept reality.
Such videos will always be grainy, but there are more of them if you want.
There are also articles, Palestinian reports, UN reports, etc. Do I really have to waste more time on this?youcrazyjesus! wrote: »In the major atrocities in the last few days there is no indication Hamas was involved. They are hardly jumping out from behind a group of them to fire or literally surrounding themselves with children while they run around. Although you would suggest they do the idea is ridiculous. Civilians are dying because of the criminal Israeli assault on Gaza as a whole, not because Hamas, may, or may not, be defending Gaza within shouting distance of a school or building. It's an extremely densely populated area.
Even in the now infamous school incident, quoted from one of your favourite sources:
“…Two Hamas militants were among the dead, both part of a rocket-launching cell….”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-obama
I already commented about the “densely populated area” rational. Although Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas in the world, the Gaza strip has fields in it, roads, etc.
The least these Hamas activists could do was let their own people know that they are going to launce an attack on Israel near the school, so these people would have a chance to get away before the attack commences.
Problem is, Hamas doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the Palestinian population, and when Palestinian civilians die it serves their purposes.youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Israel has not kept it's word, according to CNN and The Guardian Israel broke the ceasefire, according to the New York Times Hamas made very credible efforts to end rocket fire while Israel went back on it's side of the deal. Repeatedly making statements in the face of facts from well-sourced material proves something of you.
Please supply links, I doubt you actually read the articles in full, and I’ll be happy to prove you are wrong once you do.youcrazyjesus! wrote: »Oh, except peace and security for Israel, and a decent existence for Palestinians. Ignore the international law angle too.
Now that is truly funny, because as we all know, Hamas are soooo trust worthy. It’s only natural to assume they will keep their word. I mean, they haven’t so far, but hey – let’s be optimistic and trusting…
As for the international law angle – I’m all for international law being imposed on both sides. If Hamas are exempt, so is Israel.0 -
youcrazyjesus! wrote: »This is completely false.
Yet you somehow managed to prove it for me yourself, unless you now go back on your claim from earlier…youcrazyjesus! wrote: »It's a childish quip and you make many of them instead of debating, citing sources or even making arguments. Your assertions, given your inability to cite from respectable sources, your ridiculous illogical arguments and your constant self-contradiction, mean absolutely nothing. Academic studies have shown you to be wrong.
Because the slaughter is so unjustifiable and the injustice of it so clear, this time around there has been better balance in the media. You confuse this with bias towards the Palestinians because you are so used to it being different.
You really need to stop taking everything so personally. Wasn’t a quip – I don’t know what methods you used to calculate the ratio you specified.
And I have to tell you something – every time you use phrases like “your ridiculous illogical arguments and your constant self-contradiction…” I smile a little, knowing that you still can’t refute what I say resulting in you resorting to venting…:cool:0 -
Advertisement
-
Is it possible; for arguements sake, to say that maybe you yourself are biased towards one side over the other and
would it also be possible to say that maybe this is clouding your judgement of the issue?
Could it also be possible to say that certain sections of the media are showing biased towards the Palestinians for a reason?
You fail to mention the USA's constant biased towards Israel?:eek:
For you info, I think terriorists are scum, no matter what their nationality, colour or creed and I think that a powerfully backed nation state acting in retaliation, targeting both the guility and innocent alike, are also terriorist in their intent as they are terriorising the innocent to get to the guility! (and to win voters in the hardline sections of their own society:eek::mad:)
I don't hide the fact that I am pro Israeli. My posts speak for themselves.
Although it is possible that certain sections of the media are showing biased towards the Palestinians for a reason, it is still very unprofessional and can distort the truth.
The US bias towards Israel actually hurts Israel more than it helps, since everyone loves to hate the US.0 -
youcrazyjesus! wrote: »
Seriously, you need to start reading the links you post.
A plan is not an action done. My point is still valid - Israel has not built new settlements in recent years.0 -
munchester29 wrote: »With all the tunnels they have there (there are reports of hundreds if not thousands of tunnels), you would assume there would be no humanitarian crisis, what with all the aid being smuggled through the tunnels instead of weapons…
100s and 1000's. I am sure you will have no problem proving that.
Also, how could the tunnel possibly feed and provide basic neccessities for 1.5 million people? Who are being collectively punishment in an inexcusable act of state terrorism by Israel. Amazing how every excuse under the sun is being made for this.
Also, I am sure you can prove that the tunnel system is capable of supporting all 1.5 million Palestinians.0 -
munchester29 wrote: »Yet you somehow managed to prove it for me yourself, unless you now go back on your claim from earlier…
How on earth is it proof? You've INTERPRETED it as proof, but it is not proof. Stating so does not make it fact. You're getting more ridiculous by the post.You really need to stop taking everything so personally. Wasn’t a quip – I don’t know what methods you used to calculate the ratio you specified.
Typing the two search phrases into Google News would be an excellent start.And I have to tell you something – every time you use phrases like “your ridiculous illogical arguments and your constant self-contradiction…” I smile a little, knowing that you still can’t refute what I say resulting in you resorting to venting…:cool:
I have refuted your ridiculous claims in black and white, about 30 or 40 times in this thread over various subjects. By resorting to facts, logical argument and verifiable mainstream references. You fly in the face of this, stating the exacty opposite is fine, you can do as you please, the links I've provided which do much of the debunking can be clicked on by readers and if anybody cares enough they can go through them and see who is correct.
This is going OT. So in future I'll just provide references to refute your claims, you've been spectacularly wrong on any subject you've touched.0 -
munchester29 wrote: »Seriously, you need to start reading the links you post.
A plan is not an action done. My point is still valid - Israel has not built new settlements in recent years.
They have expanded and built new ones.
You need to start providing evidence of Israel not expanding or building new colonies. You instead insist that they are not expanding anything, despite the evidence showing that they are planning new colonies all time.
**EDIT**
Since the colonies in Gaza have been removed, 12,000 colonists moved into the West Bank:From the Guardian.co.uk
To the world, Sharon presented the withdrawal from Gaza as a contribution to peace based on a two-state solution. But in the year after, another 12,000 Israelis settled on the West Bank, further reducing the scope for an independent Palestinian state. Land-grabbing and peace-making are simply incompatible. Israel had a choice and it chose land over peace.
Your denials at this point are beyond ridiculous. Israel has constantly expanded colonies. Continutally insisting that you are right, when the fact show otherwise will not magically make you right.0 -
You have got to be joking at this point:
Barak approved settlement expansion despite Road Map
Thats from November of last year. I am pretty sure I posted it earlier. I am also pretty sure, other posters posted similar proof of Israel colonial expansion.
Israel has constantly built colonies. They keep on doing it again and again and again. Your going to need to do a lot better than pretending this isn't the case, as its pretty well known that Israel is constantly expanding there colonies in the West Bank.
Plans, plans and more plans - most of them in existing settlements, most of which are expected to remain in Israeli hands even after a peace agreement is in place.
My point is still valid - no new settlements have been built in recent years.0 -
munchester29 wrote: »Seriously, you need to start reading the links you post.
A plan is not an action done. My point is still valid - Israel has not built new settlements in recent years.
Again, going back to the source of the contended point in the thread, something you willfully fail to do, will resolve the issue. The original point, the one you half-replied to, stands and has been backed up by a source.
Other people have replied with sources AND this subject has come up before AND you were contradicted then too with proper sources. You're still wrong.0 -
100s and 1000's. I am sure you will have no problem proving that.
Also, how could the tunnel possibly feed and provide basic neccessities for 1.5 million people? Who are being collectively punishment in an inexcusable act of state terrorism by Israel. Amazing how every excuse under the sun is being made for this.
Also, I am sure you can prove that the tunnel system is capable of supporting all 1.5 million Palestinians.
Sorry, my point was that they use the tunnels to smuggle weapons and explosives, I wasn't the one suggesting they are used for humanitarian purposes.
As for the collective punishment - I consider Hamas are to blame.0 -
munchester29 wrote: »Plans, plans and more plans - most of them in existing settlements, most of which are expected to remain in Israeli hands even after a peace agreement is in place.
My point is still valid - no new settlements have been built in recent years.
That wasn't the original point. Go back to it and find out what it was. Did you even read the link Wes provided? The article explicitly states there is building work on going.0 -
Advertisement
-
They have expanded and built new ones.
You need to start providing evidence of Israel not expanding or building new colonies. You instead insist that they are not expanding anything, despite the evidence showing that they are planning new colonies all time.
No, actually you need to start providing evidence of Israel not expanding or building new colonies.
You make a claim, support it.
I didn’t say they weren’t expanding – I said they didn’t build new settlements.
Plans to build new colonies are just plans, they mean nothing until they are executed.0
Advertisement