Palestinian Boy Kidnapped and Murdered.

[Skashion]

This would seem to be the sensible course of action to give the Palestinians their own state, but could the Palestinians and Israeli's even share a border together without having a pop at each another, would it be possible to put a U.N. force between them without making them target's from both side's eventually.

They already have a pop each other, so that's no reason to deny them a state. The likelihood is that if the Palestinians get a state and can finally start building their own economy, the pool of resentment in which the likes of Hamas fosters will be drained significantly. After all, what would they be fighting for? How could they justify their existence? To destroy an Israel the Palestinians know cannot be defeated when they can get on with living their own lives. One immutable truth the world over is that people are people are people and just want to get on with their own lives. They only fight when politics drives them to it. That's why we need a political solution. However, as I've said over and over. There is a solution but it will not be done. Israel does not want to give up the land it occupies and even if did WANT to, Israel would have more problems with settlers in a weekend than the Palestinians could cause in a century. It would take monumental will to give the Palestinians a state, so it won't happen. Even if a deal is reached, and I can't see that even, it would collapse upon implementation.

 

[i kne albert davy]

Dignity for their people in the face of their oppressors I'd say - for both of them. The Israelis created Hamas by their treatment of the Palestinians just as the allies created Hitler's Nazis by the terms of the Treaty of Versailles.

The last thing any sane minded person would think of was Hitler bringing any form of dignity to the German people,I'll agree that the Allied terms (mainly at the French bequest) imposed on Germany allowed National socialism to flourish but if the allies had been prepared to use force in 1936 then Hitler's evil could had been stopped.
Regarding Hamas the Palestinian people must be fairly desperate to elect them or truly scared of them, I don't know what the answer is, I do know its not to fire lethal rockets into Israel nor is bombing the shit out of Gaza. It seems there's to little land for too many people of different ideologies for a simple solution. How would you settle it avoiding bloodshed if neither side's prepared to bend, I'm sure Israel isn't going to give up it's security unless forced and the Palestinian's lack the force. and even if they did it would just lead to greater slaughter,

Well Albert you must have attended a blooby good Uni to talk such sense. After the abuse on this thread this afternoon my faith in the common man is restored.

Thank you Mate highest I got was ONC in mechanical Engineering from Hyde college. but since my indifferent football career came to end I've got a degree in blooby alright. hope it's sunny on the Warren for you this evening.

 

[i kne albert davy]

This would seem to be the sensible course of action to give the Palestinians their own state, but could the Palestinians and Israeli's even share a border together without having a pop at each another, would it be possible to put a U.N. force between them without making them target's from both side's eventually.

They already have a pop each other, so that's no reason to deny them a state. The likelihood is that if the Palestinians get a state and can finally start building their own economy, the pool of resentment in which the likes of Hamas fosters will be drained significantly. After all, what would they be fighting for? How could they justify their existence? To destroy an Israel the Palestinians know cannot be defeated when they can get on with living their own lives. One immutable truth the world over is that people are people are people and just want to get on with their own lives. They only fight when politics drives them to it. That's why we need a political solution. However, as I've said over and over. There is a solution but it will not be done. Israel does not want to give up the land it occupies and even if did WANT to, Israel would have more problems with settlers in a weekend than the Palestinians could cause in a century. It would take monumental will to give the Palestinians a state, so it won't happen. Even if a deal is reached, and I can't see that even, it would collapse upon implementation.

To be honest I think you're right in the only possible solution to put an end to this madness is to give the Palestinian's a viable state, but the Israeli's are going to want to know security wise what's in it for them. Until there's some sort of trust between the two it could go on indefinitely.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The Palestinians didn't go to war, the Arabs states did. However, and what you frequently never mention, probably because you lack the knowledge of it is that before the war even started 300,000 Arabs fled the land mostly because of terror attacks from the Haganah, Irgun and Lehi. Have you heard of the Deir Yassin massacre? It wouldn't surprise me if you hadn't actually. That happened before the war started you know.

Here, however, I am going to take issue with you. I'm not disputing that Deir Yassin was a massacre or that it was part of the new Israeli government's policy to clear what it saw as strategic areas of their Arab population.

But it's simply not true to say the Palestinians didn't go to war. They had been taking part in offensive actions against both British forces and Jews for a few years prior to the partition and declaration of independence in May1948. Fawzi al-Qawukji had led an Arab revolt in 1936, which only ended when the war started and he fled to Berlin, where he spent the war years. Also the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, al-Husseini, had his own forces around Jerusalem. The Haganah itself was formed in the 1920's to protect Jewish settlements against attacks by Arab irregulars.

Once partition had been accepted by the UN, al-Qawukji came back and led an Arab paramiltary force from Jordan into the mandate. There were a good few thousand of these para-militaries, although they were pretty ineffectual fortunately. The British could have easily stopped them but just couldn't be bothered basically. These forces mounted a major attack on Mishmar Ha'Emek in April 1948. Had they succeeded, there is no doubt that no Jew would have been left alive.

At the same time, the Arab paramilitaries were attacking Jewish positions on the strategic road to Jerusalem, isolating Jewish settlements and cutting off Jerusalem completely. To counter this, the Haganah decided to take Deir Yassin as it was seen as being of strategic importance. This was their first purely offensive action to occupy somewhere, as opposed to a quick raid, and there was a firefight between the Haganah forces and the defenders. The majority of those who died were killed in this phase but a significant number were certainly killed after the Haganah had taken the village. In fact, the killing was stopped by religious Jews from the neighbouring village, who had previously had a good relationship with the Arabs of Deir Yassin.

There's no doubt significant brutality was involved but it was also in the interests of both sides to talk that up. It suited the Israelis, who were trying to frighten the Arabs into fleeing or at least not resisting, and it suited the Arab side's propaganda as well. Also, 4 days later, a Jewish medical convoy was ambushed trying to get through to Jerusalem. Although there were soldiers protecting it (including British) the vast majority of the 78 murdered were unarmed medical staff. Did you even know about that?

 

[Skashion]

The Palestinians didn't go to war, the Arabs states did. However, and what you frequently never mention, probably because you lack the knowledge of it is that before the war even started 300,000 Arabs fled the land mostly because of terror attacks from the Haganah, Irgun and Lehi. Have you heard of the Deir Yassin massacre? It wouldn't surprise me if you hadn't actually. That happened before the war started you know.

Here, however, I am going to take issue with you. I'm not disputing that Deir Yassin was a massacre or that it was part of the new Israeli government's policy to clear what it saw as strategic areas of their Arab population.

But it's simply not true to say the Palestinians didn't go to war. They had been taking part in offensive actions against both British forces and Jews for a few years prior to the partition and declaration of independence in May1948.
Fawzi al-Qawukji had led an Arab revolt in 1936, which only ended when the war started and he fled to Berlin, where he spent the war years. Also the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, al-Husseini, had his own forces around Jerusalem. The Haganah itself was formed in the 1920's to protect Jewish settlements against attacks by Arab irregulars.

Once partition had been accepted by the UN, al-Qawukji came back and led an Arab paramiltary force from Jordan into the mandate. There were a good few thousand of these para-militaries, although they were pretty ineffectual fortunately. The British could have easily stopped them but just couldn't be bothered basically. These forces mounted a major attack on Mishmar Ha'Emek in April 1948. Had they succeeded, there is no doubt that no Jew would have been left alive.

At the same time, the Arab paramilitaries were attacking Jewish positions on the strategic road to Jerusalem, isolating Jewish settlements and cutting off Jerusalem completely. To counter this, the Haganah decided to take Deir Yassin as it was seen as being of strategic importance. This was their first purely offensive action to occupy somewhere, as opposed to a quick raid, and there was a firefight between the Haganah forces and the defenders. The majority of those who died were killed in this phase but a significant number were certainly killed after the Haganah had taken the village. In fact, the killing was stopped by religious Jews from the neighbouring village, who had previously had a good relationship with the Arabs of Deir Yassin.

There's no doubt significant brutality was involved but it was also in the interests of both sides to talk that up. It suited the Israelis, who were trying to frighten the Arabs into fleeing or at least not resisting, and it suited the Arab side's propaganda as well. Also, 4 days later, a Jewish medical convoy was ambushed trying to get through to Jerusalem. Although there were soldiers protecting it (including British) the vast majority of the 78 murdered were unarmed medical staff. Did you even know about that?

So the Jews were at war with the Arabs before 1948 then, yes? So this cockahoop story Barker seems to have told himself is bullshit, yes?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The Palestinians didn't go to war, the Arabs states did. However, and what you frequently never mention, probably because you lack the knowledge of it is that before the war even started 300,000 Arabs fled the land mostly because of terror attacks from the Haganah, Irgun and Lehi. Have you heard of the Deir Yassin massacre? It wouldn't surprise me if you hadn't actually. That happened before the war started you know.

Here, however, I am going to take issue with you. I'm not disputing that Deir Yassin was a massacre or that it was part of the new Israeli government's policy to clear what it saw as strategic areas of their Arab population.

But it's simply not true to say the Palestinians didn't go to war. They had been taking part in offensive actions against both British forces and Jews for a few years prior to the partition and declaration of independence in May1948.
Fawzi al-Qawukji had led an Arab revolt in 1936, which only ended when the war started and he fled to Berlin, where he spent the war years. Also the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, al-Husseini, had his own forces around Jerusalem. The Haganah itself was formed in the 1920's to protect Jewish settlements against attacks by Arab irregulars.

Once partition had been accepted by the UN, al-Qawukji came back and led an Arab paramiltary force from Jordan into the mandate. There were a good few thousand of these para-militaries, although they were pretty ineffectual fortunately. The British could have easily stopped them but just couldn't be bothered basically. These forces mounted a major attack on Mishmar Ha'Emek in April 1948. Had they succeeded, there is no doubt that no Jew would have been left alive.

At the same time, the Arab paramilitaries were attacking Jewish positions on the strategic road to Jerusalem, isolating Jewish settlements and cutting off Jerusalem completely. To counter this, the Haganah decided to take Deir Yassin as it was seen as being of strategic importance. This was their first purely offensive action to occupy somewhere, as opposed to a quick raid, and there was a firefight between the Haganah forces and the defenders. The majority of those who died were killed in this phase but a significant number were certainly killed after the Haganah had taken the village. In fact, the killing was stopped by religious Jews from the neighbouring village, who had previously had a good relationship with the Arabs of Deir Yassin.

There's no doubt significant brutality was involved but it was also in the interests of both sides to talk that up. It suited the Israelis, who were trying to frighten the Arabs into fleeing or at least not resisting, and it suited the Arab side's propaganda as well. Also, 4 days later, a Jewish medical convoy was ambushed trying to get through to Jerusalem. Although there were soldiers protecting it (including British) the vast majority of the 78 murdered were unarmed medical staff. Did you even know about that?

So the Jews were at war with the Arabs before 1948 then, yes? So this cockahoop story Barker seems to have told himself is bullshit, yes?

There was certainly military action in the run-up to partition but mostly initiated by the Arabs. The Arab revolt of 1936-9 could also be seen as a "war". But really, does that change anything?

 

[Skashion]

So the Jews were at war with the Arabs before 1948 then, yes? So this cockahoop story Barker seems to have told himself is bullshit, yes?

There was certainly military action in the run-up to partition but mostly initiated by the Arabs. The Arab revolt of 1936-9 could also be seen as a "war". But really, does that change anything?

Well, it kind of mattered in the discussion I was having with Barker whose narrative of the start of conflict is woefully inadequate and hopelessly biased as a result, yes, so quite why you need the feel to get involved I don't know. We've been down this path before and both decided whilst it makes for a an interesting historical discussion, going back to the injuries of 1947, whilst occasionally necessary is generally best avoided because it invites quite dark debates, for instance, about whether Israel should exist at all. If you want to scrap about it, be my guest, I feel the ammunition is stacked on my side quite frankly. You can quibble about Arab atrocities and I can about Jewish atrocities, but ultimately it was 300,000 Arabs who fled, the great majority as a result of deliberate Jewish policy. You see, this is where the uncompensated injustices again stack up on the Palestinian side. The last time we discussed it, you retreated to the ground of how Jews were expelled elsewhere in the Middle East, but you see I can say quite honestly, that that was just as wrong. I am almost as critical in the behaviour of the Arab states as I am of Israel and not just because of their neglect/hostility towards their fellow Arabs but also Jews as well. However, thankfully, the Jews look after their own better than the Arabs did and now live good lives in Israel, often in former Arab homes, but as for the Palestinians, they're still waiting for their justice. As I say, if you want a scrap, bring it on... Or we can be practical and simply talk about the occupation since 1967 and the hurts that theoretically could be resolved, and more importantly, how.

As for me, I believe there must be a seachange in the status quo. I've talked to you before about this as well, about building, especially economic bridges between Palestinians and influential Jews so there is economic interdependence and a real Jewish investment in the economic wellbeing of the Palestinians and their economic growth. However, I also believe this situation can only come about with a seachange in attitudes towards the conflict and a change to the position that the Palestinians have suffered a historical injustice that needs putting right. The idea that a Palestinian state is something to be negotiated, that it's an option, not a right, is what will perpetuate this conflict more than anything.

 

[stonerblue]

Who else are the pro-Hamas fuckwits? It was plural so let's have more than the dubious-at-best Citizen in Pakistan exemplar.

Here's one

When people talk about Hamas they forget that Hamas is a democratically elected party of Palestinians and not the terrorist organization they try to define as,this was one of the conditions set by eu and us for dialogue that Hamas should be in the power democratically,and when every condition was met ans Israel knew they had to come on table finally those death of teenegera came up of which there was no proof at all even the white house statement said that after 2 days of the incident but they used this to create this massacre
And isn't it surprising that Hamas fired so many rockers and targeted civilians and yet there is no news of an injury even forget the death
The current score line is 160+ and counting to 0,and not one report on any damage to buildings?these are facts not fantasies not stories and if u think CNN n BBC is telling the truth then u seriously need to wake the fuck up,and even David Cameron said that Gaza is a prison camp jst 6 months back even though he is allie with Israel...
Just because those people are from a different religion that doesn't make them any less human,just the other day 8 people were killed out of which 5 were children while they were watching Argentina Holland semi final
Those weren't terrorist for sure
Have a heart please and dont look at the news and history as main streem media defines it,and if u look into the history u,ll know whose the oppressed and whose the opressor,I'm not asking u to take Palestinians side just askin you for a neutral take on event after analysing the whole thing

Very well said. Great post.

Much to garlicy for me.

 

[Plaything of the gods]

Hitler promised work and bread and the chance for the Germanic race to dominate the World and instead brought death and destruction, what Hamas promised I've no idea you'll have to enlighten me but the death and destruction seems to have arrived sadly.

Dignity for their people in the face of their oppressors I'd say - for both of them. The Israelis created Hamas by their treatment of the Palestinians just as the allies created Hitler's Nazis by the terms of the Treaty of Versailles.

The last thing any sane minded person would think of was Hitler bringing any form of dignity to the German people,I'll agree that the Allied terms (mainly at the French bequest) imposed on Germany allowed National socialism to flourish but if the allies had been prepared to use force in 1936 then Hitler's evil could had been stopped.
Regarding Hamas the Palestinian people must be fairly desperate to elect them or truly scared of them, I don't know what the answer is, I do know its not to fire lethal rockets into Israel nor is bombing the shit out of Gaza. It seems there's to little land for too many people of different ideologies for a simple solution. How would you settle it avoiding bloodshed if neither side's prepared to bend, I'm sure Israel isn't going to give up it's security unless forced and the Palestinian's lack the force. and even if they did it would just lead to greater slaughter,

In your first sentence you talk about Hitler at the end when I was talking about Hitler at the beginning. Your second sentence (although not represented as a sentence) then confirms my point about Hitler at the beginning.

I might also have used the analogy of the BNP. That party got a lot of support and 2 MEPs at the Euro election before last not because people liked them but because the BNP was appearing to stand up for them and promising to restore their dignity in the face of their 'oppressors'. Support for the BNP has now collapsed as the mantle has passed to UKIP, the new 'saviours'.

 

[Hamann Pineapple]

Israel is the Jimmy Savile of nation states

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/israelgaza-conflict-israel-is-jimmy-savile-of-nation-states-says-comedian-alexis-sayle-9608337.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... 08337.html</a>