Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
And closing one of the few points of dialogue will improve the situation, how, exactly?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
US announces closure of Palestinian mission in Washington
Because of the extremist on both sides I see little chance of that happening now.
Flankerl
Well-Known Member
And how did that Mission further that goal?
That's not how that works.
You claim X happened. Therefore you provide evidence for your claim.
But it is not a point of dialogue, or is the PLO at war with the USA?
The one they should talk to are far closer to Ramallah than some guy in Washington.
Perhaps they should've just accepted the peace offer by Olmert.
But what do I know? I am sure perpetual war is superior to peace.
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Avoiding the question? Cool.
GoodbyeDave
Well-Known Member
Some-one steals your country and then offers to give you a little bit back. Some offer!
You clam (and mock) it didnt happen but it you insist.
Israel is tightening its blockade on Gaza by stopping fuel deliveries
Palestinian women haunted by abuse in Israeli jails
UN envoy tells ‘outrageous’ Israel to stop shooting children in Gaza
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/israel-compared-to-nazi-germany-at-cork-conference-1.435467
Security Council Members Condemn Killing of Palestinian Civilians in Clashes at Israel-Gaza Border after Peaceful Protest Turned Violent | Meetings Coverage and Press Releases
Flankerl
Well-Known Member
The Palestinian Mission did not further any dialogue with Israel, the other party in the conflict.
You not liking the answer doesn't mean I am ignoring the question.
There was no Palestinian country. The people didn't even see themselves as Palestinian because Palestinian Nationalism didn't exist yet.
Three states were to be formed out of the British Mandate of Palestine. (which was not a country btw)
Transjordan, nowadays Jordan which got everything east of the Jordan.
Cisjordan was to be further divided between the remaining Arabs and Jews.
The Jews accepted the proposal and the same night all Arab neighbours declared war.
Throughout the war Arabs were pushed out of now Israeli controlled territory, a quarter stayed.
And on the other side Jews were pushed out of now Egyptian and Jordanian controlled territory, not a single Jew stayed.
Over the next years various riots, pogroms and the like led to almost a million Jews throughout the entire Middle East and North Africa to leave their homes.
Ironically these Jews are seen as the "good Jews", the "real Jews" compared to the "fake, evil European Jews" and many Arabs want them to return.
There is only one tiny little problem, they hate the Arabs or distrust them due to them being forced out of their homes, the pogroms and riots.
On the other side the "fake, evil European Jews" are usually the ones more open to a dialogue.
Good luck forcing the Mizrahim under Arab rule. Not seeing them agreeing to it.
And yes the Arabs have lost all of their wars of aggression against Israel. They have lost. Perhaps its time to stop and not continue with the war? Because it seems like it's not working out.
Just an idea.
Yeah that was the border crossing Hamas blew up.
Funny story.
Since then it has resumed its normal routine.
Question: Can I bring up the other side? Perhaps from an Israeli angle? If not: Why are you allowed to use a biased source and not me?
Because the MME is in bed with the Muslim Brotherhood and former Al-Jazeera employees.
How about the protesters who try to breach into Israel and wreak havoc could like keep their children home?
Who takes his children to such an activity?
Also how do you feel about most people killed being Hamas members or affiliates?
What are you trying to prove with that article?
Is that your opinion? Do I have to get the Jäger Report out again to show you how Israel is not like Nazi Germany?
So you think Palestinians should be able to storm into Israel and murder people?
Cute false picture.
1917: Palestinian
Nah. That was all the Ottoman Empire. To be precise the Beirut Vilayet and the Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem.
Also where are the green dots in Jerusalem, Hebron and Safed? We kinda used to be the majority of the inhabitants at that time in these cities.
1946: Palestinian with some Jewish dots
But most of the Land was not owned by local Arabs but by Turks in then Turkey.
Just because the Ottoman Empire ended doesn't mean that private Turkish property vanished.
Most Arabs worked on the Land of Turkish owners.
So it's kind of disingenuous to mark Jewish owned areas but ignore Turkish owned areas.
And the map should be red. Why? Because of the British Empire.
1947: Yes the Partition plan, which the Arabs rejected and immediately invaded.
1948-1967: In the war they started they then lost territory. Totally not out of the ordinary. Just 3 years prior to that 12 million Germans lost all they had and had to leave their homes.
No clue why they aren't living in refugee camps. Germans are weird.
Present: No distinction between Israel proper and the A, B and C Zones in Judea and Samaria.
Also there is some green in Gaza, which has been free of Israelis since 2006. Not including kidnapped Israelis and following soldiers.
Just the typical stuff any Jew sees at least once every week on the net.
Bull, the blockade is still in force
Did Israeli soldiers get gang raped too? Show me news reports of that and we'll call it equal
Sorry!!! I didnt realise you were the arbiter of who goes where.
If it were my opinion i would not have bothered with a united nations article
Did i say that? You think Israeli soldiers armed with american weapons can storm palestinian homes and drive them out to steal their land?
Bull, if its fake tell google that all its pictures depicting the same scenario are fake. Interestingly it seems you have picked up on hasbara propaganda to make such a suggestion
Every atrocity and piece of land ever acquired in human history is because somebody lost a war. This seems like a Darwinian, "only-the-strong-shall-survive" kind of argument.
I can see all the other points you're making, and I realize that the leaders and governments of Arabic-speaking nations are not innocent victims either.
It was similar here in America, where we rolled over the entire continent, committing atrocities, mass slaughter, and slavery along the way. We still have Indian reservations, but we now recognize that what we did in the past was wrong. Nobody is confined to reservations anymore, as their inhabitants can come and go as they please.
A lot of people opposed the civil rights movement because they thought certain ethnic groups were "dangerous," just as some Israelis see the Arabs as dangerous. But others thought it was even more dangerous to continue to oppress minority groups and felt that granting civil rights and treating people as equals would help to ease tensions and reduce the danger. Looking back, it appears that that was the correct choice to make.
Threads such as this one repeatedly prove themselves to be worthless. Points of view are not simply set, they are ossified. But, no @Stevicus, it was not "similar in America." For better or for worse, Israel was forged in great part by a death-camp refugees determined to never again find themselves at the whim of closed borders and antisemitic indifference.
The Emperor of Mankind
Currently the galaxy's spookiest paraplegic
Unfortunately that's how nations exist at the moment; so long as they're strong enough to enforce their own borders and not be conquered by others or dissolved through civil war.
"Similar" does not mean "exactly alike." I was only addressing the point which justified the current situation by the fact that "the Arabs lost."
Oh, I'm not denying that part of it. But the question could still be asked: Is that the kind of world we want? Or are we just doomed to endless warfare, fighting, and violence?
Also, Jayhawker Soule, I just to have to ask. I'm not trying to be disrespectful, but I'm just wondering: What makes you such an authority? Why should your opinion be considered more valuable than mine? Where do you get off calling this or any other thread "worthless"?
The part you're missing here is that the Arabs launched war after war, refusing any peace overtures over the course of decades.
And they're still doing it.
Tom
Shad
Veteran Member
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-tightens-gaza-blockade-stopping-fuel-deliveries-1706245121
Egypt closed it's side of the border because of Hamas. Funny how that is omitted and there is no "cry of humanity" about it. You are being manipulated by omission of facts.
- You are clearly trying to be disrespectful.
- I have never claimed to be an authority.
- To the extent that I speak with authority, it is the result of years experience with similar treads and many more years of study of respected scholarship.
That's your perception. You can't read my mind.
Then perhaps it might be better if you asked for clarification rather than cavalierly pronouncing judgment. Your posts seem to carry more melodrama and condescension than any apparent "scholarship."
Of course, you're free to put me on ignore, since that seems to be your M.O. around here, but it would be your loss, not mine.
Why would they launch war after war? I mean, I'm trying to be fair to both sides here, but let's face it: The land in question has had many occupiers over the centuries. The British managed to acquire it after WW1 because the Ottoman Empire was among the losers in that war. It didn't really belong to the British except by force of arms; they're not indigenous to that territory. Did the British or the French or the UN have any right to declare who should get what land? Or was it just a case of might makes right?
Of course, I guess one could make the case that the Arabs were terribly outmatched and had no chance at winning. If they were smart, they would have made a deal, but maybe they're stupid. But that doesn't mean they're wrong for fighting over land they genuinely believed was theirs. One might make the case that Geronimo and his followers were equally stupid to wage a war they had no chance of winning.
Nope, it hardly relevant to the abuse of humanity being systematically being metered out.