Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
The problem's Putin doesn't seem to want to negociate with them. It's a bit like the Middle East. Refusal to negociate from both sides of the conflict. Don't get me wrong, the Middle East is waaayyy different. It was just an example. You bet your ass it's waaayyy different. Israel has tried to negotiate with the palestinian authority many times. They give promisses, there's a few months of silence (at best) and they go again. I, for once have lost all hope to ever have peace with the people who think that the place I live in belong to them, even though they were never here. The day they would understand that they can't wipe our country from existence, is the day they'll agree to seriously negotiate. That won't happen. And that is why I support the separation fence (how ever it's called in english).

I don't know all the details about the situation in russia, thus I don't pretend to be able to judge who's right and who's wrong. People should adopt this approach.

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
Israel has tried to negotiate with the palestinian authority many times.
I won't deny it, Yitzak Rabin(sp?) has. since his assasination(yes he was killed, not by a palestinian but by a jewish extremist) things have gradually gone down now to the second intifada.



Originally posted by tFighterPilot
They give promisses, there's a few months of silence (at best) and they go again. I, for once have lost all hope to ever have peace with the people who think that the place I live in belong to them, even though they were never here.

The thing is both sides are heavily controlled by extremists and if one bomb goes up, every one on the other side starts to bomb things then all goes down the drain.

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
I, for once have lost all hope to ever have peace with the people who think that the place I live in belong to them, even though they were never here. [/B]

Thus, because of people like you, both iraeli and palestinian, there might never be any hope of peace in the Israel/Palestine
You need a lesson in history. The arabs lived and made their homes there for centuries. You simply can't kick them out so easily.
Don't give me any chosen land story for they MIGHT be a legend and myth. Unless there is truth of the contrary(extremely doubtful).

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
The day they would understand that they can't wipe our country from existence, is the day they'll agree to seriously negotiate. That won't happen. And that is why I support the separation fence (how ever it's called in english).
[/B]

And cutting them out changes something? It doesn't help AT ALL. Like I said before, whenever something happens, there's always a violent response from the opposing group.


Note that I neither support the Palestinians or the Israelis because I believe both groups are in the wrong. They should try to get together instead of bombing each other. Too bad extremists control both sides.

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
I won't deny it, Yitzak Rabin(sp?) has. since his assasination(yes he was killed, not by a palestinian but by a jewish extremist) things have gradually gone down now to the second intifada.





The thing is both sides are heavily controlled by extremists and if one bomb goes up, every one on the other side starts to bomb things then all goes down the drain.



Thus, because of people like you, both iraeli and palestinian, there might never be any hope of peace in the Israel/Palestine
You need a lesson in history. The arabs lived and made their homes there for centuries. You simply can't kick them out so easily.
Don't give me any chosen land story for they MIGHT be a legend and myth. Unless there is truth of the contrary(extremely doubtful).



And cutting them out changes something? It doesn't help AT ALL. Like I said before, whenever something happens, there's always a violent response from the opposing group.


Note that I neither support the Palestinians or the Israelis because I believe both groups are in the wrong. They should try to get together instead of bombing each other. Too bad extremists control both sides. Itzak Rabin. He was killed by a religious man. As I said before, all raligions are evil. So don't expect any chosen land stories from me. I know the history of Israel, and I know that the palestinians never had a country in here. When the zionist settlers came to Israel in the 19th centuary, it was a desert. A plain desert. There was nothing here, nothing at all. The palestinians never wanted a country before that, why is that? They probably weren't even here. Also, there were jews in Israel since the middle ages. We made a country, the arabs got jelous, so they attacked us time and time again (1921, 1929, 1936). They rejected everything that was purposed by the british.

So now you tell me what would you do in our possition? It's easy to say both sides are wrong, but sometimes you need to think a bit into it, and know the facts before you judge.

Can a mod move the last 3-4 posts and create a new thread please? It would be nice since we've gotten way off subject.



tfighterpilot: I say it again. I think each group is just as wrong as the other.

If I had the solution to end the Palestinian conflict, believe me I would use it right away. Sadly, the problem is deeper then history books can show. As you know, the conflict has been going on for a very long time, generations of children being taught to hate each others. Because of this, neither group has really a good chance of ending the conflict. As long as the hate remains, there will be conflicts.
This is a problem I don't see being solve tomorrow or by weapons or war. It has become a cultural problem, almost at the roots of each society involved in the conflict.
The only chance for peace remains in the hand of the children. (
Johann Koss and Right to Play (http://www.righttoplay.com/pr/m_1008_pressrel.asp) )

And perhaps of the more peace loving people living in the region: Geneva Accord (http://www.righttoplay.com/pr/m_1008_pressrel.asp)

Though only symbolic, it shows how both people can sit down and negotiate.
Yet as I have said, both side's extremists are unwilling to do anything:
Geneva Accord - Israeli opposition political leaders and Palestinian leaders announced an agreement in principle on conditions for a final settlement. The agreement, which has come to be known as the Geneva Accord, proposed historic concessions by both sides. Israel would give up sovereignty in Arab portions of Jerusalem, while the Palestinians would explicitly renounce the right of Palestinian refugees to return to Israel. Though it has no formal standing at present, the agreement has gotten widespread publicity, including support from US Secretary of State Colin Powell, and warm words from PNA Chairman Yasser Arafat. The Israeli government has denounced the agreement and the people involved in it, and tried to block advertisements for the agreement in the public media. Likewise, Palestinian extremists and their allies have denounced the agreement.

The Geneva Accord and Right to PLay are far better ideas then every piece of concrete in the world built into a wall.

i'd humbly like to point out that the WORST placed people to have a balanced view of what is going on are those in the countries involved.
Israelis know nothing of the palestinian cause, palestinians nothing of the israeli. The russian public has no more a sensible view on chechnya than the chechens. THe US and Iraqi people have hardly behaved logically after 9/11.

If you want you could comare all these types of situation to 2 kids arguing/fighting (or even a debate in the senate).
It starts off as a minor disagreement, at which stage it could be sorted out amiacably. However soon someone says or does something they'll regret. Then the other retaliates a bit harder. Back and forth it goes. As it does it gets further and further from the initial issue. All the old resentments come out. People's points of view become more and more extreme.

While you are involved in such a situation your responses seem natural, and each side feels it is in the right and the other is acting irrationally.

But to an outside observer it often seems farcical, as you watch it escalate to the point that neither is even listening, or making sense, or even probably believes a lot of what they are saying.

Unfortunately, the only way to solve such a situation is for either a strongo utside force to come in and force the two to "make up" (eg, a parent, the US) or for a pause to occur that is long enough to allow tempers to settle, people to calm down and start thinking rationally again and the possibility to forgive and make up.

(Look at the Northern Irish situation, or south africa for a good example of this).

----------

When the IRA was bombing the UK I hated them, couldn't uderstand why anyone would support them, didn't believe any claims made about british atrocities. No political party would risk being called traitors or cowards by openly negotiating with the IRA.

However,there was a gap. Tempers and opinions cooled. Talks began in secret so neither side would "loose face". Eventually the peace process started. It isn't perfect, but it is slowly getting there.

Of course, extremeists on both sides tried to wreck it ("Real IRA", paisly etc..) but both sides understood that if you stop the whole process because one nutter with a bomb won't let go of the grudge then you are giving more power to that lone nutter than the whole democratic process.

Now i can look back and see it was a great idea. I now see documentaries showing that we did treat them very badly at times, that we weren't always in the right.

-------------------

With regard to palestine/israel my natural inclination is to side with the palestinians. Neither side is "right". It is a messed up situation created by colonial powers imposing their will (like WW2, Iraq, etc..).
So, in a situation like that, with all thigs equal, i would have sympathy for both sides. However the aid of the US stops all things being equal...
Maybe it is the british way, but we tend to support the underdog. And when one side has jets, tanks, apache helecopters and Ј3billion a year; and the other side has stones, AK47s and has to blow themselves up... my sympathy goes more to them that to the guys with all the hardware.

----------------

The involvement of the US is the real sticking point for most of the world. It is the main reason most of the world hates the US, it is seen as biased and unfair, it alienates most of the arab world, and a lot of the non-arab world too.

I'd even argue that if the US had stayed out of it the either (a) the conflict would have resolved itself by now
or (b) the US would have stepped in and imposed a peace settlement
or (c) even if it was still going on it would be a minor conflict somewhere in the world that no-one knew about and it wouldn't be the cause of most of the world's problems (as it is today) and wouldn't have united the arab world against the west.

-----------

When two sides are about equal (as they might be without the US) wars tend to end pretty quickly as it isn't worth the casualities.
When they are uneven the bigger side tends to win.
But when they are vastly uneven (all these terrorist situations) the weaker side has less to loose and has to resort to much more extreme tactics, which quickly leads to the sort of escalation we see in all these situations. (the stronger side also tends to overreact and become more hardline, creating more resentment).

-----------

As for the security fence, it may work, it may not. It sure won't solve the issue.

It's like deciding to put a wall around the dodgy housing estates in the UK so that the people there can't get out because SOME of them might rob or attack us in our nice houses.
It might even reduce crime, but it is unfair, makes things worse for EVERYONE in those estates, even those who weren't doing anything wrong, creates division and resentment.

----------

I hope i've managed to get my point across clearly without offending anyone.

PS/ Did you know that most palestinians live within an hour or so of the sea, and most have never seen it? :eek:

Yeah you got it through.

It's true, non-jews and most liberals in general tend to side with the palestinians fighting with rocks against tanks.

Israel should have let the UN peackeepers in.

I had no problem if the palestinians only wanted a country in their territories, or even evacuating the settlements. But they want our ENTIRE country, and they won't stop killing us until they'll get it. Thus it can't be compared to northen irland, nor gigantic russia. Israel is a small advanced democratic country surrounded by monarchic arab countries, struggling to exist.

Whoa whoa whoa...

You do realize that in the Geneva Accord the country is only split right?

Not all of them wants to the whole place. The most important area here is Jerusalem which, under the Geneva Accord, would be split accordingly to the ethnic groups living in their parts of the city.

Hasn't been mentionned yet, but the settlements are perhaps the worse thing Israel could ever have done. It's poking the hornet's nest. The ancient war tactic of invading and replacing the people there with our own. At least it isn't raping...

I supposed you know the Israeli political system more then I do but I won't call it an advanced democracy. This isn't that US where only 2 big political parties can take over the government, its divided between many. Because of that, the party in power has to make alliances with smaller parties, sometimes right-wing extremist parties. Those smaller parties actually hold the power because if the big one doesn't want to listen to them, they'll break their alliance and there's a nice chance the party in power ight not get reelected.

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
Whoa whoa whoa...

You do realize that in the Geneva Accord the country is only split right?

Not all of them wants to the whole place. The most important area here is Jerusalem which, under the Geneva Accord, would be split accordingly to the ethnic groups living in their parts of the city.

Hasn't been mentionned yet, but the settlements are perhaps the worse thing Israel could ever have done. It's poking the hornet's nest. The ancient war tactic of invading and replacing the people there with our own. At least it isn't raping...

I supposed you know the Israeli political system more then I do but I won't call it an advanced democracy. This isn't that US where only 2 big political parties can take over the government, its divided between many. Because of that, the party in power has to make alliances with smaller parties, sometimes right-wing extremist parties. Those smaller parties actually hold the power because if the big one doesn't want to listen to them, they'll break their alliance and there's a nice chance the party in power ight not get reelected. What you don't understand is that 1 palestinian is enough to blow up a bus.

I agree that the settlements are bad, but don't blame the goverment, blame the people who don't agree to move.

The political system in Israel is indeed very different from the USA. It is a system more suited for a small country, and on my opinion, more democratic. There are advantages and disadvantages from each system (I learnt it at school ^_^)

And one Israeli Tank is enough to slaughter waves of palestinians. I believe since the beginning of the second Intifada about 900 Israeli were killed and close to 4000 Palestinians suffered the same fate. I'll have to find the stats.

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
And one Israeli Tank is enough to slaughter waves of palestinians. I believe since the beginning of the second Intifada about 900 Israeli were killed and close to 4000 Palestinians suffered the same fate. I'll have to find the stats. You indeed will have. Also check all the Israeli that died in all the wars that the arabs started.

About the tank. The difference between us and them, is that we have an army, while they have mob. If we retreat from the territories, there shalt be no tank there. Israeli extremist are usually swiftly caught, and no way they'll be able to steal a tank (this is not GTA)

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
(1)You indeed will have. Also check all the Israeli that died in all the wars that the arabs started.

(2)About the tank. The difference between us and them, is that we have an army, while they have mob. If we retreat from the territories, there shalt be no tank there. Israeli extremist are usually swiftly caught, and no way they'll be able to steal a tank (this is not GTA)

1-That's irrelevant. I could check on the stats of all the people who've died in wars in the history of mankind. Keep it to the actual Intifada or else it becomes ridiculous. Past wars are in the past and should stay there. We can only look at them and learn from their mistakes. Let's not dig up old wounds for absolutely nothing.

2-Perhaps, but when the government is controlled by a bunch of extremists it makes little difference does it?

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
1-That's irrelevant. I could check on the stats of all the people who've died in wars in the history of mankind. Keep it to the actual Intifada or else it becomes ridiculous. Past wars are in the past and should stay there. We can only look at them and learn from their mistakes. Let's not dig up old wounds for absolutely nothing.

2-Perhaps, but when the government is controlled by a bunch of extremists it makes little difference does it? 1) I suppose you mean current intifada. Yeah, check how many were killed.

2) Sharon? Extremist? Don't make me laugh. Many people that once supported him because he wanted to deal harshly with the palestinians now dislike him, and want him down. He is currently incapable of doing anything.

The only way the world would be a better place is if I ruled it.

1) I will.

2) No I'm not talking about Sharon in particular. I'm talking about the smaller political parties holding Sharon's balls.

I know Sharon has lately been trying to do more liberal stuff. He tried to force the removal of the settlements but everyone oppsed it(I'll have to look at this to point out who exactly was against).

Right now you only prove your ignorance on Israel's politics. You better do some research before throwing accusations.

Maybe you should enlighten me?

I don't have time now but I'll try to research it over the course of the weekend.

I think the United States should blockade the entire region. Withdraw all support to Israel, and keep anything from getting in or out by use of military blockade.

Eventually they'll have to work together to survive and be given a common enemy (the U.S.) to unite against.

I realize that's extreme and irrational, but I tire of reading and hearing about the conflict there. Growing up in Israel or Palestine must be horrible. Either you have to grow up with a constant fear of being in the wrong place at the right time as a suicide bomber detonates in a crowded bus or shopping plaza, or you grow up with the stigma of occupation and the knowlege that your home can be razed by bulldozers any day and there's nothing you can do about it.

There are whole generations of Jews and Palestinians that know no other situation than occupation. From the perspective of the Palestinians, all Jews are enemies since it is the Israeli government that is oppressing them. They see the Israeli people as a weapon against the Palestinians, since the government evicted many, many Palestinians to place Israelis in their towns and homes. Imagine having an invading army knock on your door and tell you you have to hit the street. Now. Then watch as the occupying government moves its own citizens into your very house.

From the point of view of the Israelis, the Palestinians are mere terrorists. They are willing to bomb crowded markets and buses, regardless of the danger to women and children. The goal is to take as many lives as possible and send as clear a message as possible: "we will fight. We will not give up. To the last breath." This resolve and apparent lunacy must be beyond "difficult" to live with. That someone can just take life without regard for families and the love fathers and mothers have for their children is abominable.

So the Israelis respond. They send in rocket attacks to take out the leadership of the terrorists, in vain hope that none will take their places or that the attacks will resolve knew leaders to arise. They are willing to send rockets to crowded streets to hit cars or into apartments where they sleep, regardless of the danger to women and children. The goal is to take as many lives as possible and send as clear a message as possible: "we will fight. We will not give up. To the last breath."

Neither side can solve the problem. There are too many among them that harbor hatred and feelings of revenge and vengence to allow any peace. The United Nations created that mess, its their responsibility to fix it. Israel has violated more UN sanctions than Iraq ever did, yet nothing is done. The U.N. should mobilize a large, very large peace force and occupy the entire region from Lebanon to Eygpt, from the Med to Jordan. For about a decade.

that would be an idea.. and something new..

Originally posted by SkinWalker
I think the United States should blockade the entire region. Withdraw all support to Israel, and keep anything from getting in or out by use of military blockade.

Eventually they'll have to work together to survive and be given a common enemy (the U.S.) to unite against.

Please try to limit quoted material, especially if its on the same page. Post more than you quote is the rule-of-thumb. :cool:

The USA had nothing to do with the situation.

I'm intruged why when the chechnians attack russia no one thinks of blaming russia. And what do they want? No matter how much territory the chechnians want, russia will still be huge. It's not the same here. Also, the palestinians attacked us before the occupation, and before Israel was even decalered. The occupation is because they attack us, not the other way around...

Your idea is that Israel will stay undefended to terrorist attacks. No thank you, I think I'll pass...

You are right that killing their leaders is pretty worthless, but that's the American way.

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
The USA had nothing to do with the situation.

I disagree. Indeed, the Israeli government ensures that the United States stays involved by demanding more and more aid. I say cut 'em off entirely. My "blockade" idea was hyperbole, but I'm serious about aid to Israel and Palestine. As long as they kill each other, neither deserves any of my tax dollars. F--- em.

The United States has supported Israel at nearly every turn. I believe Israel's existence is a direct result of U.S. aid and intervention at key moments in the nation's brief history. It was U.S. fighter planes and tanks as well as U.S. trained Israeli pilots and tank commanders that allowed Israel to repel Eygptian forces and take Lebanon. Our meddling in the affair as well as our hand in working with other nations of the pos-WWII world in setting up "Israel" as led to much animosity and violence perpetuated toward American targets worldwide.

The oil embargo by OPEC on the Western nations was a direct result of this.

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
I'm intruged why when the chechnians attack russia no one thinks of blaming russia.

I blame Russia. I think the terrorism in the region is a symptom, not a cause. Just as it is in Palestine.

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
Also, the palestinians attacked us before the occupation, and before Israel was even decalered. The occupation is because they attack us, not the other way around...

The "occupation" is "Israel" in the minds of the Palestinians. What they perceive is a nation being formed and theirs disolved. They see themselves as the victims of an invading force, being displaced from their homes and villiages, told they can no longer utilize lands that have been in their families for generations, because "now these people need a home and their ancestors used to live here a few thousand years ago."

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
Your idea is that Israel will stay undefended to terrorist attacks. No thank you, I think I'll pass...

My idea is that Israel and Palestine both be occupied and defended by UN Peacekeepers. A few hundred thousand. The Israeli military and the Palestinian militants would be prohibited from engaging in any operations until such time as the UN decided.

Those two countries are like children. You don't hand them keys to the car until they know how to drive. Unfortunately, that's what happened, so it's time to take away the keys and make them behave.

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
You are right that killing their leaders is pretty worthless, but that's the American way.

I was under the impression that the MOSSAD wrote the book on that sort of thing.

Originally posted by SkinWalker
I disagree. Indeed, the Israeli government ensures that the United States stays involved by demanding more and more aid. I say cut 'em off entirely. My "blockade" idea was hyperbole, but I'm serious about aid to Israel and Palestine. As long as they kill each other, neither deserves any of my tax dollars. F--- em.

Please post more than you quote. There is no reason to quote an entire post that is just above your own.

If there will be UN troops here, which will prevent any terrorist attack, then Israel will have no use for the militery, and everyone will be happy, and the economic condition will improve grately. I'll be happy if it happens, as I'm not THAT keen to risk my life, although I would to protect people when the time comes. I don't think that there's anything that the UN can do. But again, everyone in Israel would be happy in that case. As for now, we dislike the UN because all they do is talk, sort of like you.

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
As for now, we dislike the UN because all they do is talk, sort of like you.

Do ad hominem remarks like this boost your self esteem? This one is borderline, but I've seen you make similar remarks to other mods in other forums, so consider this a warning to avoid such comments in the future as they are against LF rules.

Originally posted by tFighterPilot
As for now, we dislike the UN because all they do is talk, sort of like you.

That seemed like a direct dig to me. Doesn't seem like you were out of line at all in my opinion.

He needs to choose his words more carefully, especially in an intillectual forum like the Senate.

Tell him if he doesn't choose his words more carefully, he'll have to face the same penalties as others who break the same rules.

I just came in to say I support Palestine.

Originally posted by InsaneSith
I just came in to say I support Palestine. I'M HAPPY FOR YOU!

have anything real to contribute? :rolleyes:

And stop deleting my posts!

14. Do not hound current moderators or admins. This is namely referring to a past influx of unwanted moderator applications, but also includes nit-picking moderator decisions.

and......

Spam: I will typically delete spam, that is to say, those posts that add nothing to the discussion of the thread, particularly if they get out of hand. A single, well-intended off-topic post is one thing, but a series of them from one or more users in succession is bad for the overall discussion. The Senate Singularity will be fed. However, as harm is not usually intended, I see no reason to issue specific warnings, though I might mention it in the thread in general sense.

Thats why your posts are being deleted.

I don't think that there will ever be peace between these two people. Pherhaps for a little bit, but it certaintly will not last.....

About 1001 Israelis were killed by Palestinian attacks in the al-Aqsa Intifada.
Most of them (more than 75%) are civilians.
Palestinians sources claim that 2,736 Palestinians were killed in the intifada. The Shin Bet is knowing about 2,124 Palestinians killed, and it has their names.
Out of the 2,124 dead, 1414 were combatants (armed men and\or terrorists), this is about two thirds (66%).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Intifada)

So it is running at about
Israel Deaths: (soldiers) 250 (civilians) 750
Palestine deaths: (soldiers) 1800 (civilians) 900

All pretty senseless deaths IMHO.
---------------------------

hey tFighterPilot, don't get so defensive. This started out as a perfectly reasoned, interesting debate.

The problem you have is that in any group you are going to have extremists (and even more extremists).

There was a lull and peace talks and a solution was near-enough agreed, the PLO was turning from terrorism to politics and it was all going OK (not great but OK). Then some idiot killed Rabin, everyone got all het up and it all started to escalate again.

So, the vast amjority of both sides supported peace, but by responding to the actions of a small group of extremists on both sides, they gave the power to the extremists and allowed them to wreck the whole thing.

Each side has gotten more and more extreme as things have gotten worse and worse, and they are now further apart than ever.

In Northern Ireland the WORST bombing ever happened AFTER the peace talks, by a tiny really-extreme group. This could easily have wrecked the whole thing... but the politicians didn't want to let a few people with a bomb get that kind of power... so they carried on.

Sharon was considered extreme when he came into office, his extreme policies haven't worked - but the rhetoric has gone to such a level that he is now considered liberal. Doesn't that just prove what i (we?) have been saying about polarisation to extremes on both sides? Unfortunately the Israeli political system means that tiny fringe groups are NEEDED to keep power, giving them massively disproportionate amounts of power and veto.

------------

Almost all the international press is blaming RUSSIA for the chechen problem... what are you reading?
Of course, most of the RUSSIAN press is more hardline and more pro putin, so attitudes are just hardening in russia. Sound familiar?

--------------

If the US stayed out of the whole thing and stopped supporting israel.
(a) Israel would get more sympathy and less hatred.
(b) Palestine would get less sympathy.
(c) The arab would wouldn't unite against the US/Israel "unfairness"
(d) The US would get less hatred and terrorism
(e) The UN would be able to intervene and help

hmmm... i can see why people support US involvement... not.

PS/ The UN can't intervene because the US won't let them... because the Israeli lobby groups in congress are nearly as powerful as the NRA ones...

Im so tired of hearing people religiously say that all religions are evil. Your bias view only makes you look foolish, and hypocritical. Im not pointing any fingers, but people constintly freaking out about religion makes them no better then the extreamists.

Please, keep it out. No religious debates here. Look at the thread title before you post.


Looks like toms made most of the research for me. It backs up almost all of my claims, especially the one about israeli politics and Sharon being stuck with smaller more extreme parties.

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
Please, keep it out. No religious debates here. Look at the thread title before you post.


Looks like toms made most of the research for me. It backs up almost all of my claims, especially the one about israeli politics and Sharon being stuck with smaller more extreme parties. Please read all posts before you assume that I am bringing anything anywhere. I was replying to a statement:
Originally posted by tFighterPilot
Itzak Rabin. He was killed by a religious man. As I said before, all raligions are evil.

I know about that post, I was one of the first poster and has been following this thread since the beginning.

It was a simple comment, if you want a religious debate against him, please keep it out of this place.

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
I know about that post, I was one of the first poster and has been following this thread since the beginning.

It was a simple comment, if you want a religious debate against him, please keep it out of this place. I dont want a debate, I was simply stateing a fact, one which you are proveing, in more ways than one.

Your fact stating might create an unwanted debate in a thread that has nothing to do with it.

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad
Your fact stating might create an unwanted debate in a thread that has nothing to do with it. This war is based on religion.

Neutron bomb the place. Kill em all with nuclear fallout, leave all those little religious places standing *don't want any psycho groups brewing here* and move back in in a decade.

Problem solved.

This war is based on religion.

Don't fall for that. This is a war about power and territory. Territory is power. Religion is the EXCUSE they're using.

Originally posted by Spider AL
Don't fall for that. This is a war about power and territory. Territory is power. Religion is the EXCUSE they're using. This war goes back as far as Isaac and Jacob.

Originally posted by ZDawg
This war goes back as far as Isaac and Jacob.

No... I'd argue that the hostility in this region goes back much farther than that. Probably beyond the Neolithic period. The Nartufian culture in the region is, after all, the most likely origin of agricuture. When the Younger-Dryas period occured following the end of the Pleistocene, the drop in temperatures caused a drought in the region, causing wild cereals like rye to lose ground to desert scrub.

The Nartufians cleared the scrub and planted seeds, beginning a practice of agriculture in the region. Once this occured, it was only natural that populations fight over scarce resources of water and soil.

The Levant and Mesopotamia have changed hands many, many times. A common practice was to force the occupants to leave after overpowering them, and replace them with your own culture. This practice occured before god, allah, and even el or yawheh were monotheistic deities of judeism, christianity, and the recent islam.

Amazingly, the cultural practices have endured beyond the religious indoctrinations. Perhaps even in spite of them.

The conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is fairly recent, but the fight over scarce resources is ancient. Amazingly, both Israeli and Palestinians are genetically very close. Both are Semitic "races" and have DNA that are fewer generations separated than either would care to admit.

If not for differences in religion and religious practices, as well as language, the two ethnic groups would be indistinguishable. But its the religious differences that divide them and create an excuse for the insanity.

This war goes back as far as Isaac and Jacob.Heh. And no doubt they were only interested in the land as well. Ahh biblical justification for war, gotta love it. :rolleyes:

Religion is regarded as true by some, false by some, but useful by those in power. I really don't believe for one moment that I'll be able to convince you of this... but religion is the EXCUSE that government has used since who knows when to get the common folk to go to war for them. How many Crusades, how many Jihads have been waged to provide leaders with land, power and comfort, all in the name of religion? How many silly, impressionable people have killed on command, on the promise of a great afterlife?

I shouldn't be so temperate really. I'll be more hard-hitting.

If any, ANY of the people on either side were truly spiritual, they wouldn't go around killing each other, or if they haven't killed, SUPPORTING those that DO kill on either side. If god exists, I'm sure he'd consider it a rather big sin, either way.

Do you know the story of Isaac and Jacob?

Do you know the story of Isaac and Jacob?ERGH!

*shuts the front door in ZDawg's face and runs away*

And I thought he was selling encyclopaedias.

Seriously though, I've heard a lot of biblical tales, and have absolutely zero desire to hear any of them again. My comment about Isaac and Jacob "also just wanting the land" was my little joke. No doubt you'll get it now.

Funneh no doubt, but your simply being close minded... your choice.

Hmm, personally I think that belief in dogma is indicative of a closed mind. Not wishing to read dogma more than once is merely indicative of good sense.

brushing off history over 9000 years old as"dogma" is close minded.

please, let us begin our cirular reasoning. let us go on for hours about the same thing, let us say it 5 different ways, let us find the law in eachothers reasonin, which will go on for ever :rolleyes:

Originally posted by ZDawg
brushing off history over 9000 years old as"dogma" is close minded.

Not for nothing, but the judeo-christian dogma isn't nearly that old. That was what he was referring to in response to the Issac & Jacob story reference (the stolen birthright blessing? From Esau? I need to look that one up.. haven't read it in years.)

Evidence for Judeism only goes back max about 4000 years BP.

They attack, we defend,While I sympathise with those who have faced the carnage caused by bombs on buses and the like, only a zealot or a fool would call the Israeli responses proportionate enough to be termed self-defence in any legal or moral respect.

Having skimmed the thread and feeling no particular need to get embroiled in any of the flame wars raging, I'll get straight to the point:

I don't care who's 'fault' it is. I don't care which side has had the most civilian casualties. And I certainly don't give a damn who's got the biblical right to the land. What I do care about is which side can do something to stop the conflict. And that side is Israel.

The Palestinian Authority can not stop the bombings. Because there is no longer a Palestinian Authority, and there hasn't been for a long time. No single Palestinian entity can control all of the armed forces fighting for the liberation of the West bank and the Gaza Strip. On the other hand, if Israel would lay down their arms - unilaterally - then all of the shooting from the Israeli side of the border would stop.

Would that be a solution? In the short term, it would most certainly not. There are too many religious fanatics, lunatics, political extremists, disgruntled widows, fatherless children, etc. on the palestinian side of the border for a unilateral ceasefire - or indeed any ceasefire - to have any immediate effect. But past experience has shown that shelling Palestinian cities, using 1000kg bombs in densely populated areas, tank-shocking civilian apartment buildings and bulldozing hab blocks are not the way to make friends within the Occiupied terretories. It only makes the problem worse.

And then we have to look at the causes of this sad conflict. One of them is the fact that the Palestinian terretories are in a legal limbo. They are occiupied, but not annexed, meaning that there is no independent Palestinian civilian government - and there hasn't been one for a long time - and the Palestinians living in the occiupied terretories are not technically part of Israel, and so are not protected by Israeli law. The result is a state of anarchy.

Another problem is the settlements. These are clearly illegal, and serve as a way to divide Palestinian land into tiny, isolated enclaves, as well as a means to deport people and steal their land. And they 'happen' to be sited just above the biggest freshwater resources in the region.

In short: Israel should stop shooting, withdraw their troops (replace them with a UN force that could be trusted by both parties) and dismantle the settlements. Maybe then build a high wall around Israel (but definitely on their own side of the border).

But why should they do that? After all, Israel seems to hold the upper hand in the conflict. In fact Israel does not. More Palestinians are born than die. That simple fact leaves Israel with a simple choice: Reach for the moderate Palestinians (yes they exist) and get a compromise, or be pushed into the Mediterranian by the unfavorable demographics of the situation. Or revoke the laws of Math.

Originally posted by ModAbuse-(tFP)
From the Israeli side, it's a war for survival. They attack, we defend, simple as that.

From the perspective of the remainder of the world, it appears that they attack and Israeli military retaliates. That is a bit different from defending. If firing a missile into an apartment building of sleeping people in order to assassinate one Palestinian who may, or may not, have been responsible for a given terrorist attack isn't in itself terrorism, then I suggest to you that the word is valueless and has no meaning.

Originally posted by ModAbuse-(tFP)
So do you ask why do I have to be in Israel? Cuz that's our country, simple as that. Just like you wouldn't leave your country if it was attacked by terrorists.

From the first millenium CE to the early 20th century, the Jewish population in the region occupied by the recently created nation of Israel was about 11%. By 1940, it increased to 30%.

In 1948, the UN Partition Plan divided the region into two states, one Arab the other Jewish, and Israel was proclaimed in 1948.

For some reason, the local Arab nations had a hard time accepting that the land of their Palestinian relatives could simply be taken and went to war. Israel said "screw the UN" and took more land. The Arabs, stayed pissed. The United States supported Israel with weapons and resources. The Arabs stayed pissed.

So when you say, "cuz that's our country, simple as that. Just like you wouldn't leave your country if it was attacked by terrorists," are you saying you're Jewish or Arab? I'm confused.

Originally posted by ModAbuse-(tFP)
They shouldn't have attacked us in 48. They thought that the gathered might of all arab countries could win, they thought wrong, and now they pay for that by having less land.

Ah! Okay... You're Jewish. So you're saying that if a society lives in land for centuries and is displaced by an invading society, then they don't have the right to resist?

Originally posted by ModAbuse-(tFP)
The arabs didn't even want a county until we arrived in the 19th century.

And yet they lived there. Your ethnocentric concept of nation aside, the Arabs in the region did live there and did make efficient use of the scant resources there.

The Jewish people are much like a virus in that they've invaded a healthy system, propagated, and, unless innoculated, will kill the system and themselves in the process.

I've actually argued that the European invasion of the over 500 nations that existed in the N. American continent was wrong. And if we lived in a society where the Am. Indian was still posing a militant threat to the security of the nation, I would argue that they deserve consideration.

I'm not saying that the Israeli people should move out, I think it's far too late for that. But something has to be done, otherwise the entire region will fall and fail. The current method of fight terror with terror is not working. It hasn't now for decades. I have to agree with ShadowT. that only the Israeli side of the conflict is capable of dealing with it.

Like it as not, both sides call the region home. And that home has limited resources, particularly in water.