Gaza; The Muslim Alamo

[hftmrock]

Here... I fixed your analogy............

 

Mr Blue steals Mr Greens car.

 

Mr Green tracks Mr Blue down to his home.

 

Mr Green starts to smash up Mr Blues car. and says he will destroy his house and his car and his children and him even if he gives the car back

 

Mr Blue throws him out of his house and waits with a shotgun until such time as he can discuss not being destroyed by Mr Green.

Edited February 11, 2006 by hftmrock

[Sir T Fireball]

...that's a tad out of date now. Mr Green has stated on TV that he will consider opening discussions with Blue if he hands him his property back.

[moon]

Like I said in opening, several polite and constructive pages ago, it is in Israel's interests to withdraw and accept international law sooner rather than later. I've pointed out that Muslims worldwide, a billion of them, are taking an interest in the diplomatic double standards surrounding Palestine. Whether it's a focus, as I believe, or an excuse, as wuntu suggests, Israeli treatment of Palestinians is going to bite us all on the :filtered:.

 

There is also the matter of demographics to consider. By 2020, it is calculated, there won't be a democratic Jewish State of Israel. It may well still be, in fact I hope it is, a democratic State but it won't be Jewish. The alternative to accepting this truth is for Israeli extremists to attempt to control Palestinians by means of apartheid. Will the American public allow their government to be lobbied and swayed by practitioners of apartheid ? I think not. It's probably against your Constitution and I can't see Americans allowing any desperate Zionist extremists to change their Constitution in order to approve apartheid between now and then. That's where the conversation is at to date.

Anybody fancy a duel with statistical stiffs or an atrocity fest, or can we keep it investigative.

Edited February 11, 2006 by moon

[hftmrock]

...that's a tad out of date now. Mr Green has stated on TV that he will consider opening discussions with Blue if he hands him his property back.

 

 

its not out of date at all.. If he was serious about the open discussion then he would remove the charter. He also said maybe after all the property is back he will look at it and see if its ok... Soooo sounds like fools gold to me. There was no promise there.. .all vaperware and he could change his mind after all the property is back.

 

the charter is the thing...

[hftmrock]

Like I said in opening, several polite and constructive pages ago, it is in Israel's interests to withdraw and accept international law sooner rather than later. I've pointed out that Muslims worldwide, a billion of them, are taking an interest in the diplomatic double standards surrounding Palestine. Whether it's a focus, as I believe, or an excuse, as wuntu suggests, Israeli treatment of Palestinians is going to bite us all on the :filtered:.

 

There is also the matter of demographics to consider. By 2020, it is calculated, there won't be a democratic Jewish State of Israel. It may well still be, in fact I hope it is, a democratic State but it won't be Jewish. The alternative to accepting this truth is for Israeli extremists to attempt to control Palestinians by means of apartheid. Will the American public allow their government to be lobbied and swayed by practitioners of apartheid ? I think not. It's probably against your Constitution and I can't see American allowing and desperate Zionist extremists to change their Constitution in order to approve apartheid between now and then. That's where the conversation is at to date.

Anybody fancy a duel with statistical stiffs or an atrocity fest, or can we keep it investigative.

 

 

I will take that over giving the land back and being destroyed in 5 years.... There is NO going back from the destruction of every Israeli

 

Hamas has NOTHING to lose by editing the charter. they can always edit it right back. Israel its entire existance to lose here... Sorry no analogy will fly in the face of extintion

Edited February 11, 2006 by hftmrock

[moon]

We'll have to see if the forthcoming Israeli elections produce a leader who thinks like you or a leader who thinks to the future. Who knows, they may even vote for another terrorist war criminal , like they did last time, and Hamas will refuse to recognise him. That's what Fatah should have done.

[hftmrock]

And as fast as I put myself into this conversation I am pulling myself out. There is no reasoning with people who in my opinion want nothing more then the destruction of Israel. (ALL IN MY OPINION). It will do no good to discuss it here for the pit so I will stop.

 

I am even writing this due to the fact that some claim that if they hear no response, their logic must be the supreme thing and they are victorious.... (Laughable if you ask me)

 

So if i dont respond.. you do the victory dance all you want. My position is clear.

 

 

[Sir T Fireball]

its not out of date at all.. If he was serious about the open discussion then he would remove the charter. He also said maybe after all the property is back he will look at it and see if its ok... Soooo sounds like fools gold to me. There was no promise there.. .all vaperware and he could change his mind after all the property is back.

 

the charter is the thing...

 

...and if Israel were serious about finding peace, they would give back that which was stolen. How does everyone seem to forget who started all this with their land grabbing exercise? All that extra space and they can't even populate what they already had. At least not with Israelies

 

As I stated before in reply to someone who said 'the victor in war always gets to keep the land'.....Iraq/Kuwait? Big Western guns soon came out in force to ensure that weren't true. Where were those self same guns when Israel did to Palestine what Iraq did to Kuwait?

[moon]

It will do no good to discuss it here for the pit

Oh, that old chestnut. Ta ta then.

[one2gamble]

How does everyone seem to forget who started all this with their land grabbing exercise?

I seem to remember a war but we have been down that road before

[Sir T Fireball]

I seem to remember a war but we have been down that road before

 

We sure have.

 

Also from the post you quoted a snippet from:

As I stated before in reply to someone who said 'the victor in war always gets to keep the land'.....Iraq/Kuwait? Big Western guns soon came out in force to ensure that weren't true. Where were those self same guns when Israel did to Palestine what Iraq did to Kuwait?

[one2gamble]

I seem to remember a war but we have been down that road before

 

 

my coment had nothing to do with a land grab, it had everything to do with who started what

 

Isreal didnt expand its borders until after the war but they werent the ones who declared war

 

My contentions

 

1. Israel would have never made a land grab were it not for them being attacked by their arab neighbors

2. Currently Palestine has little say in anything because it is not a nation and never was no matter how far you go back

3. The UN should draw Palestinian borders and declare it a state, this would give the palestinians legal ground work for claiming the land Israel is currently occupying and legitimize their ongoing violent struggle. In fact, this doesnt even have to be done by the UN. The EU, Nato, The United whatever of Arab countries can all essentially recognize Palestine as a state and begin to build upon their legitimate claim to the land.

Edited February 11, 2006 by one2gamble

[moon]

1 Israelis ( actually bands of Jewish militia, terrorists as far as the British were concerned ) were well into ethnically cleansing Palestinian villages long before the Arab armies got involved. This 'attacked by Arab neighbours' nonsense needs putting to bed permanently.

 

2 Resolution 181, the Partition Resolution, recognised Palestine as a nation. Just because the Arabs refused to have their country partitioned does not detract from that recognition. A nation of Palestinians legally exists. It's just that Israelis are squatting on their territory, is all.

 

3 Statehood will come by negotiation from strength, not as a result of the pitifull offerings of Camp David nor Arafat's illegal gifts of territory at Oslo. Time is on the Palestinian's side.

 

Edit; I hope it is anyway. I hope Time does what the UN hasn't had the bottle to do.

Edited February 11, 2006 by moon

[cpuguru]

You know what moon, I am actually starting to side with you on this one. I will admit that I was not as well read on the situation as I probably should have been and once I did read up I realized that you were correct. I was under the impression that the Gaza strip was given to Israel after WW2; however, it appears that I was dead wrong there. It appears that the Isreali's don't have any right occupying the Gaza Strip.

[Drovers Dog]

You know what moon, I am actually starting to side with you on this one. I will admit that I was not as well read on the situation as I probably should have been and once I did read up I realized that you were correct. I was under the impression that the Gaza strip was given to Israel after WW2; however, it appears that I was dead wrong there. It appears that the Isreali's don't have any right occupying the Gaza Strip.

 

 

Actually the Israeli intend to take even MORE Terrority off them to totally isolate them from the Sea Ports, so that they are totally Helpless, unless the other Arabs (Muslems) get involved! That is the real Worry in the Area, as Moon has patiently pointed out. Once the others get involved, "it is all over, Rover!"

 

Please don't Talk about dropping "Big Ones" it just makes me Puke! One Country drops a "Big One" everyone will retaliate! "Big Bang!" Nothing left to Fight over!

 

Edited February 12, 2006 by Drovers Dog

[moon]

'guru;

You know what moon, I am actually starting to side with you on this one

 

:help:

 

 

 

[Ian]

I'm interested in Russia's and France's recognition of Hamas despite Israeli, European and North American resistance. I think there's a backwash that hasn't reached shore yet.

 

I

[moon]

Yes, it's another of those morality v hypocrisy issues.

 

I think it is absolutely disgraceful that the authors of the 'spread of demahcracy' campaign should refuse to recognise the results of a free and fair election. It exposes the dangers of our homeland systems, presenting the possibility that the encumbents might refuse to recognise the victory of the challengers because the encumbents.........lost.

[Ian]

Once again, I suggest that hyperlinks provide a poor argument.

 

I

[one2gamble]

Yes, it's another of those morality v hypocrisy issues.

 

I think it is absolutely disgraceful that the authors of the 'spread of demahcracy' campaign should refuse to recognise the results of a free and fair election. It exposes the dangers of our homeland systems, presenting the possibility that the encumbents might refuse to recognise the victory of the challengers because the encumbents.........lost.

 

 

be careful moon, nobody is refusing to recognise the results of the election. The bane is dealing with a government that is 1.A terrorist org and 2. Calling for the destruction of its neighbor. Neither sit well with the west.

 

Russia doesnt have this problem because they never listed Hamas as a terrorist org from what I understand.

[Ian]

really, it all began in the 1400's with the race for colonialization...

Don't be daft... It's perfectly modern and it began with the Balfour Declration. The British haven't divested themselves of their former colonies as they said they would.

 

I

[moon]

be careful moon, nobody is refusing to recognise the results of the election

Explain to me the difference then. As far as I know, if you recognise a government then you are obliged to acknowledge it in some diplomatic way, not ignore it.

[Ian]

nobody is refusing to recognise the results of the election

Bosh. Double f****ing bosh. America, Canada and Britain have outright refused to recognise Hamas as the ruling government of Palestine even though they have easily won the democratic vote.

 

I

[one2gamble]

Bosh. Double f****ing bosh. America, Canada and Britain have outright refused to recognise Hamas as the ruling government of Palestine even though they have easily won the democratic vote.

 

I

 

 

thats not the same thing, we all recognise the fact that Hamas WON the election. We just have not been willing to deal with them until they renounce their desire to wipe Israel off the planet.

 

Its not much different than how the US reacted to the governments of Cuba and Libya.

 

if you recognise a government then you are obliged to acknowledge it in some diplomatic way, not ignore it.

not rue, diplomatic relations are not required to recognise a ruling party

Edited February 12, 2006 by one2gamble

[moon]

A leader of Hamas has stated again that the only thing needed for it to halt its armed struggle is for Israel to withdraw from the Palestinian territories it occupies.

 

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/49A...B16B7381EBC.htm

Once again, that seems entirely reasonable to me.