Israel or Palestine?

That is a pretty meaningless distinction that you are making.

Not at all. Why? Did Tunisia steal Djerba?

It's meaningless because you are needlessly confusing the issue with semantics. And what comparison is there with Djerba? Administratively speaking the island has been part of what is now Tunisia for centuries - it was never unilaterally annexed by the Tunisian government, nor was its Jewish communities expelled and repopulated with Arabs.

No. How is there a just meaningless distinction between expelling the inhabitants of a territory that comes under your sovereignty, like in Ramle, and not doing it, like in Nazareth? It seems to me like a pretty meaningful distinction between the two.

Ok bad example I guess cause they weren't expelled, just not allowed to return or retrieve their lost property I think. But let's say the Jewish quarter of Bagdhad or whatever. I think you can understand my point. Iraq didn't steal the Jewish quarter of Bagdhad even if they expel the citizens. They stole their property however.

Hey if you want to shoot rockets at another country it's your fault if there are fatalities are in your country. What a BS reason.

what a failed logic, so you're saying that Israel is doing the right thing...? Israel is backed by the US. Palestine doesn't have any real supporters.... Just look at the military difference and do some research... They've blocked food, thrown them out of their houses, block their borders and control everything down there. So please good sir, don't be ignorant

Get back to me when Palestine quits firing rockets into Israel and we'll talk.

What claim did the provisional government of Israel have on places like Ramle? There is no comparison with the Jewish quarter of Baghdad, again - administratively it had always been part of Baghdad and by extension Iraq. That wasn't the case in 1948 where we're talking about a entirely new government being formed by a minority of the population in the region - it'd be one thing if the borders of Israel were limited to the borders outlined in the UN partition plan but it wasn't. The whole point was that these territories weren't under Israeli sovereignty - that is what makes it theft.

Again, I'm not necessarily condemning or even disagreeing with what happened but it's pretty clear that territory was stolen. At the very least let's be honest about the facts.

Are you serious? if you sit in a tank and some kids throws pebbles at you, is it ok for you to use the gun on them? of course not.

Israel is starting to remind more and more of a certain german dictator.

Rockets are not fucking pebbles. The intent to is to blow shit up. Stop pretending otherwise apologist.

@Jacanuk: Palestinian militants fired a rocket into Israel just as 5 hour humanitarian cease fired ended. They also fired 3 mortar shells after the truce took effect. Israel has not responded to either attack but said it would if they continued. Israel is not the aggressor here dude.

idk man some 2000 year old book written by bronze age sheep fuckers says it is their land so who are we to argue with sheep fuckers that had a direct line to magic sky daddy?

Israel can enjoy its 15 minutes of existence for the time being. You need to be batshit crazy to believe that Israel will perpetually persist as a sovereign state within the Middle East. In fact, given the atrocities it committed over the course of the past 70 years or so and the hatred it garnered from all of its neighbors I expect it would be a death sentence to be an Israeli citizen when the time comes.

Israel was founded solely by the support of major world powers, namely the UK and other European states at the time and then the U.S paraded the Zionist club later on. Israel is allowed to persist in existing thanks to these world powers. Only thing is, these world powers will not maintain their hegemony and supremacy forever, and they may very well witness shifts in their political and ideological landscapes that may radically change their interest and stance towards Israel. Israel itself will inevitably decay just like all states and civilizations do and other Middle Eastern states will not remain at the bottom of the barrel of states and civilizations. When you compare Netenyahu and all of the more recent PMs of Israel to the likes of Mosi Dayyan, Sharon, Ben Goryon...etc you'll be able to perceive that decadence.

In the meanwhile, let us suffer for a little longer. We're neither the first nor the last people to suffer injustice and oppression at the hands of their occupying force. Pretty much everything that is claimed by the human civilization of the 21st century is a farce. Human values, justice, humanitarianism..etc they're all follies being reiterated to make some people feel good about themselves and give them a semblance of a virtuous and superior existence. The world remains governed by interest and power. Interest shifts and power decays and regenerates. The two states solutions has been slaughtered beyond resuscitation and now we wait.

Your argument was that expelling people=stealing territory. "How does the expulsion of Arabs by the IDF not constitute as theft?". So how does the expulsion of Jews by Iraq not constitute as theft? That was the whole discussion was about. How there is no meaningful difference between expelling people and extending sovereignty. And Iraq was also pretty recently just established, not that there is any good reason why that is relevant. So how did they not steal the territory of the Iraqi Jews? It's true that they weren't under Israeli sovereignty, but neither was Tel Aviv or Haifa. Jericho and Ramalah was never under Palestinian sovereignty and Baghdad was not under Iraqi sovereignty until like 1932. And so on. All of that is not theft. Why should whether it is theft or not be based on a proposal that never went through? And from the UN no less.

No it is everything but clear. Who is the true owner of the land is a very subjective question and disputed by many. I would hesitate with the word fact about such things.

This is ultimately the most important thing. It's impossible for anyone to think that Israel is currently setting itself up for long term sustainability.

Although it does have nuclear weapons and I feel they're willing to use them if need be.

Of course rockets are not pebbles which wasn't what i tried to convey. what i was trying to get you to understand that despite its of course not ok to fire rockets, the actual mortality rate or serious dmg is almost 0.

Gaza is one of the most population dense area so there is absolute no justification for what Israel are doing, its just insane that i even need to try to argument a that kids and women being murdered is something that has to stop.. And you can be 100% sure that if this was any other place then Israel the world would be in uproar and the country would face military action lead by the Nato/US. or heavy restrictions.

Please... Israel is able to defend themselves. Is shooting rockets ok? Hell no, but Israel is the superior force here. They hold all the cards and power

What do you suggest that Israel do? And no, the world would be in much much less uproar if this wasn't Israel. Much more horrible things are going on in the world every day that peopledoesn't bat an eye to. You realize this conflict is like one of the least deadly like ever?

@themajormayor: That does not excuse it at all... They should stop the occupation immediately. If someone occupied USA, don't you think americans would fight back? **** yeah they would...

What i suggest Israel do is stop acting like a certain dwarfy german dictator and start to release the occupied areas and stop using political power to stop humanitarian and general help to the people of Gaza.

Its really not that hard. And the only reason this conflict is still going on is Israel and their idea that we should all feel guilty over what happened 70 years ago.

@themajormayor: @-Sun_Tzu-: I think its pretty daft to discuss this conflict on moral grounds of any sort. The conflict came into being in the first place out of immorality and it has been allowed to continue to this day through further immorality.

That aside, and assuming that the conflict originally could afford an investigation of ethics and who has the moral high ground and justification for existence, Israel's prolonged policies of blockade of Gaza strip, checkpoint regime that continues to render life in the west bank fruitless and sterile, displacement of civilians by the thousands using the vague excuse of "security threat", demolition of civilians' houses, unlawful detention of Palestinians for years on a row, excessive and nondiscriminatory use of firepower, alienation of different Palestinian demographics from one another, illegal settlements, abusive control of all of the economic and trade activities of Palestinian, purposeful smothering of the Palestinian economy and the severe undermining of the freedom of movement of Palestinians are all more than enough to strip Israel naked of any claims of morality and right.

I think its funny, in a sad way mind you, that this debate is still well and alive among a considerable number of people worldwide.

Who said anything abot excusing anything?

Are you insane? What do you think would happen if they pulled out unilaterally? Look what happened in Gaza. We would see tenfold increase of rockets. Cause the thing is, Hamas is not interested in merly ending the occupation in the West Bank. They want an end to Israel. Not to mention Israel would put 400,000 of their own citizens in danger if they stoped it "immediately". So I don't see what ending the occupation of a completely different territory would make Hamas stop attacking Israel.

They were fighting long before there was any occupation.

Spot on Ride

And like Jon Stewart i think this shows just how f.ed up the conflict is.

And the guy in Gaza is not dressed like that because of hamas, he is dressed like that because of the bombardments and israeli soldiers.

you cant seriously think Hamas would literally pursue the destruction of Israel with the means they have now...

thats just propaganda they use to recruit

Israel is not acting comparable to that in any way, so they can't stop doing something they are not doing. And they have to a pretty big extent did all of that other stuff. It didn't really work.

From where do you think that this is "their idea"? There's nothing to indicate it.

It sounds like you are very insecure about your own feelings towards Jews. I would guess that there are much Judeophobia in you and to make yourself feel better about it you overstate Israel's action to an extreme extent while at the same time understates their suffering.

And they may very well use them but it would only postpone the inevitable. More importantly, the extremely narrow geographic depth of Israel makes it impossible for them to use nukes on neighbors such as Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and to a lesser extent Egypt, and they certainly won't be able to use them on us the Palestinians of the occupied Palestinian territories and the some ~2 million Israeli Arabs. Hell, we, the Palestinians of the occupied territories, can "occupy" Israel on our own if we just marched towards its soil provided that the U.S wouldn't send its drones to annihilate us in the way.

I personally think that if Israel uses its nukes as a last resort it would be the final nail in the coffin of its perishment. It would be like their final and most grand act of savagery against us. So it wouldn't really do much and it certainly won't deter us. Israel has no idea what it itself has been brewing for the past few decades. It reminds me of where the Jews where in Europe some 250 years ago, with the Palestinians being in their shoes now and whatnot.

Of course not. But certainly there could be a huge increase of attacks and more widespread destruction. And my question was how he wanted Israel to stop the rockets. Also I think Israel would be more worried about what kind of other powers would influence the West Bank if Hamas took over. It is a much more strategically important territory than Gaza.

I don't think having bad aim makes one more noble. The intent is clearly there. And you are clearly an apologist. It's okay for the side you like to whatever they want. Hypocrite.

Why didn't you march towards its soil long before U.S started to support Israel militarily? And without the support of any arab state or the soviet and what not. (Israel only has Israeli drones btw, it's the US that has Israeli drones.

Perfect example of why there will no peace.....

Got a notification on my phone from BBC and Guardian, Israel is starting their ground offensive in Gaza.

Are you really serious? and i am not for either side but when one side is women and children being murdered, i am clearly not for the culprit.

well shit

You aren't series. You clearly have a bias. Read your posts again. Hell this is the first time I've seen your posts and I can already tell what you back.

Do u guys really have to make quotes of quotes of quotes? It's really hard to read anything.

You are right Israel is acting like any civilized country.

Any country would occupy a area, fill the parts they can with their own citizens which they protect no matter the cost, they don't have leaders who committed crimes that would land anyone in Haag Like the attack on a refugee camp a few years back. Also any country would build up a wall around a city, either a physical wall or forcing closed borders. And then deny all humanitarian help on baseless accusations. Not to mention blocking of investments, jobs, healthcare and basic help.

And i was just waiting for your last comment, because of course if your not for Israel you are against Israel and secretly want them all dead. i guess when you run out of arguments you can always pull that card right.

Yep. I hope it does not turn into anything major. But they're calling the reserve... That's not a good sign... Not at all...

That's not what I said at all. Saying someone is not acting like HItler is not the same as saying they are acting civilized. ButI think most western countries wouldn't act much better in such a situation.

Like that is such a messed up paragraph. Where do even start? Yes, yes, no, yes, yes, didn't hapen. Agree to some extent.

Well yes, if you start comparing them with Hitler my guess is that you are against Israel.

And i didn´t say Israel was that i said that their continuous killing of civilians particularly women and children was reminding of a certain german dirtbag. Not to mention all the things i have said above and not to forget the celebration the israelites are showing sitting on hills and cheering when the bombs fall.

It shows a nasty disconnect and a huge lack of empathy among the people particular the young of Israel which is sad but not surprising when they grow up in a area like that where their country just doesn't want to admit to their own mistakes and keep adding on the death toll.

But i should have remembered goodwin and known that any connection or even mention is a debate killer

Israel is going down, and the fake occupiers with it.

Do you really want to argue about if its bad that women and children are being murdered because of some bombings that are as futile as the Hamas rockets are in hitting the actual targets?

I hope you are not seriously suggesting that we even need to have a debate about that and there is absolute no justification for such an atrocious act no matter who does it.

Straw man. I have had no such discussion with you. But if you attack another country stands to reason you will have casualties. And an appeal to emotion doesn't change that.

And which German dirtbag would that be? Well that's obviously deplorable, I think it constitutes a small minority. Some Palestinians where also cheering when rockets fell. I wouldn't compare them to Hitler because of that though.

Who in this region admits their mistakes here? Relly who? It's a decades long conflict where both have experienced suffering and their own existence threatened nationally and individually. Unfortunately that kind of situation can create a "we vs them" kind of thing.

You were the one who brought them up. You're a perfect example of Goodwin's law.

I already explained the failure of the Iraqi analogy. The Jewish Quarter was always a part of Baghdad. You're right that Tel Aviv and Haifa weren't technically under Israeli sovereignty but don't be difficult, use your head - the provisional government at least had a reasonable claim to these lands. Tel Aviv was a Jewish city founded by Jews that was to be the Israeli capital under the UN partition plan (although when you start talking about Jaffa it gets a little more complicated) . Haifa, while a bit more controversial, was still part of the proposed Jewish state per the partition plan.

The provisional government made a conscience decision when declaring independence not to specify the nation's borders because they didn't want to limit themselves - it was the plan all along to go into Arab neighborhoods and Arab communities, kick them out and repopulate these areas with Jews - how organized and systemic this policy actually was is a matter of debate but it's not inaccurate to say that the war of 1948 was in part a war of conquest. Israeli's anticipated the creation of a Palestinian state and they made an effort to deprive that future state of land. Even when accepting the UN partition plan many Zionists only approved of it for pragmatic reasons because it was seen as a way of getting their foot in the door - there's always been an eye on Eretz Israel.

To say that this was not theft by Israel is like saying it wouldn't be theft if the Kurds declared Independence, marched into Tikrit right now amid all the confusion of civil war, kicked out all the Arabs and declared it a part of the new Kurdish state. It was one thing for Israel to incorporate predominantly Jewish neighborhoods and cities during its founding - Israel had a reasonable claim to these lands, it's a different animal all together when the IDF went into Arab neighborhoods and Arab cities and incorporated that land as well. That's not to say they might've not been justified in stealing this land in terms of practicality but the land was stolen nonetheless.

@Jacanuk said:

@The_Last_Ride said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@Jacanuk said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@The_Last_Ride said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@The_Last_Ride said:

Palestine, has no air force, navy or military. They are being thrown out of their homes, beaten, tortured and killed. Israel even have the Iron Dome to shoot down the rockets. So far they have lost one compared to 200 in Palestine. Also over a 1000 injured aswell

Hey if you want to shoot rockets at another country it's your fault if there are fatalities are in your country. What a BS reason.

what a failed logic, so you're saying that Israel is doing the right thing...? Israel is backed by the US. Palestine doesn't have any real supporters.... Just look at the military difference and do some research... They've blocked food, thrown them out of their houses, block their borders and control everything down there. So please good sir, don't be ignorant

Get back to me when Palestine quits firing rockets into Israel and we'll talk.

Are you serious? if you sit in a tank and some kids throws pebbles at you, is it ok for you to use the gun on them? of course not.

Israel is starting to remind more and more of a certain german dictator.

Rockets are not fucking pebbles. The intent to is to blow shit up. Stop pretending otherwise apologist.

Please... Israel is able to defend themselves. Is shooting rockets ok? Hell no, but Israel is the superior force here. They hold all the cards and power

Spot on Ride

And like Jon Stewart i think this shows just how f.ed up the conflict is.

And the guy in Gaza is not dressed like that because of hamas, he is dressed like that because of the bombardments and israeli soldiers.

that pretty much sums it up aswell

It was not part of Iraq though. I can say that Ramle was always part of Eretz Israel. In any case I think you get my point. If not baghdad then some Jewish majority city/town/village. There must have been some in the muslim world. Again though how can you say it's stealing based on borders outlined in a non-accepted proposal?

It was never the plan all along. I agree that it could be seen as a conquest war though. I don't think conquering is neccesarily the same as stealing though. I mean a lot of Germany's territory was conquered as a result of the WWs. But it's not generally seen as theft. It is only speculation what would have happened if the partition plan was accepted. Personally I think Israel would have been content enough to not start a war for the rest of the land.

You can't compare it really. Tikrit has an owner already, Beersheba didn't. Also if you can claim a city because it has a majority Jewish population, which is fine to some extent IMO, then why can't you claim it due to a historical connection? Beersheba used to be Israel, long time ago, it's a Jewish city, founded by Jews. Why is that not enough reason to claim a city but the inhabitants have the same ethnicity is? And what about Jerusalem? It was a Jewish majority city. Was Jerusalem stolen?

Someone should invade both of them and see if they prefer that.

Conquering is not necessarily the same as stealing but it can and should be when the conquest is done not to unify homogeneous communities under the same umbrella for the sake of self-determination but instead conquering purely for expansionary reasons. Saying Israel had a claim to Beersheba because the ancient Israelites might've lived their thousands of years ago is much less convincing than Arabs taking claim of the land because the residents that were actually living there were primarily Arab. Would it not be stealing if the American Indian nations started conquering American cities?

As for Zionists being content in an alternative reality where the partition plan was accepted by both sides it is definitely not speculation. There is no need to speculate, not only do we have decades worth of evidence of Israel not being content but we have documented proof of Zionists expressing a Zionist version of manifest destiny. In the debates leading up to the declaration of independence about declaring Israel's borders there was a movement among revisionists to declare all of Eretz Isael for the Jewish State, going so far to even wanting to include land east of the Jordan river. Even today are plenty of people in Israel today that have serious problems with giving up any of the West Bank and even Gaza. When Israel disengaged from Gaza in 2005 Jewish settlers had to be physically removed from their homes.

And should we just leave it there, you saw how it ended and where it has steered the debate.

Yes, no one in the region admits error´s but the problem is not just that, its also that yes Israel might have given more liberties to Gaza, but when they at the same time refuse humanitarian help, block investments, build a wall around them and have Egypt close their border, its like pissing in your pants for the warm feeling and getting surprised when you suddenly get cold.

Anyways yes i brought it up and made a comparison because what is happening to Gaza bears a striking resemblance to it and the camps they had. And i love how you try to pin the problem on me, it was you who began the anti-semitic chat and began to accuse me of having motives or "hates".

So you dont need to respond if you dont want to discuss israel and Gaza. and instead keep "goodwin" in.

I think you need to read up on what a Strawman actually is before using it in a debate where it has no place.

Also you really need to get a better understanding of the whole situation, its not the gaza people attacking Israel and its not 2 countries in war, its one of the worlds best trained and most advanced armed military against a bunch of peasants with some home made rockets from the 70´s who couldn't hit a target if it was 20 yeards from it.

It is as i said like sitting in a tank and then having someone throw pebbles on the it. and instead of stepping outside and finding the culprits calling in an airstrike.