Quote:
1234 - you baffle me. let me ask you something, does your country have nuclear weapons? do you know what nuclear weapons are used for? that's right, pure intimidation
My country has nukes, but has never threatened first strike. It has also never armed it's delivery systems and blackmailed the world to help it.
Quote:
it's obvious to any dimwit we're not going to use them because even if we wanted to, which no one here does, we'd be banned by the entire world and wouldn't stand a week.
Dayan wanted to use them, but was only overruled by Meier who preferred blackmail. Others have also stated they would use a pre emptive first strike if needed.
Quote:
why go that far at such a non existing scenario and not look at north Korea, for example, who might use those weapons not for self defense ? or how about Pakistan which is prone to use them against India?
Both of those countries are signatories to the NPT, so there is at least some monitoring of the threat. Isreal refuses to sign up to monitoring, aided by US silence, while the US is extremely vocal about other countries non disclosure.
Quote:
we started the war. right.
Yep, right.
Quote:
ther'e still the small matter of 4 other wars launched against us
None were launched by the palestinians. The palestinians have had people fighting over their land for centuries but no one ever really consults them.
Quote:
4 to 1 on the aggressiveness balance
You've forgotton a few, Lebanon for example. A few times actually.
Quote:
I wonder how even before you knew the 67 war wasn't started by us (which you now do) you'd come to the conclusion our regime is aggressive
Isreal launched the first strikes. Understand? No matter how much you deny it, Isreal attacked first. An attack on most of the arab airfields to be precise. The occupation, Lebanon, and Isreali treatment of palestinians is more than enough proof of an agressive regime. The latest land grab is just another symptom.
Quote:
consider the fact that over 1000 Israeli civilians were killed as a result of terrorism in addition to countless soldiers.
4500 Palestinians have died, while 480 Isreali's died in the same period. That includes Isreali soldiers.
Quote:
I only said that when YOUR civilians are bombarded, IN THE SOLE PURPOSE of stopping the killing in your side, no one can blame you if you bomb the other side
So you are saying the UK should have bombed Dublin and Belfast? Lets be clear about this. You are saying we should bomb heavily populated civilain areas in an attempt to kill a handul of terrorists?
Quote:
not that it's fun and good to do but it might be the only way to stop the murder of your civilians under some circumstances
Ok so we see that you do agree with killing any number of innocent civilians in an attempt to kill one man. The real way to stop the killing is to withdraw to 67 boundaries and comply with UN resolutions - both sides.
Quote:
like comparing the nazi's or palestinians to the IRA
I didn't compare the Nazi's to the palestinians. I compared human rights abuses, freedom movements, and related terrorism. The palestinians are akin to the French Resistance and the IDF to the Germans.
Quote:
i see your friend lefty disagrees with you on that subject interesting, perhaps that action wasn't as condemned as you try to make it appear.. but we'll let the two of you sort it out
Where does Leftism support Harris? Can't say I can see that anywhere in his posts. Also he is not my "friend" and he is welcome to disagree with me on any matter he has a difference of opinion with me. At least he might steer clear of the random insults of the Zionists. He does live down the road from me though, lot of geordies on here it seems :)
Quote:
it doesn't really matter what i think about bombing civilians, what matters is reality, in which Israel has never done so
The entire weight of filmed evidence available at any news outlet (except perhaps censored Isreali ones) proves you wrong.
Quote:
It's actually liberated, the land is historically ours to begin with
Historically yours? How? Most of the Jewish citizens of Isreal are immigrants to the area. The palestinians have been there for centuries, along with Jews, christians, orthodox, you name it. Oh wait, you mean your imaginary friend said you could have it don't you? Keep the fantasies to yourself, they have no place affecting the lives of people who don't believe them.
Quote:
the defence wall might stop terrorists, but not tanks
You do realise that Sharon has presided over the greatest loss of Isreali life in recent memory? The more you oppress the palestinians, the greater their greivances and the more they volounteer to join the terrorists. Btw, where are the palestinians hiding these tanks? Don't you think they would be using modern weapons if they had them rather than blowing themselves to bits for the chance to take a few of you with them?
Quote:
do you have any idea how vulnerable Israel is without some of the liberated territories?
Eh? How does this square with your previous statement -
Quote:
the current situation in which Arab countries don't really have a chance to defeat Israel
Isreal has WMD's, it's not in danger from anyone but itself.
Quote:
And lastly the bit about "Jewish" terrorism is possibly the most absurd of all, before 48 Arab pilgrims of Jewess were a thing of the norm, the latter were barely defending themselves against the pilgrims, let alone terrorize the Arabs
You've never heard of Stern, Lehi or Irgun then? How about the King David Hotel? Lord Moyne maybe? Please read up on those groups and their actions before you expose your ignorance further.
Quote:
You're using this info you took from a website that is run by a single person who (from a simple scan of his columns) bases his writings on
Bzzt wrong. Try again.
Quote:
Not exactly sources for unbiased material, huh?
No idea, never been to any of those sites.
Quote:
The water article that you posted does not quote UN documents as you state
I said the site I took it from quoted UN documents, govt papers, etc. Where did I say this was a UN document? The site has a large library of information from all kinds of sources. Keep looking, you might find it someday.
Oh and you still haven't worked out who the original authors are yet, and it's not Elmusa. He is referencing earlier works.
Quote:
Simply because you can cut & paste columns from websites that use pro Palestinian/Arab sources, it does not make it fact
You haven't contradicted any of those facts.
Quote:
As I've actually shown you, the supposed land restriction argument is not valid
No you haven't. You just keep saying it and hoping we will all believe you. I showed court case and cabinet results, with relavent quotes. You have shown nothing.
Quote:
passing off the writing of someone else as your own. exactly what you did, btw
Can you see a little © at the bottom of my posts? Nope, neither do I. Plagarism is claiming something to be your own work, where did I claim that? You are looking like a fool disregarding content in favour of irrelavent and childish behaviour. I repeat, we are not in school here. There are no extra marks for rewording text. My posts are a mixture of original text and sections from other sites that say what I want to say without me having to bother typing it.
Quote:
The High Court case decision that I linked you to specified that the Israeli govt cannot exchange land with the JNF as it knows that land given to the JNF will be primarily leased to Jews only
No, it stated that non jews could not live in Katzir. Here is a link for you. My interpretation fits in much better with facts on the ground and statements in the public domain from Isreali cabinet members than yours.
Quote:
Next time you mention apartheid, I'd like a link that shows that Blacks had full voting rights in South Africa, as Arabs do in Israel.
Apartheid is not soley exclusion from the vote. Blacks in the south of the US technically had the vote before the civil rights movement, but lived in an apartheid country.
Quote:
I'd like a link that shows how Blacks made up ~10% of the SA parliament, as Arabs do in Israeli parliament.
Shame arabs are 20% of the population though isn't it?
Again, apartheid is not soley based on possession of the vote. This is the actual definition. You will note that Isreal breaches many of those Articles.
Quote:
You've mispoken here, since Druze, Bedouins and other Arabs in Israel are Israelis.
I know some arabs are Isreali's, 20% to be exact. I said show me land they have that Isreali's of all creeds cannot live on. Not a refusal of a grant, but outright bar to entry.
The link I provided earlier also adresses the Bedouin and Negev inhabitants and Isreal's plans for them. Same plan as for all the palestinians - squeeze them into a smaller and smaller area while cutting off their water access arable land.
Quote:
Not even you believe this. The Palestinians along with the rest of the Arab nations rejected the same 2 state solution that they now say they will accept
No one ever asked the palestinians, somehow they keep getting lumped into Nasser's and others plans. Egypt is not the palestinians. Neither is Syria or any other country.
Quote:
The Arab states' response to Israeli immediate offerings of land for peace:
No Peace. No Recognition. No Negotiations. How sweet
Isreal did not offer all the occupied land back and crucially refused to allow palestinians thrown off their own land to return. That is, and indeed should be, unacceptable and the palestinians have UN resolutions supporting their case.
Since then Isreal has never offered a full return of the land or the right of return. The arab states however have all recognised Isreals right to exist. The PLO is even trying to pursuade it's followers to drop the right of return too, a bitter price to pay as I am sure any Jew would agree. I mean, zionists believe Isreal is all about the right of return yes?
Quote:
So you believe that Israel brought on 9/11. This in contrast to Al Qaeda themselves who for years drew complaints that they don't pay enough attention to the Palestinian cause. This in contrast to bin Laden himself saying that his goal was to drive the US "occupation" forces out of holy Muslim Saudi land
I mentioned the Saudi holy lands, and also pointed out that Al Qaida succeeded in it's aims. Bin Laden is a terrorist and will latch on to any Muslim grievance as cover for his jihad. Isreal's illegal occupation and WMD's (the resolutions against Isreal are almost exactly the same as the arguments used by the US to attack Iraq), while supported by the US, were the natural next step. So yes, US and Isreali foreign policy brought on 9/11. You do know who trained Bin Laden etc don't you? And who is connected to the Bush family via construction contracts and numerous joint funds? None of this is a surprise really from the family than made it's first mound of cash from IG Farben. As a jew I am sure you know who they were.
Quote:
Are you aware of the Hebron riots? Safed riots? Arab massacres date back to 1920. In a few days in 1929 over 130 Jewish civilians were killed.
From the inquirey into the Hebron riots -
racial animosity on the part of the Arabs, consequent upon the disappointment of their political and national aspirations and fear for their economic future."
The Arabs feared economic domination by a group who appeared to the Arabs to have unlimited funding from abroad.
The Commission acknowledged the ambiguity of former British statements to both Arabs and Jews.
The arabs it seems saw the start of the path they are on now. Thrown off their own land by a group with unlimited funding from abroad. It does sound familiar doesn't it?
Of course I don't defend the killings, religion was as usual used to fan the flames of a difficult situation. In fact, just to make sure, I will explicitly condemn the killings just as I have all civilians that have died in the region. You don't seem to feel the need to condemn any amount of IDF slaughter though.
Speaking of terrorists again, no comment on Irgun and the rest then? Those were not random mobs killing for one day, they were terrorists who killed repeatedly for many years.
Quote:
1967 war. Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone adopted at the UN Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1958. Look it up. Egypt blocked the Straits of Tiran to Israeli cargo. They then demanded that the UN Emergency Force in Sinai leave. After they did leave without any argument, Israel acted. If that's offensive in your world so be it.
The UN didn't have the troops in Sinai to fight at that time. The UN relies on member nations to provide troops, it has no standing army. The UN then passed resolutions demanding free movement at sea to all nations and that Isreal return the land taken from various countries along with the land of the never-realised palestinian state. Isreal launched the first strike rather than wait for negotiations.
Quote:
long cut and paste about children fighting
17 - 18 year olds serve in the IDF, and that's the occupying army never mind the resistance to said occupation. If I was 17 and a palestinian damn right I'd be there too. These people have grown up with nothing but Isreali oppression in every facet of their lives and are happy to fight against the occupier, the articles even states as such. Children under that age should not fight, but even in the french resistance (and many others) children younger than 10 were used as spies and had weapon training. Fighting for your lives against a nation with a vastly superior military (the palestinians hardly even merit the description "military" at all) that is apparently immune from international censure brings desperation. Hamas etc are indeed terrorists, but don't forget that the PLO is the democratically elected representatives of the palestinians. I agree with B'Tselem that the PLO should be more active in stopping stonings by children and other activities, but that does not excuse the IDF firing tank shells at people armed with sticks and stones.
Perhaps if the IDF did not destroy every attempt at a PLO security infrastructure they might be able to police their own areas effectively. Isreal always uses the excuse of the PLO's inability to control crowds etc to run in all guns blazing, but never mentions the fact that the IDF keeps blowing up police stations, communications centres and other important systems of an embryonic state. A state that Sharon and his ilk want to prevent at all costs.
Thing is though, most of the children killed were doing things like walking to school (a 6 year old girl), playing in schoolyards (8 year old boy), attending his brothers funeral (8 year old again iirc), the list goes on. There is never any evidence of the weapons the IDF always claims they have, and it takes the death of a foreigner to show how far the IDF will go in lying to protect it's soldiers when they kill civilians
Quote:
Israel and Israeli characteristics include: ...
Shall I list what Kach and others print about the arabs? Extremists on both sides demonise each other with racial stereotypes. Add religion into the mix and you've got the mess we have now.
Quote:
Until the Arab states comply with 242, it's a moot point. It calls for peace & recognition of all countries in the region and for Israel to withdraw "from territories".
Newsflash - arab states recognised Isreal's right to exist years ago. Still no sign of the IDF leaving though. The arabs have done their part, the world now waits for Isreal to leave the occupied areas and for the development of a palestinian state.
For years palestinians (and other arab nations) have said that a UN peacekeeping force could patrol the border areas of the newly created state and enforce order (and if you think the US wouldn't invade everyone in sight to help Isreal if they had that resolution in their favour you are clearly insane). Isreal has always refused the offer, just as it refuses to allow UN monitoring of it's occupation.
Quote:
1234 it's funny how you neglected to mention the soviet plane that landed in Alexandria, Egypt, carrying nuclear weapons in the same war, you f***ing demagogue. and that was well after it was clear Israel wasn't going to use nukes and no existential danger was present for the Egyptians
It was a russian ship, not a plane. It was dispatched after Russia learned of Isreal's preparations for launch and stayed in port till November, unloaded. There are also strong doubts on whether the ship ever had a nuke on it at all, as the only evidence is on a level with Powells UN speech about Iraq's WMD and we know how that has turned out ...
Quote:
there would be never such danger from Israel who never was and never will be on the offensive
Tell that to Lebanon (several times) and to the palestinians. The IDF launches aggressive wars regularly.
Quote:
so if Egypt has access to nukes as well.. and Israel is the dangerous one.. you must reckon Egypt is a more peaceful country than Israel
Egpyt never had access to nukes. Even if that ship did have a nuke on it, it was firmly in USSR control not Egyptian.
Quote:
the UK has nukes, right ? if you were invaded simultaneously by all neighbor countries that didn't have nukes and face total annihilation, would you *consider* using nukes as a last resort - ultimate contingency?
Nope.
Heh, expecting me to say yes or something?
But of course Isreal has never faced total annihilation, if it had lost the war in 73 it would have had to return to 67 borders and the US would ensure it lost no more than that. The US would not allow it's client state to fall completely. Kissinger, with his usual brutal honesty, said that the US wanted Isreal to get a bloody nose but not to lose.
Quote:
and let me just repeat the fact that that was 30 years ago and any comparison to the military balance and firearms to be used today is a joke at best
You keep saying this, where did I say there was some form of balance? I was pointing out that Isreal has a history of having first use as part of its tactical doctrine, and has actually prepared to launch.
It seems both of you have stopped debating the contents of the earlier posts. Water rights, land rights, human shields, torture, oppression, apartheid - all these things still stand and you only make vague attempts at addressing them if you bother at all.
I guess just calling the gentiles stupid is more your style.