Gaza rocket fire resumes

[Valort]

Israel got most of its current land fair and square in war, if other nations are made they lost land they shouldnt start stuff in he first place

Try telling them that. The close to 2 million Israeli Arabs are simply those who didn't try to "Kill all jews, cause they be jews, and they tuk er jubs", and that is why we are Israeli citizens, and despite a troublesome vocal minority speaking of "Free Palestine" and "Kill all jews", we are quite happy as Israeli citizens.

The only difference between us and Palestinians, is, actually, that we aren't oppressed by terrorist groups interested only in bloodshed and slaughter.

[Raybourne]

Actually, no. Israel was created by British mandate on a land with no owners. Just because a nomadic people moved from place to place in the area doesn't make the area theirs. And the "Palestinian" people never existed before Britain decided to bring back the old Roman name for the area.

Israel never marched into "Palestine". Israel marched into Egypt a couple of times... Syria and Lebanon as well, a couple of times. But into Palestine? I think a place has to exist for anyone to march into. Or are you going to say we marched into Narnia, as well?

For what reason does land belong to someone in your opinion? Just because they're stronger militarily?

---------- Post added 2012-11-18 at 06:00 AM ----------

On their creation in 1945

It's 1947 actually, though your points still stand.

edit: oops thought something else nvm

[Zhangfei]

For what reason does land belong to someone in your opinion? Just because they're stronger militarily?

Israel functions entirely on might makes right, the most morally repugnant basis of morality there is.

They can starve and shoot the Palestinians at will (Valort seemed proud of this) so apparently they should act like dogs and grovel at their masters' feet?

[Tierbook]

For what reason does land belong to someone in your opinion? Just because they're stronger militarily?

---------- Post added 2012-11-18 at 06:00 AM ----------



It's 1947 actually, though your points still stand.

edit: oops thought something else nvm

Might makes right... thats simply the way the world has been since the dawn of civilization

[Zhangfei]

Might makes right... thats simply the way the world has been since the dawn of civilization

So why condemn Hamas? Surely we should just allow nations to go to war, launch nukes at Israel etc. It's might makes right after all!

[Raybourne]

Might makes right... thats simply the way the world has been since the dawn of civilization

Doesn't make it moral, actually. It only means you can oppress someone weaker than you.

---------- Post added 2012-11-18 at 06:06 AM ----------

So why condemn Hamas? Surely we should just allow nations to go to war, launch nukes at Israel etc. It's might makes right after all!

Free market on violence baby. That should make the most efficient human beings.

For killing and just getting by, that is.

[Bromance22]

Palestine was never a country, Palestinians should go to there brothers and sisters in Jordan/Egypt/Syria, there all arabs, all from the same region. Israel is a country formed in what used to be the British Mandate of Palestine, the Arabs didnt like that so they attacked and started a war. Israel won said war, expanded there borders (extremely modest expansion) so that they could make sure they could defend their sovereignty and citizens from harm, being surrounded by a race of people that dont believe they have the right to exist. In the end the one with the biggest stick has control. Israel not only has the biggest stick but is also a first world country, far more advanced than any other in the mid east.
Only when the palestinain people tell their governments to halt aggression against Israel (rockets every day) and speak out against suicide bombings and wretched things like that will Israel even think about stopping their expansion into the West Bank. The palestinians have been refugees for 60 years and have done nothing with the territory they "control". Israel has professionals in all fields of life, producing doctors, lawyers, businessmen, innovation and the like, Palestinians want to do to Israel what they did to Gaza, turn the whole god dam place into a dependent ghetto that requires handouts to even be able to go about day to day life.

One last thing. Arabs can be citizens in Israel, Jews cannot in any middle eastern country aside from ISrael. Now i know there is resentment in Israel between the Jewish and Arab peoples, but that is similar to how a Frenchman or Brit would feel about a German after WW1/2, in middle eastern countries if your a Jew you should be killed on the grounds that you are exactly that, a Jew. There is a black and white difference between the two peoples, with very little grey areas.

[Tierbook]

Doesn't make it moral, actually. It only means you can oppress someone weaker than you.

---------- Post added 2012-11-18 at 06:06 AM ----------



Free market on violence baby. That should make the most efficient human beings.

For killing and just getting by, that is.

Nothing is moral depending on who you ask.

[Valort]

On their creation in 1945

If you want to talk about UN laws and resolutions, read Article 51 of Chapter 7 of the UN charter.
Allow me to quote some for you:

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

In fact, by this article, Israel is only RIGHT in defending itself against Hamas (IE, We have a member of the UN under armed attack). Therefore, nothing the UN decides can impair Israel's right to defend itself. In fact, the UN should actually be HELPING Israel defend itself against Hamas, as of this article.

Furthermore, if you want to bring the UN into the fray, here, have their take on Territorial Integrity:

Territorial integrity is the principle under international law that nation-states should not attempt to promote secessionist movements or to promote border changes in other nation-states.

As in, the PA, and even Hamas, are wrong by bothering the territorial integrity of the state of Israel. What we have here, are some organizations trying to take land from a nation-state which is a member of the UN.

But please, by all means, give us sources for your "ban on acquisition of lands in wars".

---------- Post added 2012-11-18 at 08:16 AM ----------

Israel functions entirely on might makes right, the most morally repugnant basis of morality there is.

They can starve and shoot the Palestinians at will (Valort seemed proud of this) so apparently they should act like dogs and grovel at their masters' feet?

Proof and sources? Or are you back to twisting the truth to fit your little idea of reality again?

[Mercadi]

One last thing. Arabs can be citizens in Israel, Jews cannot in any middle eastern country aside from ISrael.

Actually there are some (very few) Jews still remaining in other Middle Eastern states. I'm saying that because I've seen fresh Jewish immigrants from Iran just a few years ago.

[Raybourne]

Nothing is moral depending on who you ask.

Why would you base it on asking random people?

[Valort]

For what reason does land belong to someone in your opinion? Just because they're stronger militarily?

Well, since the whole "We were here first" point means a loss for the Palestinians, and the whole "We were squatting in your loft while you were traveling in Europe, therefore it is now ours!" isn't a conclusive win for them either, you could decide who owns land by either going the hell back in history and seeing who has more roots to the place (In which case the Jews take the party cake), you could check who got the area from whoever was in control of it during the time it was given (As in, the British Mandate at that time, and the UN later on), or you could go with the "stronger military" option, which is also correct, given the fact that without that turretless tank Israel had back in 47, they would've been herded into death camps again.

[Zhangfei]

If you want to talk about UN laws and resolutions, read Article 51 of Chapter 7 of the UN charter.
Allow me to quote some for you:

Yes, let me quote one of the very first ones to you:

" Third, they respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live; and they wish to see sovereign rights and self government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them"

So how about you get out of their land before waving those UN resolutions around? You broke one of those it's based on when you stole Palestinian land and sovereignty.

Well, since the whole "We were here first" point means a loss for the Palestinians,

You mean they were first? Once again, prove to me that Palestine was entirely depopulated when the zionists came, or this argument is ridiculous, as it is. Zionists came after Palestinians had lived there and bought land off Palestinians.

[Valort]

Actually there are some (very few) Jews still remaining in other Middle Eastern states. I'm saying that because I've seen fresh Jewish immigrants from Iran just a few years ago.

Lets say that Jews living in Islamic nations are either living in constant fear, or kept as "the token jew" to show the world how accepting that country happens to be (Like the ones in Iran, who eventually resort to falsifying passports to escape)

[Raybourne]

If you want to talk about UN laws and resolutions, read Article 51 of Chapter 7 of the UN charter.
Allow me to quote some for you:


In fact, by this article, Israel is only RIGHT in defending itself against Hamas (IE, We have a member of the UN under armed attack). Therefore, nothing the UN decides can impair Israel's right to defend itself. In fact, the UN should actually be HELPING Israel defend itself against Hamas, as of this article.

Furthermore, if you want to bring the UN into the fray, here, have their take on Territorial Integrity:

As in, the PA, and even Hamas, are wrong by bothering the territorial integrity of the state of Israel. What we have here, are some organizations trying to take land from a nation-state which is a member of the UN.

But please, by all means, give us sources for your "ban on acquisition of lands in wars".

---------- Post added 2012-11-18 at 08:16 AM ----------



Proof and sources? Or are you back to twisting the truth to fit your little idea of reality again?

You do know Israel took Sinai after a war.... right? (I believe it was in the first war).

[Zhangfei]

Lets say that Jews living in Islamic nations are either living in constant fear, or kept as "the token jew" to show the world how accepting that country happens to be (Like the ones in Iran, who eventually resort to falsifying passports to escape)

Wow, have you asked them all this or is this Israeli propaganda?

[Valort]

Yes, let me quote one of the very first ones to you:

" Third, they respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live; and they wish to see sovereign rights and self government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them"

So how about you get out of their land before waving those UN resolutions around? You broke one of those it's based on when you stole Palestinian land and sovereignty.

HOW in hell did you understand THAT to mean THAT?!
They have their government. They chose their prime minister. Those in gaza supposedly democratically chose Hamas to rule them. By that point, they have it all. No part of your quote speaks of lands, it speaks of governments and sovereigns.

Stop twisting the truth, or simply learn to understand what you read for what it is.

[Raybourne]

Well, since the whole "We were here first" point means a loss for the Palestinians, and the whole "We were squatting in your loft while you were traveling in Europe, therefore it is now ours!" isn't a conclusive win for them either, you could decide who owns land by either going the hell back in history and seeing who has more roots to the place (In which case the Jews take the party cake), you could check who got the area from whoever was in control of it during the time it was given (As in, the British Mandate at that time, and the UN later on), or you could go with the "stronger military" option, which is also correct, given the fact that without that turretless tank Israel had back in 47, they would've been herded into death camps again.

It matters not who was there first. We have both parties, we have to deal with it. Israel is a state now, but Palestine has the right to sovereignty.

[Valort]

Wow, have you asked them all this or is this Israeli propaganda?

I'm sorry, have you never heard of this on the weekly Jihadist meeting?
Also, you're still deflecting and not providing any sources for your dribble.

---------- Post added 2012-11-18 at 08:24 AM ----------

It matters not who was there first. We have both parties, we have to deal with it. Israel is a state now, but Palestine has the right to sovereignty.

But you asked, so I answered.
And yes, they do have a right to sovereignty, but not inside the borders of an existing country. That would upset the territorial integrity of a UN member.

[Zhangfei]

I'm sorry, have you never heard of this on the weekly Jihadist meeting?

I wouldn't exactly know given I'm a Christian now, would I? LOL

They have their government. They chose their prime minister. Those in gaza supposedly democratically chose Hamas to rule them. By that point, they have it all. No part of your quote speaks of lands, it speaks of governments and sovereigns.

You took their territories and forced them to leave at gunpoint. That's not self-determination. After all, you can switch off their power and water when you want; that's not self-determination either.

I could point out the further UN resolution about occupiers needing to leave occupied nations?