Israel/Palestine in the News, Part III

Discussion in 'International News' started by JBigjake, Mar 24, 2011.

  1. yasik19

    yasik19 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Chelsea
    Ukraine
    Oct 21, 2004
    Daly City
    I'd like to say this is surprising, but it is so not.
     
  2. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    It quotes sources for many of it's points which are, in themselves, well made.
    So you're saying that there are two sides to every question? So the nazis gassing the Jews... that has two sides to it, does it? Presumably you're upset because, 'Well, NOBODY sticks up for the Nazis, do they'! No, they don't because you'd have to be a total retard to do it... for details click here

    There aren't necessarily two sides to every matter. I mean there might be but sometimes one sides actions are grossly disproportional to the actions of the other and, in this case, the Israelis have occupied territory they're not entitled to and it's that that's caused most of the problems we're seeing now.

    Of course, it also has to be said that, on the other side of the issue, one point the Palestinians keep making is that there have been very few Israelis killed in rocket attacks but, quite honestly, the only conclusion that leads me to is that they're even more shit at terrorism than they are at propaganda. You'd have thought there'd be a message for them somewhere, wouldn't yer :(

    As for the US and Iran stoking the flames of conflict with weapons and money, they should be ashamed of themselves but then, that would require a degree of self-awareness they're clearly lacking.
     
  3. Anthony

    Anthony Member+

    Chelsea
    United States
    Aug 20, 1999
    Chicago
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  4. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    Well, quite!

    The thing is the Israelis and their supporters keep saying that Israel faces a threat to it's sovereignty but that hasn't been true for quite a while... not in any real sense, anyway. What it faces is the loss of sovereignty over land it should never have had in the first place and was only grabbed as a result of war.

    As I've said on here before, Germany started WWII by invading the Czechs whom Britain had a defensive treaty with... but that doesn't mean that, in the event of them losing, I can go and knock down some German fellas house in Stuttgart and build my own house there. That's not the way the civilised world works.

    In terms of the loss of sovereignty over the occupied territories, many other countries don't now exist in exactly the same format and size they once did including places like the German Democratic Republic and, of course, Britain which had control over Southern Ireland and lost it in the 1920's Strictly speaking we might also be 'losing', (although that's not how many people consider it), control over Scotland in a couple of years time. That's what happens in a civilised country that values the opinions of those it has power over.

    The Israelis should tell any of their people that build houses in the occupied territories that they're living in someone else's country and, if they want to stay there in the future, it will be on their forbearance and that the Israelis won't interfere if they mistreat them or want to throw them out at some point.

    Likewise the US must STOP funding the Israelis expansionist policies because they're making the situation far, FAR worse than it need be. Quite honestly they're following EXACTLY the same path as the British right-wing did with their lunatic and counterproductive support for Ian Paisley and his crackpot band of thugs.

    Having said that even that silly cow, Thatcher, realised there was no long term future in continuing that way and that continued AFTER they tried to blow her up in the Brighton bombing.

    Thatcher narrowly escaped injury in an IRA assassination attempt at a Brighton hotel early in the morning on 12 October 1984.[122] Five people were killed, including the wife of Cabinet Minister John Wakeham. Thatcher was staying at the hotel to attend the Conservative Party Conference, which she insisted should open as scheduled the following day.[122] She delivered her speech as planned,[123] a move that was widely supported across the political spectrum and enhanced her popularity with the public.[124]

    On 6 November 1981 Thatcher and Irish Taoiseach Garret FitzGerald had established the Anglo-Irish Inter-Governmental Council, a forum for meetings between the two governments.[120] On 15 November 1985, Thatcher and FitzGerald signed the Hillsborough Anglo-Irish Agreement, the first time a British government had given the Republic of Ireland an advisory role in the governance of Northern Ireland. In protest the Ulster Says No movement attracted 100,000 to a rally in Belfast,[125] Ian Gow resigned as Minister of State in the HM Treasury,[126][127] and all fifteen Unionist MPs resigned their parliamentary seats; only one was not returned in the subsequent by-elections on 23 January 1986.[128]

    Of course, Southern Ireland ALSO included a clause in it's constitution which would have meant Northern Ireland not appearing on any maps, i.e. an 'existential threat', which was, of course, the reason for the Ulster Says No protests.
     
  5. Yaroni

    Yaroni Member

    Aug 31, 2007
    Tel Aviv
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Israel
    Sorry i didnt read the whole thing, but to say Israel should have never been created in the first place is hardly helpful, especially considering the hegemonic intentions your country has by implementing our state.

    But whats the point of looking to the past, are we gonna leave Israel to appease the Arab world. No, there is way too many unrealistic talking points regarding this issue.

    The question is, what do we do now? At this moment in time, what is the strategy, does practical urgency take precedence over optimistic objectives?

    I mean discourse is one thing, but it has always been an us or them world, and nothings changed, especially considering the nature of our enemy.
     
  6. Naughtius Maximus

    Jul 10, 2001
    Shropshire
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    England
    The only practical way forward is for there to be a negotiated settlement with the Palestinians, that's why the ludicrous position of 'not negotiating with Hamas' is so ridiculous. Put simply who ELSE are the Israelis going to negotiate with? The Americans? The Greeks? The Australians? NO! You negotiate with the people with whom you have the disagreement. In the final analysis that's what the IRA and the British government had to do.

    The starting point should be the 1967 borders around which the details can be decided. Property could be passed to Palestinians who can't afford to build houses and the owners recompensed, (if the US wants to help, that's where they come in), whilst the Palestinians agree to cease all terrorist activities. If you then build a defensive wall it should be easier to defend and nobody can claim they're not where they should be. Well, they can CLAIM it but they and everyone else will know they've agreed to it. The problem atm is there IS no agreement.

    Obviously, after this period of time it won't be easy but the long term alternative might be bad, in fact it might be disastrous for Israel and the whole area. All it needs is for the Iranians or some other such party to obtain nuclear weapons and for some mad mullah to launch them. These things can happen by accident or miscalculation don't forget. The idea that everyone's acting rationally can be a fatal error. TBH it's exactly that sort of thinking that caused, to one degree or another, the first world war and arguably, the second. Frankly it was precisely that sort of unintended consequence that led us to make the Balfour declaration which led, eventually, to the formation of the state of Israel in the first place. It was also what led us to partition Ireland because those in the north refused to be forced into a united Ireland and wished to remain part of the UK. If we'd have thought it through we'd probably have said 'sort yourselves out' and left them to it but we THOUGHT we were doing the right thing at the time by allowing the north to remain part of the UK which was what they wanted.

    Regarding the Israeli situation, as you say, (and I've said as much myself on here many times), we are where we are. There's no point in bleating about what's happened in the past. The Israelis DID take military control of land in the occupied territories and will now have to try and come to terms with the people there. But the fact is that's not going to happen with them constantly pushing the military answer to every question.

    The daft thing is they HAVE removed settlements from Gaza, (although the fact they probably found them hard to protect is another matter), but that doesn't really count for much if they then try and make it difficult, not to say impossible, for it to function as a viable entity.
     
  7. Iranian Monitor

    Iranian Monitor Member+

    Aug 18, 2004
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
    I noticed that a new thread has opened up and therefore cut my message from this thread and put it in the new thread.
     
  8. HerthaBerwyn

    HerthaBerwyn Member+

    May 24, 2003
    Chicago
    tomwilhelm repped this.
  9. Mani

    Mani BigSoccer Supporter

    Aug 1, 2004
    Club:
    Perspolis
    Nat'l Team:
    Iran
  10. tomwilhelm

    tomwilhelm Member+

    Dec 14, 2005
    Boston, MA, USA
    Club:
    Fulham FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  11. odessit19

    odessit19 Member+

    Dec 19, 2004
    My gun safe
    Club:
    AC Milan
    Nat'l Team:
    Ukraine
    I stopped reading when he referred to some IDF troops as Goliad Brigade.
    There is no such thing, there is Golani Brigade, that originated to combat Syrian front up north.
    And Merkava II has been replaced by Merkava III and Merkava IV.

    Clueless opinions are fun to read...
     

Share This Page