Biggest Israeli Land Grab For 30 years

[Helmet Cole]

You're a classic example of someone who thinks accusations of racism are a sophisticated and clever debating technique.

Some of us just make our point and wait for replies.

Now those 1.5 square miles are part of Israel I'm sure the area will be freer and more prosperous, somewhere for people of all creeds and races to live a life however they choose, to practice whatever religion they choose, to express their sexuality however they choose and to vote how they choose.

Surely that's something for everyone to be pleased about.

Didn't realise the Israeli 'land grab' was in fact an effort to bring religious freedom, democracy, and sexual freedom to the downtrodden Palestinians. I'm glad you have explained this, and I look forward to Israeli efforts to bring these freedoms to the rest of the Middle East, North Korea, and of course their invasion of Russia in an attempt to make Russia a more safe and welcoming place for gays!

I never looked at it like that either - lebensraum is the new empowerment.
Just why do folk insist on resisting such wonderful invading benefactors?
If only the residents of the Sudetenland had seen the light, we could have prevented all that world war two unpleasantness.

Tbh I think there was a lot of tacit acceptance of Germanys action at the beginning of the war, with a lot of appeasement and denial of what the Nazi's were trying to achieve. As a result I believe certain sections of the population of Europe suffered particular persecution. I'm sure the world has learned from this and we would not give our tacit approval to genocide ever again - would we?

 

[SteWadda]

That was part of the joke, they're generally not, and the word Shiite sounds like shite, as in little shites. Never mind.

I got the joke I thought it was based on fact though.

My apologies for misleading you. No, nearly all jihadists are Sunni Muslims. Shia Muslims certainly have well-known militant groups, like Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Mahdi in Iraq but I wouldn't call them jihadists. They don't generally to subscribe to expanding their lands into an Islamic caliphate because they are a minority in the Middle East (although they are a majority in Iran, Iraq and Bahrain). They generally try to defend themselves and their own existing power rather than expand it. In the case of Syria, they are a minority where they control political power - and have tried to defend that power. Assad is from a sect of Shia Muslims called Alawites. Many Sunnis hate that state of affairs are generally belligerent towards Sunnis. You may think that's fair game that the Sunnis are angry about being ruled by a minority, and I see their point, and this is why more political inclusivity is a good idea. However, Assad is the best of a bad bunch I'm afraid, he's a nasty fucker, but for a country like Syria which is a potential genocide waiting to happen due to the number of minorities there, a pretty secular regime like Assad's is better than letting ISIS take over. Also, it should be pointed out that in Bahrain, it is Sunnis who rule the Shia majority and for thirty-odd years the majority Shias of Iraq had to put up with a minority Sunni in Saddam Hussein. So a minority ruling a majority is hardly a one-way street and believe me, Sunnis weren't protesting about giving Shias more rights in Iraq and still aren't in Bahrain.

Thanks for that, I think I could get away with pretending I know somthings about it in conversation now. Might even throw a little shiites joke in.

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

Didn't realise the Israeli 'land grab' was in fact an effort to bring religious freedom, democracy, and sexual freedom to the downtrodden Palestinians. I'm glad you have explained this, and I look forward to Israeli efforts to bring these freedoms to the rest of the Middle East, North Korea, and of course their invasion of Russia in an attempt to make Russia a more safe and welcoming place for gays!

I never looked at it like that either - lebensraum is the new empowerment.
Just why do folk insist on resisting such wonderful invading benefactors?
If only the residents of the Sudetenland had seen the light, we could have prevented all that world war two unpleasantness.

Tbh I think there was a lot of tacit acceptance of Germanys action at the beginning of the war, with a lot of appeasement and denial of what the Nazi's were trying to achieve. As a result I believe certain sections of the population of Europe suffered particular persecution. I'm sure the world has learned from this and we would not give our tacit approval to genocide ever again - would we?

A scenario where the most powerful nations in the world either look the other way or actively support an aggressor who is hell bent on wiping out their neighbours?
No, I'm sure that simply couldn't happen nowadays.
Especially if the persecuted became the latter day persecutor.
They wouldn't do that, because they would know just how morally wrong such appalling behaviour was, given that they had been on the receiving end not that long ago?
And they certainly wouldn't choose to punish folk who played no part whatsoever in their own persecution, would they?
No siree.
That is just unthinkable.

 

[tidyman]

I'm not too worried by Israel's decision to annex 1.5 square miles of land.

Faced with a vast area of the middle east nearly 300 times its own size and full of people who are ideologically crazed in their hatred of Israel, it is inevitable that the Israeli government will need to make constant and minor adjustments to borders and strategy in the interests of national security.

That all sounds very civilised but didn't the press release state it was simply an act of spite and revenge for the three teenagers who were killed the other week?

 

[Blue Mist]

I'm not too worried by Israel's decision to annex 1.5 square miles of land.

Faced with a vast area of the middle east nearly 300 times its own size and full of people who are ideologically crazed in their hatred of Israel, it is inevitable that the Israeli government will need to make constant and minor adjustments to borders and strategy in the interests of national security.

That 1.5 square miles will now join the rest of Israel, the only state in the middle east with free speech, free elections, a free press, freedom of religion and equality for women, gays and other groups which are horribly repressed in the rest of the region.

That is something to celebrate.

If your logic is correct the question that should be asked is why only 1.5 square miles. Why don't they take 25 sq miles or 325 sq miles. That will ensure the constant minor adjustments don't need to be made. You could have a no go area of 125 miles between Israel and every other country.

 

[Blue Mist]

Ever since Israel was founded its neighbours have been less than friendly and on several occasions downright belligerent - though thankfully to an incompetent degree.

These neighbours set the tone for the relationship and continue to do so, and it is entirely natural for Israel to respond in a robust, responsible and caring manner which reflects its perfectly justifiable and rational lack of trust it has in the surrounding population.

What fucking planet are you from?,what apart from shit stirring are you trying to do on here?,Palestinian children have been killed and you ascertain that the IDF have killed them in a caring manner.
Palestinian people have had their homes, livelihoods,families destroyed and it's alright, as it was done with best intentions.

Just saying that if you cause people in authority a lot of trouble then they are going to keep an eye on you and treat you increasingly harshly and with an increasing lack of trust.

That's what the police do. That's what employers do. That's what teachers do.

And that's what Israel does with its neighbours.

Best not to misbehave in the first place.

In a less enlightened time the Met Police used to say that about 'Black' men in London. Fortunately most if not all have learnt they were wrong.


I stopped reading the United thread as there is a RAG on who is clearly wumming and Blues are falling for it. It is silly and spoiling a god thread. I may have to stop reading/posting in this thread because Urmston you are also wumming, (but strangely not getting puled about it) I have just read another post from you that can only be described as wumming at its finest.

Sad really.

 

[Skashion]

If your logic is correct the question that should be asked is why only 1.5 square miles. Why don't they take 25 sq miles or 325 sq miles. That will ensure the constant minor adjustments don't need to be made. You could have a no go area of 125 miles between Israel and every other country.

If Israel offered citizenship to every Palestinian I reckon they'd take it, which is why they don't and instead operate an occupation.

 

[Blue Mist]

If your logic is correct the question that should be asked is why only 1.5 square miles. Why don't they take 25 sq miles or 325 sq miles. That will ensure the constant minor adjustments don't need to be made. You could have a no go area of 125 miles between Israel and every other country.

If Israel offered citizenship to every Palestinian I reckon they'd take it, which is why they don't and instead operate an occupation.

You are better informed than I am on the subject but I am not sure they would. The majority want to leave in peace, in their own country, practicing their religion and ways of life. Israel would impose restrictions on them even if they were granted citizenship.

 

[Skashion]

You are better informed than I am on the subject but I am not sure they would. The majority want to leave in peace, in their own country, practicing their religion and ways of life. Israel would impose restrictions on them even if they were granted citizenship.

I don't think you are correct about that, although you're possibly misunderstanding my meaning. Opinion polls show without exception that Palestinians (Israeli Arabs) who have Israeli citizenship rights overwhelmingly want to keep them. They want to keep them because it is very strategic for them to do so. You're also neglecting that the Palestinians continue to demand Right of Return - for the same strategic reasons. Israel could own the whole land fairly easily and somewhat end the occupation by just annexing Gaza and the West Bank, and giving Palestinians citizen rights, like they did in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. The reason why they don't do that with the West Bank and Gaza is because the population sizes would be virtually identical and Israeli politics would suddenly be very very different. This is why Israel continues occupation whilst trying to claim it is a democracy. It's all a front, it is an apartheid state masquerading as a democracy. Israeli so-called democracy depends on a hefty Jewish majority, which is what makes claims of freedom of this, that and the other complete bollocks. The Palestinians can't and won't have those freedoms because Israel wants the land and cannot annex the West Bank and Gaza and remain a democracy because Jews would become a marginal minority and that would be the end of Israel. Israel is predicated on racism, and shockingly produces racist outcomes.

 

[Blue Mist]

You are better informed than I am on the subject but I am not sure they would. The majority want to leave in peace, in their own country, practicing their religion and ways of life. Israel would impose restrictions on them even if they were granted citizenship.

I don't think you are correct about that, although you're possibly misunderstanding my meaning. Opinion polls show without exception that Palestinians (Israeli Arabs) who have Israeli citizenship rights overwhelmingly want to keep them. They want to keep them because it is very strategic for them to do so. You're also neglecting that the Palestinians continue to demand Right of Return - for the same strategic reasons. Israel could own the whole land fairly easily and somewhat end the occupation by just annexing Gaza and the West Bank, and giving Palestinians citizen rights, like they did in East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. The reason why they don't do that with the West Bank and Gaza is because the population sizes would be virtually identical and Israeli politics would suddenly be very very different. This is why Israel continues occupation whilst trying to claim it is a democracy. It's all a front, it is an apartheid state masquerading as a democracy. Israeli so-called democracy depends on a hefty Jewish majority, which is what makes claims of freedom of this, that and the other complete bollocks. The Palestinians can't and won't have those freedoms because Israel wants the land and cannot annex the West Bank and Gaza and remain a democracy because Jews would become a marginal minority and that would be the end of Israel. Israel is predicated on racism, and shockingly produces racist outcomes.

As I said Skash, you better informed than I am and accept fully what you say, thank you by the way for the explanation given above. It sheds a different light on a complex subject, a subject made more complex by the biased reporting for 40 years. I am nearly old enough when we in the UK called them terrorists, oh how times have changed. Control the media and you control the world.