What do you guys think about the west bank barrier [Archive]

CCIP

10-18-10, 01:29 AM

Don't mind the wall, but the route taken could be better!

Yeah, that's sort of what I'm getting at. The wall is not a bad idea, it's just the fact that it's a very unilateral solution for a two-way problem. Otherwise hey, let's face it, they would need something to keep them apart even in the best of possible scenarios here.

Skybird

10-18-10, 02:49 AM

Some weeks ago there was a major essay in one of the international newspapers I use to skim over, showing statistics how illegal border crossings by Palestinian terrorists have dramatically declined and the number of terror attacks inside Israel also. That was what the wall was build for by intention. And it works - better than was hoped.

It does not compare to the Berlin wall, which had a totally different purpose. The Berlin wall was a prison wall. The Palestinian wall is a protection wall.

Tribesman

10-18-10, 03:53 AM

If someone wants to build a wall then they should only build it on land that is theirs.

papa_smurf

10-18-10, 04:16 AM

Its an ill conceived idea, as it was originally built to try and stop suicide bombers getting into Israeli territory, but now its an excuse for Israel to expand their own territory and completely scuppering any chance of a peace deal in the middle east.

Blood_splat

10-18-10, 05:19 AM

If someone wants to build a wall then they should only build it on land that is theirs.

Here we go...

1000 page thread :rotfl2:

I-25

10-18-10, 05:21 AM

its basically the same thing thats between the US - Mex border

Jimbuna

10-18-10, 05:24 AM

Here we go...

1000 page thread :rotfl2:

LOL :DL

the_tyrant

10-18-10, 05:51 AM

thanks guys, i needed this for an essay

August

10-18-10, 08:12 AM

Here we go...

1000 page thread :rotfl2:

Nah, most of the board has him on ignore. :yep:

tater

10-18-10, 10:30 AM

If someone wants to build a wall then they should only build it on land that is theirs.

Should France give itself back to the Neanderthals? If someone crops up claiming to be a pre-Roman tribalist, should they get ownership of England back (or the rest of Europe)?

Every nation on earth exists because they knocked someone over the head and took it from them at some level. The jews predate Islam (or Christianity), so they get it... or is there a statute of limitations? Islam took their territory at sword-point, too, after all. Whoever owned something 75 years ago gets it, perhaps? Not 74 years or 76, but 75. Or maybe 83 years? 112? Or do the Native Americans get rights too? How about we push it back to 1491? Hmmm. Where does it end?

Given that the "Palestinians" (there was never such a state before it was invented, and the real palestinian state already exists, it's called "Jordan") sided (and raised troops for) the Nazis, punishing them post ww2 seems pretty reasonable. You side with Nazis, well, you'll have your borders dictated to you—hard cheese for you.

Freiwillige

10-18-10, 10:46 AM

Your argument is that they sided with the Nazi's? I'm pretty sure the Palestinians had millions of combat troops in German uniforms in Russia right?

I have heard so pretty loose arguments both for and against the Palestinians but this takes the record!

Even if they did have a pro German opinion it was probably more to do with England's control over the middle east and the old saying any enemy of my enemy is my friend.

But your argument that they sided with the Nazi's is about as relevent as saying the Russian's, English, French, Norwegians, etc sided with the Nazi's because thousands of them fought for the Reich.

Takeda Shingen

10-18-10, 10:50 AM

Given that the "Palestinians" (there was never such a state before it was invented, and the real palestinian state already exists, it's called "Jordan") sided (and raised troops for) the Nazis, punishing them post ww2 seems pretty reasonable. You side with Nazis, well, you'll have your borders dictated to you—hard cheese for you.

Then the Finns and the Swiss should expect to be seeing coalition forces up close and personal soon, right?

tater

10-18-10, 11:19 AM

Then the Finns and the Swiss should expect to be seeing coalition forces up close and personal soon, right?

Don't get me started on the so-called neutrals of WW2. And the Finns... tough choice, side with one set of democidal orcs or another.

There is a lot of literature on the European neutrals during the war one at a time, but this book is a nice overview of all of them in one book:
http://www.amazon.com/Sympathy-Devil-Neutral-Europe-Germany/dp/081475175X/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpt_2

My point, BTW, was not that that alone justifies anything, but it's certainly part of the equation. Bottom line is that borders are frequently set by conflicts (the US border, for example, texas is not part of Mexico last time I checked), that's just life.

Bilge_Rat

10-18-10, 12:09 PM

"security barriers" are used by every country in the world to protect vulnerable targets. The US had security barriers criss-crossing Baghdad.

Israel puts them up when required and also takes them down when the danger has passed:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/world/middleeast/16mideast.html

TLAM Strike

10-18-10, 12:17 PM

I didn't believe this stuff at first but then I researched it and its crazy...

Your argument is that they sided with the Nazi's?

No I think we are saying that these guys still want to be Nazis...
http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/5645/imagesnazism0024.jpg
^These dudes have not recently discovered emulating the Nazis is cool, they have been doing that salute since WWII.
http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/1225/imagesnazism0006.jpg
The SS had Muslim Division in Yugoslavia, made up of Bosnian Muslims.

Arafat's hero Haj Amin Al Husseini...
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/4742/huse.jpg
... he is the guy next to Hitler... ask the Nazis to invade British Palestine and extend Hilter's Final Solution to the Jews there.

Is every Muslum in the world a Nazi? No, but their leaders seems to want to be... :roll:

CCIP

10-18-10, 01:00 PM

Well, let's not point to the faults of the Palestinian state and its terrorist organizations - there are also normal everyday people living there you know. I for one don't care if Israel puts Hamas, Hezbollah and Fatah in cages (along with their own Jewish right-wing politicians), but it'd be nice if regular people on both sides of the barrier could have normal lives. If there must be a barrier, let it not get in the way of either doing so.

Disclaimer: I have a close cousin living in Israel, so it's much in my own interest to see the Jews left in peace there. It's just that I really don't think it's gonna happen unilaterally, even if a barrier's involved. The extreme settlements and the byzantine wall sections that carve them into the middle of the West Bank need to go. Whichever side's historical excuses you use, the fact is that there's thousands of normal people on both sides that are totally justified in living where they live. Balance things out, give the Palestinians a chance to have non-broken infrastructure in the West Bank, and from there something can begin to be accomplished. Otherwise you won't have much luck dealing with a completely broken entity that is the Palestinian state now.

Capt. Morgan

10-18-10, 01:29 PM

thanks guys, i needed this for an essay

Do you mean that you can't form your own opinion?

Tribesman

10-18-10, 05:05 PM

Nah, most of the board has him on ignore
You mean a few of the wingnuts plus Skybird who have one thing in common in that they often have to post crazy lies to try and support their views:rotfl2:

Every nation on earth exists because they knocked someone over the head and took it from them at some level.
The world has changed, the countries have agreed that such stupidity is very silly.
Israel signed up to that agreement. If it doesn't want to keep to the agreement than it should leave it and become a pariah state.
Hmmm. Where does it end?

Thats a simple question, it ends when they said it ended.

the real palestinian state already exists, it's called "Jordan"
Oh dear, slight problem there, its very clearly spelt out in the resolutions which paved the way for the foundation of an Isreali state that no part of jordan shall be considered part of the Palestinian arab state or Jewish state.
If you have a problem with that then take it up with your government as they were instrumental in drawing it up just as they were about the stopping of acquisiton of territory through conflict and transfering of populations into militarily occupied territory:yeah:

tater

10-18-10, 06:08 PM

If you attack your neighbor (after telling your own people to get out of the combat zone ahead of time (which is how the bulk of the displaced actually left), and he kicks your ass, and ends up in what used to be your territory, tough sh*t.

As for Jordan, the West Bank was theirs before THEY attacked. I said the "palestinian" state was jordan simply because it is filled with "palestinians." Whatever they are, it's not like they were ever self-governing, the entire region has been a volleyball with one larger group or another controlling it for ages (Ottoman Turks, Brits, etc). It's interesting to look at how they described themselves before. They always associated themselves with the broader Arab world, not a a nation-state.

Had the Arab war against the nascent Israel succeeded, we'd not have the same problem in reverse—of an "occupied" Israel filled with Israelis. They'd have bumped all of them off, or driven them all off (or some combination of "ethnic cleansing" and genocide). Also, had it succeeded, there would be no "Palestine." The various co-belligerents would have split it up into added territories to their own states. A little to Syria, some to Jordan, some to Egypt. There would be both no Israel, AND no Palestine. Creating a Palestine was never part of the plan when they took up arms (the Arabs, not the terrorists).

Tribesman

10-18-10, 06:38 PM

If you attack your neighbor (after telling your own people to get out of the combat zone ahead of time (which is how the bulk of the displaced actually left), and he kicks your ass, and ends up in what used to be your territory, tough sh*t.

Tough sh*t has no legal standing does it.
Since the matter I raised was construction and property rights than thats a simple question of legality of which there is a complete lack.

As for Jordan, the West Bank was theirs before THEY attacked.
Was it? I could have sworn they were the occupying power and the west bank was just the west bank which was occupied and Jordan was Jordan which is the other side of the river.
Perhaps I am wrong, can you show anything valid that states the occupied west bank was recognised as being Jordan?

Castout

10-18-10, 06:43 PM

Great wall. Both are designed to keep people out whereas the Berlin wall was designed to keep people in.

:hmmm: I have given the sentence some deep thoughts frankly I can't tell the difference logically speaking unless it's political.

Keep people out keep people in . . . .

It's like this question:
Are the cages in the zoo meant to keep the animals in or the people out?

It seems like both to me.....

Are the cages meant to protect the people from the wild animals or the animals from the wild people? Then who's in the cage actually? :doh: A bigger cage doesn't mean it is not....and then who's watching who in the zoo?! I knew that monkey gave me a strange look...damn him for having me paid to be his viewing pleasure!

This is what happens when one doesn't go to higher higher education :damn:

Nah, most of the board has him on ignore. :yep:

Ouch that's rude :dead:

TLAM Strike

10-18-10, 06:51 PM

Was it? I could have sworn they were the occupying power and the west bank was just the west bank which was occupied and Jordan was Jordan which is the other side of the river.
Perhaps I am wrong, can you show anything valid that states the occupied west bank was recognised as being Jordan?

Source (http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1950/apr/27/jordan-and-israel-government-decision)

His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom have been officially informed by the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan of the union of the Kingdom of Jordan and of that part of Palestine under Jordan occupation and control. The Jordan Government, in this communication, have stated that an Act providing for this union was unanimously adopted on 24th April by the Jordan Assembly, which is composed of representatives of both these territories, and received the Royal Assent on the same day. His Majesty's Government have decided to accord formal recognition to this union.

Tribesman

10-18-10, 07:03 PM

Well done TLAM.
Though its....
Subject of course to the over riding charter on such matters..... which of course takes precedence and invalidates the recognition.
Its why I asked about validity as the British and Israeli deals with Jordan both lacked it.

Ouch that's rude
Its OK, he is just being a troll again so its what is expected from him

August

10-18-10, 07:08 PM

:hmmm: I have given the sentence some deep thoughts frankly I can't tell the difference logically speaking unless it's political.

Then you aren't really familiar with the Berlin Wall.

It's like this question:
Are the cages in the zoo meant to keep the animals in or the people out?

It seems like both to me.....

If cages at the zoo are really designed to keep people out then how did the child in the video clip below manage to fall in?

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/421147/little_boy_falls_into_a_gorilla_enclosure/

Castout

10-18-10, 08:11 PM

Then you aren't really familiar with the Berlin Wall.

If cages at the zoo are really designed to keep people out then how did the child in the video clip below manage to fall in?

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/421147/little_boy_falls_into_a_gorilla_enclosure/

Umm it was more a philosophical question than technical :)