Palestine being recognized as a separate state page 7

195 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:

What a shitty example. It’s completely one sided. Let me clean it up for you:

A little guy with a bag of shit keeps hitting a bigger guy in the face with his bag of shit, presumably because the bigger guy is in the littler guy’s room. Right or not, the bigger guy has no where else to go. The little guy kept hitting the big guy in the face, until finally the bigger guy hit the littler guy in the face so hard that he got knocked out for a while. Then, when the littler guy finally came around, he got up and started hitting the bigger guy in the face with the bag of shit, again. The bigger guy got pissed off, again, and hit the littler guy in the face, again, knocking him out, again. The littler guy finally came around, again, and this process repeated several times, and is still repeating, over and over and over.

Now, for my position: The bigger guy shouldn’t knock out the littler guy. Why not? Because it doesn’t solve anything. The bigger guy should do everything he can to make friends with the littler guy, but also should remove the bag of shit from the scene. And, the little guy is a fucking dumb ass for picking on a bigger guy with no hope of getting rid of him, and no hope of ever winning a fight against him.

So, like I said, they are both wrong. Explain to me how I only condemn the weaker guy. Explain how I say the big guy should fight even better. Because I’ve never said anything like that. Learn a new tune. Making me out to be unquestioningly supportive of Israel isn’t going to work. It isn’t going to scare me into supporting Palestine unquestioningly. You aren’t going to paint me as one sided one way, and get me to be one sided with you the other. Palestine and Israel are both wrong. They both are. Part of that, is that Palestine is wrong. I’m not going to back off of that, as I won’t back off of saying both sides are wrong. They both are. Calling me one sided for not being against Israel and for Palestine is shit. It’s shit. It’s not even worth response, and yet you get one, again. Keep pushing your luck, though. Keep telling me I’m one sided, and I’ll keep giving a two sided position. Remember that I’m not doing it for you, though. I’m doing it for the benefit of everyone else, to see that not everyone caves to this shit.

uhm…you forgot in your example that the smaller guy is also a stinking monkey…

seriously, i give up. be that way then. ok, one more try:

It isn’t going to scare me into supporting Palestine unquestioningly

lol. obviously i’d criticize you for that as well. black and white thinking eh?

So, like I said, they are both wrong. Explain to me how I only condemn the weaker guy. Explain how I say the big guy should fight even better. Because I’ve never said anything like that. Learn a new tune. Making me out to be unquestioningly supportive of Israel isn’t going to work. It isn’t going to scare me into supporting Palestine unquestioningly. You aren’t going to paint me as one sided one way, and get me to be one sided with you the other. Palestine and Israel are both wrong. They both are. Part of that, is that Palestine is wrong. I’m not going to back off of that, as I won’t back off of saying both sides are wrong. They both are. Calling me one sided for not being against Israel and for Palestine is shit. It’s shit. It’s not even worth response, and yet you get one, again. Keep pushing your luck, though. Keep telling me I’m one sided, and I’ll keep giving a two sided position. Remember that I’m not doing it for you, though. I’m doing it for the benefit of everyone else, to see that not everyone caves to this shit.

seriously, stop playing fucking games. you have not condemned the building of walls on Palestinian territory to keep Israelis safe, while not granting Palestine the right to build a wall on Israelean territory to keep themselves safe from Israel. you have not even condemned yet another building of houses in zones Israel appropriated that UN disallowed them to build on.

stop playing games and adress that, and bunch of other things that came up. why don’t you condemn that? without changing the subject please.
and without saying “because Palestinians are bad”, because that can easily be turned around, so only shows your horrible bias.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

Then you’ll never stop the import of improvised weaponry. Nor the use by a desperate people.

So we have to consider compromises – by all sides involved.

The end of Palestine using weapons is not Israel’s responsibility. It’s Palestine’s. When I said “they” stop importing, using, and promising the continuing of weaponry against Israel, the “they” is Palestine. That’s why you got a “no”.

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:
and without saying “because Palestinians are bad”, because that can easily be turned around, so only shows your horrible bias.

Israel has the physical power to completely obliterate every living Palestinian. They don’t. If the tables were reversed, Palestine would. If that weren’t the case, I’d agree that they should be treated fairly, but it is the case. I fully support Israel having control over the area, building walls and buildings. They have a stable government. Palestine does not. Why the hell would I advocate for things to be “fair”. Just because I don’t unquestioningly support Israel, or unquestioningly support Palestine, doesn’t mean I can’t see the situation for what it is.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by vikaTae:

Then you’ll never stop the import of improvised weaponry. Nor the use by a desperate people.

So we have to consider compromises – by all sides involved.

The end of Palestine using weapons is not Israel’s responsibility. It’s Palestine’s. When I said “they” stop importing, using, and promising the continuing of weaponry against Israel, the “they” is Palestine. That’s why you got a “no”.

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:
and without saying “because Palestinians are bad”, because that can easily be turned around, so only shows your horrible bias.


Israel has the physical power to completely obliterate every living Palestinian. They don’t. If the tables were reversed, Palestine would. If that weren’t the case, I’d agree that they should be treated fairly, but it is the case. I fully support Israel having control over the area, building walls and buildings. They have a stable government. Palestine does not. Why the hell would I advocate for things to be “fair”. Just because I don’t unquestioningly support Israel, or unquestioningly support Palestine, doesn’t mean I can’t see the situation for what it is.

What is your opinin about settlements?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:What is your opinion about settlements?

It depends on who’s land, by who, for what purpose, within missile range of what cities, set up on what roads… etc etc. There is no good answer to fit every settlement question. I’d be happy to answer your question if you were more specific. Which settlement, which date?

 
Flag Post
Israel has the physical power to completely obliterate every living Palestinian. They don’t.

wow, how noble. and no they don’t btw, not so easily. especially not without being stopped by every nation in the world, except the USA.
plus, that clearly wouldn’t prevent any aggression against Israel, now would it?

If the tables were reversed, Palestine would

oh yes. they’re all stinking monkeys that totally would kill entire populations just for sports.

I fully support Israel having control over the area, building walls and buildings. They have a stable government. Palestine does not. Why the hell would I advocate for things to be “fair”.

adn that is why you are hated, which is the reason why you receive aggression. so you shouldn’t get any support. unfortantely the USA is equally retarded, so you keep enjoying their support…god damnit USA.

Just because I don’t unquestioningly support Israel, or unquestioningly support Palestine, doesn’t mean I can’t see the situation for what it is.

yeah, there you have it. Palestinians are all genetically programmed to want to exterminate all Jews, because they’re evil and inferior like that, and not because Israel is a dickhead, no Israel has no fault in it. however all aggression from Israel is righteous retaliation—no wait, necessary “defence”.

now that we’re back to that, you still can’t see how you’re biased eh?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:What is your opinion about settlements?

It depends on who’s land, by who, for what purpose, within missile range of what cities, set up on what roads… etc etc. There is no good answer to fit every settlement question. I’d be happy to answer your question if you were more specific. Which settlement, which date?

What is your opinion about settlements on sector E1 which will cut west bank in half.

 
Flag Post

I assume he refers to the illegal ones that are inside the OT which has been building for decades. Those ones.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:What is your opinion about settlements?

It depends on who’s land, by who, for what purpose, within missile range of what cities, set up on what roads… etc etc. There is no good answer to fit every settlement question. I’d be happy to answer your question if you were more specific. Which settlement, which date?

What is your opinion about settlements on sector E1 which will cut west bank in half.

I think it is petty of Israel to build settlements there. I read both sides of the issue, and Israel’s official response was one that described it as some sort of retaliation against Palestine. It’s a political move, and one that’s just going to stoke anger, not the other way around. I roundly condemn the settlement. Instead, Israel should build the buildings, the infrastructure, put food and clothes, and everything needed, and other things wanted like TVs, computers, etc, and then just give it to the Palestinians. Give the Palestinian people the physical structures. Build them cities. Win their hearts.

On the other hand, I don’t find this as an excuse for Palestine to attack Israel. Palestine, historically, has not responded well to Israel’s concessions to them, such as the Gaza strip, which has been host to hundreds of rocket launches since Israel gave it to the Palestinians.

So, Israel is wrong, by making this settlement. That’s my short answer. Why do you ask me about it?

 
Flag Post

hmm…i think it’d be wiser to just honor the UN resolutions. giving them gifts could turn ugly. they may be distrustful of it, and they may take it and sell it for weapons, they may also feel you’re trying to buy them out…would just be a bit awkward.

but it’s a nice thought.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:What is your opinion about settlements?

It depends on who’s land, by who, for what purpose, within missile range of what cities, set up on what roads… etc etc. There is no good answer to fit every settlement question. I’d be happy to answer your question if you were more specific. Which settlement, which date?

What is your opinion about settlements on sector E1 which will cut west bank in half.

I think it is petty of Israel to build settlements there. I read both sides of the issue, and Israel’s official response was one that described it as some sort of retaliation against Palestine. It’s a political move, and one that’s just going to stoke anger, not the other way around. I roundly condemn the settlement. Instead, Israel should build the buildings, the infrastructure, put food and clothes, and everything needed, and other things wanted like TVs, computers, etc, and then just give it to the Palestinians. Give the Palestinian people the physical structures. Build them cities. Win their hearts.

On the other hand, I don’t find this as an excuse for Palestine to attack Israel. Palestine, historically, has not responded well to Israel’s concessions to them, such as the Gaza strip, which has been host to hundreds of rocket launches since Israel gave it to the Palestinians.

So, Israel is wrong, by making this settlement. That’s my short answer. Why do you ask me about it?

if someone tries to cut USA in half, what will you do?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:if someone tries to cut USA in half, what will you do?

If the USA were run by a group of people that oppressed, intimidated, and murdered its own people, had used children as suicide bombers, and was launching rocket attacks on a far superior military, all in the name of ownership of land for a religious despot and political power, which would result in danger to my own family, I’d be pretty fucking happy to see it cut in half.

The west bank is not the Mississippi river, fucko. Come up with better examples or continue to get served. =D

 
Flag Post

I roundly condemn the settlement. Instead, Israel should build the buildings, the infrastructure, put food and clothes, and everything needed, and other things wanted like TVs, computers, etc, and then just give it to the Palestinians. Give the Palestinian people the physical structures. Build them cities. Win their hearts.

Indian reserves for arabs. ftw.

I suppose they could do that, as fellow colonizers. Let’s see, between Canada and the US we’ve had about two hundred years of using reserves to placate the natives. With a few minor quibbles (like the fact that they squander it on corrupt chiefs, creating massive poverty and drug abuse which is ‘solved’ by gaming the system and building casinos, and of course, their entire cultural worldview despises us for giving them shreds and taking acres), such a thing might be feasible, and should start showing returns in another 60-70 years. It IS better than the current strategy of nothing-at-all.

 
Flag Post

But he’s not one-sided folks.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

I roundly condemn the settlement. Instead, Israel should build the buildings, the infrastructure, put food and clothes, and everything needed, and other things wanted like TVs, computers, etc, and then just give it to the Palestinians. Give the Palestinian people the physical structures. Build them cities. Win their hearts.

Indian reserves for arabs. ftw.

I suppose they could do that, as fellow colonizers. Let’s see, between Canada and the US we’ve had about two hundred years of using reserves to placate the natives. With a few minor quibbles (like the fact that they squander it on corrupt chiefs, creating massive poverty and drug abuse which is ‘solved’ by gaming the system and building casinos, and of course, their entire cultural worldview despises us for giving them shreds and taking acres), such a thing might be feasible, and should start showing returns in another 60-70 years. It IS better than the current strategy of nothing-at-all.

I say that Israel taking over Palestinian space is bad, and I get told that I’m suggesting Indian settlements, and that I’m one sided.

Originally posted by softest_voice:

But he’s not one-sided folks.

I’m beginning to think that instead of defending Palestine with pro-Palestine arguments, the only ammunition you guys have is anti-Israel arguments. When a guy comes along that is neither pro-Israel, nor pro-Palestine, what do you guys do if you can’t paint him as unquestioningly pro-Israel? Paint him as unquestioningly pro-Israel. What do you do when that fails miserably? Why, you continue to paint him as pro-Israel of course!

I mean, what the fuck can I do? I say I roundly condemn an action of Israel, and the reaction? I’m fucking one sided solidly with Israel.

Screw you guys, I’m going home.

 
Flag Post

I never said you were one sided, merely that your pretense of being fair is a transparent joke. You’re definitely pro-Israel, and you’re not pro-palestinian by any means, but I wouldn’t call you anti-palestinian, the way I’d call, well, a good portion of this thread anti-israel. Other than “they’ll kill my child” remark, which you haven’t reiterated in awhile.

But you ARE, in fact, suggesting the best course is to create Bantustan-like places that wouldn’t exactly give them anything more than superficial control of their own affairs, but would give them (in a carefully controlled way) lots of other stuff, like big screen tvs, computers, potable water etc. And it’s slowly dawning on me that you really aren’t aware of why, in this debate, that’s considered like, one of the worst ways this could all end up: an actual Israeli apartheid system. Not world war three, because sorry, that’s retarded, but systemic state-ordered ethnic transfer, designed to keep them complacent and more importantly, non-threatening.

That didn’t work for the South Africans, obviously. And it only worked for us because we had plenty of space, plenty of time, and best of all, it got started hundreds of years ago when we were still debating whether or not the indigenous darkies were a subcategory of human. We’d be just as screwed internationally as Israel is if Canada or the US were to try the same thing you’re proposing in modern times. In other words, we get away with it now only because the natives are used to it, or enough so that they aren’t determined to kill us. And, obviously, that they can leave the reserve. We don’t trap them there so they can’t enter our cities.

Now I believe Beauval or somebody suggested at one point that if, instead of giving them shit like Father Knows Best, you give them the tools and cash to build up their economy and infrastructure (but not just doing it for them, let them build their own damn cities), make their territory contiguous – none of this illegal settlement shit – and lift the blockade, while at the same time insisting on international oversight from neutral countries, to keep the weapons out…that might do the trick. That, at least, is consistant with conflict resolution in other torn-up countries.

 
Flag Post

Which country would be neutral enough to ensure weapons didn’t come in? Anyone who was thorough enough to ensure no weapons entered would be accused of pro-Israeli bias, and anyone who wasn’t would be accused of pro-Palestinian bias.

The reason I don’t approve of the idea of giving them the means to build their own cities, is because then the government that got those means (monies), would be a Palestinian government, that would use those funds for who knows what, and likely take credit for everything, and continue blaming Israel for all their problems. No, Israel needs to build the cities, and put everything in them, and then hand them to the Palestinians, and say “look what we built you, we are your friends”. Israel needs credit. That’s the whole point. A number of dollars sent to the PLO or Hamas isn’t going to mean bull crap to the citizens who know nothing about it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

This isn’t 1914. It isn’t even 1939. There will be no world war over palestine. If anything, being recognized as a state doesn’t give them any more power than they had before, except symbolic. Even the ICC entry would be a longshot, and assuming they got into that too? It’s not like Israel hasn’t ignored international law in the past.

I think I prefer being a naive idealist to a paranoiac with an antiquated misunderstanding of how modern international politics works.

Yes, because the allies of Palestine are peaceful modern realists. If Palestine becomes it’s own sovereign nation, with alliances like Iran, Syria, and North Korea, they will be completely understanding, and not use that as a reason to go to war. Those countries are so modern and enlightened.

You call it “paranoid”. I call it realistic. Israel is blockading a part of the land there, that if it becomes a nation with allies, will be an act of war, by definition. Fuck that. I’m not for redefining the actions of our allies to “war” with a small group of people, and their allies across the globe. Yeah, not cool.

Your views on Iran and Syria are completely skewed by the media. I’m not so sure about North Korea, as I have never been there and know very little about it.

Iran is (arguably) the most scientifically progressive nation in the Middle East (competing only maybe with Turkey and Israel), a regional powerhouse, with more religious freedom than the Arab states to the south supported by the U.S and NATO. Iran has, to a degree, more freedom of speech than E.U countries. The main reason Iran is getting crap from the international community is because they nationalized their resources (oil, minerals, water etc.) to prevent them from being ravaged by multinational corporations. Iran also maintains its own central bank that is entirely government owned, preventing foreign entities from buying into their national interests (which happened under previous regimes supported/set up by the Americans, British, Jews, and partially the Russians. Hence, the Iranians kicked out BP during the Revolution of 1979.

Iran doesn’t play by the international game of debt accumulation and banking cartels, THAT is why there is a media vendetta against them, THAT is why there is a threat of war. Their banking system also forbids usury, which is by nature risky (and profitable for international business)

Is it coincidence that the same trouble happened with Libya and Iraq? One of the first things the occupying powers did in Iraq was set up a new central bank under their supervision, while shells were still flying around them.

Syria is an ally of Iran and pursues a similar banking system, no wonder they are getting shit from NATO now.

Also, you call Israel an ally (of America, I would presume). Isn’t that usually a term that refers to a mutually beneficial relationship?

 
Flag Post

Which country would be neutral enough to ensure weapons didn’t come in? Anyone who was thorough enough to ensure no weapons entered would be accused of pro-Israeli bias, and anyone who wasn’t would be accused of pro-Palestinian bias.

Japan, Brazil, Belgium…whoever has the money, interest, and dependability. It’s not that difficult to come up with a list of candidates. They probably will get accused of bias, but not in the same stretch as if the US or the UAE were to do it.

The reason I don’t approve of the idea of giving them the means to build their own cities, is because then the government that got those means (monies), would be a Palestinian government, that would use those funds for who knows what, and likely take credit for everything, and continue blaming Israel for all their problems. No, Israel needs to build the cities, and put everything in them, and then hand them to the Palestinians, and say “look what we built you, we are your friends”. Israel needs credit. That’s the whole point. A number of dollars sent to the PLO or Hamas isn’t going to mean bull crap to the citizens who know nothing about it.

:)

I give up. If you seriously think that the palestinians would be MORE appreciative of Israelis treating them like fucking children (in a padded cell, as it were), rather than giving them back the means and control of their affairs, there’s nothing more to say. Israel doesn’t need more credit. Israel’s been under the rug for 40 years, unnoticed while other guys like South Africa and Iraq have been the scorn of the world community. Now it’s Israel’s turn, and it’s about damn time they took some heat.

I mean, you wonder why people have become so virulently anti-israel over the eight or nine years, why they’re so willing now to turn a blind eye to palestinian militancy, and it’s because regardless of what the palestinians have done, there’s no question that Israel has fundamentally mismanaged this whole mess since the OT was established. They’ve been given billions of dollars in aid and military resources, which they’ve used to build up this highly affluent society, and all the while they’ve meandered and second-guessed and generally done shit-all to resolve the situation. People are pissed, and a few crumbs offered isn’t going to make the palestinians any more placable. Obama’s cool reception of Netanyahu when he was first elected was the first time a sitting US president (including Carter) publicly tried to put the screws on them, and it was like being sucker-punched. They couldn’t believe it. And now they’re sullen and resentful, well, good! They need to get over it, the golden years are over and this international fury isn’t going to just go away with enough PR and money.

 
Flag Post

The Israeli government giving the Palestinian people will be more effective at willing the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people, than the Israeli government giving money to the Palestinian government to give stuff to the Palestinian people. If you liken that to putting them in a “padded cell”, or “treating them like children” then you need to read up on history. Start with the Marshall Plan.

 
Flag Post

…you need to read up on history.

…you need to read up on history.

you need to read up on history.

you need to read up on history.

You can’t write this stuff, folks.

 
Flag Post

Instead of mocking me, explain how a plan for Israel to implement something akin to the Marshall Plan for Palestine wouldn’t assist in relations with the people?

 
Flag Post

Dude, when someone who so blatantly ignores the history of the conflict under discussion starts telling others (especially Jan, who’s got a pretty solid bead on the whole shitshow there) to “read up on history”…

Sorry, but mockery is all that’s deserved.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:if someone tries to cut USA in half, what will you do?

If the USA were run by a group of people that oppressed, intimidated, and murdered its own people, had used children as suicide bombers, and was launching rocket attacks on a far superior military, all in the name of ownership of land for a religious despot and political power, which would result in danger to my own family, I’d be pretty fucking happy to see it cut in half.

The west bank is not the Mississippi river, fucko. Come up with better examples or continue to get served. =D

May be you and your generation will not
but preceding genrations will had use children as suicide bombers, and was launching rocket attacks on a far superior military i can bet my life on it
and where did they killed their own?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by thepunisher52:
Originally posted by MyTie:
Originally posted by thepunisher52:if someone tries to cut USA in half, what will you do?

If the USA were run by a group of people that oppressed, intimidated, and murdered its own people, had used children as suicide bombers, and was launching rocket attacks on a far superior military, all in the name of ownership of land for a religious despot and political power, which would result in danger to my own family, I’d be pretty fucking happy to see it cut in half.

The west bank is not the Mississippi river, fucko. Come up with better examples or continue to get served. =D

May be you and your generation will not
but preceding genrations will had use children as suicide bombers, and was launching rocket attacks on a far superior military i can bet my life on it
and where did they killed their own?

How did this not who what now?

Originally posted by softest_voice:

Dude, when someone who so blatantly ignores the history of the conflict under discussion starts telling others (especially Jan, who’s got a pretty solid bead on the whole shitshow there) to “read up on history”…


Sorry, but mockery is all that’s deserved.


Well then educate me. Exactly what part of the history of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict am I so ignorant on as to render me useless on the topic? I suspect this is just ad hominem in mockery form. Fuck off, softest.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by MyTie:
Well then educate me. Exactly what part of the history of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict am I so ignorant on as to render me useless on the topic?

Does it have to be Softest in particular?

I suspect this is just ad hominem in mockery form. Fuck off, softest.

Yeah… I think that people now are just labling any kinda indirect insult as ad homonym now.