Israel raids ships carrying aid to Gaza, killings civilians

[brianm23]

Here's a relevant question.

Which country existed first. Israel or Palestine?

Who has been in that region longer. Jews or Muslims?

Palestine was there first. This land was partitioned in 1947 by the UN and given partial land to the Jews which became Israel. In 1948, Israel declared it's independence. The country of Israel has only been around for around 62 years. If you have anything to refute this, I suggest you present your case.

I think Arabs and Jews have both been in the region for quite some time, with the jews being the minority. What did you ask Jews or Muslims instead of Jews and Arabs? You are trying to make this a religion thing.

[Predicto]

Not Jewish and dont hate Arabs at all. I hate terrorists. And as long as the Palestinians elect terrorists to be their government, I will attach my hatred of terrorists to those who empower them.

After this incident, how do you think Hamas is likely to do in the next Gaza election?

Perhaps, just perhaps, Israel's actions for 50 years might have had some role in pushing otherwise normal Palestinian people toward supporting extremism?

Haha! Just kidding. Israel is completely blameless, as always, and hoping for any change in the status quo makes me an anti-semitic terrorist lover.

[Kilmer17]

Palestine was there first. This land was partitioned in 1947 by the UN and given partial land to the Jews which became Israel. In 1948, Israel declared it's independence. The country of Israel has only been around for around 62 years. If you have anything to refute this, I suggest you present your case.

I think Arabs and Jews have both been in the region for quite some time, with the jews being the minority. What did you ask Jews or Muslims instead of Jews and Arabs? You are trying to make this a religion thing.

Because it IS a religion thing.

Israel first became a nation in around 1300 BC. again, you are simply using a convenient date to back up your claim. There was history prior to 1947.

[Kilmer17]

After this incident, how do you think Hamas is likely to do in the next Gaza election?

Perhaps, just perhaps, Israel's actions for 50 years might have had some role in pushing otherwise normal Palestinian people toward supporting extremism?

Haha! Just kidding. Israel is completely blameless, as always, and hoping for any change in the status quo makes me an anti-semitic terrorist lover.

Hamas was elected after years and years of Israel bending over backwards for peace. That was their reward? So they should now be concerned that their current actions will lead to Hamas staying in power? Why should they care now? They get Hamas either way, but at least like this, they limit their ability to strike Israeli civilians.

[dockeryfan]

Anyone who thinks Israel has bent over backwards for peace has not been paying attention to the last 50 years.

['Skins_&_'Stons]

“We will have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us”.

-Golda Meir

Enough said...

[Predicto]

Hamas was elected after years and years of Israel bending over backwards for peace.

Bending over backwards for peace. Peace meaning "we get every bit of land that is any good, you get to live in a camp surrounded by walls." How noble.

That was their reward? So they should now be concerned that their current actions will lead to Hamas staying in power? Why should they care now? They get Hamas either way, but at least like this, they limit their ability to strike Israeli civilians.

Why should they care? Because it is NEVER GOING TO END until they start caring.

[Kilmer17]

Anyone who thinks Israel has bent over backwards for peace has not been paying attention to the last 50 years.

Hooray for unsubstantiated broad allegations! Woohoo!

[Predicto]

“We will have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us”.

-Golda Meir

/THREAD

Anyone who spouts a talking point and then says /thread hasn't added much to the discussion.

For maximum impact, you should have used: "'Nuff Said!"

[Kilmer17]

Bending over backwards for peace. Peace meaning "we get every bit of land that is any good, you get to live in a camp surrounded by walls." How noble.

Why should they care? Because it is NEVER GOING TO END until they start caring.

They offered damn near everything the Palestinians wanted and their reward was Arafat walking away and bombing them some more. Followed up by the people electing a terrorist group as their govt.

I think Israel should be praised every day for not simply saying **** it, and taking it all by force.

['Skins_&_'Stons]

Anyone who thinks Israel has bent over backwards for peace has not been paying attention to the last 50 years.

I am not even going to respond to that.

If Israel unilaterally disarmed tomorrow, the last Israeli would be dragged from his house and killed sometime next week. If Israel’s enemies unilaterally disarmed tomorrow, the State of Israel would politely thank them, the Palestinians could live in peace, and the world could go back to worrying about problems less deliberately manufactured and exacerbated.

[Predicto]

Hooray for unsubstantiated broad allegations! Woohoo!

Yes, you did make an unsubstantiated broad allegation that Israel has bent over backwards for peace. It was a giggler of the first order.

['Skins_&_'Stons]

For maximum impact, you should have used: "'Nuff Said!"

Done.

[dockeryfan]

Hooray for unsubstantiated broad allegations! Woohoo!

Israel makes a point of setting prerequisites and believes it has an exclusive right to do so.

What is a basic prerequisite for peace? An end to occupation.

Israel will never meet that prerequisite, and as such, will never truly want peace.

To say they are bending over backwards is beyond idiotic.

[Predicto]

I am not even going to respond to that.

If Israel unilaterally disarmed tomorrow' date=' the last Israeli would be dragged from his house and killed sometime next week. If Israel’s enemies unilaterally disarmed tomorrow, the State of Israel would politely thank them, the Palestinians could live in peace, and the world could go back to worrying about problems less deliberately manufactured and exacerbated.[/quote']

Sure. Live in peace in a squalid camp surrounded by walls with Israeli soldiers on top of them, while eating dirt. I'm sure they find that prospect very appealing. Who wouldn't want that?

[brianm23]

Because it IS a religion thing.

Israel first became a nation in around 1300 BC. again, you are simply using a convenient date to back up your claim. There was history prior to 1947.

Where are you getting this history from? The Bible?

If you are using "pre-BC" as your claim that the Jews should have the land, then what would YOU say if the UN told America that we had to give up our land back to the native Americans? That's who held it pre-BC. You going to give up your house and land to it's rightful owners from thousands of years ago?

Since you want to go that route, lets give back the land to it's original owners.

Also, I'm not using dates that is convenient for me, I'm using dates that are current with the times.

[Kilmer17]

Ok, using that same line of thinking that the US is here now so we cant go back and give it to the Indians, then Israel has it now, so what does it matter what it was 60 years ago? Why is 60 years more relevant than 3000 and more relevant than currently?

[dockeryfan]

I am not even going to respond to that.

If Israel unilaterally disarmed tomorrow' date=' the last Israeli would be dragged from his house and killed sometime next week. If Israel’s enemies unilaterally disarmed tomorrow, the State of Israel would politely thank them, the Palestinians could live in peace, and the world could go back to worrying about problems less deliberately manufactured and exacerbated.[/quote']

And Israel will use the enemy they have created.

In earlier days, Israel convinced itself that if only they could get the Arabs to the table to talk peace it could be achieved. They convinced themselves that there was no partner for peace, and that the ultimate ambition of Arabs was their complete destruction. (Actually the sentiment you have now is a throwback to many many years ago.)

When Arabs actually decided to try a peace agreement, the Saudi initiative, the Syrian initiative, they were dismissed out of hand. No longer was it, "if only we could bring them to the table" they were at the table, but it was not a table of Israels choosing. Because they really do not want a peace agreement. Not if it means giving up anything. Anything.

Israel stands at the forefront of refusal at this point.

[Larry]

Here's a relevant question.

Which country existed first. Israel or Palestine?

Who has been in that region longer. Jews or Muslims?

No, here's a completely irrelevant attempt at a Talking Point.

Gee, the Jewish religion has seniority, therefore they own the world?

Do the Italians have a legitimate claim to own the entire Mediterranean? "Well, gee, it was ours during the Roman Empire, so it should be ours now."

There are some really stupid arguments used on this topic, but the "well, 3,000 years ago . . . " one has got to be the stupidest.

[Madison Redskin]

I am not even going to respond to that.

If Israel unilaterally disarmed tomorrow' date=' the last Israeli would be dragged from his house and killed sometime next week. If Israel’s enemies unilaterally disarmed tomorrow, the State of Israel would politely thank them, the Palestinians could live in peace, and the world could go back to worrying about problems less deliberately manufactured and exacerbated.[/quote']

I agree that, if Israel disarmed, Islamic militants would almost certainly start kicking Israelis out of the region.

However, I don't agree that the Israelis would leave the Palestinians to their own devices if they disarmed. A healthy minority of Israelis believe that the West Bank and Gaza should be occupied solely by Jews. In other words, some Israelis would like to see the WB and Gaza ethnically cleansed and cite the Torah for the legitimacy of that goal.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24021.htm

[Kilmer17]

No, here's a completely irrelevant attempt at a Talking Point.

Gee, the Jewish religion has seniority, therefore they own the world?

Do the Italians have a legitimate claim to own the entire Mediterranean? "Well, gee, it was ours during the Roman Empire, so it should be ours now."

There are some really stupid arguments used on this topic, but the "well, 3,000 years ago . . . " one has got to be the stupidest.

Of course in your mind it is Larry. But you'll see no fallacy in your sides own arbitrarily chosen date.

[Larry]

They offered damn near everything the Palestinians wanted and their reward was Arafat walking away and bombing them some more.

Utter lie.

[Kilmer17]

Utter lie.

Sure. Facts and figures gettting in your way again though.

[brianm23]

Ok, using that same line of thinking that the US is here now so we cant go back and give it to the Indians, then Israel has it now, so what does it matter what it was 60 years ago? Why is 60 years more relevant than 3000 and more relevant than currently?

The problem here is, it wasn't land that Israel had conquered like the Brits did in WWI. It was Britian's land which the Arabs inhabited (minority population of jews) during the Ottoman's Empire existence (thousands of years). It was the UN that decided this land should be given to the Jews instead of the people who had been living there longer than the Jews had (and in more abundance). So basically some beauracrats took these people's land and gave it to them as a consolation prize for the holocaust. Israel should have NEVER had the land to begin with which is the whole problem with this fiasco.

You didn't answer my question. What would YOU do if your land and home were stripped from you and given to the native Americans.

[Larry]

However, I don't agree that the Israelis would leave the Palestinians to their own devices if they disarmed. A healthy minority of Israelis believe that the West Bank and Gaza should be occupied solely by Jews. In other words, some Israelis would like to see the WB and Gaza ethnically cleansed and cite the Torah for the legitimacy of that goal.

Uh, I'd point out that if Israel really, really wanted to kill all of the Palestinians, they could have done so at any time over the last 50 years.

While I don't necessarily think that they deserve any great amount of thanks for stopping short of Holocaust II, I do think we should recognize that they have, in fact, had the ability.