Discussion
It's all very well to call Hamas terrorists and the IDF an army but a) they both terrorise people on a day to day basis and b) the formative years of Israel were based on terrorism. If you remove people from their land using terror, you can only expect to be terrorised yourself. That's my thoughts and the thoughts of Israel's early leadership. It's totally naive to expect "cleansed" people to lie down and not put up a resistance. Jews should know this as well as any other people.
The fact that Hamas exists has to be down to the injustice Israel carried out and continues to carry out. People would be a lot less sympathetic to Palestine if they were given the rights they deserve and still continued attacking Israel. But we are not there yet, and until we are, I can't see why any rational, fair person can't see why the Palestinians put up resistance.
You don't create peace by opressing people.
The fact that Hamas exists has to be down to the injustice Israel carried out and continues to carry out. People would be a lot less sympathetic to Palestine if they were given the rights they deserve and still continued attacking Israel. But we are not there yet, and until we are, I can't see why any rational, fair person can't see why the Palestinians put up resistance.
You don't create peace by opressing people.
On the actual point a few posts above, can anybody think of any recent history (say last couple of hundred years) whereby an invading force or 'oppressor' has successfully defended their actions, held their territory 'stolen' from the indigenous people and not been totally ostracised by the rest of the world? If not evicted and ultimately defeated leading to decades of pain?
And this is a genuine and serious question ....
And this is a genuine and serious question ....
Slaav said:
On the actual point a few posts above, can anybody think of any recent history (say last couple of hundred years) whereby an invading force or 'oppressor' has successfully defended their actions, held their territory 'stolen' from the indigenous people and not been totally ostracised by the rest of the world? If not evicted and ultimately defeated leading to decades of pain?
And this is a genuine and serious question ....
Sri Lanka and the tamil tigers insurrection.And this is a genuine and serious question ....
Grumfutock said:
And yet some on here will still defend them to the hilt. Shame.
Righty ho, I would like to invite you to show us ALL where anyone has posted on here "defending" the terrorist actions of Hamas.What you sinlemindedly fail to realise is that people UNDERSTAND, note UNDERSTAND, not SUPPORT, why they attack.
Once you grasp that concept then the thread may actually progress away from a little children's shouting match.
But I'm not holding my breath on the above.
Slaav said:
On the actual point a few posts above, can anybody think of any recent history (say last couple of hundred years) whereby an invading force or 'oppressor' has successfully defended their actions, held their territory 'stolen' from the indigenous people and not been totally ostracised by the rest of the world? If not evicted and ultimately defeated leading to decades of pain?
And this is a genuine and serious question ....
USA?And this is a genuine and serious question ....
Mojocvh said:
Righty ho, I would like to invite you to show us ALL where anyone has posted on here "defending" the terrorist actions of Hamas.
What you sinlemindedly fail to realise is that people UNDERSTAND, note UNDERSTAND, not SUPPORT, why they attack.
Once you grasp that concept then the thread may actually progress away from a little children's shouting match.
But I'm not holding my breath on the above.
And yet they don't CONDEMN, note CONDEMN, not JUSTIFY, when they do! What you sinlemindedly fail to realise is that people UNDERSTAND, note UNDERSTAND, not SUPPORT, why they attack.
Once you grasp that concept then the thread may actually progress away from a little children's shouting match.
But I'm not holding my breath on the above.
Alpinestars said:
It's all very well to call Hamas terrorists and the IDF an army but a) they both terrorise people on a day to day basis and b) the formative years of Israel were based on terrorism. If you remove people from their land using terror, you can only expect to be terrorised yourself. That's my thoughts and the thoughts of Israel's early leadership. It's totally naive to expect "cleansed" people to lie down and not put up a resistance. Jews should know this as well as any other people.
The fact that Hamas exists has to be down to the injustice Israel carried out and continues to carry out. People would be a lot less sympathetic to Palestine if they were given the rights they deserve and still continued attacking Israel. But we are not there yet, and until we are, I can't see why any rational, fair person can't see why the Palestinians put up resistance.
You don't create peace by opressing people.
Well put, and to add to your point you should expect armed resistance when you oppress people.The fact that Hamas exists has to be down to the injustice Israel carried out and continues to carry out. People would be a lot less sympathetic to Palestine if they were given the rights they deserve and still continued attacking Israel. But we are not there yet, and until we are, I can't see why any rational, fair person can't see why the Palestinians put up resistance.
You don't create peace by opressing people.
The justification for legitimate armed resistance has been specifically applied to the Palestinian struggle repeatedly. To quote General Assembly Resolution A/RES/3246 (XXIX) of 29 November 1974:
"3. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the peoples’ struggle for liberation form colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation by all available means, including armed struggle."
"7. Strongly condemns all Governments which do not recognize the right to self-determination and independence of peoples under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the peoples of Africa and the Palestinian people."
However, this does not constitute a 'carte blanche' to target civilians which is the sole reason why those of us who support Palestinians' rights to self-determination condemn Hamas's indiscriminate rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. So yes we can be pro-Palestinians and anti-Hamas at the same time( the two concepts are NOT mutually exclusive), something which is beyond the grasp and understanding of some pro-Israel contributors on here.
So to recap, acts like rockets attacks against civilians, and suicide bombers who target civilians are crimes against humanity.Nevertheless, these criminal actions in no way negate the Palestinian people’s legitimate right to armed resistance if it's targeting legitimate military targets.
However, as a part of Israel’s propaganda campaign against the Palestinian people and their legitimate cause, Israel absolutely refuses to differentiate between Palestinian terrorism and Palestinian legitimate armed resistance.This has been evidenced by deliberately branding attacks on Israeli military targets in the Gaza Strip a decade ago as "terrorist attacks". In these particular instances there was a Palestinian attack on a fully armed military transport in the process of actively conducting a military operation manned exclusively by Israeli uniformed soldiers.According to a myriad of United nation resolutions like UNGA Resolution A/RES/3246 (XXIX; 29 November 1974), UNGA Resolution A/RES/33/24 (29 November 1978), UNGA Resolution A/RES/34/44 (23 November 1979), UNGA Resolution A/RES/35/35 (14 November 1980), UNGA Resolution A/RES/36/9 (28 October 1981), people under colonial and foreign domination have the right to use armed struggle against their oppressors and that this specifically applies to the Palestinian people.
Indiscriminate tank shelling of densely populated area like Gaza by the IDF constitute a crime against humanity and is a form of terrorism sanctioned and sponsored by the state of Israel which collectively punishes Palestinians as long as Hamas is in charge.There is no such thing as "legal terrorism" just because it's conducted by an official government.The US and Israel - flatly reject the concept that a state is capable of “terrorism” so according to their definition the Ton Ton Macoute of Haiti under the Duvaliers, the Nazi SS and Gestapo, or the ISI of Pakistan - all of whom used outright terrorist tactics for various purposes, were not “terrorists” because they were official state agencies. I think most observers would consider their actions terrorist in nature.
Alpinestars said:
It's all very well to call Hamas terrorists and the IDF an army but a) they both terrorise people on a day to day basis and b) the formative years of Israel were based on terrorism. If you remove people from their land using terror, you can only expect to be terrorised yourself. That's my thoughts and the thoughts of Israel's early leadership. It's totally naive to expect "cleansed" people to lie down and not put up a resistance. Jews should know this as well as any other people.
The fact that Hamas exists has to be down to the injustice Israel carried out and continues to carry out. People would be a lot less sympathetic to Palestine if they were given the rights they deserve and still continued attacking Israel. But we are not there yet, and until we are, I can't see why any rational, fair person can't see why the Palestinians put up resistance.
You don't create peace by opressing people.
Neither do you create peace by electing a government (Hamas) whose stated intention is the destruction of Israel.The fact that Hamas exists has to be down to the injustice Israel carried out and continues to carry out. People would be a lot less sympathetic to Palestine if they were given the rights they deserve and still continued attacking Israel. But we are not there yet, and until we are, I can't see why any rational, fair person can't see why the Palestinians put up resistance.
You don't create peace by opressing people.
Like it or not this is a précis of what's gone on over the past century....
So had the Arabs/Palestinians accepted the original UN terms all this would have been avoided........
Before World War I, Palestine was a district ruled by the Turkish Ottoman Empire.
The Ottomans were defeated by Britain and her allies in the war.
After WWI, Britain took control of Palestine, but there was much trouble between the Arabs who lived there and Jews who wanted to live there too.
In the early part of the 20th century thousands of Jews moved to the area before it became Israel to start new lives and set up new communities.
Many were escaping Europe and Russia as they were where they were being persecuted for being Jewish. Many more moved to Israel after the Holocaust, including from Arab countries.
After World War II, Britain decided to let the United Nations decide what to do with Palestine.
The United Nations suggested dividing Palestine into two countries, one Arab and one Jewish.
The Arab leaders said no to the plan, but the Jewish leaders accepted it and declared the state of Israel. The American President gave his support to the new state.
The neighbouring Arab states declared war on the new country.
After months of intense fighting, Israel and her Arab neighbours agreed to stop the war.
Israeli forces captured what is now recognised as the state of Israel by the international community. However relations between them were still tense and more wars followed.
After these wars Israel occupied Arab land e.g.Golan Heights,in order to increase their security by providing a buffer zone.
P.S. Can you imagine now with Syria in the catastrophic state it is in now,how vulnerable Israel would be if it had not occupied the Golan Heights ?
Edited by avinalarf on Saturday 23 August 15:35
Who gave Britain or the UN the right to divide land and give up half of it to immigrants? It's naive to believe just because the UN RECOMMENDED a course of action, it legitimises it. The fact is Israel was created by Zionist terrorism. No ifs no buts.
On a side note, the people of Palestine should not have to pay for or accommodate Jews who were persecuted. That's just solving a problem for Jews and putting the Palestinians in their (former) shoes.
On a side note, the people of Palestine should not have to pay for or accommodate Jews who were persecuted. That's just solving a problem for Jews and putting the Palestinians in their (former) shoes.
avinalarf said:
Neither do you create peace by electing a government (Hamas) whose stated intention is the destruction of a Israel.
Like it or not this is a précis of what's gone on over the past century....
So had the Arabs/Palestinians accepted the original UN terms all this would have been avoided........
Before World War I, Palestine was a district ruled by the Turkish Ottoman Empire.
The Ottomans were defeated by Britain and her allies in the war.
After WWI, Britain took control of Palestine, but there was much trouble between the Arabs who lived there and Jews who wanted to live there too.
In the early part of the 20th century thousands of Jews moved to the area before it became Israel to start new lives and set up new communities.
Many were escaping Europe and Russia as they were where they were being persecuted for being Jewish. Many more moved to Israel after the Holocaust, including from Arab countries.
After World War II, Britain decided to let the United Nations decide what to do with Palestine.
The United Nations suggested dividing Palestine into two countries, one Arab and one Jewish.
The Arab leaders said no to the plan, but the Jewish leaders accepted it and declared the state of Israel. The American President gave his support to the new state.
The neighbouring Arab states declared war on the new country.
After months of intense fighting, Israel and her Arab neighbours agreed to stop the war.
Israeli forces captured what is now recognised as the state of Israel by the international community. However relations between them were still tense and more wars followed.
After these wars Israel occupied Arab land e.g.Golan Heights,in order to increase their security by providing a buffer zone.
P.S. Can you imagine now with Syria in the catastrophic state it is in now,how vulnerable Israel would be if it had not occupied the Golan Heights ?
well said, it's the small details like this that seem to have been passed by here...Like it or not this is a précis of what's gone on over the past century....
So had the Arabs/Palestinians accepted the original UN terms all this would have been avoided........
Before World War I, Palestine was a district ruled by the Turkish Ottoman Empire.
The Ottomans were defeated by Britain and her allies in the war.
After WWI, Britain took control of Palestine, but there was much trouble between the Arabs who lived there and Jews who wanted to live there too.
In the early part of the 20th century thousands of Jews moved to the area before it became Israel to start new lives and set up new communities.
Many were escaping Europe and Russia as they were where they were being persecuted for being Jewish. Many more moved to Israel after the Holocaust, including from Arab countries.
After World War II, Britain decided to let the United Nations decide what to do with Palestine.
The United Nations suggested dividing Palestine into two countries, one Arab and one Jewish.
The Arab leaders said no to the plan, but the Jewish leaders accepted it and declared the state of Israel. The American President gave his support to the new state.
The neighbouring Arab states declared war on the new country.
After months of intense fighting, Israel and her Arab neighbours agreed to stop the war.
Israeli forces captured what is now recognised as the state of Israel by the international community. However relations between them were still tense and more wars followed.
After these wars Israel occupied Arab land e.g.Golan Heights,in order to increase their security by providing a buffer zone.
P.S. Can you imagine now with Syria in the catastrophic state it is in now,how vulnerable Israel would be if it had not occupied the Golan Heights ?
allnighter said:
Indiscriminate tank shelling of densely populated area like Gaza by the IDF constitute a crime against humanity and is a form of terrorism sanctioned and sponsored by the state of Israel which collectively punishes Palestinians as long as Hamas is in charge.
this is what winds me up, your use of wildly inaccurate emotive termswhen will you get it into your head that it's not Indiscriminate?
you may not like it, but they are very much targeted (unlike the rockets!).
eg, the latest house demolished (the 3 Hamas leaders) was not down to some indiscriminate attack, it was very much targeted, and from the results, extremely accurately with a non-explosive kinetic munition (note the lack of damage around it)
much as you seem to loathe the IDF, their professionalism on this so far has been pretty close to 100% in terms of hitting the targets they were aiming at.
yes, there have been a handful of near misses, (and as with everything in this context, it only takes a small error to have a pretty big outcome).
to then go on that they are a terrorist organisation again and again is almost sycophantic.
Alpinestars said:
Who gave Britain or the UN the right to divide land and give up half of it to immigrants? It's naive to believe just because the UN RECOMMENDED a course of action, it legitimises it. The fact is Israel was created by Zionist terrorism. No ifs no buts.
On a side note, the people of Palestine should not have to pay for or accommodate Jews who were persecuted. That's just solving a problem for Jews and putting the Palestinians in their (former) shoes.
Quite right.On a side note, the people of Palestine should not have to pay for or accommodate Jews who were persecuted. That's just solving a problem for Jews and putting the Palestinians in their (former) shoes.
So whilst your at it why not talk to us about......
Northern Ireland.......Cyprus....Pakistan .....Bangladesh...Most artificially created African Countries,disputed Islands off the coast of Japan, most recently the Crimea....IS invasion of Iraq and Syria.......The list goes on......and on....and on.
avinalarf said:
Quite right.
So whilst your at it why not talk to us about......
Northern Ireland.......Cyprus....Pakistan .....Bangladesh...Most artificially boundried African Countries,disputed Islands off the coast of Japan, most recently the Crimea....IS invasion of Iraq and Syria.......The list goes on......and on....and on.
We're talking Palestine and Israel. So whilst your at it why not talk to us about......
Northern Ireland.......Cyprus....Pakistan .....Bangladesh...Most artificially boundried African Countries,disputed Islands off the coast of Japan, most recently the Crimea....IS invasion of Iraq and Syria.......The list goes on......and on....and on.
Alpinestars said:
avinalarf said:
Quite right.
So whilst your at it why not talk to us about......
Northern Ireland.......Cyprus....Pakistan .....Bangladesh...Most artificially boundried African Countries,disputed Islands off the coast of Japan, most recently the Crimea....IS invasion of Iraq and Syria.......The list goes on......and on....and on.
We're talking Palestine and Israel. So whilst your at it why not talk to us about......
Northern Ireland.......Cyprus....Pakistan .....Bangladesh...Most artificially boundried African Countries,disputed Islands off the coast of Japan, most recently the Crimea....IS invasion of Iraq and Syria.......The list goes on......and on....and on.
I am trying to put it in the wider context of World geopolitics.
Things evolve.
Israel/Palestine does not exist in a vacuum.
Funkycoldribena said:
Not a trick question-but just wondering what everyones definition of a terrorist is.
Good question. The use of force or aggression which causes physical or emotional damage or stress to someone, particularly against someone who has not done something to warrant that aggression or force. Edited by Alpinestars on Saturday 23 August 15:45
avinalarf said:
So had the Arabs/Palestinians accepted the original UN terms all this would have been avoided........
The United Nations suggested dividing Palestine into two countries, one Arab and one Jewish.
The Arab leaders said no to the plan, but the Jewish leaders accepted it and declared the state of Israel. The American President gave his support to the new state.
The crucial bit is "the Arab leaders said no to the plan............."The United Nations suggested dividing Palestine into two countries, one Arab and one Jewish.
The Arab leaders said no to the plan, but the Jewish leaders accepted it and declared the state of Israel. The American President gave his support to the new state.
Easy enough to argue now that things might have been better had it been accepted, but equally easy to see why it was rejected at the time. Did Israel ever keep to it? Would they now accept its re-adoption?
avinalarf said:
Quite right.
So whilst your at it why not talk to us about......
Northern Ireland.......Cyprus....Pakistan .....Bangladesh...Most artificially created African Countries,disputed Islands off the coast of Japan, most recently the Crimea....IS invasion of Iraq and Syria.......The list goes on......and on....and on.
With regards to Pakistan & Bangladesh,(and possibly Cyprus) it has to be said that they were created as a result of the wishes of the "domestic" populations of both countries wanting the right of self-determination. Even India was created as a result of the indigenous population not wanting to be ruled by an occupation power.So whilst your at it why not talk to us about......
Northern Ireland.......Cyprus....Pakistan .....Bangladesh...Most artificially created African Countries,disputed Islands off the coast of Japan, most recently the Crimea....IS invasion of Iraq and Syria.......The list goes on......and on....and on.
With regards to Cyprus - the only reason the Turkish Army is able to "rule" is because of the consent of the majority of the population.
avinalarf said:
Alpinestars said:
Who gave Britain or the UN the right to divide land and give up half of it to immigrants? It's naive to believe just because the UN RECOMMENDED a course of action, it legitimises it. The fact is Israel was created by Zionist terrorism. No ifs no buts.
On a side note, the people of Palestine should not have to pay for or accommodate Jews who were persecuted. That's just solving a problem for Jews and putting the Palestinians in their (former) shoes.
Quite right.On a side note, the people of Palestine should not have to pay for or accommodate Jews who were persecuted. That's just solving a problem for Jews and putting the Palestinians in their (former) shoes.
So whilst your at it why not talk to us about......
Northern Ireland.......Cyprus....Pakistan .....Bangladesh...Most artificially created African Countries,disputed Islands off the coast of Japan, most recently the Crimea....IS invasion of Iraq and Syria.......The list goes on......and on....and on.
I'm still waiting for an answer; how can one be ashamed of a country? Feel free to agree at any time that it was a dumbass thing to type to start with.
TheRealFingers99 said:
avinalarf said:
So had the Arabs/Palestinians accepted the original UN terms all this would have been avoided........
The United Nations suggested dividing Palestine into two countries, one Arab and one Jewish.
The Arab leaders said no to the plan, but the Jewish leaders accepted it and declared the state of Israel. The American President gave his support to the new state.
The crucial bit is "the Arab leaders said no to the plan............."The United Nations suggested dividing Palestine into two countries, one Arab and one Jewish.
The Arab leaders said no to the plan, but the Jewish leaders accepted it and declared the state of Israel. The American President gave his support to the new state.
Easy enough to argue now that things might have been better had it been accepted, but equally easy to see why it was rejected at the time. Did Israel ever keep to it? Would they now accept its re-adoption?
Why is it that you cannot grasp the idea that Israel has different governments some are more hawkish than others,depending on what's going on,either home politics or international politics
Many people judge Israel on standards they do not apply to any other country,and do not have the common sense to take a World view of the problem.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff