Israel bomb hospital among other things

@Jag85:

Im not so sure about that, the degree to which the Levantine Arabs were influenced by the Islamic conquest and such isn't to be underestimated, to no less an extent that Jews were influenced by being in Europe or in the Maghreb for instance. Although they obviously do have more connections in general to the region. Though if they are all secretly Jews, they could all mass convert :P , wouldn't happen of course although it would be pretty hilarious.

You seem to be unable to understand the point, Im not accusing you personally of claiming that , but the fact is, that was the accepted defenition for many , many years, you can't just go and change things based on what you want, one minute Jews are what I described before, the next, the Jews are described as a bunch of European colonists in the Middle East (and yes, that is a claim made often), everybody seems to enjoy having their own idea of what Jews are, without of course asking the Jews themselves in most cases. Ive said it sarcastically before, but one day there will be an article claiming Jews are secretly from Mars.

of course part of the blame falls on Jews themselves in this, but then identity and such are internal affairs. Oh and in the 1940s Jews weren't accused of killing Jesus , they were accused of being vermin.

not a right defenition , try harder. define it in the context of what I said.

You didn't answer the question. What are the borders of a free Palestine? You say this is what Israeli's oppose, be specific about what it is we're talking about.

As for the Arabs who were driven out to make way for these European Zionist settlers, while I will freely concede that ethnic cleansing took place in 1948 by Zionists (although the extent and coordination of this cleansing is greatly exaggerated by anti-zionists), you conveniently left out the fact that this occurred in the midst of war (what's the excuse for the Jews that were expelled in Arab countries?), and it was Arabs who started this war. It was Palestinian Arabs who started the civil war in Mandatory Palestine immediately after the UN general assembly adopted the UN partition plan, and it was the neighboring Arab states that invaded Israel immediately after it declared its independence. And even after the war ended, for 20 years these refugees in the west bank and the strip lived under Arab, not Israeli, occupation. What happened to many of the Arabs who lived in what is now Israel is tragic, but the war would've ended in tragedy regardless of the outcome, and if we're going to be honest the war probably would've ended in greater tragedy had the Arabs won. Had the alternative scenario occurred chances are we'd be talking about a second Holocaust in the middle east rather than a Nakba. Israeli's aren't going to apologize for winning, nor should they, not when the stakes were as high as they were.

And again, I empathize with the Palestinian condition - it is a tragedy that words don't give justice to. I understand perfectly well why Palestinians fight, I am not even necessary opposed to all forms of armed resistance. But if they choose to side with Hamas I hope they lose. Israel cannot determine what the goals of the Palestinian people are, that is up to them.

Right of course.

I think you need to stop getting your information from Fox, its not good for your ability to debate a subject.

@Jacanuk actually death and wounded numbers are coming from the Gaza Health Ministry. ergo, Hamas. not the UN. the UN is treating them like actual numbers for the time being.

Holy shit are we still arguing about this? Hamas is a terrorist group. They're hiding among civilians who CHOSE not to leave. People die in war, sometimes innocent. Welcome to the real world, grow up and grow a pair.

Crying about it in a forum won't stop anything. Israel is in the right currently. I hope they annihilate HAMAS.

The Bedouin Arabs who conquered the Middle East and North Africa came in relatively small numbers, so they had relatively little long-term genetic impact on the native populations of those regions, be they Levantines, Egyptians, Maghribis, or Mesopotamians. In Judea/Palestine's case, the natives who remained behind (whether Jewish, Samaritan, Pagan, etc.) eventually became mostly Hellenized or Christianized, and then after the Arab conquest, mostly Arabized.

I assume you're referring to the "Middle Eastern" part, not the "Christ killer" part? In that case, it depends on which perspective you see it from. From a European perspective, Jews were seen as Semitic Middle-Easterners, just like Arabs. But from a Middle-Eastern perspective, the Ashkenazi Jews migrating from Europe were seen as European colonists.

Actually, the Nazis did use the "Jesus killer" propaganda in order to get Christians to support their Holocaust. They even went as far as portraying Jesus as a member of the white Aryan master race... kind of like the blonde-haired, blue-eyed portraits of Jesus we still see across Western churches.

Okay, you've seriously lost me there. Israeli simply means a citizen of Israel. And Jew means a member of Jewish ethno-religious group. What is so confusing about the term Israeli Jew?

The problem is that most of the borders in the Middle East today were drawn up by European colonialists, especially the British, after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War I. When they were drawing up those lines, they were clueless about the ethnic and religious complexities of the regions, and just drew them up how they wanted (usually with clean, straight lines), while making different conflicting promises to different groups. When they drew up the borders for Iraq, for example, the British didn't care about the differences between Sunnis and Shias, or Arabs and Kurds. And with Mandatory Palestine, the British made conflicting promises to both the Palestinian locals and the Jewish settlers from Europe.

The Zionist ethnic cleansing of Palestinians actually began in 1947, almost immediately after the UN resolution was passed, even before Israel was officially created, or any Arab countries ever declared war on Israel, or any Arab countries exiled Jews. Contrary to Israeli propaganda, the conflict was not started by Arabs, but by Zionist terrorist groups like Irgun, Lehi and Haganah who were carrying out terrorist bombings against both Brits and Arabs in Palestine since the 30's. When the British promised the Palestinians a free Palestine and closed the borders to further Jewish immigration from Europe, the Zionist insurgents ramped up their terrorist bombing campaigns, eventually getting their way through violence. After the British withdrew and the UN agreed to a two-state solution where Zionists get a majority of the land, despite Jews only owning ~10% of the land prior to the resolution, many around the world, including Zionist Jews like Einstein and Indians like Gandhi, protested against it (Einstein instead preferred an ideal one-state solution where both Palestinians and Jews live together as equals). When Israel was finally created, the Zionist terrorist groups eventually became the IDF and the terrorist leader David Ben-Gurion became Israel's first Prime Minister. It was only after the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians began in 1947, which led to hundreds of thousands of refugees in neighbouring countries, that Arab states eventually declared war on Israel in 1948.

As for the present conflict, it's not a football game where we root for which side to win. Both Israel and Hamas are no doubt war criminals, but out of the two, it would be disingenuous to deny that Israel is the far bigger war criminal, something which even the UN called Israel out on.

Argue against it all you want...it's the truth. And is Fox your only rebuttal? I already told you I don't watch Fox.

@Jag85:

but there is the problem , you can't have two different identities for the same group (and that group is supposedly expected to accept both), and neither seem to ask the Jews themselves how they define themselves. Its somewhat ignorant in that it essentially means the Jews are damned no matter what (btw who are any of those people to tell the Jews who they are??)

To be fair, the Jewish idea of religion sounds confusing to alot of non Jews because they try to view it particularly through a Christian or sometimes an Islamic lens , where its possible to have a religion which is universal and is composed of many different ethnicity and groups. Judaism doesn't work that way (in a way its a lot closer to the idea of religion as it was in the year 1000BC). Ive already stated my views on this particular issue and how it relates politically, in that ultimately both the Jews and Arabs are "native" enough to have rights over it, how to share it is the issue.

Yes I know it was used in the propaganda, but that part was really fairly small compared to the rest, Jew hatred has this amazing ability to morph into anything based on what is fashionable at the time and place.

its not confusing for me , but the term Israeli Jew is alot more complex than that, but I will let you ponder that one, I was asking more in demographic , or if you want anthropological terms

I think this vidoe tells it very well

Again you refuse to answer the question. You said that Israeli's oppose a "free Palestine." What does a free Palestine look like on a map?

You give a very odd recollection of history - you make it seem like the UN resolution was passed and then the Jews responded with ethnic cleansing. To understate things - that couldn't be more wrong. I have to ask, where do you get your facts from? The Jews in Palestine responded to the adoption of the partition plan with public demonstrations of joy. The Arabs on the other hand responded with violence. The first causalities in the civil war were Jewish civilians. Yes it is true that prior the partition plan there was violent clashes between the two communities - I am not going to defend all that went on, but if you go back far enough (to the battle of Tel Hai) it was still Arabs that went on the offensive against Jewish communities. The fact of the matter is that the ethnic cleansing happened during the fog of war. Tragedies were committed by both sides - I won't deny that. But it is unquestionably true that the war of 1947-48 would've ended in tragedy regardless of who won and who lost. On top of that I would contend that had the Arabs won the fate of the Jews would've been much worse than the Arab Nakba - there's plenty of historical evidence that supports that suggestion. Where would the Jews have gone had they lost?

You say something particularly interesting about the British closing the borders of Palestine to stop Jewish immigration from Europe. The document you are referring to is the white paper passed in 1939. Why was it passed? Because the British succumbed to Arab violence and unrest. Your recitation of facts is so absent of context and skewed to one side in this conflict that I am forced to believe that you don't like Jews very much and/or are a severely misinformed bleeding heart liberal who sees pictures of dead Arabs on the news and reflexively blames Israel or the west.

Now tell me, what possibly could've been going on in Europe that resulted in Jewish immigration? As far as I'm concerned Jewish paramilitary groups were completely justified to engage in armed resistance against Britain, and by the sweeping, inane logic that you use to justify sympathy with Hamas you should agree. You seem to completely lack any sort of the empathy or understanding for the Jewish people as they were on the brink of annihilation, that you plead people should have for Hamas. If you want to continue down this road of history I am happy to talk about the much more active role that Arab leaders had in the Holocaust itself.

You also say that the British made conflicting promises to both the Arabs and Jews in the region. While there is some truth to that, how conflicting these promises were is a matter of dispute. Let's look at the facts - Britain promised the Hashemites independence and the Zionists a Jewish homeland. The Zionists and the Hashemites reached an agreement in 1920 for what could only be called a two state solution. This fell apart in a matter of months because of European imperial interests (although it can be said that the agreement was still valid once the Arab states became independent in the 40's). They then gave the Hashemite's all of Palestine that was east of the Jordan River in 1922. No further progress gets made until after WWII when the British mandate of Palestine was nearing its end. Yes the Jews got a majority of the land but that's only because this proposed Jewish state was primarily composed of the largely barren Negev desert which dominates the region's geography, and even then, Beersheba was to be part of the Arab state. Land ownership can be argued (you overstate this point), but the borders of the two states largely reflected the demographic facts on the ground.

As for Eintsein, while he dreamed of a bi-national state, he also realized that the entire Zionist vision was threatened by "fanatical Arab outlaws" and played no small role in helping found the state of Israel as well as promoting its legitimacy abroad after it declared its independence.

As for Ghandi, well, he also said that the only way for Jews to resist the holocaust was to collectively commit suicide. I don't care about Ghandi.

United Nations does not get their numbers from Hamas its just idiotic to even try to come with that. Also you are probably together with Israel the only one even trying to question these numbers.

Even Amnesty is not disputing the numbers, what they do say is.

Amnesty International also does not contend that all the Palestinian civilian fatalities and casualties were the result of unlawful Israeli attacks. In some cases civilian bystanders may have been killed as a result of genuine human errors or weapons malfunctioning, or may have been the unintended victims of lawful attacks on military objectives – including in cases where Palestinian armed groups failed to take the necessary precautions or used tactics which exposed civilians to undue risk. However, the killings of many of the hundreds of Palestinian civilians not involved in the conflict, including some 300 children, cannot simply be dismissed as “collateral damage” – incidental to otherwise lawful attacks – or as mistakes. Nor can they be attributed to panicked reactions of lone soldiers operating under fire.

What would a "free Palestine" look like? Take a pick. Hamas wants to take it back to 1946, Fatah and Israel's left-wingers want to take it back to 1967, and Israel's right-wing Likud party doesn't want to take it back at all.

Do you have any evidence to support your claim that the first casualties of the civil war were Jews? When the civil war broke out in 1947, there is no indication whether the first victims were Jews or Palestinians. All we do know for certain is that the Zionist ethnic cleansing campaign against Palestinians began in 1947. And for the record, while some rioted, most Palestinians at the time didn't actually care who they're new rulers were. They've been ruled for centuries by Ottoman Turks and then Brits, so for most Palestinians, it didn't matter who was next in line. But unlike the Ottomans and Brits, little did they know that the Zionists would outright expel them from their homes and steal all their property and land. Also, there's no evidence to suggest the Arabs would have ethnically cleansed the Jews if they had won. As for the Battle of Tel Hai in 1920, that doesn't seem like it has any relation to the Arab-Zionist conflict. As part of the Franco-Syrian War, Syrian Arabs went looking for French soldiers in a Jewish village, Jewish residents misunderstood and retaliated, leading to an unintentional fire-fight, with 8 Jews dead and 5 Arabs dead. Sounds like something out of a Tarantino movie.

There was occasional Arab violence and unrest in reaction to Zionism, often in the form of riots, but they weren't the ones creating terrorist organizations that went on bombing sprees across the region. It was the Zionists who started that trend, one that, ironically, Arabs themselves would later adopt decades later. And for the record, anti-Israel and anti-Jewish are two different things, so it's best you stop confusing the two. There are many Jews who are anti-Israel as well.

Now it seems like you finally get it. There is indeed common ground between Hamas today and the Zionist terrorists of the 30's-40's. If you're going to condemn Hamas today, then you would have to condemn Israel's very founders. The Zionist terrorist groups active in the 30's and 40's would later become the IDF, and even Israel's first prime minister was a terrorist leader before the founding of Israel. Both the Zionists in the 30's-40's and Hamas today are driven by decades of victimhood and a desire for freedom, no matter the human cost.

The thing about the Zionists at the time is that they were willing to negotiate with non-Palestinian Arabs, but outright refused to negotiate with Palestinians, because they knew the Palestinians would refuse to give up any of their lands or property. As for the demographic facts on the ground, you can see right here what the demographic reality was on the ground in 1946, with Jews owning barely 10% of the land, while the rest was mostly owned by Palestinians. It didn't make any sense at all to give Jews most of the land, far beyond what they actually owned.

As for Einstein, he was opposed to nationalism in general, including nationalistic forms of Zionism. He stated: "I should much rather see reasonable agreement with the Arabs on the basis of living together in peace than the creation of a Jewish state. My awareness of the essential nature of Judaism resists the idea of a Jewish state with borders, an army, and a measure of temporal power, no matter how modest. I am afraid of the inner damage Judaism will sustain—especially from the development of a narrow nationalism within our own ranks, against which we have already had to fight strongly, even without a Jewish state." In 1948, he condemned the Herut party (which evolved into today's Likud party), comparing them to Nazis and Fascists for their atrocities against Palestinians.

As for Gandhi, India went through a violent partition just months before the UN resolution, so from India's own negative experience, it makes sense why India was opposed to the partition of Palestine. To India, Israel was no different to Pakistan, both wanting to divide a nation along religious sectarian lines.

Um, where do you think they're getting the numbers from?

an analysis of the data hamas has provided the UN (and the UN provided news agencies) indicates that only about 20% of the killed palestinians are females and 63% of the dead are male in the age group of 18- 35 . -- https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mM2B0oIdsk06F98p16netyeDQRKZEdUmxxoDIUEa2TA/htmlview?sle=true#gid=188124445

also you can see data compared to other wars in Afghanistan,Iraq,Kosovo,Chechnya,Libya. ( in the causulties section you can see a link to the source of the data) (also an al jazeera numbers and name data) -- http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/07/gaza-under-seige-naming-dead-2014710105846549528.html

further more here is a warning call to wafa hospital before IDF targets site (plus you can see shots being fired from the hospital) -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O9AHzUKYk8&list=UUawNWlihdgaycQpO3zi-jYg

UNRWA confirms a second school was found with rockets in it -- http://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/press-releases/unrwa-condemns-placement-rockets-second-time-one-its-schools

terrorists use ambulance for transportation in gaza -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O114V9PdmM&list=UUawNWlihdgaycQpO3zi-jYg

and UN ambulance in gaza transporting hamas fighters -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7wiu6V-J98

This discussion will go nowhere until you first recognize how wrong this statement is. You can't just take a sterilized view of the Nakba and look at it in a vacuum without the proper context. The war of 1948 was a struggle for existence for the Jewish people in the most literal sense of the word. That is not hyperbole. It's also important to point out that the Jews didn't kick all of the Arabs outs (nor was there any widespread, organized ethnic cleansing initiative) - the ones that remained became Israeli citizens, and since 1948 they have been afforded more rights in Israel than they would have in any Arab country in the world. Also you keep giving the impression that once the partition plan failed and Jews immediately started rounding up Arabs and kicking them out. That is simply not what happened. There is absolutely no evidence that the Jews embarked on a "ethnic cleansing campaign" starting in 1947. The best evidence you can offer is Plan Dalet, which was put into effect in April '48, and even then that doesn't paint the picture that you want to paint.

Now, here's what leading Arab nationalists were saying,

Fawzi al-Qawuqji, who went from being a Nazi collaborator to leader of the Arab Liberation Army gave this threat as the UN considered the partition plan, and what would happen if they voted the "wrong way"

“We will have to initiate total war. We will murder, wreck and ruin everything standing in our way, be it English, American or Jewish"

You also have Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, a leading Arab nationalist, and someone who was intimately involved with the Holocaust. In 1944 he said "Arabs, rise as one man and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion. This saves your honor. God is with you."

In 1947, Abdul Azzam, a leading Egyptian diplomat, said "I hope the Jews do not force us into this war because it will be a war of elimination and it will be a dangerous massacre which history will record similarly to the Mongol massacre or the wars of the Crusades. I think the number of volunteers from outside Palestine will exceed the Palestinian population." He said later in 1948, “It does not matter how many [Jews] there are. We will sweep them into the sea."

And this is all just what they say in public - to this day the relevant Arab documents regarding this conflict are sealed shut. You can't point to similar quotes from leading Zionists, nor can you say that Israel is guilty of the same amount of secrecy.

The sad thing is that very little has change between now and then. Palestinian refugees are still fed the delusion from birth that the "Zionist occupiers" will be purged from the land.

Do you honestly believe that the war wouldn't have ended in tragedy had the Jew lost? Do you seriously believe that the Jews would be treated with dignity and respect under Arab rule? Never mind the public calls for genocide, just look at how these Arab states treat their own citizens over the years - look at how they've treated Palestinian refugees since 1948.

As I said in my last post, I am not necessarily opposed to armed resistance. But when that armed resistance is fought for the sake of establishing an ethnically pure Islamist caliphate, as is the case with Hamas, it is not hard at all for me to oppose it. At the end of the day Israeli civil society is worth defending.

Probably from the Gaza health officials and their press sources in Gaza.

But still the data cant be argued with and its just moronic to even question them, when they are accepted by pretty much all serious sources.

You mean the Hamas-run ministry of health? This might be hard to believe but Gazan civil society is completely dysfunctional - it's been run into the ground by a corrupt leadership that proclaims from the comfort of a hotel room in Qatar that death in Gaza is better than life. The public institutions and infrastructure in the region have been severely neglected - Hamas would rather spend valuable resources like concrete on vast underground tunnels into Israel for the purpose of kidnapping and massacring Jews than use that concrete to construct homes and buildings for its people. Given that backdrop are we really justified in saying that the Gaza Ministry of Health is a reputable source of information that shouldn't be questioned?

As for "press sources" in Gaza, what does that mean? It is notoriously difficult to report in Gaza - not only because of how dangerous it is, but Gazan's are usually not at the liberty to speak freely to the press, lest they want to risk being seen as a "collaborator"

I've learned more about the Israeli-Arab conflict reading Sun_Tzu's posts than I ever have from trolling the internet. Sometimes Gamespot has it's redeeming qualities.

I said Gaza health officials, not the ministry which means doctors, nurses, volunteers. But even if the news media did get them from ministry i see no reason to question them, when serious news media and humanitarien org. does not.

Also you sound like a israeli propaganda machine, its like you see this conflict from one side, the pro-israel and just repeat what they claim. And you claim hamas wont spend money on improving the living conditions, how do you suggest anyone put money into anything when Israel is blockading Gaza, blocks investments, refuses humanitarian help unless its on their terms, which is just absolutely ridiculous. Not to mention built a wall so that they are pretty much blocked in.

I think if these palestinians were christians and not muslims this conflict would have a whole different angle and most people would of course demand Israel be stopped.

Why do you think there is a blockade on Gaza? Why do you think investments are blocked? It is an undeniable fact that Hamas would rather spend money and resources (both of which are scarce in the strip) on waging a physical and psychological war against Israeli society. Do you think that there is a huge surplus of concrete available in Gaza? Are you really claiming that the sophisticated underground tunnel system leading from Gaza into Israel hasn't been constructed at the expense of humanitarian projects? There is money to spend in Gaza, as limited as it may be. Hamas makes the decision to spend that money on rockets rather than improving the lives of its civilians.

And it's not just Israel that's blocking Gazans into the strip. What do you think Egypt is doing?

@-Sun_Tzu-:

sun_tzu is right, israel isnt the only country blockading gaza, egypt is also blockading (and it is legal under international law) further more UN personal in gaza are locals (and biased,a that is why many of UNRWA employees were found either assisting terrorist or hosting them as teachers or let them lecture) therefore it is not odd for UN employees to be taking information from hamas ( for example the first rockets the UN found in one of the schools were given to the local authorities in gaza, meaning hamas, and later on these rockets even disappeared)

a short video about what they could have done with all that cement

@-Sun_Tzu-

I just wanna say, as a Saudi in Saudi. the amount of pushback I get over here when discussing Israel/Palestine is enough for me to shut up fast in public. Basically it's emotional rhetoric laced with religious justifications. I've got a friend in Bahrain who after i detailed Arab initiatives, Arab leaders probable thinking (which is different from the Arab on the street), to Palestinian leadership efforts towards peace. I got a "the difference is clear. Every true believing Muslim knows that there is only one Palestine, and that it doesn't matter what any Arab leader or international community thinks!" At which point there is no (safe) route to go further.

Some of the more educated Saudis I can engage with, but the level of ignorance or selective memory involved is simply astounding. It's like another Saudi friend (living in the US) said to me "it's like when Brian and Stewie went on that tour in Berlin" (apologies can't find a better version). It's like once you break down the situation frankly then the knee jerk reaction run towards religion and emotional hyperventilation occurs regardless.

Something like 60% of what i see being plastered on my facebook feed from friends and family over here are either pallywood pics, or (deliberately) mis-attributed photos of other war zones in the region most notably Syria and Iraq. A lot of it by the Solidarity Movement or Muslims looking to create noise. People will believe anything they see to confirm their own bias, and will react with anger and vitriol when you point out clearly the falsehood.

The problem over here on the Arab side of the fence is as @Darkman2007 said "what is practically possible is ideologically impossible, and what is ideologically permissible is practically impossible to achieve"

For me, being here for going on 2 years straight now in Saudi. the problem is clearly more on the Arab side. the Arab people don't know (whole situation) or are unwilling to deal with the situation realistically. preferring to say we need to have all out war usually with a "one day it'll be gone" comment (never explain how Israel is going to disappear though).

My friend in Bahrain who said "the difference is clear" is an unemployed football guy who loves sci-fi, video games, pop culture. seems like a pretty normal dude, up until religion/politics gets involved. Enjoys his good life in a Gulf Country, while advocating and vehemently defending a social-political ideology that would take what enjoyments in life he has right now away, and punish him severely for minor infractions.

It's like listening to poor white trash vote and vehemently defend billionaire Republicans (just as an off the cuff example of people who defend positions that are diametrically opposed to their own self-interests).

and what's worse, is that I AM often accused of being the tough talker. the guy who says to negotiate, that war isn't gonna solve the issue nor bring a Palestine into being. Instead, the guy who subscribes to Muslim Brotherhood militant thought and all-out war is saying i'm the the tough talker. meanwhile I don't see him leaving his cushy apartment to go fight the good fight in the battlefields of his native Syria, or to help his brothers in arms in Gaza....

and I'm just using him as an example, I've met lots of people who defend the Saudi religious establishment within my own family, people who support ISIS and Nusra, people who support Hezbollah and Shia groups as well... and ALL of them don't live lives that'd be ok by any of these groups... the sheer level of hypocrisy is grating to say the least.

There is a serious level of disconnect over here between ideology and reality and what's possible to do. The least of our problems are where our priorities should be as Arabs with our own states (and even the Palestinians).

The media here very rarely allows for moderate or liberal voice, and will not tolerate in the slightest anything that so much as makes religion LOOK like it could be wrong or not helpful to solving a situation. There is a lot of bravado about themselves, and it's one that constantly highlights all the good things Arabs brought to the world in the past, but negates to bring up the here and now. Not to mention it's CONSTANTLY shifting the blame for problems, and the regional discussion constantly is publicly entertaining conspiracy theories usually based on racial hatred (the Jews) nationalism (Americans/Israel/Iran/Saudi are screwing with xyz) or sectarianism (Shia vs Sunni).

Which just ferments hatred even further, because it's spreading the hate around based on little more then heresay.

It's not a surprise that the Arab world is a backwater, and if not for the oil, it'd be basically roving bands of different ISIS groups murdering and killing everyone they deem heretical or wrong until some iron-fisted dictator can hold a place together.

It is hyperbole. There was no imminent "second Holocaust". David Ben-Gurion, the Zionist terrorist leader who became Israel's first Prime Minister, himself stated in March 1948:

"I believe the majority of the Palestinian masses accept the partition as a fait accompli and do not believe it is possible to overcome or reject it… The decisive majority of them do not want to fight us."

After having been occupied for centuries, by Egyptians, Turks, and Brits, most Palestinians back then didn't care who their next rulers were, but life just continued on as normal. Ben-Gurion himself acknowledged that the overwhelming majority of Palestinians are passive and do not want to resist the Zionist occupation, so why would he feel the need to expel entire Palestinian towns and villages? Clearly because he wanted a Jewish state where Jews should be the majority.

Nevertheless, there were several Arab nationalists at the time making threats to the Jewish immigrants if the UN resolution was passed, which Ben-Gurion no doubt took advantage of as propaganda to further his cause and motivate Zionist extremist fighters still scarred by the memory of, and radicalized by, the Holocaust.

The Nakba began in 1947. According to British sources at the time, just a day after the UN resolution was passed, the Zionist groups Irgun and Hagana (then labelled terrorists, before becoming the IDF) began a campaign of terror in Haifa, followed by other Palestinian towns and villages in December. However, British troops were often deployed to defend Palestinian towns and villages from Zionist extremists. After the British withdrew in early 1948, most Palestinian towns and villages were left defenceless, making the expulsion a lot less difficult.

I really think you need to open your eyes and try to watch something else then israeli news. Its nothing but propaganda that all investments and humanitarian aid would go straight to digging tunnels or to Hamas themselfs. Not to mention that if Israel really wanted to help, they could just create their own controlled centers and give out aid there, but no what they do is bomb UN schools and hospitals and kill innoncent civilians and kids.

Also Egypt is closing their border after pressure from US who get it direct from Israel. Not because they really want to.

Oh, and not to mention that even Al Mazen Center for Human Rights confirms that civilian casualties

@Jacanuk:

when was the last time you watched Israeli news to determine it was propaganda or even what was being said and shown in general?

and this statement regarding Egypt shows you know little about the politics and considerations at work here,

@Jag85

please provide source of information.

and try to keep this discussion civilized.

@Jacanuk

egypt is blockading gaza because of hamas, hamas is connected to the muslim brotherhood and have been said to aim the muslim brotherhood in terror attacks in egypt.

thats why egypt is blockading gaza. in matter of fact they pretty much hate america now ( since the obama administration supported the muslim brotherhood and morsi and didnt recognize the new government after the deposing of morsi)

@Jacanuk - Seriously man?...

1. Israel is already providing aid. setting up a clinic, facilitating red crescent to maneuver to areas, sending in trucks full of aid. Meanwhile Egypt blocks aid. Don't believe Turkey's Erdrogan who says Israel is the one blocking aid from entry...

1 & 2 . Note this Al Jazeera talk about Egypt. remember Al Jazeera is owned by Qatar who is financing Hamas, Hamas's friends right now are Turkey, Qatar, and Iran (little bit until the Syrian civil war broke out). Just listen to Qatar's AJE spin doctors downplay Egypt and try to lift up Qatar/Turkey role. early on in this conflict Hamas gave it's term for ceasefire which was mocked in the Egyptian press.

Why? because Hamas wants control of the Rafah crossing and not Egypt, and would like a friendly Arab country of it's choosing to be the supervisor instead of Egypt. From both the Egyptian and Qatari press, the problem isn't USA pushing Egypt to do anything, but rather that Egypt under Al-Sissi doesn't like Hamas and is going to punish them further.

I know this might blow your mind, but when John Kerrycame he got stopped and forced to go through security when he arrived in Egypt. This is a bit of a smack in the face for high level diplomats visiting each others nations. Obama's foreign policy in the middle east is looked upon as an unmitigated disaster in the middle east. from the Arab Gulf, to Israel, to Iraq, to Egypt and Libya.

So please. try again. Try harder with the big bad scary America bullying everyone.

Basically all i hear from you guys is "somehow somewhere America/UK is to blame for what's going on here". THAT'S IT.

You don't seem to be very informed about the situation.

It doesn't take Israeli propaganda to realize that Hamas is neglecting its civilian infrastructure. Hamas leadership is not shy about talking about its underground tunnels - it brags about them openly in public rallies. You can't have it both ways - you can't talk about how scarce resources are in the strip and then at the same time act like the sophisticated network of tunnels isn't built at the expense of humanitarian projects that would improve the lives of Gazan residents.

Your post is ironic considering you see the conflict from one side as well. My objection to HAMAS does not come from their religious views but from their actions. If you continue to attack a country it does have the right to defend itself. I'm not sure what kind of crazy mind set thinks a country should just stay quiet and a target. Because I can guarantee that everyone stating those views would act quite differently if they were in danger.

As for health officials....they answer to HAMAS. But keep your head in the sand and believe the propaganda.

How about they move Israel to Europe or the US? I mean Europe and the US are Israel's biggest allies, they defend them almost unilateraly so why won't these countries sacrifice something for once in the international scene and give Israel some land instead of suggesting taking other people's lands? I mean we all know the conflict won't solve itself and both parties are nowhere near to agree to a solution. Palestinians have much less support from developed countries than Israel and, probably, nobody wants them. So why not make a extreme solution for a extreme situation like this?

@sibu_xgamer:

why not move the Palestinian Arabs to America or Europe instead, given the aging and slowly decreasing population in Europe (at least if birth rates keep on going down), they could sure use the cheap workforce

look mum , I can talk nonsense too.

It doesn't take Hamas propaganda to realize how the israeli government is not making a lot of efforts to avoid civilian casualties and that the claim that they're used as human shields by Hamas and that that's the reason they are killed is BS. I mean when you see a video of kids playing on a beach being blown off by the israeli forces then whoever calls that propaganda is a cynic or just a sick person.

Why nonsense? why is it nonsense to suggest using european or american land but is not nonsense to take palestinian land? Do you realize how stupid that sounds? suddenly taking land from palestinians is logical, common sense, the only solution but suggesting taking european or american land is unspeakable. This is the kind of crap that makes the world such an absurd place, some group decides what is supposed to make sense and we should all agree with it without questioning.

Why not move the palestinians? For the simple reason that Europe and the the US support Israel and not Palestina. Given that Israel, Europe and the US are friends and allies then it's much more common sensical to let your friends to your house than your enemies.

@sibu_xgamer:

lol, wow, so apparently moving Jews around like cattle is ok , but Arabs are sacred in this? interesting. Didn't you already get to move Jews around for last 1900 years? not had enough of that Im guessing?

Though you don't seem to understand some simple sarcasm though, Im not claiming there is a need to move anybody. why would there be any need.

Why would there be any need? are you serious? haven't you been paying attention? do you suggest then that palestinians keep living like secluded cattle, getting bombed and damned to underdevelopment and that they just deal with it? or do you suggest that Hamas or other groups keep trying to kill Israel?

I never said Arabs are sacred, I'm saying that it will be the most practical solution. Maybe hurting israelis' pride and making the uncomfortable process of moving will be better than keep killing innocent people up and down?

I mean Sun-Tzu asked where would I suggest Israelis should move? I gave him my answer. You don't like it and that your sole argument against is basically emotional. Fine but it IS a possible solution and worth considering no matter how much you try to make it sound as ridiculous it isn't much more ridiculous than what has happened since 1946 in the region.

@sibu_xgamer The most realistic scenerio is to have the Arab states change their 1959 position, and letting Palestinian refugees settle in the lands they're in - those being Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. and if not them completely, they'll be treated like other refugees in UNHCR treats other refugees in re-settling them elsewhere. I know the US will take some in for sure, and other countries elswhere will open their doors to them.

A finalized agreed-upon peace settlement between Israel and Palestine will allow for some refugees to return back to both countries.

that's it.

It's a relatively easy solution to a painful problem. UNRWA should of never been formed. Palestinians refugees should be treated just like all other peoples under the UNHCR and given at the bare minimum a passage way out for their children, AND that refugee status was not inheritable.

@sibu_xgamer:

lol, my ancestors lived in that place, when yours were playing in some swamp , trust me , Jews don't need your approval to live there, trust me on that. Hamas will get wiped out before the Jews do, you can trust me on that too.

Im sarcastically saying you should move the Arabs instead, after all a bunch of them are still refugees so packing is easier anyway (again , I know Jews are like cattle to you)

my solution to this whole problem is quite simple and well known.

@sibu_xgamer:

UNHCR has been doing this for over 50 years, after world war 2 UNCHR was formed in order to help refugees and resettle them in new countries, resettling displaced refugees is not a stupid notion and the resettling of displaced refugees have helped millions already.

gaza is gaza and the west bank ( also known as judea and samaria) should stay where they are but the palestinians outside of israel and gaza should be resettled in their host countries or countries that would accept them.

For that to happen you have to make Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the Palestinians to agree directly. For my solution you need one country from Europe or the US and Israel to agree directly. Mine seems simpler as I see it but maybe your solution could work. Although I find it way more difficult and less practical.

I'm guessing Palestinians don't need your approval to live there either. So keep murdering them and then come crying about propaganda when I call you a murderer. At least grow a pair and accept your murdering and careless nature like a man then if your attitude is going to be that of a whiny little psychopath.

@sibu_xgamer:

my solution is to give them their own country, and no , the Arabs do not need me to tell them to live there, on that you are right.

though I'm not particularly concerned if you call me a murderer, I generally only care about the opinion of people I respect. That said calling me a psychopath is a little hilarious, last I checked you were the one making nonsense arguments which frankly defy logic (and it seems most people responding to you think so too)

@sibu_xgamer - Seriously, i'm sorry to burst bubbles here, but you can't negotiate countries out of existence. Quite frankly your being childish and absurd.

The agreement for the Arabs was done via the Arab League. and the US and EU can pull their collective weight on them to change their positions and if NOT that, then start pulling funding from UNRWA (because you'll never get it voted away, not if the 57 Muslim states, and the former communists now non-aligned bloc at the UN command an easy super majority in every vote in the general assembly). but given that the US and EU are the primary financiers, pull funding, and have the UNHCR start taking over those responsibilities. and if they did put UNHCR in the region, to have OUTSIDE monitoring and supervising everything. corruption is rife with this business here.

If the wealthy Arab Gulf states step up to pay the bills, so be it, but they'll get tired of paying for it. the UNRWA is about 3x more expensive then the UNHCR despite the UNHCR handling tens of millions of more people in it's history and with a far far smaller staff. Plus the UNRWA is infested with militants like Hamas.

millions of people have been displaced, countries have lost territories, and in a few instances been wiped out completely even, and in some other cases new countries have emerged. Point is, the UNHCR in comparison to UNRWA, it WORKS, and is far more humane and moral thing to do.

Holding people in refugees camps, by their brother ARABS no less, for 60 YEARS in order to wave some kind of 'sword' upon Israel's neck isn't going to work, and not to mention immoral and inhumane to say the least.

How easy you guys simplify things, and then you cry about propaganda pfft. He's a whiny little psychopath because he justifies keep bombing civilians and killing them and won't contemplate an alternative solution that could make sense to avoid that because it seems that it hurts his feelings. I've seen a bunch of jews appose the Israeli government murdering campaign and even act is defiance of that. Those are not whiny little psychopaths, they're respectable human beings. So cut the crap on that BS about propaganda and playing the victims just because you're jews. If you're a murderer you're a murderer if you're a jew, a palestinian, a german, a japanese, etc.

Immorality and inhumanity comes from both parties here. Really non can declare to have the moral upper hand. I'm not proposing to negotiate a country out of existence, I'm proposing to negotiate the land that country will settle on.

That's a very "modest" proposal you are suggesting. Do you really think that Europeans or Americans would be a-OK with giving up their own land for a Jewish state? Do I really have to go into the history of antisemitism within these regions of the world, especially in Europe? I do think that Zionists should have a "plan B" in the back of their mind because I don't think Zion's future in Eratz Israel should be taken for granted, but the forced relocation of 6 million Jews from their homes is not a solution as much as it is capitulation, and really shouldn't (and won't) be considered until Arab militants are "storming the gates". And lets imagine what that would look like for Jews - they again would not be able to pray at the western wall - Jerusalem, the holiest city in Judaism will be completely blocked off from the Jewish people, and what will happen to the Jews that get left behind? Logistically it is impossible to suggest that the Jewish population in its totality will leave. And again the Jews will be forced to pick up the pieces and rebuild another Jewish state. Look, Jews cannot solve the problem of antisemitism, they can only react to it. That is what Zionism is - a realization that attempts to assimilate has failed and that the only way forward is Jewish self-determination (a right recognize by the UN, by the way).

There are somewhere around 20 Arab states in the world. There is already a Palestinian Arab state in the world, with a Palestinian majority (ruled by a Hashemite minority, admittingly, but a Palestinian state nonetheless). The Palestinian refugee crisis would end tomorrow if their Arab brothers wanted it to end tomorrow. The Palestinian refugees lived under Arab occupation for 20 years before they came under Israeli occupation. Look at the condition of the refugee camps in Arab countries. Even in Jordan, Palestinian-Jordanians come under constant threat of having their citizenship revoked.

I didn't cry about anything. I don't think he was justifying bombing civilians. I think expelling him and millions of others hurt more than just his feelings. How can they oppose something that doesn't exist? Doesn't seem more respectable than anything else. The Jews clearly are the victims of alot. I don't see anyone coming in and calling Palestinians psychopath murderers.

You could call those who kill civilian israelis and their supporters psychopath murderers and I'll agree with you. But my category of murdering psychopaths doesn't take into account nationality so a jew can be a murdering psychopath all the same.

Even the Jews you speak of (I'm assuming people like Norman Finkelstein and Noam Chomsky) realize the lunacy in what you are proposing.

Earlier in this thread a posted I video of Norman Finkelstein strongly condemning the BDS movement in the face of a BDS organizer. Jewish anti-zionists are not shy about condemning the antisemitic excesses of the anti-Zionist movement when it stares them in the face, at least when they are among "friends".