Of course, on the other hand, it could simply show that you don't understand what am I saying. But that would be too simple an explanation I suppose. Either way, I am not going to join the dots for you.
Your comment about the difference between assasination and murder was so beside the point that it simply does no justice to rederobs post. I think it really shows that you either refuse to understand what he is trying to say or u just cant understand. Your posts are quite baffling. Even this post about how 2 sides are fighting different wars - seriously, wtf?
Of course, on the other hand, it could simply show that you don't understand what am I saying. But that would be too simple an explanation I suppose. Either way, I am not going to join the dots for you.
Your posts continue to show a mind numbing ignorance of common knowledge.
The Palestinians have less land today than ever.
To say that 3-4 years ago they had "nothing" is a plain and simple lie, or sheer stupidity.
.
I have met many Israelis and many Palestinians in my time, and much prefer the Israelis.
The Palestinians are a dreadfully tribal people, riven by petty hatred for the outside world and for other Palestinians. Israelis make good friends and loyalty is their strong point.
That is just my experience of them both.
The Israelis can be tiresome at times but need a land to call their own, I would support them against the Arab collective which surrounds them.
gg
hmmm lets see. terrorism is the systematic use of violence to create fear, generally to achieve an ideological goal, it deliberately targets civilians and seeks to create mass havoc and casualties.
assassination is the targetted killing of an individual (or small group of individuals) for ideological, military or various unhinged purposes. by definition they are very different things.
Forgive my confusion, but your link verifies my point, then you go on on a dummy spit. What is your point here?crap
let's see, israel bulldozes palestinian houses gives us the independent (uk), the ny times, cnn, the obligitory wiki link and a few blogs, all on the first results page.
the three of you are like peas in a pod, just because someone holds different ideas (which are referenced to various sources that are continually discredited by you armchair experts) we're manipulated, nieve, ignorant, don't have the facts, blah blah blah. get off your high horse.
Ah Rederob Let me just summarize this... I am an ignorant stupid liar.
If you can tell me in what country some of your Palestine re;atives were living in 3-4 years ago and if that country had any chance(>2.5%) of becoming a Palestine State, I will except all of the above.
Cheers, and pls leave out the 60 yr history.... it doesn't apply anymore(not my call)
There is no step out of "checkmate" - it's game over.The first step out of checkmate is to recognise that both sides have a position - to insist that only one side is ultimately right is to condemn your "team" to eternal chaos. I think the Palestinians deserve better than that - and better than your loose arguments.
I am in a quandary. You seem to be aware of your condition which, perhaps, makes you less stupid than you might lay claim.Ah Rederob Let me just summarize this... I am an ignorant stupid liar.
There is no step out of "checkmate" - it's game over.
It does not take the wisdom of Solomon to work out that if you take someones property, they might be deeply offended. The UN resolutions seek to give Palestinians something in return for their dispossession. Most would consider that a fair arrangement.Just by the by, the belief that a UN resolution is always some kind of act of Solomon is not inevitably the case. All countries that vote for them have their own agendas.
Only because you twist the argument.But this is going around in circles again.
I would differ.It doesn't take an act of Solomon to realise Israel is here
Only because you twist the argument.
Israel's only defence will be the nuclear option.
The can of worms opens....
There are:I only give the link to show there are other - no doubt biased but other - ways to view everything:
From ABC, 22 Jan. 09
Hamas declares victory in Gaza
By Middle East correspondent Ben Knight
The political leader of Hamas has declared that his organisation won the recent war in the Gaza Strip.
Khaled Meshaal who is exiled in Syria, says Hamas stopped Israel achieving its aims.
On Wednesday, Israel's army said it had completely withdrawn from the strip, although troops will remain near the border and its spy-planes continue to fly over the territory.
News of the withdrawal sent people back onto the streets for the first time in weeks, as shops opened and people began restocking, after three weeks when many had barely left their houses.
While the fighting has ended in Gaza, the battle to rebuild the territory is just beginning and the destruction is immense.
Whole neighbourhoods have been literally flattened. People are sleeping out under carpets strung across the branches of trees.
The Hamas leadership is still in hiding.
Not according to western governments. Icelandic assets were seized under terrorism laws in the UK, a bozo with a laser pen arrested under terrorism laws in the US, but I digress, let's just stick to the various dictionary definitions:
There is no question that the Israeli state is employing terrorism to control the Palestinian. Equally, no question that Hamas is a terrorist organisation.
To believe that only one side is wrong and the other side is right is nothing short of an amazing bias based on.... whatever.
But I disagree with nickfish, you cannot ignore the recent 60 years of history. Y#ou can accept it as having happened and work within that frame, but you can't ignore it.
Forgive my confusion, but your link verifies my point, then you go on on a dummy spit. What is your point here?
There are:
Lucas owns a property, and has a mortgage.
Rederob is homeless and, after being mistreated by the same bank as Lucas, is given Lucas's house by the bank.
Lucas can live elsewhere on the property, but the house is now Rederob's - no mortgage to pay!
Lucas takes the bank to court, who agree with Lucas that his treatment is unfair.
The bank has washed its hands of the matter. Rederob owns the house and Lucas was given the right to remain on the property.
Rederob and Lucas can work it out between themselves.
Lucas is unhappy. He throws rocks at the house to annoy Rederob.
Rederob kills his pets.
Lucas throws more rocks at his house.
Rederob cuts off his power and water, and stops him from leaving the property to buy food, or visit the doctor.
Lucas goes to other neighbours for help.
They sneak him some scraps, and lots more rocks to throw at the house.
Lucas goes back to court, and time and again they agree he is hard done by, occasionally mediating some settlement that never last long.
Lucas throws more and more rocks, so Rederob bulldozes his lean to on the fenceline.
Lucas has surely learned a valuable lesson: Don't mess with me because there are harsh consequences.
Now, somewhere in the above there is a circular argument.
Or do we have "checkmate"?
One state is the way forward to peace in Mideast: Gaddafi
A combined one-state solution is the best way forward for Israel and the Palestinians to finally put an end to "perpetual war," Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has written in The New York Times.
"The history of Israel/Palestine is not remarkable by regional standards -- a country inhabited by different peoples, with rule passing among many tribes, nations and ethnic groups; a country that has withstood many wars and waves of peoples from all directions.
"This is why it gets so complicated when members of either party claims the right to assert that it is their land," Gaddafi wrote.
After the surge in deadly violence in Gaza, Gaddafi argued that "everywhere one looks, among the speeches and the desperate diplomacy, there is no real way forward.
"A just and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians is possible, but it lies in the history of the people of this conflicted land, and not in the tired rhetoric of partition and two-state solutions," he said.
The Libyan leader argued that a two-state solution inevitably would create an unworkable security threat to Israel, while partitioning the West Bank into Jewish and Arab areas, with buffer zones between them, also would not work.
"Buffer zones symbolise exclusion and breed tension. Israelis and Palestinians have also become increasingly intertwined, economically and politically," Gaddafi wrote, so "the compromise is one state for all, an 'Isratine' that would allow the people in each party to feel that they live in all of the disputed land and they are not deprived of any one part of it."
"Assimilation is already a fact of life in Israel," Gaddafi added, noting that "there are more than one million Muslim Arabs in Israel."
In the latest casualty toll, Gaza medics said the recent Israeli offensive had killed 1330 people, at least half of them civilians including 437 children. Another 5450 were wounded, including 1890 children.
But I read an article recently (Time?) about the Jewish State being in peril internally simply because the number of Muslims inside Israel at present is increasing so fast that democratic voting might eventually turn against the Jews. I can't find the article again and I can only remember the gist of it, so don't quote me.
That would seem to make Gaddafi's idea unworkable given Israel's paranoia about being overrun???
Still, it's an alternative. And any alternative to the recent bloodletting has to be considered.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?