AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → You support Israel? I DO

879 278798
bobbyr5
offline
bobbyr5
7 posts
Nomad

I just feel the morals and ethics of the middle east aren't right compared to any western country.

  • 879 Replies
zakyman
offline
zakyman
1,627 posts
Peasant

Has nothing I mentioned about not punishing the people who are innocent for the sake of crushing the tiny minority sank in?


Has anything that I have said about the misfortune of circumstance sank in? No, it is not all of the Palestinians fault, however, when a group's charter calls for your destruction (Hamas), you don't just let them have free borders to get more weapons. Yes it is unfortunate that many innocent civilians are trapped, but it is also unfortunate that Hams doesn't want what's best for their people! That is why Israel blockades in the first place, in order to ensure the best for THEIR citizens.

Never once mentioned that.


I never said that you said that. I don't necessarily mean things I have heard on this forum.

that it is pointless to fight for a Palestinian state or call for negotiations with these in place


No, it isn't. If the Palestinians really wanted peace, they would negotiate a better situation for themselves. Also, what you said about international law, you never quoted me any articles or sections of the law which make it illegal to build settlements.
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad

No, it isn't. If the Palestinians really wanted peace, they would negotiate a better situation for themselves. Also, what you said about international law, you never quoted me any articles or sections of the law which make it illegal to build settlements.

Niko meant that was opals land even according to UN
So, having a property in other country with out their consent is a crime for a individual and act of aggression for a country.
BTW you condemn UNO this much, you forget the fact that it is the organization on who's consent that you based israel's creation.
Talk about hypocrisy.
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,991 posts
Grand Duke

Has anything that I have said about the misfortune of circumstance sank in?


It has, but I am going to say again that an entire group should not be punished by the errors of the few black sheep who terrorize others. That's bullying and oppressing, ''labels'' of Israel which you keep denying which are in fact true when seen in this light. And most of Israel's and the Palestinian people acknowledge that a return to the 1967 borders is feasible and reasonable.


Yes it is unfortunate that many innocent civilians are trapped, but it is also unfortunate that Hams doesn't want what's best for their people!



No, it isn't. If the Palestinians really wanted peace, they would negotiate a better situation for themselves.


So now it's the Palestinians' fault that they demand terms which are in fact moderate? By not even claiming land from 1948 but from 1967? By agreeing to a one to one swap which Israel has denounced and hence withdrawn from negotiation? They want to negotiate a better settlement for themselves, and unfortunately, if Israel cannot dismantle their illegal settlements, they cannot expect the Palestinians to cave in on some of their demands.


No, it isn't. If the Palestinians really wanted peace, they would negotiate a better situation for themselves. Also, what you said about international law, you never quoted me any articles or sections of the law which make it illegal to build settlements.


I quoted links which deem it illegal to claim land by conquest, which is indirectly stating that settlements are illegal since the land you settle on is not yours.
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,991 posts
Grand Duke

BTW you condemn UNO this much, you forget the fact that it is the organization on who's consent that you based israel's creation.
Talk about hypocrisy.


That's a rather good point. If the UN was so biased towards Israel, they would never consent to an Israeli state in the first place.
zakyman
offline
zakyman
1,627 posts
Peasant

That's a rather good point. If the UN was so biased towards Israel, they would never consent to an Israeli state in the first place.


One of the primary reasons for the creation of Israel was the horror and shock of the Holocaust. The world felt guilty, and decided to give the Jews a country. But then, the Arabs-with all of their mighty oil-cried about it, and thus, you have an anti-Israeli UN. Also, just because one law is passed, doesn't mean that that is the tone of the entire body for eternity. Take Prohibition in the United States for instance. Does that mean that a single amdendment make it that Congress is always against alcohal? No. The congresspeople have changed, so so has the ideoligy of the body. The UN once had many more sympathetic nations to Israel, but then the governments changed, and now, as a collective group, the feel the need to condemn Israel for every action that it takes.

I quoted links which deem it illegal to claim land by conquest, which is indirectly stating that settlements are illegal since the land you settle on is not yours.


Wikipedia, while nice, is not exactly what I am looking for. Quote me a UN page, or a page where international law specifically making the Israeli settlements illegal.

So now it's the Palestinians' fault that they demand terms which are in fact moderate?


Is it Israel's fault that the Pals want to go to the table already getting everything they want? No, it's not. Unreasonable demands by the Palestinians have hindered the peace process way too long!

"We insist that going back to the negotiation table will not happen without the immediate halt of all settlement activities ... and the recognition of the state borders, including Jerusalem, and the release of all prisoners as agreed to with the previous Israeli government," Rahim said.


This quote was taken directly from an article on CNN.

Still think that Israel is crazy for not exactly going back to the table immediately?
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad

One of the primary reasons for the creation of Israel was the horror and shock of the Holocaust. The world felt guilty, and decided to give the Jews a country. But then, the Arabs-with all of their mighty oil-cried about it, and thus, you have an anti-Israeli UN. Also, just because one law is passed, doesn't mean that that is the tone of the entire body for eternity. Take Prohibition in the United States for instance. Does that mean that a single amdendment make it that Congress is always against alcohal? No. The congresspeople have changed, so so has the ideoligy of the body. The UN once had many more sympathetic nations to Israel, but then the governments changed, and now, as a collective group, the feel the need to condemn Israel for every action that it takes.

Just because your ancestors lived their centuries ago does not mean you should live there for eternity either.
zakyman
offline
zakyman
1,627 posts
Peasant

Just because your ancestors lived their centuries ago does not mean you should live there for eternity either.


And...back to the anti-Israeli slogans...

It has, but I am going to say again that an entire group should not be punished by the errors of the few black sheep who terrorize others


It is misfortunate, however, as a whole, the Palestinians have been lucky that the Israeli government has not taken more violent action! If they wanted to, the Gaza Strip could be turned into a parking lot. Would I support that? Heck no! However, the Palestinians can't keep pushing their luck with Israeli patience. That is a recipe for disaster.
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,991 posts
Grand Duke

But then, the Arabs-with all of their mighty oil-cried about it, and thus, you have an anti-Israeli UN.


I wonder why you threw in the oil adjective here as though it was a negative trait of theirs.


The UN once had many more sympathetic nations to Israel, but then the governments changed, and now, as a collective group, the feel the need to condemn Israel for every action that it takes.


As far as I recall the number of sympathetic nations has increased to include neutral Arab nations and Turkey to boot.

The world felt guilty, and decided to give the Jews a country.


Clearly then, I smell a distinct whiff of biasness? Or am I leaping too much to conclusions?

Wikipedia, while nice, is not exactly what I am looking for. Quote me a UN page, or a page where international law specifically making the Israeli settlements illegal.


Do you really want a torrent of UN resolutions stating how such settlements are illegal?

Resolution 446 (Mentions the 4th Geneva Convention to boot).

Resolution 452

Resolution 465

These are just the Security Council Resolutions, i.e even the US acknowledges them.

Article 49, 4th Geneva Convention:

The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.

Is it Israel's fault that the Pals want to go to the table already getting everything they want? No, it's not. Unreasonable demands by the Palestinians have hindered the peace process way too long!


The right of return is not unreasonable if managed properly. The 1967 borders are not unreasonable, furthermore both publics agree so, and the destruction of illegal settlements is not unreasonable given the lack of legality of their existence. Furthermore, the Israelis have on more than one occasion been as obstinate as the Palestinians on budging.

Still think that Israel is crazy for not exactly going back to the table immediately?


I still think that Israel is unreasonable. It's settlements are illegal, and continuing to build them whilst a peace settlement is hammered out is tantamount to showing the insincerity of the Israelis ; that they can carry on building despite not knowing the outcome of the negotiations. Furthermore, East Jerusalem has been allotted to the Palestinians even under the 1967 borders, and if the previous government has agreed to release prisoners, they should abide by that.

The Palestinians are unreasonable for demanding so much just to get to a peace table, but that doesn't mean that the Israelis themselves are not tainted.

And...back to the anti-Israeli slogans...


Which is a slogan backed by reason. You yourself stated that Israel was created based on the guilt of the world and the fact that the Jews saw it as an ancient home. Flippant and weak reasons. Just because it is anti-Israeli does not mean it is necessarily bad and dismissable,

the Palestinians have been lucky that the Israeli government has not taken more violent action!


If they did, I can fully empathise with how it is painted as a bully by innocent people. Israel has no right to violate innocents, let alone escalate them. Period.

However, the Palestinians can't keep pushing their luck with Israeli patience. That is a recipe for disaster.


Wasn't someone a few pages back going on how Israel was the small and weak nation in a sea of opponents and hostility? That was a nice U-turn somewhere.

Just because Israel is in a superior position does not mean it can use it's weight to push down the Palestinians and demand unfair terms and then claim they were lucky to get a few scraps of land.
zakyman
offline
zakyman
1,627 posts
Peasant

Wasn't someone a few pages back going on how Israel was the small and weak nation in a sea of opponents and hostility? That was a nice U-turn somewhere.


You completely take my post out of context, and attempt to apply it to a completely different subject. Israel needs to sustain their borders because of outside attack, however the Palestinians are like that one mosquito that keeps biting you. Eventually, you are going to swat at it.

but that doesn't mean that the Israelis themselves are not tainted.


I never said that they weren't. However, how many times do you expect Israel to comply with a few things the Palestinians want, only for the Pals to flip them the bird and walk away!?

The right of return is not unreasonable if managed properly


Than what is your plan to manage it without swamping the demographics?

Article 49, 4th Geneva Convention:

The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.


It is not a transfer of civilians if they are willing to go! They move there of their own free will, not by some forced transfer of the Israeli govt.
nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,991 posts
Grand Duke

You completely take my post out of context, and attempt to apply it to a completely different subject. Israel needs to sustain their borders because of outside attack, however the Palestinians are like that one mosquito that keeps biting you. Eventually, you are going to swat at it.


Israel does not need to sustain current borders, which in fact incite more Palestinian attacks. When compared to the map of 1967, they in fact have less land to defend, a smaller border with potentially hostile nations.

So now the Palestinians are pests who bite for no reason? The reason they bite is also due in part to the unfairness of Israeli treatment, who claim that by not squashing it, they are already doing it a favour.

However, how many times do you expect Israel to comply with a few things the Palestinians want, only for the Pals to flip them the bird and walk away!?


A) Israel has not halted the settlement building, a clear sign of its intentions.
B) Israel has itself rejected Palestinian attempts, which did include a one to one swap that Israel rejected.

Than what is your plan to manage it without swamping the demographics?


A migration plan, let in a few per year, and set quotas. Given that most Palestinians would choose to live in their own state, rather than living under the umbrella of their not so long ago foes, it seems feasible.

It is not a transfer of civilians if they are willing to go! They move there of their own free will, not by some forced transfer of the Israeli govt.


The Hague Regulations prohibit the occupying power to undertake permanent changes in the occupied area, unless these are due to military needs in the narrow sense of the term, or unless they are undertaken for the benefit of the local population.

Article 42 of the Hague Regulations defines territory as being occupied when the territory of the Hostile State is actually placed under the authority of a Hostile Army.

Furthermore, the Israeli Supreme Court, sitting as the High Court of Justice, has itself stated that Israel has been holding the areas of Judea and Samaria in belligerent occupation, since 1967. The court also held that the normative provisions of public international law regarding belligerent occupation are applicable. The Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague of 1907 and the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War 1949 were both cited.


The establishment of the settlements leads to the violation of the rights of the Palestinians as enshrined in international human rights law. Among other violations, the settlements infringe the right to self-determination, equality, property, an adequate standard of living, and freedom of movement.
TheAnarchoAtheist
offline
TheAnarchoAtheist
14 posts
Nomad

NO! I am not anti semetic (I think religion is a joke though) but their government is corrupt and forces palestinians out of their own homes all the time. There is no reason for there to be a jewish-state in the middle east, you're just asking for trouble.
-I.N.

nichodemus
offline
nichodemus
14,991 posts
Grand Duke

but their government is corrupt


Every government is to a certain extent corrupt. Israel ranks 36 on the list, which is pretty high up. If you're going to deny the right for a nation to exist just because it is corrupt, no nation should exist, and the first to go would also be the Arab nations to boot.

forces palestinians out of their own homes all the time.


The Palestinians sometimes make it impossible for Israel not to look after its citizens without having to do so.

There is no reason for there to be a jewish-state in the middle east, you're just asking for trouble.


Previous pages have stated a myriad of good reasons, read them before commenting.
zakyman
offline
zakyman
1,627 posts
Peasant

but their government is corrupt


In which ways? Give me proof, or your argument isn't valid. As Nicho said, they are ranked pretty well!

forces palestinians out of their own homes all the time


If you mean by bulldozing houses built without permits, than those houses are already illegal, and any nation would tear them down.

There is no reason for there to be a jewish-state in the middle east, you're just asking for trouble


Yes, there are plenty of reasons for a Jewish nation to exist in the Middle East. First and foremost, that is where people believe Judaism started, so it is basically like Islam's Mecca. Second of all, there are Jewish artifacts and towns abundant throughout the country including Beer Sheva, The Wailing Wall (The Kotel or Western Wall), and Massada.
thepunisher93
offline
thepunisher93
1,826 posts
Nomad

If you mean by bulldozing houses built without permits, than those houses are already illegal, and any nation would tear them down.

Except Istaeli occupation on it is illegal.
Yes, there are plenty of reasons for a Jewish nation to exist in the Middle East. First and foremost, that is where people believe Judaism started, so it is basically like Islam's Mecca. Second of all, there are Jewish artifacts and towns abundant throughout the country including Beer Sheva, The Wailing Wall (The Kotel or Western Wall), and Massada.

Few pages back, when I said Israel = jews you called me anti semitic.
Secondly if that was so dear to you, why your elders left it in first place?
If they were forced, why didnt they resist?
And after all those years you come and claim that land, thats just absurd.
Had it been Makkah muslims would have vanished fighting for it rather than surrendering.
zakyman
offline
zakyman
1,627 posts
Peasant

Few pages back, when I said Israel = jews you called me anti semitic.


That's because you made an equation of Israel being totally Jewish, and visa versa. What I said is that there are plenty of Jewish artifacts and historical sights in Israel.

Secondly if that was so dear to you, why your elders left it in first place?


TheSecond Holy Temple was destroyed and the Jews were kicked out of the area.

If they were forced, why didnt they resist?


I suggest doing research before making baseless accusations.

Had it been Makkah muslims would have vanished fighting for it rather than surrendering.


That's nice, but irrelevant. For what it's worth, the Jews on Masada committed mass suicide when the Romans started building a ramp to reach them.

"Why didn't they fight the builders?" you ask.

Well, because the people who were building the ramp were Jewish slaves to the Romans.
Showing 421-435 of 879