Thread: The irrationality of Palestinian suicide bombings

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

First of all being jewish is not a race, the people who got kicked out of Palestine 2000 + years ago are not the same people who came to Palestine from Eastern Europe in 1882.

Secound. The incident in which you site happend 2000 fucken years ago. Seriously, If we organized the world by what happend 2000 years ago then the Turkys would have to go back to their ancient ancestral grazing lands the British would have to go back to England and oh ya the Scottish remember them?

You are making yourself look quite hypocritical here. This post is only the second time that you have used Jews as a non-collective. I know they are not a race, and I was using your own logic because you have constantly said "Jews versus palestinians/arabs"

Second, if things that happened 2000 years ago dont matter then religions should be done away with. AND if things that happened 2000 years ago dont matter then there should be no bad blood between Jews and Muslims. AND if things that happened 2000 years ago dont matter then it shouldn't matter when the arabs moved in that region either. Do you see where I am going here? I would actually like it if I got to move to Ireland. It is very pretty there.

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

There were jews in the region as a majority 2000 + years ago but they abandoned the area, in my other post on this page i explained how the fact jews lived in the region 2000 + years ago does not extend ownership of the land to the present day.

I also explained on the other page how the situation with the native americans in North America and the one with the Palestinians is only comparable to the extent that colonial scum from Europe settled there land. Read my post if you need to.

Canada is a pluralist society and is not ethnocentric in nature. I explaiend several time that the whole situation in the area is ethnocentric. The UN Started it if i can play the blame game.......They gave European jews who had been in the middle east for LESS then a generation a swath of land with 700 000 arabs on it to make a JEWISH state. Does that not strike you as rascist?

first paragraph, did so, There are still native american reservations where they practice their own beliefs and practices. They are not all amalgamated in to society. So, there goes that argument.

On that note, I do AGREE with you that the way Israel was formed was out of line. It was improper and they should have had better foresight. I was just having a good time rebutting your other points because I enjoy debate. However, I do not agree with targeting civilians to get your point across. It is simply dishonorable and really shows no skill or valor on the part of the bomber.

Originally Posted by Aquanina

Then what the hell are they doing in the west bank and gaza strip???

Those are leftovers of old wars. Three times, Israel was attacked along those routs. The West Bank is particularily important because it borders on Jerusalem and a large portion of the Jewish population. It was occupied to prevent Jordanian artillery to be in firing range of the capital. They're basically buffer zones to thwart invasions (part of the bigger picture compared to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict).

Now Israel has tried to give autonomy to these regions, they even retreated their troops a while back. But every time they make headway, the stupid militants blow something up, which brings Israeli retribution and escalates the conflict.

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

The rational is that is not a fair fight, and that the playing field needs to be evend up to compensate for the huge advantage the guy in the Humvee has over the guy being occupied.

Originally Posted by Aquanina

But considering that the Palestinians are not only fighting Israel but THE UNITED STATES as well, I support them doing whatever they can to fight.

So if a cafe gets blown up and lots of civilians get killed and a four year old's birthday party gets blown to shreds, that is a good thing because it is a matter of "fighting" and "getting even". I have tried to wrap my brain around that concept, and I just can't do it. Help me here. What does it do other than what you (Dragon) said about hurting Israel's economy? I don't get this. All it seems to do is create more tragedy. Even hurting Israel's economy just causes more of a bummer for the regular families that live there. It's not like the Israelis are going to say, "Okay, fanatical Muslims who demand a theocracy where people of our ethnicity are not allowed. Our economy has been hurt some by you lately, so go ahead and have your way with the land where we were born and raised and live now. Go ahead. We're going to move to Poland now." It is not going to happen. So what is the point? It's just tragedy. Nothing more. Also, if you care so much about Muslims, why do you want them to commit suicide?

I have my own problems with certain power structures. I have had major issues with Baptists in powerful positions in my life. Would it make sense for me to wait outside of First Baptist Church with an AK and mow over regular folks in the congregation as they walk out of a service? Would that be "getting even"? NO! It would just be an evil act that mindlesssly and pointlessly causes additional agony in the world. That is ALL it would do. Right? If a Zoroastrian burns my house down and I go and burn a different Zoroastrian's house down, have I gotten "even"? Absolutely not. The idea makes no sense.

If you think anything more results from Palestinian suicide bombings in Israel other than what I have mentioned, tell me SPECIFICALLY what it is. Saying it is "fighting" or "getting even" is way too vague. I still don't understand what you are trying to say.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

You are making yourself look quite hypocritical here. This post is only the second time that you have used Jews as a non-collective. I know they are not a race, and I was using your own logic because you have constantly said "Jews versus palestinians/arabs"

Because it is the jews vs the Arabs ie non palestinian entities have entered the fray , just because i use the term jew does not mean im saying they are a race. I use the term jew to categorize them since in israel they are of many races so i cant categroize them uner a race but i cant categorize the vast majority under a relegion. Hence my use of the term jews!

Originally Posted by tkdyo

Second, if things that happened 2000 years ago dont matter then religions should be done away with. AND if things that happened 2000 years ago dont matter then there should be no bad blood between Jews and Muslims. AND if things that happened 2000 years ago dont matter then it shouldn't matter when the arabs moved in that region either. Do you see where I am going here? I would actually like it if I got to move to Ireland. It is very pretty there.

You missed my point completely. I was trying to explain to you that you can't make a claim for a peace of land based on a group of people who lived and abondend a peace of land 2000 + year. My analogy in which i used the gypsies was to show you how ridiculous it would be if the Gyspies were to leave Europe and go back to india and kick the people of Rajistan out of their hosue because a thousand years ago their ancestors were made into slaves and they were taken to Europe and North Africa.

The things that happend 2000 years ago should be irrevelant. There would be no conflict today if European jews didnt immigrate to palestine in 1882 and les then a generation later ask for their own country on arab land. The whole conflict goes back to 1882 when the European jews came to Palestine. Forget what happend 2000 years ago. I was just trying to tell you that making a claim based on a group of people who lived in palestine 2000 years ago and then abandoned it is stupid.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

first paragraph, did so, There are still native american reservations where they practice their own beliefs and practices. They are not all amalgamated in to society. So, there goes that argument.

The vast majority of Native Americans in the USA are assimilated to some degree or onother in that they speak english, they regard themselvs as american citizens and hold citizenship and they practice christianity. I beleive one of those categorizations is true for 99% of Native Americans in the USA they are all assimilated to some degree alot of them are extremely well assimilated. My argument still stands.

My point was to tell you that the comparison between the native american issue in the USA and the palestinian/ israeli conflcit is only similar in that colonists from Europe came over on teh land. Other then that is is really different and i still stand by that. There goes your argument out of the window.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

On that note, I do AGREE with you that the way Israel was formed was out of line. It was improper and they should have had better foresight. I was just having a good time rebutting your other points because I enjoy debate. However, I do not agree with targeting civilians to get your point across. It is simply dishonorable and really shows no skill or valor on the part of the bomber.

Alrighty then you made your point. I rebukked what you rebuked of me. Touchee.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Those are leftovers of old wars. Three times, Israel was attacked along those routs. The West Bank is particularily important because it borders on Jerusalem and a large portion of the Jewish population. It was occupied to prevent Jordanian artillery to be in firing range of the capital. They're basically buffer zones to thwart invasions (part of the bigger picture compared to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict).

Now Israel has tried to give autonomy to these regions, they even retreated their troops a while back. But every time they make headway, the stupid militants blow something up, which brings Israeli retribution and escalates the conflict.

Israel has colonized Jerusalem and the West Bank and raped the resources o the region particulary the water resources in defiance of international law.

Under international law the occupation of the palestinians does have SOME legitimay in that they are using it as a buffer zone but the israelies are really taking it too far with the extent of their occupation.

And they take it to far in that they are occupying land which is basically modern day colonozation. They are folishly putting their own civilans into harms way by doing this and the consquences are theirs to face.

The threat of Jordanian artillery today is non existent as Israel have a peace treaty and diplomatic relations.

Why does israel have an occupation in the west bank today?

Israel ONLY has an occupation in Palestine today because they ILLEGALY HAVE CIVILANS ON ARAB LAND!!!!

THERE IS ABSOLOUTELY NO THREAT FROM JORDAN!!!!

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

So if a cafe gets blown up and lots of civilians get killed and a four year old's birthday party gets blown to shreds, that is a good thing because it is a matter of "fighting" and "getting even". I have tried to wrap my brain around that concept, and I just can't do it. Help me here. What does it do other than what you (Dragon) said about hurting Israel's economy? I don't get this. All it seems to do is create more tragedy. Even hurting Israel's economy just causes more of a bummer for the regular families that live there.

The attacks do work to an extent. Israel loses many people to emigration every year and a huge reason for it is the military service they have to endure and the security risks. In the bigger picture they increase emigration, they reduce immigration and they hinder the growth of the economy in many ways aswell. At the end of the day those who don't immigrate to israel will be better for it and those who emmigrate will be better for it to.


It sends a good message to perspective immigrants: If yo dont wanna get blown up stay the fuck off our land!!! and the same message to potential emigrants.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

It's not like the Israelis are going to say, "Okay, fanatical Muslims who demand a theocracy where people of our ethnicity are not allowed. Our economy has been hurt some by you lately, so go ahead and have your way with the land where we were born and raised and live now. Go ahead. We're going to move to Poland now." It is not going to happen. So what is the point? It's just tragedy. Nothing more. Also, if you care so much about Muslims, why do you want them to commit suicide?

Again the Palestinians dont want a theocracy...They want to have their country back which was stolen from them by the european immigrants and the UN. the part about going to poland i addressed in my post above.

I have my own problems with certain power structures. I have had major issues with Baptists in powerful positions in my life. Would it make sense for me to wait outside of First Baptist Church with an AK and mow over regular folks in the congregation as they walk out of a service? Would that be "getting even"? NO! It would just be an evil act that mindlesssly and pointlessly causes additional agony in the world. That is ALL it would do. Right? If a Zoroastrian burns my house down and I go and burn a different Zoroastrian's house down, have I gotten "even"? Absolutely not. The idea makes no sense.[/QUOTE]

This is not about Palestinians not liking judaism or the other way around its about two groups who contest the land who are of different relegions. Hating Judaism or hating islam has nothign to do with it, its about the occupiers and the land theives.

I beleive in an eye for an eye though, its revenge. No bad deed goes un punished the israelies started the cycle of violence anyway when the UN gave them their ill gotten land. And its not just my side that beleives in an eye for an eye. If israel can find out were a suicide bomber or a militant comes from tehy bulldoze and seize all the land on his block. Its collective punishement they level whole neighbourhoods in retrubition. It goes both ways.

If you think anything more results from Palestinian suicide bombings in Israel other than what I have mentioned, tell me SPECIFICALLY what it is. Saying it is "fighting" or "getting even" is way too vague. I still don't understand what you are trying to say.[/quote]

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Where do you draw the line then? The Arabs were the invaders once, they took over the lands of people that had been there for generations. Now the Arabs have made themselves at home and lay claim to the land.

Israel has existed for about 60 years, or two generations. How long must Israel exist before the land is "rightfully" theirs? Five generations? Ten generations? Fifty generations? If Israel exists for another thousand years, will the land still "belong" to Arabs?

Face it, ethnicity does not grant you sole posession of a territory.

like i said you cant claim ownership to a land based on people who lived on it 2000 years ago. That is just to ridiculous. Can we agree giving people land based on some people who lived and abandoned the place 2000 years ago is reidiculous? The Palestinian/Israeli conflict is much much more recent and is fixable.

According to the Un and Israel the jews own Palestine. How do you feel about that? The Palestinians who were there before them deserve there own country where they are not marginalised.

So fewer Jews live on the land than otherwise. The overall population is still going to remain, so so what? It is not worth killing the innocent for that. Not even close.

Like I keep saying, people who were born in Israel and whose parents and even grandparents were born in Israel are not trespassing. So killing them, especially the children who have no idea what is going on, is really "an eye of an innocent person for an eye supposedly taken from this completely different person". Did you see my Zoroastrain analogy?

Countries should belong to individuals, not ethnic groups.

I told you I agree that the U.N. pulled a major screw over in the 1940's. I see it that way because I am consistent. It was ethnic discrimination, which is ALWAYS a terrible thing. If the Israeli military is really targetting innocents (I hear claims both ways on that.), then they are terrible for doing that. I am not about to say such a thing is good because "an eye for an eye". You can only get revenge on the individuals that wronged you. You don't get revenge by hurting only people who had nothing to do with it. That is not revenge. It is mindless evil.

Ethnic discrimination is not balanced out by more ethnic discrimination. It is compounded by it.

Originally Posted by AquaNina;

And let's not forget about Christian Zionism, one of the largest reasons we support Israel, give them so much money, and pay jews to move to the occupied West Bank and Gaza. Because we all know that the second coming of christ won't happen until the jews return to the promised land, right!? So let's just kick out the people who had been living there, LITERALLY throw arabs out of their homes for these new jewish settlers who have no right to be there.

Christian zionism is one of the scariest things i have come across in my reading of the palestinian/israeli conflict. Its just so insane and twisted. Even the israelies feel uncomfortable by christian zionism but they need all the friends they can get so you dont hear them complaining.

In short christian zionism is motivated by their desire to be able to shake hands with jesus in their lifetime.

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

Christian zionism is one of the scariest things i have come across in my reading of the palestinian/israeli conflict. Its just so insane and twisted. Even the israelies feel uncomfortable by christian zionism but they need all the friends they can get so you dont hear them complaining.

In short christian zionism is motivated by their desire to be able to shake hands with jesus in their lifetime.

Religion pisses me off so much.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

So fewer Jews live on the land than otherwise. The overall population is still going to remain, so so what? It is not worth killing the innocent for that. Not even close.

Like I keep saying, people who were born in Israel and whose parents and even grandparents were born in Israel are not trespassing. So killing them, especially the children who have no idea what is going on, is really "an eye of an innocent person for an eye supposedly taken from this completely different person". Did you see my Zoroastrain analogy?

Countries should belong to individuals, not ethnic groups.

I told you I agree that the U.N. pulled a major screw over in the 1940's. I see it that way because I am consistent. It was ethnic discrimination, which is ALWAYS a terrible thing. If the Israeli military is really targetting innocents (I hear claims both ways on that.), then they are terrible for doing that. I am not about to say such a thing is good because "an eye for an eye". You can only get revenge on the individuals that wronged you. You don't get revenge by hurting only people who had nothing to do with it. That is not revenge. It is mindless evil.

Ethnic discrimination is not balanced out by more ethnic discrimination. It is compounded by it.

The "mindless evil" goes both ways. Both groups excercise collective punishment but oh well thats how it is.

The overal population is still there but its decreasing. A big reason why israel will be an arab country by the end of the century is because of extremely high EMMIGRATION and extrmeely LOW immigration.

The wider palestinian conflict finds its way into most israelies lives and makes it more difficult for them to live their lives thus encouraging emmigration.

If anything these methods used by Palestinian Militias will hasten Israel becoming a Palestinian country again.

To me the ends justifies the means used by the Palestinian Militias.

If it were not for this i would not support them.

haha i have the last word in this thread!!!!

I declare victory!

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

The "mindless evil" goes both ways. Both groups excercise collective punishment but oh well thats how it is.

If that's true, then screw every individual who is involved in it.

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

The overal population is still there but its decreasing. A big reason why israel will be an arab country by the end of the century is because of extremely high EMMIGRATION and extrmeely LOW immigration.

I seriously doubt that, unless the U.N. pulls another ethnic discrimination stunt in the other direction or something. There will never come a point where every or even a majority of Israeli Jews have decided to leave Israel. But if you were right, that would be awesome! No more Jews!

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

If that's true, then screw every individual who is involved in it.

Thats the reality of it.

Originally Posted by universal Mind

I seriously doubt that, unless the U.N. pulls another ethnic discrimination stunt in the other direction or something. There will never come a point where every or even a majority of Israeli Jews have decided to leave Israel. But if you were right, that would be awesome! No more Jews!

Well i guess the UN wasn't discriminating against the arabs because they were arabs, i guess they just didnt give a shit about the peasant people because at that time they were pretty much just that.

This isn't about hating jews its about land. My stance would be the same if it were sikhs,christians or scientologists in their place.

There is not a majority of israeli jews who decide to leave israel but many many do every year and it adds up in the long run my friend.

you can't argue with numbers.

"edit" I have seen statitiscs showing coupled with the relatively hight birth rate of israeli Arabs and high emigration rate of Israeli Arabs will make israel a arab state. There are statistisc to back me up on this.

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

There is not a majority of israeli jews who decide to leave israel but many many do every year and it adds up in the long run my friend.

you can't argue with numbers.

"edit" I have seen statitiscs showing coupled with the relatively hight birth rate of israeli Arabs and high emigration rate of Israeli Arabs will make israel a arab state. There are statistisc to back me up on this.

I don't think Israel will ever become a Palestinian state, and I don't think the Israelis are going to be driven out like you are saying the suicide bombings will cause. Numbers may be reduced, but there will never come a point when the suicide bombings were worth it. I don't think driving Jews out of Israel is a legitimate goal any way. I also maintain my position that the suicide bombings are really about just venting rage and trying to make the big Allah phantom in the sky happy so he will provide virgin whore Heaven.

I hope we are not that far away from the day when the world sees both Judaism and Islam the way it sees Greek mythology. Same goes for Christianity. Think of all of the bullshit religion has caused in the world.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I don't think Israel will ever become a Palestinian state, and I don't think the Israelis are going to be driven out like you are saying the suicide bombings will cause. Numbers may be reduced, but there will never come a point when the suicide bombings were worth it. I don't think driving Jews out of Israel is a legitimate goal any way. I also maintain my position that the suicide bombings are really about just venting rage and trying to make the big Allah phantom in the sky happy so he will provide virgin whore Heaven.

I hope we are not that far away from the day when the world sees both Judaism and Islam the way it sees Greek mythology. Same goes for Christianity. Think of all of the bullshit religion has caused in the world.

If it were not for the grievances caused by Israel Palestinians would not have a reason to blow themselves up. Obviously they pray to god and all that shit, but you would to if you were going to give up your life and you beleived in god.

anyway i have to disagree with you the high emigration rates and the high israeli arab rith rates will have their effect on israel dude.

Its called the "Israeli-Arab demogrpahic time bomb", ill try and get some links for you to read about this. This is a very real phonomenom.

"Arab citizens were recently identified as a "problem" that required the establishment of the Demography Council, a government body comprising academics, gynecologists and lawyers that is charged with devising ways to increase the Jewish birth rate. Understandably, the Arab population has inferred that Israel now officially considers Jewish babies good, Arab babies bad"

http://www.iht.com/articles/2002/11/...ook_ed3__0.php

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

Obviously they pray to god and all that shit, but you would to if you were going to give up your life and you beleived in god.

If Aunt Martha had a penis, she would be Uncle Fred.

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

anyway i have to disagree with you the high emigration rates and the high israeli arab rith rates will have their effect on israel dude.

Its called the "Israeli-Arab demogrpahic time bomb", ill try and get some links for you to read about this. This is a very real phonomenom.

There is a large faction that will never leave without being forced out by something much more powerful than what they are up against now. They would consider it an insult to God. Don't forget that Israel has nukes. The hurdles are just too high to get to the point you are talking about. It's "the holy land".

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

There is a large faction that will never leave without being forced out by something much more powerful than what they are up against now. They would consider it an insult to God. Don't forget that Israel has nukes. The hurdles are just too high to get to the point you are talking about. It's "the holy land".

If you put a frog in boiling water it will jump out....If you put a frog in cool water and slowly turn up the tempature, the frog wont notice and will die.

The Israelies are like the frog, they wont know what hit them and anyway according to israel the israeli arabs are "equal" or atleast as equal as you can be in an enthnocentric country. So who they gonna call? Ghostbusters!!!

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

Because it is the jews vs the Arabs ie non palestinian entities have entered the fray , just because i use the term jew does not mean im saying they are a race. I use the term jew to categorize them since in israel they are of many races so i cant categroize them uner a race but i cant categorize the vast majority under a relegion. Hence my use of the term jews!

same reason why I use it.

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

You missed my point completely. I was trying to explain to you that you can't make a claim for a peace of land based on a group of people who lived and abondend a peace of land 2000 + year. My analogy in which i used the gypsies was to show you how ridiculous it would be if the Gyspies were to leave Europe and go back to india and kick the people of Rajistan out of their hosue because a thousand years ago their ancestors were made into slaves and they were taken to Europe and North Africa.

The things that happend 2000 years ago should be irrevelant. There would be no conflict today if European jews didnt immigrate to palestine in 1882 and les then a generation later ask for their own country on arab land. The whole conflict goes back to 1882 when the European jews came to Palestine. Forget what happend 2000 years ago. I was just trying to tell you that making a claim based on a group of people who lived in palestine 2000 years ago and then abandoned it is stupid.

I see the point you were trying to make. But to me, If things that happened so long ago are irrelevant then it should also be irrelevant how long someone's people moved in.

As far as the abandoning thing. I think it is still pretty unclear weather they abandoned it or were removed. Either way, I think our logic patterns are different on this and we are gonna keep beating our heads against each other on this arguing point. lol

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

The vast majority of Native Americans in the USA are assimilated to some degree or onother in that they speak english, they regard themselvs as american citizens and hold citizenship and they practice christianity. I beleive one of those categorizations is true for 99% of Native Americans in the USA they are all assimilated to some degree alot of them are extremely well assimilated. My argument still stands.

My point was to tell you that the comparison between the native american issue in the USA and the palestinian/ israeli conflcit is only similar in that colonists from Europe came over on teh land. Other then that is is really different and i still stand by that. There goes your argument out of the window.

so, shouldn't this minority still get the land back since it all use to be their people's and they are still alive(or at the least the area their tribe use to cover)? the only difference is that the Native Americans where defeated long ago and the Palestinians are fighting now. How do you think you would feel if eventually the Palestinians were defeated and it was said it was ok because they were assimilated? Would you be ok with that?

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

Alrighty then you made your point. I rebukked what you rebuked of me. Touchee.

ah ha! but we are not finished yet

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

Israel has colonized Jerusalem and the West Bank and raped the resources o the region particulary the water resources in defiance of international law.

Under international law the occupation of the palestinians does have SOME legitimay in that they are using it as a buffer zone but the israelies are really taking it too far with the extent of their occupation.

And they take it to far in that they are occupying land which is basically modern day colonozation. They are folishly putting their own civilans into harms way by doing this and the consquences are theirs to face.

The threat of Jordanian artillery today is non existent as Israel have a peace treaty and diplomatic relations.

Why does israel have an occupation in the west bank today?

Israel ONLY has an occupation in Palestine today because they ILLEGALY HAVE CIVILANS ON ARAB LAND!!!!

THERE IS ABSOLOUTELY NO THREAT FROM JORDAN!!!!

What you have said is only your opinion, I think your doing a lot of rationalizing. And maybe there is relative peace in the region because of these buffer zones? If you were at war with a country 3 times in the last half century, would you be so eager to give up land that borders on your capital? I think Israel has every right to play it safe, given that its neighbors still want to wipe it off the map.

And also, you didn't address the fact that Israel has tried to demilitarize the West Bank and Gaza. They had ended the occupation. But was that enough? No, the militants broke the peace and Israel sent its troops back. The Palestinians are fully to blame for their lack of autonomy in those regions.

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

like i said you cant claim ownership to a land based on people who lived on it 2000 years ago. That is just to ridiculous. Can we agree giving people land based on some people who lived and abandoned the place 2000 years ago is reidiculous? The Palestinian/Israeli conflict is much much more recent and is fixable.

According to the Un and Israel the jews own Palestine. How do you feel about that? The Palestinians who were there before them deserve there own country where they are not marginalised.

But isn't it true that when the Arabs conquered the region, how long ago that might have been, they occupied territories held by others for generations? Isn't it hypocritical to say that it was OK for the Arabs back then but not OK for today's newcomer, Israel, now just because your stuff "convieniently" doesn't matter anymore? When is this cut off age where events don't matter anymore? A hundred years, a thousand? So I restate my question, how long does Israel have to exist before the land suddenly becomes "theirs"?

This line of argument only prooves further that land "belongs" to no one. I really dislike the "Israel has no right to exist on Palestinian lands" argument.

Oh and please make use of the multi-quote button, this is getting confusing .

Originally Posted by Spartiate

What you have said is only your opinion, I think your doing a lot of rationalizing. And maybe there is relative peace in the region because of these buffer zones? If you were at war with a country 3 times in the last half century, would you be so eager to give up land that borders on your capital? I think Israel has every right to play it safe, given that its neighbors still want to wipe it off the map.

Dude its the law. israel has the right to have some sort of occupation to accomodate its security needs ie a buffer zone so not to get invaded. Thats not my opinion its the LAW.

Israel in no way has the right to have a civilan occupation nor to take the resources of said land. Israel is exploiting the situation in violation of international law. Even the current occupation which is only in effect to protect the illegal settlements is excessive.

Israel has a peace treaty and relations with Jordan,which just goes to show the true nature of the occupation is about taking land that is not theirs.

israel is mainting an illegal occupation of East Jerusalem and colonizing it with their civilians.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

And also, you didn't address the fact that Israel has tried to demilitarize the West Bank and Gaza. They had ended the occupation. But was that enough? No, the militants broke the peace and Israel sent its troops back. The Palestinians are fully to blame for their lack of autonomy in those regions.

First thing HAMAS offered Israel a 10 year truce all they had to do was pull out their illegal occupation of Gaza,East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Hamas had a cease fire with israel and israel broke it with an air strike in Gaza. they violated the ceasefire not Hamas.

The West Bank is not for Israel to demiliatrize. Its not Israeli territory what they should do is pull out of the West Bank and build a wall on the border. Right now israel is buidling a wall in the middle of the West Bank effectivelly illegally aneexing more Palestinian land to Israel. PPl call it teh apartheid wall.

Anyway israel should build a wall at the border and mind their own business, they have no right to have this type of occupation. If israel wants talks with Gaza they can try and get a ceasefire set up again but only if they dont vilate the ceasefire!!!

Originally Posted by spartiate

But isn't it true that when the Arabs conquered the region, how long ago that might have been, they occupied territories held by others for generations? Isn't it hypocritical to say that it was OK for the Arabs back then but not OK for today's newcomer, Israel, now just because your stuff "convieniently" doesn't matter anymore? When is this cut off age where events don't matter anymore? A hundred years, a thousand? So I restate my question, how long does Israel have to exist before the land suddenly becomes "theirs"?

So your telling me that because the arabs did the jews can do it to? And that makes it alright? Israel is Basing their claim on a group of people that lived and abondoned a peace of land 2000 years ago is not legitimate, would it hold up in court? Me things no....

Listen ok. 80% of Israels jewish population has only been in the regions for 50 years or less. That does not give them the right to land at all period. The Palestinians have a generations generations long claim to the land. The European Jews have only a history in the region of 150 years maximum but most of them only go back less then 50 years. That is no way legitimate.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

This line of argument only prooves further that land "belongs" to no one. I really dislike the "Israel has no right to exist on Palestinian lands" argument.

This line of argument only proves that Europeans cant come and settle on non european land and make a country on non european land. It wasnt ok back in the days of coloumbus it isnt ok today. The fact is the palestinians pre date them and the UN disregarded the Palestinians in favour of giving the european immigrants a country. Do you think what the UN did was wrong?

Let me put it in perspective for you ok. When the jewish state Israel was created there was more then 700 000 arabs on the land. The UN ignored them and gave the Europeans the land instead. Was that not unjust spartiate?

Originally Posted by spartiate

Oh and please make use of the multi-quote button, this is getting confusing .

Sorry dude...You should of put that at the top of your post....to late i guess

Originally Posted by tkdyo

same reason why I use it.

woops i made a spelling mistake with my thing. I meant to say this:
"Because it is the jews vs the Arabs ie non palestinian entities have entered the fray , just because i use the term jew does not mean im saying they are a race. I use the term jew to categorize them since in israel they are of many races so i cant categroize them uner a race but i cant\ categorize the vast majority under a relegion. Hence my use of the term jews!"

Originally Posted by tkdyo

I see the point you were trying to make. But to me, If things that happened so long ago are irrelevant then it should also be irrelevant how long someone's people moved in.

That makes no sense, 2000 years ago what happend to a group of people is irrevelant bcause it holds no revelance or atleast it should not hold any revelance to what is happening today.

Israel has only been around 60 years, it is revelant how they moved in because the way they moved in. They estabilished a jewish state with
700 000 arabs on it, that is revelant because it was such a tragedy and because it happen not very long ago.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

As far as the abandoning thing. I think it is still pretty unclear weather they abandoned it or were removed. Either way, I think our logic patterns are different on this and we are gonna keep beating our heads against each other on this arguing point. lol

Some of them abonded the land and some of them were forcibly removed, whateva.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

so, shouldn't this minority still get the land back since it all use to be their people's and they are still alive(or at the least the area their tribe use to cover)? the only difference is that the Native Americans where defeated long ago and the Palestinians are fighting now. How do you think you would feel if eventually the Palestinians were defeated and it was said it was ok because they were assimilated? Would you be ok with that?

Listen the jews left 2000 years ago, they moved out they got over it.

Being jewish is not a race its a relegion, the european jews which i mention so often are not middle easteners they are followrs of the jewish faith. Land does not belong to a relegion it belongs to a people. They have no legitimate claim to the land.

The Palestinian people who were there all the while lived there for ages and had a majority to the present day from the 6th century,that is enough for a claim!

No that is not the only difference go back and read my post were i talk about the native americans and the Palestinian comparison,i make several points which seem to have gone unnoticed by you.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

ah ha! but we are not finished yet

and it goes on...fine with me.

I did notice you points, you just dodged my question by claiming race and religion are not the same. I made no such claim. Im using the term Jew in the exact same context as you.
I specifically said what happened to Native Americans BACK THEN is exactly the same as what is happening now to the Palestinians. They were moved out by force, they fought several wars over hundreds of years with the settlers, it has only been within the last 100 or less years that the Native Americans have become part of our culture or were even given rights outside of their reservations. The same exact thing could happen to the palestinians. Does that all of the sudden make it not relevant the same way that you claim the Native American example is not? and before you say its not the same because Israel was made a relgious state, the colonies were christian states as well, they hung anyone who was not christian.

We already know we agree that the situation going on in Israel is not right. but this point we have very different tracks on it seems.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

I did notice you points, you just dodged my question by claiming race and religion are not the same. I made no such claim. Im using the term Jew in the exact same context as you.

I think we're both getting mixed in our back and forths, i thought you were implying that i was saying Jews are a race earlier. I guess i just got mixed up in teh back and forths. I will go back to your question and answer it here for ya i did not entend it...


[quote=tkdyo]I specifically said what happened to Native Americans BACK THEN is exactly the same as what is happening now to the Palestinians. They were moved out by force, they fought several wars over hundreds of years with the settlers, it has only been within the last 100 or less years that the Native Americans have become part of our culture or were even given rights outside of their reservations.[QUOTE]

You made a very good point here....I guess my american history is really bad because i neglected these facts that should have been glaringly obvious otherwise. Touchee you got me on this one....

Originally Posted by tkdyo

The same exact thing could happen to the palestinians. Does that all of the sudden make it not relevant the same way that you claim the Native American example is not? and before you say its not the same because Israel was made a relgious state, the colonies were christian states as well, they hung anyone who was not christian.

Ok dude. I think you dont have a very broad understanding of Islam or Judaism. First thing is. The Israeli-Arabs have not adopted Hebrew as their first language at all. They are still arabic native speakers and the israelies ar enot trying to make them adopt Hebrew as their native langauge.

Secound thing. Judaism has a rule against advertising their relegion. You know in christainity were the jehovah witnesses come to your door and they try and convert you? Well that is against the principles of Judaism. Chances are if you walk up to a rabbi and say i want to become a jew he will tell you to go away and stop wasting his time. Jews dont try and get converts period unlike christians.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

We already know we agree that the situation going on in Israel is not right. but this point we have very different tracks on it seems.

I guess we agree to disagree?


ok man is this the question you feel i didn't answer? (below this)

Originally Posted by tkdyo

so, shouldn't this minority still get the land back since it all use to be their people's and they are still alive(or at the least the area their tribe use to cover)? the only difference is that the Native Americans where defeated long ago and the Palestinians are fighting now. How do you think you would feel if eventually the Palestinians were defeated and it was said it was ok because they were assimilated? Would you be ok with that?

What minority? The jews left 2000 years ago, only a small handful of jews remained in Palestine and btw they lived in peace with the arabs.

The Palestinians will not be assimilated into jewish/israeli culture i explained this in this post about how judaism is against getting converts. But i will humour you and answer the question anyway. If the Palestinians were defeated and they were assimilated into Hebrew/israeli culturally. Which is to say that they adopted Hebrew and Judaism as their language and relegion and they intermarried with the jews then i would say the exact same thing i say about the native americans. They are israelies now and they consider themselves as such. End of story.

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

I think we're both getting mixed in our back and forths, i thought you were implying that i was saying Jews are a race earlier. I guess i just got mixed up in teh back and forths. I will go back to your question and answer it here for ya i did not entend it...

ah, yeah, I think we can leave this behind, too many quotes, too many details in the sentances

[QUOTE=dragonoverlord;722986]
[quote=tkdyo]I specifically said what happened to Native Americans BACK THEN is exactly the same as what is happening now to the Palestinians. They were moved out by force, they fought several wars over hundreds of years with the settlers, it has only been within the last 100 or less years that the Native Americans have become part of our culture or were even given rights outside of their reservations.

You made a very good point here....I guess my american history is really bad because i neglected these facts that should have been glaringly obvious otherwise. Touchee you got me on this one....

it was a good back and forth though :thumbs up:

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

Ok dude. I think you dont have a very broad understanding of Islam or Judaism. First thing is. The Israeli-Arabs have not adopted Hebrew as their first language at all. They are still arabic native speakers and the israelies ar enot trying to make them adopt Hebrew as their native langauge.

Secound thing. Judaism has a rule against advertising their relegion. You know in christainity were the jehovah witnesses come to your door and they try and convert you? Well that is against the principles of Judaism. Chances are if you walk up to a rabbi and say i want to become a jew he will tell you to go away and stop wasting his time. Jews dont try and get converts period unlike christians.


I guess we agree to disagree?

aye, I know this, what I meant to say is if they did just live with each other one or the other might become assimilated. but yes, I think we will agree to disagree

Originally Posted by dragonoverlord

What minority? The jews left 2000 years ago, only a small handful of jews remained in Palestine and btw they lived in peace with the arabs.

The Palestinians will not be assimilated into jewish/israeli culture i explained this in this post about how judaism is against getting converts. But i will humour you and answer the question anyway. If the Palestinians were defeated and they were assimilated into Hebrew/israeli culturally. Which is to say that they adopted Hebrew and Judaism as their language and relegion and they intermarried with the jews then i would say the exact same thing i say about the native americans. They are israelies now and they consider themselves as such. End of story.

alrighty, that does answer my question, I just needed clarification on your logic a bit.

The minority bit was about if those few native americans who still stick to their ancestors way should get their land back, but it doesnt matter because we got passed that on you response about Native americans above. Good debating with you, it was fun

[quote=tkdyo;723211]ah, yeah, I think we can leave this behind, too many quotes, too many details in the sentances

[quote=dragonoverlord;722986]

Originally Posted by tkdyo

I specifically said what happened to Native Americans BACK THEN is exactly the same as what is happening now to the Palestinians. They were moved out by force, they fought several wars over hundreds of years with the settlers, it has only been within the last 100 or less years that the Native Americans have become part of our culture or were even given rights outside of their reservations.

it was a good back and forth though :thumbs up:

Ok you makea good point here. I agree to a certain degree.

Originally Posted by tkdyo

aye, I know this, what I meant to say is if they did just live with each other one or the other might become assimilated. but yes, I think we will agree to disagree

I obviously disagree vehamently on this....

Originally Posted by tkdyo

alrighty, that does answer my question, I just needed clarification on your logic a bit.

The minority bit was about if those few native americans who still stick to their ancestors way should get their land back, but it doesnt matter because we got passed that on you response about Native americans above. Good debating with you, it was fun

Umm i thinkt hose native aericans should get some land sort of like a national park where the GOV gives animals some land to bears, the GOV could make national parks for native americans