Israeli

[S 8 GRN]

Alpinestars said:

Grumfutock said:

I rest my case.

Wow. Not sure what all that's supposed to prove but wow well done. Now let me humour you with a response using your rules. If you'd bothered to go back and look at the posts made earlier today, you'll see that Avinalarf posted the point about the rest of the world as a direct response to one of my posts. Being a public forum, Countdown responded to it. Under your rules only I should have been able to. You posted in response to Countdown. Under your rules, what skin did you have in the game? I (having skin in the game) posted in response to you. You concluded by saying I jumped in. You can't make this stuff up.

I know it's difficult following posts (you had the same problem a few weeks ago and decided to take your ball home then as well). But if you feel you've proved something, well done.

Now, back to Israeli terrorism http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-eas...

Edited by Alpinestars on Saturday 23 August 18:23

http://blog.unwatch.org/index.php/2014/07/13/pales...

Here we go round the mulberry bush
The mulberry bush, the mulberry bush
Here we go round the mulberry bush
So early in the morning

[Scuffers]

Wills2 said:

Australia is another example, whipped most of the place from the indigenous population.

New Zealand?
England
most of south america
Canada

actually, pretty much everywhere if you think about it.

[Grumfutock]

Alpinestars said:

Grumfutock said:

Do I? Kindly quote where I said that? Please do.

What I have said is that I didn't wish to continue to converse with certain individuals, you included. A statement that I have broken I accept, but as for leaving? Never. But as usual you read one thing but quote and write another. Continue by all means.

So don't converse then. No one is making you do it darling.

Still going habibi? OK I will take that as an admission of error. I guess it is the best I will get as again from experience little man suffers never admit fault

[avinalarf]

TheRealFingers99 said:

A world view?

Let me ask again: "Did Israel ever keep to it? Would they now accept its re-adoption?" And add, can you list the UN conventions that Israel have broken?

No John,I can't make that list.

[Countdown]

Grumfutock said:

Countdown said:

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.

So that makes it ok then?

Do you see the Turkish Army bombing Greek cypriots? Or building settlements in the Greek half of Cyprus? And justifying it by saying it needs a buffer zone?

You really can't see the difference, can you?

[Countdown]

avinalarf said:

Countdown said:

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.

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.

Isn't it funny that people can always justify the right to exist of other countries but get rather exercised when it comes to Israel.

Not at all. In the examples you gave the indigenous population was fighting against an oppressive regime, determined to deny them the right of self determination.

If you compare the situation to Israel / Palestine who do you think is denying anybody the right for self determination?

Israel keeps stating it's a democracy - so why not let the Palestinians vote? Ah but then Israel wouldn't be a Jewish State anymore....and that takes priority over being a democracy......Cant have it both ways I'm afraid. Either you're a democracy or you're not.

[avinalarf]

Countdown said:

avinalarf said:

Countdown said:

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.

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.

Isn't it funny that people can always justify the right to exist of other countries but get rather exercised when it comes to Israel.

Not at all. In the examples you gave the indigenous population was fighting against an oppressive regime, determined to deny them the right of self determination.

If you compare the situation to Israel / Palestine who do you think is denying anybody the right for self determination?

Israel keeps stating it's a democracy - so why not let the Palestinians vote? Ah but then Israel wouldn't be a Jewish State anymore....and that takes priority over being a democracy......Cant have it both ways I'm afraid. Either you're a democracy or you're not.

Most of the Arabs living in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967 and later annexed, were offered Israeli citizenship, but most have refused, not wanting to recognize Israel's claim to sovereignty. They became permanent residents instead. They have the right to apply for citizenship, are entitled to municipal services, and have municipal voting rights.
Twelve Arabs serve in the current Knesset, out of which 11 represent Arab parties (Balad, Ra’am-Ta’al and Hadash).
Contrast the above with the vast majority of the countries I have mentioned,where endemic corruption and severe oppression is the norm.
By comparison Israel is a beacon of democracy.
Or in the USA ,remember the "hanging chads" fiasco in Florida the 2000 elections.
One does not have to look very hard to find plenty of examples of far less democratic countries than Israel.

Edited by avinalarf on Saturday 23 August 22:05

[Countdown]

avinalarf said:

Most of the Arabs living in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967 and later annexed, were offered Israeli citizenship, but most have refused, not wanting to recognize Israel's claim to sovereignty.

Which is understandable to be honest. It would be akin to the French or the Polish accepting German citizenship, thereby lending a degree of legitimacy to the Occupation. It's interesting that this political enfranchisement wasn't extended to the population of the whole of the West Bank at the same time. Why do you think that might have been?

avinalarf said:

They became permanent residents instead. They have the right to apply for citizenship, are entitled to municipal services, and have municipal voting rights.

A couple of articles below which suggest that the rights for Israeli Arabs aren't perhaps as great as you might think.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/24/opinion/not-all-...

http://www.ipcri.org/index.php/ipcri-media/news/44...

avinalarf said:

Contrast the above with the vast majority of the countries I have mentioned,where endemic corruption and severe oppression is the norm.

In the examples you gave, could you show me one where the soldiers of one country are occupying another, against the wishes of the local population, or creating settlements, carrying out arbitrary arrests, and carrying out extra-judicial assasinations ?

[Countdown]

avinalarf said:

Contrast the above with the vast majority of the countries I have mentioned,where endemic corruption and severe oppression is the norm.
By comparison Israel is a beacon of democracy.
Or in the USA ,remember the "hanging chads" fiasco in Florida the 2000 elections.
One does not have to look very hard to find plenty of examples of far less democratic countries than Israel.

Edited by avinalarf on Saturday 23 August 22:05

I don't disagree that Israel is a better "democracy" than most. But the fact that it discriminates against Palestinians sits on it's face like a massive cancerous mole. The USA could be the absolute perfect democracy but if it disenfranchised a whole subsection of its society (e.g. stopped all black or hispanic or ginger people from voting) then it doesn't matter how good the "rest" of its democracy is.

[Countdown]

Scuffers said:

Wills2 said:

Australia is another example, whipped most of the place from the indigenous population.

New Zealand?
England
most of south america
Canada

actually, pretty much everywhere if you think about it.

What was considered acceptable hundreds of years ago is now considered barbaric by civilised nations. Well, most civilised nations.

[TheRealFingers99]

avinalarf said:

Most of the Arabs living in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967 and later annexed, were offered Israeli citizenship, but most have refused, not wanting to recognize Israel's claim to sovereignty. They became permanent residents instead. They have the right to apply for citizenship, are entitled to municipal services, and have municipal voting rights.
Twelve Arabs serve in the current Knesset, out of which 11 represent Arab parties (Balad, Ra’am-Ta’al and Hadash).
Contrast the above with the vast majority of the countries I have mentioned,where endemic corruption and severe oppression is the norm.

Edited by avinalarf on Saturday 23 August 21:57

Which isn't to say they're not still oppressed and the Knesset members marginalised. Haaretz carries an interesting interview with the Meretz Party's former leader, Hain Oron, also Holocaust survivors condemn Israel for 'Gaza massacre,' call for boycott.

That Israel isn't totally corrupt, utterly unredeemable, is due to the presence of many good Jews, both in and outside Israel. But a good few of them feel they're fighting a loosing battle.

[Scuffers]

You might want to tell that nice Mr putin that!

[avinalarf]

Countdown said:

avinalarf said:

Most of the Arabs living in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel in the Six-Day War of 1967 and later annexed, were offered Israeli citizenship, but most have refused, not wanting to recognize Israel's claim to sovereignty.

Which is understandable to be honest. It would be akin to the French or the Polish accepting German citizenship, thereby lending a degree of legitimacy to the Occupation. It's interesting that this political enfranchisement wasn't extended to the population of the whole of the West Bank at the same time. Why do you think that might have been?

avinalarf said:

They became permanent residents instead. They have the right to apply for citizenship, are entitled to municipal services, and have municipal voting rights.

A couple of articles below which suggest that the rights for Israeli Arabs aren't perhaps as great as you might think.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/24/opinion/not-all-...

http://www.ipcri.org/index.php/ipcri-media/news/44...

avinalarf said:

Contrast the above with the vast majority of the countries I have mentioned,where endemic corruption and severe oppression is the norm.

In the examples you gave, could you show me one where the soldiers of one country are occupying another, against the wishes of the local population, or creating settlements, carrying out arbitrary arrests, and carrying out extra-judicial assasinations ?

So it's OK to stifle all opposition parties and assassinate political opponents,to allow corruption both political and financial to go unchecked,as is the case with most African and Middle Eastern countries,,but you still single out Israel as the worst example of a state.
I'm afraid as with some other posters your single focused antipathy towards Israel makes it impossible to have a reasonable debate.

[Countdown]

avinalarf said:

So it's OK to stifle all opposition parties and assassinate political opponents,to allow corruption both political and financial to go unchecked,as is the case with most African and Middle Eastern countries,,but you still single out Israel as the worst example of a state.
I'm afraid as with some other posters your single focused antipathy towards Israel makes it impossible to have a reasonable debate.

In the examples you gave, could you show me one where the soldiers of one country are occupying another, against the wishes of the local population, or creating settlements, carrying out arbitrary arrests, and carrying out extra-judicial assasinations ?

FWIW I haven't said that Israel is the worst example of a State. But the others in your examples don't purport to be democracies.

[Countdown]

Scuffers said:

You might want to tell that nice Mr putin that!

Is that the standard that you measure Israel against?

[Scuffers]

Countdown said:

Scuffers said:

You might want to tell that nice Mr putin that!

Is that the standard that you measure Israel against?

Ha ha, you wish...

[allnighter]

avinalarf said:

Neither do you create peace by electing a government (Hamas) whose stated intention is the destruction of 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.

You mean immigrants, foreigners who had no business being there in the first place, and who were the source of much discontent amongst Arabs, a bit like us moaning about Romanians and Poles taking over over our jobs and straining our NHS.

avinalarf said:

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.

How nice and fluffy, only you overlooked the Zionist terrorism Arabs were subjected to and the forced expulsion and ethnic cleansing of 750.000 Arabs and the destruction of more than 500 villages to make room for these immigrants in order to change the demographics of Palestine, because the racist Zionist future state was not ready to tolerate a majority Arab population, nor was Zionism inclusive in its ideology.It was/is no different to a white supremacist ideology: Racist to the core.

avinalarf said:

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.

Nobody had the right to deny the indigenous Arabs the right to self-determination. Resolution 181 merely endorsed UNSCOP’s report and conclusions as a recommendation.NOTHING WAS SET ON STONE TILL BOTH PARTIES AGREED AND SIGNED A CONTRACT.

avinalarf said:

The neighbouring Arab states declared war on the new country.

Would you blame them? They did not want the Palestinian Arabs' land stolen and given to foreigners without their consent. His Majesty's government royally fked up the whole affair, and the Arabs were not happy with the way it was all handled.It was the most shameful episode in the history of our government.

avinalarf said:

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

Absolute nonsense, Israel knew the Arabs were not going to attack it, but the generals convinced the Israeli government to act quickly to gain an advantage in the area and acquire even more territory. Israel's vulnerability is a false narrative based on fallacious propaganda to justify its continued transgression and defiance of international law and countless UN security council resolutions and specifically resolution 242 in June 67 which calls for “Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict."

Edited by allnighter on Sunday 24th August 00:27

[TheRealFingers99]

avinalarf said:

I can't make that list. [edit](of UN resolutions broken by Israel[/edit]

Haaretz quote a study finding 32 since 1968, which puts them top of the league.

[allnighter]

Scuffers said:

this is what winds me up, your use of wildly inaccurate emotive terms

when 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.

Yes I would not expect anything less from a feral IDF cheerleader like yourself Scuffers, so excuse me if the rest of us do NOT share your undying passion for the best paid, best equipped, and best U.S supported terrorist organisation in the whole world, and yes you are consistent and keen on 'sugar-coating' everything the IDF do even when shamelessly bombing sleeping children, oh yes, I almost forgot, you call our reaction "think-of-the-childrenism", so yes carry in your misinformed, blinkered, drip fed, brain washed, ignorant and stupid interventions against anyone who 'dared' criticise your beloved terrorists, and conveniently ignore our equal condemnation of Hamas's targetting of Israeli civilians. You are truly pathetic, and I mean that in the nicest way possible.

Edited by allnighter on Sunday 24th August 08:03

[TheRealFingers99]

Scuffers said:

this is what winds me up, your use of wildly inaccurate emotive terms

to then go on that they are a terrorist organisation again and again is almost sycophantic.

I'm not sure of what legally constitutes a terrorist organisation.

However, the JC reported Israeli teenagers refuse to join IDF over "war crimes" and Haaretz the murder of a 10 year old boy by the IDF (in a refugee camp, miles away from Gaza).

I do believe that there are honourable men and women in the IDF. See this report from Breaking the Silence -- ex IDF grunts. One explains the extreme difficulty of accurately placing artillery rounds under extreme pressure.