Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:What I find interesting is to ask the question, "Had there been no hostages taken, would the assault on Gaza been so severe?"
Who knows but any excuse is an excuse
adnj wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:What I find interesting is to ask the question, "Had there been no hostages taken, would the assault on Gaza been so severe?"
Who knows but any excuse is an excuse
Those excuses have provided political cover for Palestinian leadership to remain in power with few elections, for 60 years. Those excuses have enabled Israel to take control of Jerusalem and grow recognized Israeli territory by two-thirds over the last 70 years. Those excuses have allowed for one of the smallest countries in the world to have outsized influence in international relations.
The common man will simply continue to be incensed and disturbed by the illustrations in the book without reading any of the words - and argue about how others lack "critical thinking skills." Because outrage is their excuse.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:What I find interesting is to ask the question, "Had there been no hostages taken, would the assault on Gaza been so severe?"
Who knows but any excuse is an excuse
Those excuses have provided political cover for Palestinian leadership to remain in power with few elections, for 60 years. Those excuses have enabled Israel to take control of Jerusalem and grow recognized Israeli territory by two-thirds over the last 70 years. Those excuses have allowed for one of the smallest countries in the world to have outsized influence in international relations.
The common man will simply continue to be incensed and disturbed by the illustrations in the book without reading any of the words - and argue about how others lack "critical thinking skills." Because outrage is their excuse.
What about the Israeli gov't treatment of the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank?
Dizzy28 wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:What I find interesting is to ask the question, "Had there been no hostages taken, would the assault on Gaza been so severe?"
Who knows but any excuse is an excuse
Those excuses have provided political cover for Palestinian leadership to remain in power with few elections, for 60 years. Those excuses have enabled Israel to take control of Jerusalem and grow recognized Israeli territory by two-thirds over the last 70 years. Those excuses have allowed for one of the smallest countries in the world to have outsized influence in international relations.
The common man will simply continue to be incensed and disturbed by the illustrations in the book without reading any of the words - and argue about how others lack "critical thinking skills." Because outrage is their excuse.
What about the Israeli gov't treatment of the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank?
So far it doesn't seem at least in Gaza that HAMAS treats the people any better than Isael does.
The Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar has for years overseen a secret police force in Gaza that conducted surveillance on everyday Palestinians and built files on young people, journalists and those who questioned the government, according to intelligence officials and a trove of internal documents reviewed by The New York Times.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:If Israel treated the Palestinians better than Hamas did then there would be no Hamas
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Dizzy28 wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:What I find interesting is to ask the question, "Had there been no hostages taken, would the assault on Gaza been so severe?"
Who knows but any excuse is an excuse
Those excuses have provided political cover for Palestinian leadership to remain in power with few elections, for 60 years. Those excuses have enabled Israel to take control of Jerusalem and grow recognized Israeli territory by two-thirds over the last 70 years. Those excuses have allowed for one of the smallest countries in the world to have outsized influence in international relations.
The common man will simply continue to be incensed and disturbed by the illustrations in the book without reading any of the words - and argue about how others lack "critical thinking skills." Because outrage is their excuse.
What about the Israeli gov't treatment of the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank?
So far it doesn't seem at least in Gaza that HAMAS treats the people any better than Isael does.
There's that whataboutism again
The people didn't revolt against their treatment by Hamas or the PA, they revolt against their treatment by the Israelis.
Why are 7000 Palestinians in Israeli prisons and only judged by military court instead of civil as Israelis are?
Why the settlements. Why the wall.
It is oppression under occupation.
If Israel treated the Palestinians better than Hamas did then there would be no Hamas
Arafat said no. Enraged, Clinton banged on the table and said: "You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe." A formal Palestinian rejection of the proposals reached the Americans the next day. The summit sputtered on for a few days more but to all intents and purposes it was over.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/23/israel3
That camp David deal was the same conditions as we see in the west bank today.Dizzy28 wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Dizzy28 wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:What I find interesting is to ask the question, "Had there been no hostages taken, would the assault on Gaza been so severe?"
Who knows but any excuse is an excuse
Those excuses have provided political cover for Palestinian leadership to remain in power with few elections, for 60 years. Those excuses have enabled Israel to take control of Jerusalem and grow recognized Israeli territory by two-thirds over the last 70 years. Those excuses have allowed for one of the smallest countries in the world to have outsized influence in international relations.
The common man will simply continue to be incensed and disturbed by the illustrations in the book without reading any of the words - and argue about how others lack "critical thinking skills." Because outrage is their excuse.
What about the Israeli gov't treatment of the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank?
So far it doesn't seem at least in Gaza that HAMAS treats the people any better than Isael does.
There's that whataboutism again
The people didn't revolt against their treatment by Hamas or the PA, they revolt against their treatment by the Israelis.
Why are 7000 Palestinians in Israeli prisons and only judged by military court instead of civil as Israelis are?
Why the settlements. Why the wall.
It is oppression under occupation.
If Israel treated the Palestinians better than Hamas did then there would be no Hamas
You continue to place no agency with Palestinians
Also I mentioned earlier in here I am pro two state at the 1967 borders and anti settlements in the West Bank. Apart from being land grabs the settlements made Oct 7th possible in no small part due to the deployment of all the regular non war time IDF Brigades to the West Bank to secure settlements.
Can you however point out a time when the Palestinians were willing to accept a two state solution? AFAIK in 2000 Ehud Barak offered essentially 1967 (97% of West Bank and all of Gaza plus East Jerusalem).
Arafat was like nah dawg.........2nd Intifada here we come!!!!!
https://time.com/6332127/israel-palesti ... hud-barak/
Clinton was outraged at ArafatArafat said no. Enraged, Clinton banged on the table and said: "You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe." A formal Palestinian rejection of the proposals reached the Americans the next day. The summit sputtered on for a few days more but to all intents and purposes it was over.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/23/israel3
Walls and military occupation are the result of no compromise. Can you name a better way to protect your people from assymetric warfare?
Dizzy28 wrote:You continue to place no agency with Palestinians
Also I mentioned earlier in here I am pro two state at the 1967 borders and anti settlements in the West Bank. Apart from being land grabs the settlements made Oct 7th possible in no small part due to the deployment of all the regular non war time IDF Brigades to the West Bank to secure settlements.
Can you however point out a time when the Palestinians were willing to accept a two state solution? AFAIK in 2000 Ehud Barak offered essentially 1967 (97% of West Bank and all of Gaza plus East Jerusalem).
Arafat was like nah dawg.........2nd Intifada here we come!!!!!
https://time.com/6332127/israel-palesti ... hud-barak/
Clinton was outraged at ArafatArafat said no. Enraged, Clinton banged on the table and said: "You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe." A formal Palestinian rejection of the proposals reached the Americans the next day. The summit sputtered on for a few days more but to all intents and purposes it was over.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/23/israel3
sMASH wrote:That camp David deal was the same conditions as we see in the west bank today.Dizzy28 wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Dizzy28 wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:adnj wrote:What I find interesting is to ask the question, "Had there been no hostages taken, would the assault on Gaza been so severe?"
Who knows but any excuse is an excuse
Those excuses have provided political cover for Palestinian leadership to remain in power with few elections, for 60 years. Those excuses have enabled Israel to take control of Jerusalem and grow recognized Israeli territory by two-thirds over the last 70 years. Those excuses have allowed for one of the smallest countries in the world to have outsized influence in international relations.
The common man will simply continue to be incensed and disturbed by the illustrations in the book without reading any of the words - and argue about how others lack "critical thinking skills." Because outrage is their excuse.
What about the Israeli gov't treatment of the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank?
So far it doesn't seem at least in Gaza that HAMAS treats the people any better than Isael does.
There's that whataboutism again
The people didn't revolt against their treatment by Hamas or the PA, they revolt against their treatment by the Israelis.
Why are 7000 Palestinians in Israeli prisons and only judged by military court instead of civil as Israelis are?
Why the settlements. Why the wall.
It is oppression under occupation.
If Israel treated the Palestinians better than Hamas did then there would be no Hamas
You continue to place no agency with Palestinians
Also I mentioned earlier in here I am pro two state at the 1967 borders and anti settlements in the West Bank. Apart from being land grabs the settlements made Oct 7th possible in no small part due to the deployment of all the regular non war time IDF Brigades to the West Bank to secure settlements.
Can you however point out a time when the Palestinians were willing to accept a two state solution? AFAIK in 2000 Ehud Barak offered essentially 1967 (97% of West Bank and all of Gaza plus East Jerusalem).
Arafat was like nah dawg.........2nd Intifada here we come!!!!!
https://time.com/6332127/israel-palesti ... hud-barak/
Clinton was outraged at ArafatArafat said no. Enraged, Clinton banged on the table and said: "You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe." A formal Palestinian rejection of the proposals reached the Americans the next day. The summit sputtered on for a few days more but to all intents and purposes it was over.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/23/israel3
Walls and military occupation are the result of no compromise. Can you name a better way to protect your people from assymetric warfare?
Which is just a slower version of invading and occupying a country
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Dizzy28 wrote:You continue to place no agency with Palestinians
Also I mentioned earlier in here I am pro two state at the 1967 borders and anti settlements in the West Bank. Apart from being land grabs the settlements made Oct 7th possible in no small part due to the deployment of all the regular non war time IDF Brigades to the West Bank to secure settlements.
Can you however point out a time when the Palestinians were willing to accept a two state solution? AFAIK in 2000 Ehud Barak offered essentially 1967 (97% of West Bank and all of Gaza plus East Jerusalem).
Arafat was like nah dawg.........2nd Intifada here we come!!!!!
https://time.com/6332127/israel-palesti ... hud-barak/
Clinton was outraged at ArafatArafat said no. Enraged, Clinton banged on the table and said: "You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe." A formal Palestinian rejection of the proposals reached the Americans the next day. The summit sputtered on for a few days more but to all intents and purposes it was over.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/may/23/israel3
I just haven't posted anything on Palestinians.
I agree with you on a two state solution.
Ideally I'd prefer one place where everyone can live in peace but what would they even call it?
Palestinians are being oppressed and they have been retaliating. Even with a two state solution they may still be fighting as it will take generations to remove the hate both sides have for each other.
meccalli wrote:
People like to keep their head in the sand yes.
Dizzy28 wrote:Still one of the juiciest tidbits of this entire conflict. The rank hypocrisy of the South Africas, Nicaraguas et al when it comes to using the ICC and ICJ.
No Jews no news!!!!
Sent from my Pixel 7 using TriniTuner mobile app
I'll check out that later.Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:Dizzy28 wrote:Still one of the juiciest tidbits of this entire conflict. The rank hypocrisy of the South Africas, Nicaraguas et al when it comes to using the ICC and ICJ.
No Jews no news!!!!
Sent from my Pixel 7 using TriniTuner mobile app
is this Jews news worthy?
sMASH wrote:Still need to see the terrorists target aid workers and journalists....
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests