How much of Palestine should the Arabs get back? - <MOD WARNING>

Look, either you are a dishonest person, or you are an idiot. There's no way any normal person could read what I wrote, and think this is what I said. Whichever one is true, stop it. Don't waste my time with this idiocy.

I don't care if they accept it or not.

I asked you a question. what would YOU do? You didn't answer that. You can't just complain about it being unjust, and not propose something yourself, which is less unjust. The problem is that things in the world do not happen in a way so that there is a perfectly just solution available. There will be injustice no matter what. it's a matter of getting the least unjust situation, the most tolerable compromise. If you do not understand such a fundamental thing, you ought not waste people's time by commenting on issues like this.

And you better not, because I don't want to have to call you an idiot.

If we assume that is really what I want, what is it that's racist about that? You can't just call it racist because you think it's bad. It might be bad, doesn't make it racist. Stop misusing the word, stop butchering your own language.

When there is a history of terrorist and rocket attacks any time Israel has let its guard down, one can understand they would be cautious. When one looks at what palestinian media is saying about jews, one can understand if the israelis are sceptical to wheter the arabs even want peace. For peace to be given a chance, palestinians need to meet some basic requirements. Most importantly, do not call for the extermination of the jews, the destruction of israel, or use terrorism.

I wouldn't mind seeing UN peacekeepers btw, but that of course means the two parties could agree to something in the first place.

As I've said, autonomous arab regions within Israel is a good idea. Palestinians can have their own regions, with own police force perhaps.

 

Among other things, yes, that's what I'm saying. Given their track record, why would anyone put any great deal of trust in them? I certainly wouldn't. And if you're an israeli whose family's safety would depend on that trust, you would definitely not take the risk.

 

Yeah, but the Jews were there first originally.

 

The problem with this ridiculous poll is that it does not give the best possible option i.e. give nothing to the Palestinians, expel them to Jordan and fight and exterminate the terrorists amongst them.

Although the poll is useless, there are some strong, intelligent replies here.

 

No, sorry it is not. Nazis too were discriminating according to racial and genetic types, just like Israel or former South Africa. Explain to me how come Israeli segregation is better than Nazi germany's. Seriously (and that's not the only point on whicg both regimes can be compared by the way - there also reliance on folkloric fairy tales, hyper-militarisation, desire for lebensraum, designation of both ubermenschen race and their ennemy untermenschen etc). You cannot ignore these common points forever.

Yeah, there only one whole side of the deal. Who cares what they think, right? As long as you've got the military means to enforce your edicts, who gives a (*)(*)(*)(*) about the goyim?

I'tell you what I'd do; If I was Israel, I leave the occupied territory and give a generous monetary compensation to all those who were affected by my exacerbated nationalism - it's not like they can't afford it. I would retreat back behind the 1967 borders and issue a national apology for the barbarism we became poster boys for. Then I'd allow peacekeepers between our people for at least 3 generations and give security responsability to them. And then I'd crack down on my own extremists, throw them out of the decision-making process and into jail.

 

No, they were not. Before the Jews there were the Canaanites, among others. Fight zionist propaganda.

 

Hey Borat - what happened to us plundering, land stealin', murdering Frenchmen? Not only there's no trace of it remaining, but you didn't even took a quote in the hopes that I wold not see you trying to tip-toe your way out of it. I can taste your deseperation, and I enjoy it. You were warned and you foolishly chose to ignore the warning. May that be a lesson for you in the future: It's better to know what one is talking about.

 

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/un/un242.htm

Assuming that the Palestinian Arabs accept the last provision, which they have expressed the willingness to do in recent peace negotiations, then it's time for the UN Security Council to enforce the requirement that Israel withdraw it's military force of occupation from all of the territory occupied during the 1967 conflict. This should start with severe economic sanctions against Israel and if Israel still refuses to withdraw from the occupied territories then the UN Security Council must authorized the use of military force just like it did when Iraq invaded Kuwait.

It's really that simple based upon the "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" established at the end of WW II with the creation of the United Nations.

 

Okay, it was the latter of the two then...

There are jews opposed to it also, but I don't care about what they think either. You can't make everyone happy.

And what would you do if you were palestine?

 

Sorry dear, Brits needed to be rescued during WWI and as they did not learn their lesson they needed to be rescued during WWII. And then the iron boot of indigenous people all over the world kicked the British invaders in the teeth all over their colonies and sent them flying all the way back to their foggy little island faster than they could say long live the Queen.

Jews had no help in 1948, the world was watching indifferently and making bets on Israel's survival (never exceeding 50%). In 1956 Israel was actually helping the Brits and the French in their stupid and as usually incompetent plot to invade Egypt. In 1967 Israel was once again fighting alone against 6 arab armies. In 1973 the US helped with resupplies but at that time Israel was a nuclear power so it saved Damascus and Cairo from nuclear annihilation, not Israel.

 

You happened, living on the land stolen by European invaders from the indigenous population of North America. And refusing to go back to where you ancestors came from, while demanding that others vacated their own land and country.

 

I never said I liked, nor supported Hamas.

But, I think Hamas is some what reactionary to Israeli colonists, but of course terrorism is unacceptable.

But, to tell you the truth, I really don't like Mediterranean people I think they're all kind of nuts.

 

Sorry honey, remind me when six million brits walked like sheep to their deaths?

 

Oh I agree, that was pathetic, and it would not have happened if the Brits hadn't reneged on their vows and created Israel in the 1930s as per the Balfour declaration. Anyway, the surviving Jews fortunately learned their lesson, kicked the British occupier out of their land and made sure that this would not happen ever again.

 

Death to all Jews isn't reactionary. Liberal? Sure. Not reactionary now or when Hitler pursued the same goal. Leftists feel safe "reacting" to strawmen.

 

We shall see, talk's cheap when you have the US behind you and you are only facing civilians

 

As if all Palestinians think that all Jews must be killed?

There's also definitely Jews who think similar about Palestinians.

I for one don't support genocide of anyone.

 

Sure. Meanwhile as a country the UK utterly failed in the 20th century, had to be bailed out twice by the US in 2 world wars and then tasted the boot of the indigenous people on their teeth in all their colonies. The Jews on the other hand, accomplished their 2000 year old dream of getting their country back and successfully defended it against the hordes of barbarians.

 

The British couldn't wait to leave Palestine.. The Zionist terror gangs had killed over 500 peacekeepers and Count Bernadotte.

 

The British, as the designated Mandatory over Palestine, were responsible for implementation of self-government by the Palestinian People at the end of WW I under Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations. The British had no authority whatsoever to establish a nation of European Jews in their area of responsibility in the Middle East.

The British failed to do what they assumed responsibility to do as Mandatory and violated Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations by allowing European Jewish immigration without the express consent of the People of Palestine.

 

Agreed, the British failed to do much during the Mandate. I have no issue with excepting my country did wrong.

 

You don't believe the Bible?

 

Had the British fulfilled their roles and responsibilities established by Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations they would have been out of Palestine within about ten years and Palestine would have been a self-governing sovereign nation.

Unfortunately the British were a "WASP Supremacy Colonial Power" and were completely unsuited to the task of creating a non-WASP government in a foreign land like Palestine. The British were perhaps the worst possible choice for being the Mandatory over Palestine at the conclusion of WW I and the break-up of the Turkish Empire.

 

The British occupiers were hanging jews and Arabs alike by hundreds, on minor alleged violations, without a fair trial. And yes the jewish boot kicked the British invading hangman in the teeth and sent them back to where they came from. In all fairness all indigenous people all over the British colonies kicked their a&ses out of their lands.

 

Sounds like the Jewish refugees to Palestine were pretty damaged..