Israel vs Palestinians II

[MAD]

Are we living in the Twilight Zone?

Our country is in trouble. You think this is about Israel, you are mistaken.

 

[volbound1700]

There were the Turks in what's now Greece in the 1800's.

They went back to Turkey after their Empire that enslaved Greece collapsed.

 

[MAD]

'We are fighting Jews, not Zionism,' Palestinian activist Ahed Tamimi declares​

“My definition of Judaism, ever since I was a child, has been that it is the same as Zionism,” Tamimi said, according to a translation by the MEMRI Institute. “There is no difference between them."​

 

[OrangeTsar]

There were the Turks in what's now Greece in the 1800's.

Maybe the only conflict in the world almost as old as the Jews vs their neighbors is Greek vs Turk.
Something about a thousand ships, Priam, Hector, Achilles, Agamemnon, and a wooden horse.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Give Greece back Istanbul then and apologize for the ethnic genocide of Greeks in Turkey, Assyrians in Iraq, Armenians, Coptic Egyptians etc by all your Arab/Islamic cult brethren.

Why is Constantinople even a part of Turkey today?

When is Islam going to apologize for their ethnic genocides highlighted above?

true.
The world will not heal until Mass is once again celebrated in the Hagia Sophia in the great city of Constantine

 

[n_huffhines]

Sins by both the IDF and actual Americans. Nobody here will change their minds.

Wake up! This is why they have to keep international media out.

 

[MAD]

Sins by both the IDF and actual Americans. Nobody here will change their minds.

Wake up! This is why they have to keep international media out.

View attachment 766722

The one that never changes is you, you don’t care when we show you actual proof yet your whole rant comes from an “Anonymous Source” and “without proof”.

So how can you be taken seriously?

 

[NCFisher]

People whose families had been living in Europe for going on 2,000 years have as much right to a land as those whose families have lived there for hundreds and thousands of years? There's the slight of hand.

People who don't own the land regardless of how long they live there, have as much right at those who do own it, whether Arab or Jew? And people who repeatedly attempt to erase another people have as much right as the people who put them in their place and defended themselves?

While increasingly choking off Jewish immigration, the British never restricted the Arab. Arab immigration greatly increased to Palestine as Jewish immigration brought better agricultural and infrastructure knowledge, and increased wages? How're you going to separate those Arabs from those Jews who continuously lived there? How will you compensate those Jews scattered across the globe for 2000 years? A real pickle, eh?

The bottom line is as @volfanhill phrased it: might is right. Whether the UN or NATO exercising power over a group for the 'rights' of another, or Jews staking their homeland, rights exist with the force to retain them. Everything else is an appeal to the heavens.

 

[n_huffhines]

Whoa! Not again.

And no one will change their minds about Israel.

 

[n_huffhines]

Every stupid, invalid denial is an admission of the evil.

 

[NCFisher]

You ask 'exactly what seizures of territory are you referring to prior to 1948's Israel Declaration of Independence?'. I had written 'during its formation and subsequent wars', but what would become the IDF had started ethnic cleansing with Deir Yassin and other attacks before independence was declared.
Ghazi Hamad's referring to the state, no?

That's the point; Jews had purchased land until the 1948 Declaration of Independence, while Arabs had refused anything other than an Arab state for Palestine.

You speak of 'attacks' as a one-sided affair, something done by Jews to Arabs. It is complete falsehood. This was a mutual war over land both had kinship to, and the underdog won. BEFORE independence was declared:

The Arabs were blunt in taking responsibility for the war. Jamal Husseini told the Security Council on April 16, 1948:
The representative of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday that they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight.24

The British commander of Jordan’s Arab Legion, John Bagot Glubb, admitted:
Early in January, the first detachments of the Arab Liberation Army began to infiltrate into Palestine from Syria. Some came through Jordan and even through Amman…They were in reality to strike the first blow in the ruin of the Arabs of Palestine.25

Myths & Facts Partition and the War of 1948

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

Why didn't Israel ethnically cleanse the 150K Arabs who immediately formed about 20% of their population, and is between 21-22% today - ? Because the term means nothing when you frivolously apply it.

 

[NCFisher]

Please go ahead and make your point and explain how I'm misunderstanding something.
I understand what you've written, or at least I believe I do. If you think I've misunderstood then please let me know how I have.
Hamas apparently did intend to kill as many as possible on 10/7, including Arabs and Thais. Other than the part of the attack that was directed at IDF posts I would call it a terrorist attack but not genocide.
Where? Article 31 of their charter.

You'd stated: "Except acquiring land by force is out of bounds now. Remember the new rules we helped set forth after WWII. That's why it's called illegally occupied."

Rebuttal: It is not. And if ever "the rules" state a nation or group of people must endure constant attack and cannot secure themselves, then "the rules" are illegitimate.

Any such rule must first concern itself with offensive taking of land, and if a defensive taking, the long-term disposition of that land. The defending party is entitled to not just an end of attacks, but a security agreement. If no such terms are agreed upon, the defending party has no obligation to abandon their physical or moral position. And if such agreements are reached but the security is continually breached, there is no state of peace but rather a running conflict with moments of armistice. In that case, a 'rule' cannot require the defender to invite attack by abandoning strategic position, and be considered legitimate.

And yet in that same charter, I point to the genocidal language. And in Hamas media, I posted at least 15 recent vintage quotes of Hamas leaders telling us what Hamas actually envisions for the Jew. If you want to believe there's room for Jews to live - literally just live - in a Hamas ruled society, I have nothing to say that will appeal to you.

​

 

[NCFisher]

We need to starve the UN.

 

[EasternVol]

They went back to Turkey after their Empire that enslaved Greece collapsed.

Except for the 50,000 or so that couldn't because they were killed.

 

[EasternVol]

Maybe the only conflict in the world almost as old as the Jews vs their neighbors is Greek vs Turk.
Something about a thousand ships, Priam, Hector, Achilles, Agamemnon, and a wooden horse.

Weren't the Trojans Anatolians and not Turks?

 

[EasternVol]

The one that never changes is you, you don’t care when we show you actual proof yet your whole rant comes from an “Anonymous Source” and “without proof”.

So how can you be taken seriously?

Your credibility on that point is very weak considering the WTOB level of drivel you yourself throw out.

 

[OrangeTsar]

Weren't the Trojans Anatolians and not Turks?

By Turks I meant Geographically and not necessarily tied to today’s ethnic composition.
If you believe the Aeneid (almost certainly fictional) then the Romans descended from Aeneas, a refugee from the fall of Troy, making it Greek vs Roman

 

[EasternVol]

People who don't own the land regardless of how long they live there, have as much right at those who do own it, whether Arab or Jew? And people who repeatedly attempt to erase another people have as much right as the people who put them in their place and defended themselves?

While increasingly choking off Jewish immigration, the British never restricted the Arab. Arab immigration greatly increased to Palestine as Jewish immigration brought better agricultural and infrastructure knowledge, and increased wages? How're you going to separate those Arabs from those Jews who continuously lived there? How will you compensate those Jews scattered across the globe for 2000 years? A real pickle, eh?

The bottom line is as @volfanhill phrased it: might is right. Whether the UN or NATO exercising power over a group for the 'rights' of another, or Jews staking their homeland, rights exist with the force to retain them. Everything else is an appeal to the heavens.

I don't see how they didn't own the land considering that Jews owned less than 10% of it in 1947. Maybe you could enlighten me. Funny how you say one side 'tried to erase' as a negative and the other 'put them in their place' as a positive when it's tit for tat. You definitely aren't reaching conclusions objectively.
The Arab Palestinians were already and had centuries been the very large majority of the population. The British didn't tilt the scales appreciably there.
You still haven't backed up your claim that international law allows taking land by force. I suppose that's because you can't.

 

[Smokey123]

Waiting for the “how can you even blame them” or the “lies!!! That’s Hamas propaganda” response

 

[Vol8188]

Yesterday, Hamas boasted that it executed four Palestinians for "collaborating with Israel," including one aid worker.

But instead of writing about that, the media ran unverified allegations from Hamas that Israel killed four Palestinian aid seekers




View attachment 766660

For reference, here is Hamas posting about yesterday's executions
View attachment 766662

From efischberger

And our pro Hamas crowd will continue to ignore that Hamas is openly killing civilians when they shed their fake tears over all the dead civilians and try to proclaims it’s proof of “genocide”.

 

[Smokey123]

And our pro Hamas crowd will continue to ignore that Hamas is openly killing civilians when they shed their fake tears over all the dead civilians and try to proclaims it’s proof of “genocide”.

and the people that claims there’s no innocents in Gaza and they’re all terrorist will pretend to care when Hamas is the one killing then

 

[Vol8188]

and the people that claims there’s no innocents in Gaza and they’re all terrorist will pretend to care when Hamas is the one killing then

I’ve never claimed there’s no innocents. I think a lot of people vastly over estimate the number of innocents. For example people who tell us “armed gangs, not Hamas!” Stole all the food from the UN.

But there’s innocents in all conflicts. The difference with this conflict isn’t the indifference of Israel towards civilians, but rather the indifference of their own government. That’s why civilian deaths are so bad. Because not only does Hamas not care about their own, but Hamas is literally rewarded for the death of their own. More dead civilians only benefits Hamas

That’s why when people continue to pull up the total dead stats in an effort to use it against Israel, the data should be taken with a grain of salt. Because Hamas is intentionally killing their own

 

[volbound1700]

Except for the 50,000 or so that couldn't because they were killed.

Link? Small number compared to the Millions they lost. Tell me what country do the great Greek cities of Ephesus, Miletus, Halicarnassus, Pergamum, Sinople, Iconium, Nicaea, and Tembzond reside in?

 

[MAD]

I’ve never claimed there’s no innocents. I think a lot of people vastly over estimate the number of innocents. For example people who tell us “armed gangs, not Hamas!” Stole all the food from the UN.

But there’s innocents in all conflicts. The difference with this conflict isn’t the indifference of Israel towards civilians, but rather the indifference of their own government. That’s why civilian deaths are so bad. Because not only does Hamas not care about their own, but Hamas is literally rewarded for the death of their own. More dead civilians only benefits Hamas

That’s why when people continue to pull up the total dead stats in an effort to use it against Israel, the data should be taken with a grain of salt. Because Hamas is intentionally killing their own

 

[Smokey123]

I’ve never claimed there’s no innocents. I think a lot of people vastly over estimate the number of innocents. For example people who tell us “armed gangs, not Hamas!” Stole all the food from the UN.

But there’s innocents in all conflicts. The difference with this conflict isn’t the indifference of Israel towards civilians, but rather the indifference of their own government. That’s why civilian deaths are so bad. Because not only does Hamas not care about their own, but Hamas is literally rewarded for the death of their own. More dead civilians only benefits Hamas

That’s why when people continue to pull up the total dead stats in an effort to use it against Israel, the data should be taken with a grain of salt. Because Hamas is intentionally killing their own

Good I’m glad you haven’t. Sadly some in this thread have and then plenty more in the other thread, things like no innocents, they’re all terrorists, animals, bomb the whole land, etc. Then turning around and acting like you care about them for a talking point? F’ing disgusting

Israel should probably stop playing into Hamas hand, then act surprised when people are not taking their side when they are caught bombing a hospital, aid workers, children getting water, etc.

There’s a big difference between saying war is hell bad **** happens to innocent people, atrocities are committed in every war vs IDF is the most moral army in the world that has never done anything bad and no innocents have died