Israeli

[allnighter]

Mrr T said:

Your argument is despite using the word “killing” in section a) using the words “destroy” elsewhere still mean killing.

I do not have time for a web forum argument to research if there are any cases which aid with the analysis.My own view is the treaty would have been drafted by legal draftsmen (and women) who would be very accurate in their use of words.

So I would suggest:
a)If they had intended to include only an action which included killing the clauses would have said so.
b)That clause a) includes the word “killing” but the others do not is not accidental.
c)Destroy does not mean killing alone it has a much wider definition.
d)If destroy had to include killing then you only need clause a) the rest are redundant.

In my view forcible removing a population for its home, (now be careful I am not saying Israel did that), that was your accusation. Would be in breach of clause b) and c) even if they did not kill anyone.

A quick google search shows others hold the same view.
http://www.genocidewatch.org/genocide/whatisit.htm...

Lets also be clear this is my opinion. You are entitled to hold a completely different opinion.

I will also refrain from calling you a cretin, an idiot, and the various other insult you so love to direct at posters who disagree with you.

The whole 'genocide' saga that you created was a deliberate ploy to discredit the integrity of posters who disagree with you. It was not good enough for you that I confirmed that genocide never crossed my mind, you insisted that it was.
It's a well known tactic of yours that you have used in the past with me and other posters. You say something cretinous and provocative like this:

Mrr T said:

I never suggested you want all jews dead. I am sure you will be happy so long as as most of them are.

Now nothing in all the 300 pages of this thread warranted that remark. It was insulting and deliberately intended to derail the thread and discredit the integrity of those who oppose your view. Instead of apologizing and acknowledging the error of your ways , you went on to create the 'genocide' saga as a smokescreen to further sling more mud hoping it will stick.

Like I said, this is not the first time you have used personal digs as devious debating methods to create mayhem in a forum like this then sat back, watched posters' reactions, then complained that they were calling you names. Personally I think that every single name that you have been called by me and other posters on here was well deserved, because you are the most devious liar and dishonest poster on PH. Hang your head in shame!

[Countdown]

Grumfutock said:

And as always you change the reality of what was said and put words into peoples mouths. And as usual you cherry pick the quote and ignore the rest of it.

The rest of your post suggests that you think the Palestinians in the West Bank should be happy and content with the current arrangement when, in reality, their hopes for a two-state solution become increasingly remote as time passes. It is perfect and ideal from Israel's point of view but the Palestinians are getting increasingly desperate.

Grumfutock said:

I will also ask you the question that I asked earlier:

"How would you of done it? Be so kind as to educate us all on how you would of dealt with suicide bombings? With the tunnels? With the kidnapping and murders? How, exactly, would you of reacted to 3,000 missiles being shot at your country? Pray enlighten us!"

Well, I could do what you do and avoid it or say I've already answered that question, or somesuch but I'll answer again.

1. I would have made peace with Fatah
2. I would have stopped further Settlement activity in the West Bank
3. I would have used the 1967 borders as a basis for a permanent two-State settlement
4. I would have demonstrated to the Palestinians that I was genuinely committed to peace and a two-state solution.

Now perhaps you'd be kind enough to answer a couple of my questions;

1. Do you accept that the Settlements are going to be a massive obstacle for a viable two-state solution?
2. If so, how does Netanyahu continuing to approve more and more Settlements increase the possibility for peace?

[Grumfutock]

[Grumfutock]

Countdown said:

Now perhaps you'd be kind enough to answer a couple of my questions;

1. Do you accept that the Settlements are going to be a massive obstacle for a viable two-state solution?
2. If so, how does Netanyahu continuing to approve more and more Settlements increase the possibility for peace?

1. Yes. Are lobbing missiles at Israel an obstacle?
2. It wont. How does demanding their cessation work when they send bombers in?

When all is said an done one side will have to give up first. You say it should be Israel, I say it should be the terrorists Hamas. We are at an impasse I think.

[Countdown]

Grumfutock said:

1. Yes. Are lobbing missiles at Israel an obstacle?

As you have pointed out Fatah isn't lobbing missiles at Israel. How has this worked out for them?

Grumfutock said:

2. It wont. How does demanding their cessation work when they send bombers in?

As you have pointed out Fatah isn't sending in any bombers.How has this worked out for them?

Grumfutock said:

When all is said an done one side will have to give up first. You say it should be Israel, I say it should be the terrorists Hamas. We are at an impasse I think.

The cynic in me thinks that, even if Hamas give up, Israel will insist on Islamic Jihad giving up. And if IJ give up Israel will insist on Hezbollah giving up. And if Hezbollah give up, no doubt Iran will be expected to lay down its arms before any peace talks can commence. That's the pattern followed by Netanyahu and Likud so far, just finding reasons to avoid making any concessions.

Netanyahu has openly admitted what his long-term plan is. I'm not sure why you continue to ignore the fact that this is the exact OPPOSITE of what is needed to create a viable peace. You still keep insisting that "if only Hamas would do such and such". It won't matter.

[Grumfutock]

Not really. I just see it from the Israeli point of view. Simples.

[allnighter]

Countdown said:

The cynic in me thinks that, even if Hamas give up, Israel will insist on Islamic Jihad giving up. And if IJ give up Israel will insist on Hezbollah giving up. And if Hezbollah give up, no doubt Iran will be expected to lay down its arms before any peace talks can commence. That's the pattern followed by Netanyahu and Likud so far, just finding reasons to avoid making any concessions.

Netanyahu has openly admitted what his long-term plan is. I'm not sure why you continue to ignore the fact that this is the exact OPPOSITE of what is needed to create a viable peace. You still keep insisting that "if only Hamas would do such and such". It won't matter.

Hamas and Israel need each other.Israel needs to hold on to any territory it has acquired,continue with settlements, and dismiss any real prospects of a viable Palestinian state citing Hamas as the spanner in the works. Hamas needs Israel's continued aggressive stance to justify its so-called armed struggle and recruit more and more disaffected Palestinians to its ranks.

[audidoody]

You two need to get a room!

[SR7492]

Grumfutock said:

When all is said an done one side will have to give up first. You say it should be Israel, I say it should be the terrorists Hamas. We are at an impasse I think.

I don't know if you are just plain stupid or ignorant. Israel holds all the cards; so who has to give up first?

There was no rockets being fired 8 years ago; was Israel willing to have a 2 state solution then?

Instead, the settlements have increased ten fold (and more being approved daily) and bottleneck of the people in Gaza increasing by shutting everything off and not letting anything through!

You are obviously blinded by your love for the trigger happy IDF murderers; hence why you always seem to 'try' to answer a question (albeit half an attempt) with a question itself! Pathetic.

The simple truth is Israel does not want the Palestinians as their neighbours; they never did.

But no, it's all the Palestinians fault who got kicked out of their homes/land and now being ethnically cleansed!

Can't blame the big bad wolf can we?

[Grumfutock]

SR7492 said:

Grumfutock said:

When all is said an done one side will have to give up first. You say it should be Israel, I say it should be the terrorists Hamas. We are at an impasse I think.

I don't know if you are just plain stupid or ignorant. Israel holds all the cards; so who has to give up first?

And you are just outright RUDE! But thank you for your helpful contribution.

[Scuffers]

SR7492 said:

I don't know if you are just plain stupid or ignorant. Israel holds all the cards; so who has to give up first?

There was no rockets being fired 8 years ago; was Israel willing to have a 2 state solution then?

I was keeping quiet till I read this crap.

Hamas have been firing rockets at Israel since 2001, yes, 2001, 13 years ago.

if your going to make a point, if you can't even get recent history right, what chance do you stand with anything more challenging?

[Grumfutock]

Scuffers said:

SR7492 said:

I don't know if you are just plain stupid or ignorant. Israel holds all the cards; so who has to give up first?

There was no rockets being fired 8 years ago; was Israel willing to have a 2 state solution then?

I was keeping quiet till I read this crap.

Hamas have been firing rockets at Israel since 2001, yes, 2001, 13 years ago.

if your going to make a point, if you can't even get recent history right, what chance do you stand with anything more challenging?

Shall I mention the suicide bombings since 1993 or save that for later?

And a small point of order!!! 8 years ago you say? Hmmmmm that makes it 2006?

In 2006 1,247 rockets and 28 mortars were fired at Israel. We wouldn't want to be ignorant or plain stupid now would we.

Edited by Grumfutock on Tuesday 26th August 14:47

[Scuffers]

Grumfutock said:

Shall I mention the suicide bombings since 1993 or save that for later?

what? you mean those plucky underdog, peace-loving palestinians?

surely not!

being a bit more serious..

getting a bit sick and tired of the same old excuses trotted out, ie, that Israel stole the palestinians land.

let's be 100% clear about this, that's simply not true and never was, as with most stuff, it's just a little bit more complex than that.

Some arabs were paid a lot of money for land that was questionably theirs to start with, and at the time, the descendants of what we now call palestinians were nowhere near what is now Israel/Gaza, they were mostly between what is now the west bank and Jordan.

But, let's not a few important bit's of history get in the way of the cries of GENOCIDE etc.

you only have to watch the Youtube vid of the UN school in Gazza to see how this re-writing of history is going to perpetuate the war for at least the next generation if not longer, well done the UN!

[Grumfutock]

Don't get me started on the UN! Waste of rations!

[SR7492]

Ah Scuffers; was wondering where you went!

Ok; my mistake on the calculations; let's say 13 years (happy) BUT it doesn't change the rest of my points (which you two have have avoided again; how convenient huh)

[Grumfutock]

SR7492 said:

Ok; my mistake on the calculations; let's say 13 years (happy) BUT it doesn't change the rest of my points (which you two have have avoided again; how convenient huh)

All your points are link to that date, now 2001! They were carrying out suicide bombings since 1993 so your remaining questions are a pointless debate.

[Scuffers]

SR7492 said:

Ah Scuffers; was wondering where you went!

Ok; my mistake on the calculations; let's say 13 years (happy) BUT it doesn't change the rest of my points (which you two have have avoided again; how convenient huh)

so, only 50+% wrong then?

and you wonder why I can't be arsed to discuss this with people like you?

honestly man, you clearly have no clue, so may I suggest you might want to go away and swat up on REAL history?

PS. and whilst you're at it, the 'big-bad-wolf' as you put it?

well, may I suggest you look up Qatar's support & bankrolling of not only Hamas, but half the islamic nutjobs the world is contending with today?

with their influence and money combined with the incompedance of some NGO's and the UN we have what you like to call Palestine

Edited by Scuffers on Tuesday 26th August 15:54

[SR7492]

Scuffers said:

honestly man, you clearly have no clue, so may I suggest you might want to go away and swat up on REAL history?

Edited by Scuffers on Tuesday 26th August 15:54

LOL

That is rich coming from you

[league67]

Scuffers said:

SR7492 said:

I don't know if you are just plain stupid or ignorant. Israel holds all the cards; so who has to give up first?

There was no rockets being fired 8 years ago; was Israel willing to have a 2 state solution then?

I was keeping quiet till I read this crap.

Hamas have been firing rockets at Israel since 2001, yes, 2001, 13 years ago.

if your going to make a point, if you can't even get recent history right, what chance do you stand with anything more challenging?

Like understanding how stupid is to use 'think of the children' idiocy in context of this thread, or learning the difference between 'your' and 'you are'.

Seems that, the less educated you are, the more likely you are to support terrorist IDF.

[Scuffers]

SR7492 said:

LOL

That is rich coming from you

and you wonder why I (and others) CBA to discuss this with you.

at least I have the integrity to get basics like dates right, you kind of have to realise that details are important in a world full of propaganda and bullst, you on the other hand seen quite happy to jump in with half-cut rhetoric and bullst dressed up like it's all hard done by Palestinians because of the Evil Israelis.

Now, I am not suggesting Israel are totally blameless or whiter than white in any of this, however, you really need to step back and look at the bigger picture....