Gaza rocket fire resumes

[Deleted]

What are you talking about? Sinn Fein has always been a "normal" political party, since its founding in 1906. The Provisional IRA, the group responsible for much of the violence related to Northern Ireland was created with help from elements of Sinn Fein in the late 1960. The reason the IRA stopped killing people is because the British government, various Irish Republican groups, and the Irish government were beginning multiparty talks that Sinn Fein was barred from thanks to their association with the IRA. Sinn Fein was to forced to rein the IRA in or face a loss of political relevance in the new emerging order. If Israel and the Palestinians are to follow the Irish model, then Israel should reach out to other Palestinian stakeholders and attempt to marginalize Hamas politically.

they are trying to marginalise hamas hence why they've blockaded the gaza strip and warned fatah not to make any unity deals.

[Beavis]

Oh, and the "association" wasn't broken. The Provisional IRA ceased to exist in 1997 because its disarmament and demobilization was a precondition for Sinn Fein's participation in the multiparty talks. In order for Hamas to follow that path, they'd have to agree to a draw down and ceasefire prior to political engagement.

[Deleted]

Oh, and the "association" wasn't broken. The Provisional IRA ceased to exist in 1997 because its disarmament and demobilization was a precondition for Sinn Fein's participation in the multiparty talks. In order for Hamas to follow that path, they'd have to agree to a draw down and ceasefire prior to political engagement.

Through poltical means (multiparty talks), they achieved exactly what I wrote above. Thanks to deals and talks, and not bombing civilians, the total separation between poltical party and armed guerrilla has been achieved. Aka what I said.
Or are you going to tell me it didn't happen?

This is what needs to be done in Israel too. But in the current situation there is NO way you can have talks and deals.
Israel is showing to be as stubborn as their counterpart.

---------- Post added 2012-11-13 at 12:27 PM ----------

No state can abdicate from protecting its population, which is what you are suggesting. Tell you what, go look up the number of rockets fired monthly before operation Cast lead and after it. Those numbers are fairly self-explanatory.

And no, even in its darkest periods, NI did not come even close to the second intifada levels of violence.

Are you joking? In NI the English were fighting an organised army with training and weapons. Not a bunch of rocks throwing desperados.

[Liara]

Are you joking? In NI the English were fighting an organised army with training and weapons. Not a bunch of rocks throwing desperados.

If you think that the military wing of Hamas (Az-Aldin Al-Qasam brigades) are a bunch of rock throwing desperados, you are gravely mistaken.

[ati87]

Which country was here before Israel, again?
The British mandate. And before that, only empires.
Fact is, the Arabs of the region (note, Arabs, not Palestinians, because that term didn't exist until the 70's or so) declined the two state partition plan, and instead decided to launch an attack on the Jews living in the area once Israel was voted to be a country. Then 5 more countries joined (Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq) the attack the day after the founding of Israel, all in an attempt to wipe Israel out and take the entire area for themselves.
And they lost.

A country isn't defined by it's government but by it's people.

And how does your argument hold up even? End of the day the land itself does not belong to Israel because at best by your logic it should be divided between the 5 countries you mentioned and at worst it should be given to Turkey.

And I will say it again no single country would accept a formation of a country within their own border, even if you don;t acknowledge the Palestinians you are acknowledging the other Arab countries.

It may sound harsh but the entire process of dividing a country without even asking the citizens is nothing more then theft, a even which should have never happened. By what right did the Western countries even have to divide any land that did not belong to them, and the British mandate meant they controlled the land and not owned it. The conflict that started because was to be expected and that is precisely the reason why the UN was formed and we have international law.

Nobody would accept the fact that some fat people that don't even live in your country dictating that you will lose half of the country to immigrants.

[Liara]

A country isn't defined by it's government but by it's people.

And how does your argument hold up even? End of the day the land itself does not belong to Israel because at best by your logic it should be divided between the 5 countries you mentioned and at worst it should be given to Turkey.

And I will say it again no single country would accept a formation of a country within their own border, even if you don;t acknowledge the Palestinians you are acknowledging the other Arab countries.

It may sound harsh but the entire process of dividing a country without even asking the citizens is nothing more then theft, a even which should have never happened. By what right did the Western countries even have to divide any land that did not belong to them, and the British mandate meant they controlled the land and not owned it. The conflict that started because was to be expected and that is precisely the reason why the UN was formed and we have international law.

Nobody would accept the fact that some fat people that don't even live in your country dictating that you will lose half of the country to immigrants.

Your entire argument is based around the premise that before Israel, there was a country in this area. There wasn't. Your point is moot.
The British controlled the land, and since there was no owner, then they were the next best thing.

But instead of accepting the land proposed to the Arabs who were living here, they decided to attack and try and take everything by force.

The 5 countries had zero relevance, they just attacked because they didn't like the idea of Israel. They were never in this area. No country lost land due to the formation of Israel (though they did afterwards, in wars, and even though I'd have preferred they keep the WB and the Gaza Strip, it's their own failure that resulted in losing those areas).

[Purlina]

Your entire argument is based around the premise that before Israel, there was a country in this area. There wasn't. Your point is moot.
The British controlled the land, and since there was no owner, then they were the next best thing.

Someone always owns the land, we are not talking about a new island that just appeared out of nowhere...

[Liara]

Someone always owns the land, we are not talking about a new island that just appeared out of nowhere...

No, someone controls the land. There is a world of difference between control and ownership. Before the British, the Ottoman Empire controlled the area.

[Purlina]

No, someone controls the land. There is a world of difference between control and ownership. Before the British, the Ottoman Empire controlled the area.

So I guess everyone living there was just renting out apartments then...

And the British government just owned all the apartment buildings?

[Liara]

So I guess everyone living there was just renting out apartments then...

And the British government just owned all the apartment buildings?

We were talking about a country. Not about individual houses.

[Deleted]

We were talking about a country. Not about individual houses.

Man I enjoyed this debate, but do you realise how small minded, ridiculous, biased, one sided does this sound?
There was no country? Seriously?
Palestine is a term created in 500 BC to define the people living in the area. 2500 years ago.
Come on, you have to come up with something better then that.

[Reeve]

Wow, love how you just ignore the facts of what's being reported and go right into "whatever I want to say, despite reality" mode. I've noticed most anti-Israel people do this - fantastic stuff. Almost like Fox "News".

God, I've been attacked by the left more often in the last couple days... Ironic that you'd compare me with Fox News, given that I'm a liberal, and an Obama supporter, but I guess that's neither here nor there.

As I've said before in here, I have a cousin who's married to a Palestinian-American who grew up in Gaza, and he can tell me first hand what he has experienced and what his friends and family have experienced in Gaza. The Israeli military has hardly been angels in this conflict. Settlements are being constructed against Israeli law on Palestinian land and protected by the Israeli military. The Palestinians are no angels either, but I don't believe in sweeping the bad behavior of either group under the rug because it doesn't fit nicely into the story we want to tell.

Also, I'm not Anti-Israeli. Israel has been there a long time now, and I believe it has a right to exist at this point. I just think they need to stop being crappy to their neighbors.

But it's not, whatsoever. If Palestine could stop attacking Israel civilians for more than a week or two, perhaps their government could be listed as something other than a terrorist organization, or even better, perhaps those same "government leaders" (aka terrorists) could think about something other than themselves, and negotiate for a two-state solution.

You could turn that around and say that maybe if the Israelis honored their agreements and stopped encroaching on land they themselves agreed was Palestinian, maybe negotiations wouldn't break down and terrorism wouldn't be fomented.

Do you have any facts on this? If we are the top producer of oil, won't that pretty much make us self sufficient?

(hey, did you hear about your state's cessation plans? )

If we're the top producer of oil, that doesn't make us self sufficient because we'll still be consuming more than we produce. The US consumes 18,690,000 bbl/day (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/en...il-consumption), while Saudi Arabia, the world's current top producer, produces 10,520,000 bbl/day (https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat.../2173rank.html). That's a deficit of 8,170,000 bbl/day even if we were producing as much as Saudi Arabia. That's not self-sufficiency.

And yes, I saw there's a stupid petition out there that will go nowhere because the majority of Texans aren't actually that stupid.

[Purlina]

We were talking about a country. Not about individual houses.

Someone still owned the land, you can't just come in and take it.

Look at the Native Americans who lived here. They didn't have an "official country", but it was still wrong of us to slaughter them and take over. Or do you think it was right of us to kill them for their land because there was no "official country".

Just because there isn't a pretty flag stuck in the soil, that doesn't mean you can come in and take what you want.

[Liara]

Someone still owned the land, you can't just come in and take it.

Look at the Native Americans who lived here. They didn't have an "official country", but it was still wrong of us to slaughter them and take over. Or do you think it was right of us to kill them for their land because there was no "official country".

Just because there isn't a pretty flag stuck in the soil, that doesn't mean you can come in and take what you want.

Then why did they refuse the partition plan? Why attack and try to take everything by force? Why instigate violence in the first place?

[Deleted]

Then why did they refuse the partition plan? Why attack and try to take everything by force? Why instigate violence in the first place?

You really want to document yourself on the birth of the state of Israel. It ain't really all peace and love man.

[Mavett]

Then why did they refuse the partition plan? Why attack and try to take everything by force? Why instigate violence in the first place?

Intolerance.

[N-7]

Wrong again. Topics are started by a variety of people, for a variety of reasons. Although it's pretty obvious which side you stand on.

If you bothered to read my next post you would have seen:
Kalyyn :Okay so I went through about 20 Palestine threads, and it looked to be about 50/50. But you do have a point, I'll give you that.
Me: Yeah it seems that way.

[Purlina]

Then why did they refuse the partition plan?

It gave the majority of the land (56 percent) to the Jews, who at that stage legally owned only 7 percent of it. And the area under Jewish control would have contained 45 percent of the Palestinian population.

Maybe if they came out with a fair plan, it wouldn't have been rejected...

[Deleted]

Intolerance.

Yes. It totally makes sense.
The fact that their land was stolen in matter of days had NOTHING to do with it.

[soulcrusher]

Usual zionist lies about there being no such thing as Palestine used to justify stealing their land, murdering their children and treating them as legally inferior citizens. They may have lived their for hundreds of years but have less rights under the law than an American or russian emigre who's just arrived. keep it up though by all means. You reap what you sew and if history has shown us anything you shall reap the whirlwind with this attitude.