Israel 'to make more withdrawals'

[STEED]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4776548.stm

Israel must not back down, you can not keep giving land away.

[Type XXIII]

I'm quite certain Israel will stop at some point. Hopefully it will one day be possible with a Palestinian state and an Israeli state side by side.

Hopefully, I say, but I do not consider it possible as of now. For that, there are to many, on both sides, that oppose any kind of peace treaty.

This article shows some of the problems well, the Israeli settlers oppose the decision as it forces them to move, while the Hamas opposes it because, it appears, it isn't enough. If there are to be any hope of peace in the region, both Israelis and Palestinians will have to be willing to go back on their claims.

[mog]

Good. Occupying land for defensive purposes is one thing, but colonising that land with civilian settlements is different altogether.

[The Avon Lady]

Good. Occupying land for defensive purposes is one thing, but colonising that land with civilian settlements is different altogether.
It's not occupied. It's captured. The Arabs wanted to destroy Israel. We won. Too bad.

Gaza was never legally Egypt's and Judea and Samaria was never legally Jordan's. And there never was an Arab political entity called Palestine. Nor was there ever a "Palestinian People" until the term was fabricated in the 1960s so that suckers like yourself can feel all soft and mushy inside for a mass of homicidal maniacs.

Time for tea! :lol:

[U-552Erich-Topp]

Yes the land is slowly being given back. In a way, it's somewhat similar to what happened to Germany after the Second World War when it became much smaller. Now Germany is one nation again.

[The Avon Lady]

Yes the land is slowly being given back. In a way, it's somewhat similar to what happened to Germany after the Second World War when it became much smaller. Now Germany is one nation again.
Really? The same? And did Poland, France, Russia, England and the US have national declarations calling for the destruction of Germany? Really?

[mog]

It's not occupied. It's captured. The Arabs wanted to destroy Israel. We won. Too bad.
Nothing like a good old-fashioned land grab, eh? I'm afraid annexing your enemy's land doesn't fly in this day and age. If by the use of 'captured' in preference to 'occupied' you are implying that the land is now Israel's forever, then how come the borders haven't been redrawn so that the settlements are inside Israel proper?

Gaza was never legally Egypt's and Judea and Samaria was never legally Jordan's. And there never was an Arab political entity called Palestine.
Irrelevant. The land was outside Israel's legal borders and clearly not terra nullius.

Nor was there ever a "Palestinian People" until the term was fabricated in the 1960s so that suckers like yourself can feel all soft and mushy inside for a mass of homicidal maniacs.
Nice one. :up:

[The Avon Lady]

It's not occupied. It's captured. The Arabs wanted to destroy Israel. We won. Too bad.
Nothing like a good old-fashioned land grab, eh?
How is winning a defensive war, where the other side is the agressor, a land grab? Twist the truth to suit your agenda? Yep, that will indeed fly in this day and age!
I'm afraid annexing your enemy's land doesn't fly in this day and age.
Suggested reading: Judea, Samaria, and "occupation" (http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/008924.php)
If by the use of 'captured' in preference to 'occupied' you are implying that the land is now Israel's forever, then how come the borders haven't been redrawn so that the settlements are inside Israel proper?
Because Israel has been behaving like a group of lemmings for the last 60 years. Lemmings describes the current self-suicide the Israeli government is slowing placing the country into and what this thread's topic is about.
Gaza was never legally Egypt's and Judea and Samaria was never legally Jordan's. And there never was an Arab political entity called Palestine.
Irrelevant. The land was outside Israel's legal borders and clearly not terra nullius.
Not true! The Mandates Commission of the League of Nations officially set aside the entire land up to the Jordan river, as Israel's legal boundary. It was the British who violated the Commision's instructions. The Mandate was formalized by the 52 governments at the League of Nations on July 24, 1922.
Nor was there ever a "Palestinian People" until the term was fabricated in the 1960s so that suckers like yourself can feel all soft and mushy inside for a mass of homicidal maniacs.
Nice one. :up:

[mog]

How is winning a defensive war, where the other side is the agressor, a land grab?
Because being in the right doesn't give you carte blanche.

Twist the truth to suit your agenda? Yep, that will indeed fly in this day and age!
Just out of curiosity, what do you presume is my agenda?

Not true! The Mandates Commission of the League of Nations officially set aside the entire land up to the Jordan river, as Israel's legal boundary. It was the British who violated the Commision's instructions.
That's certainly not my understanding of it. Perhaps you could point out exactly where it says that the entire Palestine Mandate is to become the Jewish national home, as opposed to a Jewish state being created inside the Palestine mandate at HM's Government's discretion.

Here is the text:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/palmanda.htm

[The Avon Lady]

How is winning a defensive war, where the other side is the agressor, a land grab?
Because being in the right doesn't give you carte blanche.
Silly me.

Why not?

Twist the truth to suit your agenda? Yep, that will indeed fly in this day and age!
Just out of curiosity, what do you presume is my agenda?
Claiming Israel's illegatmacy to declare Judea and Samaria as integral parts of Israel.
Not true! The Mandates Commission of the League of Nations officially set aside the entire land up to the Jordan river, as Israel's legal boundary. It was the British who violated the Commision's instructions.
That's certainly not my understanding of it. Perhaps you could point out exactly where it says that the entire Palestine Mandate is to become the Jewish national home, as opposed to a Jewish state being created inside the Palestine mandate at HM's Government's discretion.

Here is the text:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/palmanda.htm
See therein Article 25 (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/palmanda.htm#art25), which tentatively excludes anything east of the Jordan River from the Mandate.

[STEED]

Long live Israel, well done Avon Lady :up: :up:

[Sixpack]

You beat me to it, Steed.

Confessions of a (weary old -39 next month) Dutchman:

1. Yea, the Israeli-Pali conflict on the news every night bothers me for some time now

2. Yea, it sure would be nice to have the conflict over with

3. Yea, I acknowledge nobody has a clue how that could happen (without 'Deus ex machina' that is)

4. Yea, Israel's claim "land for real peace and full acceptance of Israel' is understandable, admirable and imo just. Yet an impossible stipulation, for the destruction of Israel is at the core of Islam ! Full circle, no escapes. Unless Islam changes its ideology of hatred.

5. Yea, the Palis totally suck in my book because of their terrorist approach to make changes things happen for them. In fact: I dont give a rat's bottom for their claims anymore, nor other muslim interests groups (granted, I never did anyway ;)

6. So, rock on Israel ! :rock: Dont give up the fight. It's the cross Israel has to carry. How ironic :)

[STEED]

What dose Israel’s neighbours want, answer to blow Israel off the map what kind of neighbours are they, the worst kind. Israel has every right to live their on their own land. Well done Israel you fight for your freedom. :up: :up:

Well said Sixpack :rock:

[U-552Erich-Topp]

Yes, sooner or later Israel will have to hand the land back. It's just the way the world goes.

[Wim Libaers]

Yes the land is slowly being given back. In a way, it's somewhat similar to what happened to Germany after the Second World War when it became much smaller. Now Germany is one nation again.

But still smaller than it used to be.

[TLAM Strike]

Yes the land is slowly being given back. In a way, it's somewhat similar to what happened to Germany after the Second World War when it became much smaller. Now Germany is one nation again.

But still smaller than it used to be. Don’t complain look at all the land Italy has lost over the Centuries… :lol:

[SUBMAN1]

Everything here is going as expected. Isreal held the land for a long time, with the world crying foul - and the world said, this is why the Palasitnians attack you.

So, Isreal gave them their land to prove the rest of the world wrong. The Palastinians still attack them. It is almost to a point now that I think Isreal has a right to take that land back and hold on to it forever, just as a reminder to those that would attack them again that it isn't without consequence.

-S

PS. In the old world, the deterance of attack used to be slavery. Maybe that should be the way forward too.

[Iceman]

Traditional Navajo have a very different view of the earth itself from the dominant culture. They believe that the earth, as the source from which all life comes, is the mother of all people and a living being herself. She, like any other person, has organs, which are various geological formations and veins and arteries, which are rivers and streams. If too much of her insides such as water, coal, and other mineral, are removed then she will eventually, yet assuredly, die as would any human whose had their vital organs removed. If, however, the land is cared for and respected properly, it will continue to provide for the people.

This type of belief while very different from Christianity,Islam, or Judaism I think is probably the sanest way to look at the Earth...I don't understand the mentality of ANY culture who denies that if the Earth dies then it was all for nothing and all the wars and all the fighting was in vain....All are responsible and indeed all must seek to work together or else...well you know....what I see happening is the majority soon realizing this and pulling togther under one flag...if not the planet is Doomed...and if it does I think it is still doomed because of the "Man" factor...and the evil nature that man has adopted and follows naturally.

Still preach only one way out...JC. :up:

[mog]

Silly me.

Why not?

'Two wrongs don't make a right.'


See therein Article 25 (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/palmanda.htm#art25), which tentatively excludes anything east of the Jordan River from the Mandate.

Yes, and the British exercised that right by distinguishing that area as Transjordan and making it effectively autonomous, didn't they? Why does that remove their right to partition Palestine in the eventuality that a one-state solution would fail like it did?

If Israel has a claim to lands outside the partitioned borders under the old League of Nations directives that refer to a one-state solution in Palestine, then the same logic can be applied in favour of the Palestinians to annex parts of Israel itself.

[U-552Erich-Topp]

Well said Mog :up: :up: :up:

[The Avon Lady]

Silly me.

Why not?

'Two wrongs don't make a right.'
There is nothing wrong here. That the best you can come up with? Thanks but saving are skins seems a little more important than such stale diplomatic ettiquette.


See therein Article 25 (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/palmanda.htm#art25), which tentatively excludes anything east of the Jordan River from the Mandate.
Yes, and the British exercised that right by distinguishing that area as Transjordan and making it effectively autonomous, didn't they? Why does that remove their right to partition Palestine in the eventuality that a one-state solution would fail like it did?
What one-state solution failed? A 2-state solution failed! The British Peel commission partitioned the land. The Jews, out of lack of choice accepted it. The Arabs didn't. The Brits did everything they could to worsen the conditions of the Palestinian Jews.
If Israel has a claim to lands outside the partitioned borders under the old League of Nations directives that refer to a one-state solution in Palestine, then the same logic can be applied in favour of the Palestinians to annex parts of Israel itself.
That's why they went to war with us time and time again, with the deliberate aim to destroy us and "drive us into the sea". They lost. Too bad. Don't like it? Lump it, plain and simple. :down:

[mog]

There is nothing wrong here. That the best you can come up with? Thanks but saving are skins seems a little more important than such stale diplomatic ettiquette.
Colonisation is wrong, and the fact that the Arabs started the war doesn't make it right. In any case, how on earth does building settlements constitute saving Israeli skins? If anything, I would think that these settlements probably impede Israel's ability to fight terrorists by forcing the IDF to defend scattered targets.

What one-state solution failed? A 2-state solution failed! The British Peel commission partitioned the land.
Palestine up until partition was a single state in the sense that both Arab and Jew were under the same central government, albeit British. Clearly they could not co-exist and the mandate was ungovernable, as the Peel Royal Commission reported.

There's nothing to suggest that Britain's plans to partition Palestine are in any way illegal or incongruent with the League of Nations mandate. The fact that the UN presided over the partitioning in 1947 appears to support this. If the whole of Palestine were intended to become Israel it would explicitly state as much in the mandate or somewhere in official British documents.


If Israel has a claim to lands outside the partitioned borders under the old League of Nations directives that refer to a one-state solution in Palestine, then the same logic can be applied in favour of the Palestinians to annex parts of Israel itself.
That's why they went to war with us time and time again, with the deliberate aim to destroy us and "drive us into the sea".
But were they justified in doing so?

[Sixpack]

Colonisation is wrong.

So why dont you leave Australia ?

[Happy Times]

Colonisation is wrong.

So why dont you leave Australia ? Good one :up: And if we start looking at who was first Jews kinda have a claim. Also entire ME was mostly cristian and jewish before the Arabs started rolling from the desert.

[mog]

Colonisation is wrong.

So why dont you leave Australia ?
You disagree? Presumably you wouldn't mind me annexing your backyard then.

I just might take you up on that offer.


'The rules' have changed somewhat in the last 200 years. A relevant analogy regarding Australia would be our attempt at annexing Papua New Guinea after WW1. Obviously this was frowned upon by the international community and didn't go ahead. This is an age of diplomacy, not countries doing whatever they feel like with those weaker than them. The Dutch should be able to recognise this as a good thing more than most, given what you suffered from the Germans.

[Happy Times]

Colonisation is wrong.

So why dont you leave Australia ?
You disagree? Presumably you wouldn't mind me annexing your backyard then.

I just might take you up on that offer.


'The rules' have changed somewhat in the last 200 years. A relevant analogy regarding Australia would be our attempt at annexing Papua New Guinea after WW1. Obviously this was frowned upon by the international community and didn't go ahead. This is an age of diplomacy, not countries doing whatever they feel like with those weaker than them. The Dutch should be able to recognise this as a good thing more than most, given what you suffered from the Germans. I dont accept violent annexing with agression, Finland had to cede territory because of Russian agression in WW2, but Israel wasnt the agressor in this case. And Arabs have land from Arabian peninsula to West-Africa, the fact they cant form their own national state is hardly our fault.

[STEED]

Colonisation is wrong.

So why dont you leave Australia ?
:rotfl:

Good point a very good point :up:

[Sixpack]

This is an age of diplomacy.

Say that to these guys for starters, and please make a video for us when you do :-j (in random order)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38106000/jpg/_38106238_jongilap150.jpg

and:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a3/Osama-med.jpg/150px-Osama-med.jpg

and:
http://www.theconnection.org/content/2003/06/26/0627hamas173.jpg

and:http://www.venusproject.com/ecs/images/toppled_dictators/sadam_husein.jpg

and:

http://www.tomgpalmer.com/images/Robert%20Mugabe.jpg

[Type XXIII]

And Arabs have land from Arabian peninsula to West-Africa, the fact they cant form their own national state is hardly our fault.

Yes... because all Arabs are of the same nation. :roll:
Be careful not to label the conflict Arab vs. Jews. In its core, the conflict is between Palestinians and Israelis

Anyway, that Israel annexed buffer zones after the 1948 war is understandable, but then they started settling those buffer zones, which was, I think, a mistake. That is not to say that the Palestinian terrorists are in their right when they attack Israeli civilians.

The issue is, as previously stated, very complex, and it is hard to solve. Both parts mean they belong to and have a right to the country. I think both parts should be allowed to live there. There are two possible solutions.

1) Union. a multicultural state, where the peoples are tolerating and respecting each other, and living side by side in peace.

However, there are people, both Israeli and Palestinian that are opposed to living in peaceful co-existance, so we're left with option 2) Segregation. A new partition of Israel, into the national states of Israel and Palestine, and a strong UN presence to deter attacks from either side.

[Happy Times]

es... because all Arabs are of the same nation.
Be careful not to label the conflict Arab vs. Jews. In its core, the conflict is between Palestinians and Israelis Great majority of Arabs share the same history, culture, language and religion. Its a different matter, that they are a tribal culture that have rivaled amongst themselfs also. But Palestinians for sure arent a nationality. :roll:

[The Avon Lady]

And Arabs have land from Arabian peninsula to West-Africa, the fact they cant form their own national state is hardly our fault.
Yes... because all Arabs are of the same nation. :roll:
What's the difference between the Arabs in today's Jordan and those in Judea and Samaria?
Be careful not to label the conflict Arab vs. Jews. In its core, the conflict is between Palestinians and Israelis
Actually the conflict is between not only the Arabs (as in Pan-Arab)and the Israelis but between Islam and non-Islam.
Anyway, that Israel annexed buffer zones after the 1948 war is understandable, but then they started settling those buffer zones, which was, I think, a mistake.
Will you state the same about Jordan's annexation of Judea and Samaria and Egypt's of Gaza? Funny how everyone forgets......
The issue is, as previously stated, very complex, and it is hard to solve. Both parts mean they belong to and have a right to the country. I think both parts should be allowed to live there. There are two possible solutions.

1) Union. a multicultural state, where the peoples are tolerating and respecting each other, and living side by side in peace.
Bye bye. Not acceptable. Not real. Get real.

However, there are people, both Israeli and Palestinian that are opposed to living in peaceful co-existance, so we're left with option 2) Segregation. A new partition of Israel, into the national states of Israel and Palestine, and a strong UN presence to deter attacks from either side.
I fully agree.

Jordan is Palestine. Go for it!

[STEED]

This is an age of diplomacy.

Say that to these guys for starters, and please make a video for us when you do :-j (in random order)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38106000/jpg/_38106238_jongilap150.jpg

and:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a3/Osama-med.jpg/150px-Osama-med.jpg

and:
http://www.theconnection.org/content/2003/06/26/0627hamas173.jpg

and:http://www.venusproject.com/ecs/images/toppled_dictators/sadam_husein.jpg

and:

http://www.tomgpalmer.com/images/Robert%20Mugabe.jpg

Good one Sixpack :up:

[TLAM Strike]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38106000/jpg/_38106238_jongilap150.jpg

and:

http://www.tomgpalmer.com/images/Robert%20Mugabe.jpg Someone should send that picture of Mugabe to Kim Jong Il, maybe he would grow a mustache like that. With those shades he be one styling four-foot psychopathic dictator. :D

[STEED]

Guys don't mess with Avon Lady she has a front line seat and has a better understanding of what is going on in the middle east. :yep:

[STEED]

http://www.tomgpalmer.com/images/Robert%20Mugabe.jpg Someone should send that picture of Mugabe to Kim Jong Il, maybe he would grow a mustache like that. With those shades he be one styling four-foot psychopathic dictator.

Yes we have seen that mustache a little bigger on a real monster now rotting in hell

[Happy Times]

Yes we have seen that mustache a little bigger on a real monster now rotting in hell Probably his secret idol.

[Sixpack]

My initial post with great diplomatic leaders got lost. I then quickly made the one I ended up posting, but unfortunately the following great guy got lost in the process.

The true master of diplomacy in this golden age of diplomacy, I give you: (you guessed right) ;)

http://www.planet.nl/upload_mm/1/8/b/1978466971_1999998627_180605_337x253_ahmadinejad.j pg

:shifty:

[August]

My initial post with great diplomatic leaders got lost. I then quickly made the one I ended up posting, but unfortunately the following great guy got lost in the process.

The true master of diplomacy in this golden age of diplomacy, I give you: (you guessed right) ;)

http://www.planet.nl/upload_mm/1/8/b/1978466971_1999998627_180605_337x253_ahmadinejad.j pg

:shifty:

He sort of looks like your avatar...

[Sixpack]

huh ?......Let me have a look.....Hell, you're right !

But then again: I aint diplomatic either ! :hulk:

[Type XXIII]

What's the difference between the Arabs in today's Jordan and those in Judea and Samaria?


Not much, except from slight differences in modern history, I'll give you that, but there are other Arabs that are significantly different. Arabs are not a nation any more than Europeans are.

Actually the conflict is between not only the Arabs (as in Pan-Arab)and the Israelis but between Islam and non-Islam.


That is your opinion. I feel that is generalizing too much, and consider the conflict between Israel and Palestinia by it self, without drawing in other conflicts that are only slightly related.


Will you state the same about Jordan's annexation of Judea and Samaria and Egypt's of Gaza? Funny how everyone forgets......
State what about them? That the annexations were understandable, but that the settlement of them was wrong?

As far as I know, there were no Egyptian settlements in Gaza, nor Jordan settlements on the West Bank. Gaza and the West Bank were densely populated already from pre-1948 inhabitants and refugees from the areas that Israel annexed.

But what is wrong is that there was not established a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza during the period 1948-1967. I do not know why this wasn't done, it would have aided the peace process remarkably.


Bye bye. Not acceptable. Not real. Get real.


Read on, I stated that in the following paragraph.


I fully agree.

Jordan is Palestine. Go for it!

Palestine is also the areas west of Jordan. Geographically speaking, you live in Palestine. But that is beside the point.

The Palestinians have as much right as the Israeli do to live in the contested areas. But since Israelis and Palestinians can't live in peace together, the best solution is a compromise, where those areas are divided in Israeli and Palestine parts.

Land for peace is a good strategy. If only the Israeli settlers and the Palestinian authorithies would understand that...

Guys don't mess with Avon Lady she has a front line seat and has a better understanding of what is going on in the middle east. :yep:

I prefer seventh or eighth row when I go to the movies, makes me able to see the whole screen at once.

On a more serious note, (if Avon Lady is on the front row in this matter, I'm on the back row, right behind a basketball player,) I still can't, in the name of my consience, let views that differ from my own go unchallenged and unapposed. I respect Avon Lady and her opinions, but I disagree with some of them. I express this disagreement because I can't just sit back and let others form my opinions.

Also, this thread is about the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis, and an Israeli is probably not the most unbiased person when it comes to this subject.

[Happy Times]

http://newsblaze.com/pix/2006/cartoon/gv1216c.jpg

[TLAM Strike]

Land for peace is a good strategy. I bet thats what Neville Chamberlain thought... :nope:

[PeriscopeDepth]

Guys don't mess with Avon Lady she has a front line seat and has a better understanding of what is going on in the middle east. :yep:

Also possibly the most biased person on the board. A lot of her posts are excellent and everybody else has a bias also, just something you have to realize while reading her posts.

PD

[TteFAboB]

Actually the conflict is between not only the Arabs (as in Pan-Arab)and the Israelis but between Islam and non-Islam.


That is your opinion. I feel that is generalizing too much, and consider the conflict between Israel and Palestinia by it self, without drawing in other conflicts that are only slightly related.

Is the censorship in Norway for multicultiralism and only slightly related to Islam?

The Palestinians have as much right as the Israeli do to live in the contested areas. But since Israelis and Palestinians can't live in peace together, the best solution is a compromise, where those areas are divided in Israeli and Palestine parts.

Do they? Israelis are a people who value their books and their democracy, they form great scientists, musicians and commercial enterprises world-wide. Will the Palestinians really live better in a Palestinian state, where the only book they'll ever hold is the Koran?

The best solution is to create a larger Israel that covers all of Palestine, suppress and arrest or kill all terrorist-political authorities and remove Palestinian children from their homes where they will learn martydom by terrorism is acceptable and desired and sent to a school where they'll receive basic education.

The Israeli-Palestinian young orchestra was created by an Israeli, it is led by an Israeli and conducted by an Israeli. Palestinians have no problem submitting to an Israeli authority and playing along next to an Israeli.


I prefer seventh or eighth row when I go to the movies, makes me able to see the whole screen at once.

You happen to learn alot about Israel and Palestine from the movies?

On a more serious note, (if Avon Lady is on the front row in this matter, I'm on the back row, right behind a basketball player,) I still can't, in the name of my consience, let views that differ from my own go unchallenged and unapposed. I respect Avon Lady and her opinions, but I disagree with some of them. I express this disagreement because I can't just sit back and let others form my opinions.

Also, this thread is about the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis, and an Israeli is probably not the most unbiased person when it comes to this subject.

Since you are rightfully willing to express your opinion when in contrast with others, I take the liberty to assume from your silence your consentment with the Norwegian pro-censorship mentality. If so, you have no right to say the Avon Lady is biased, if you, yourself is pro-Muslim or pro-Arab.

Aren't you sitting right next to the Avon Lady on the front row?

Land for peace is a good strategy.I bet thats what Neville Chamberlain thought...
:up:

[Wim Libaers]

Yes we have seen that mustache a little bigger on a real monster now rotting in hell Probably his secret idol.

No, no, not secret at all. Mugabe has already claimed to be the modern Hitler in public.

http://www.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/03/26/wzim26.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/03/26/ixworld.html

[STEED]

Guys don't mess with Avon Lady she has a front line seat and has a better understanding of what is going on in the middle east. :yep:

Also possibly the most biased person on the board. A lot of her posts are excellent and everybody else has a bias also, just something you have to realize while reading her posts.

PD

Yes I know :doh:

[Type XXIII]

Is the censorship in Norway for multicultiralism and only slightly related to Islam?
It's only slightly related to the Israel-Palestinia-conflict, which is the conflict I'm discussing.


Do they? Israelis are a people who value their books and their democracy, they form great scientists, musicians and commercial enterprises world-wide. Will the Palestinians really live better in a Palestinian state, where the only book they'll ever hold is the Koran?

The best solution is to create a larger Israel that covers all of Palestine, suppress and arrest or kill all terrorist-political authorities and remove Palestinian children from their homes where they will learn martydom by terrorism is acceptable and desired and sent to a school where they'll receive basic education.

The Israeli-Palestinian young orchestra was created by an Israeli, it is led by an Israeli and conducted by an Israeli. Palestinians have no problem submitting to an Israeli authority and playing along next to an Israeli.


I agree partly with your view on the Palestinian authorities. They are sponsoring terrorist activities and are hampering the peace process. They will have to change or be removed, if peace is to come to the region.

But I do not agree with your proposed treatment of Palestinian children. What you are promoting is racism and ethnic cleansing (less violent than other examples of ethnic cleansing, but ethnic cleansing nonetheless.) That is not the way to go. But you do have right in that they need better education.



You happen to learn alot about Israel and Palestine from the movies?


Do I have to write it like this?

"I prefer seventh or eighth row when I go to the movies, makes me able to see the whole screen at once."


Since you are rightfully willing to express your opinion when in contrast with others, I take the liberty to assume from your silence your consentment with the Norwegian pro-censorship mentality. If so, you have no right to say the Avon Lady is unbiased, if you, yourself is pro-Muslim or pro-Arab.


I take the liberty to assume you are monitoring me, since you are so certain of me never expressing my opinion against it. No? I might not have done so on these forums, but I do have a life outside of them, you know. My view on censorship is highly complex, but it isn't relevant in this discussion. I am not pro-Muslim nor pro-Arab, but neither am I anti-Muslim or anti-Arab. If you read my posts, you will find that I'm critizising Islamists and Palestinian authorities, as well as Israeli settlers. I'm trying to avoid generalizations and polarizations. And I do defend Arabs and Muslims on these forums where they are constantly being critizised, because very few else does.


Aren't you sitting right next to the Avon Lady on the front row?


Not when it comes to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Land for peace is a good strategy.I bet thats what Neville Chamberlain thought...

It could have been a good strategy back then as well, if the Poles had an army capable of beating the Germans and the Brits one capable of crushing them.

Note that the solution I have outlined would require a huge international (read: UN) effort. It is very unlikely to happen, as the UN do not have the means to follow it through. Also, China, and maybe USA as well, would definitely veto such a proposal if it was to come up in the UN Safety Council.

An end to the Israel-Palestine conflict seems very, very unlikely at the present moment... :nope:

[Sixpack]

The best solution is to create a larger Israel that covers all of Palestine ..

I like the idea so far.

Kind of like how the Aussies rule the primitive Aboriginals and Americans the inferior Indians :lol: (hope you understand I am being sarcastic here)

I think it fits the bill allright :yep:

[STEED]

But I do not agree with your proposed treatment of Palestinian children. What you are promoting is racism and ethnic cleansing

Where dose TteFAboB say ethnic cleansing in his posts?

Reshesh -
Palestinian children from their homes where they will learn martydom by terrorism is acceptable and desired and sent to a school where they'll receive basic education.

I don't see him implying they should kill the Palestinian children?

[Happy Times]

Yes we have seen that mustache a little bigger on a real monster now rotting in hell Probably his secret idol.

No, no, not secret at all. Mugabe has already claimed to be the modern Hitler in public.

http://www.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/03/26/wzim26.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/03/26/ixworld.htmlLMAO :rotfl: I should have guessed..

[TteFAboB]

I exaggerate things a little bit since we're talking about an extreme scenario.

If we were to be realistic, and assume first that a greater Israel exists, given all the new problems and conflicts such a thing would bring, kidnapping children would be a last, probably unnecessary, resort.

This can be done, far more simply, by the Palestinian authority, by implementing a condition on their money hand-out programs. To receive the cash, your children MUST be going to a proper school without Jihadists teachers. The kid is discovering the world, he will develop an individual moral code, while the parents can sit at home doing nothing and receive the money. The kid will grow clever and outsmart the Hamas, his individual moral sense will conflict with the Islamic ethic, and that's why the Hamas will never provide nor education nor such condition to Palestinian children, should somebody else do it then?

When I meantion the Norwegian case, I mean to imply the palestinian-israeli conflict is greater than a land claim, there is an entire terrorist-raising system in place that will not disappear easily even if all Palestinian claims were granted, and if Israel was to be wiped off the map, then instead of blasting Tel Aviv, the Hamas would blast a restaurant in Germany to demand cheaper loans or a bus in Paris for more foreign aid. The analogy would be that censoring newspapers, not only in Norway, also have greater motivations behind from multiple factions that would not stop at censorship.

I understand the cinema metaphor, my idea is that you present a more politically correct view that is usually seen in the movies about the region.

I monitor this forum, and fill the blanks with illations. You defend Arabs and Muslim freedom fighters, but believe what the AL has to say should be taken as something more biased than that. She can do much more from the front row than you can from the rear rows, like the Israeli-Palestinian young orchestra I mentioned, it's not an UN or international initiative, it's Israelis and Palestinians doing the work.

Well, we're all biased here in the sense we all want to see the conflict end with peace and love, don't we?

[U-552Erich-Topp]

From TteFAboB reply. "Well, we're all biased here in the sense we all want to see the conflict end with peace and love, don't we?".

Hummm, I rather doubt that this is likely to happen given the history and current events in the Middle Eastern region. (the previous sentence is not a remark against you TteFAboB).

Thirty years ago, most people in these parts didn't really care what was going on in the Middle East. However today, many people do keep their ears open when it comes to Middle Eastern events.

I've noticed since 911 that may of the people I know don't like the Middle East anymore (you should hear what they think should happen to the entire Middle East. Let's just say there wouldn't be birthrate in the entire area for many decades to come.) Is this the direction the Middle East is ultimately headed for???????????????

[kiwi_2005]

The U boat Jews :arrgh!:

Taken from "The World at Arms" book. Publisher, Readers Digest.

There is little mention, ive typed the exact words from the book.

When Berlin was declared Judenrein ('Free of Jews') in 1944, some 4000 Jews in fact remained, leading a submerged life which earned them the nickname 'U-boats'. A few brave Gentiles were prepared to help them. In Berlin a group of two dozen with the code name 'Uncle Emil' ran a survial system for the U-boats'.
One of its members, Dr Tegel, was a master printer who could forge vital documents. A 'U-boat' was constantly on the move from cubbyholes to cellars and garden sheds. He was in perpetual fear of detection and represented an ever-present threat to his protectors. The chaos caused by Allied bombing enabled any 'U-boat' stopped and questioned to claim that he had been bombed-out-so long as his papers were in order and he did not look Jewish. Hunger was a constant companion as two or three 'U-boats' lived on one forged or donated ration card.
A few Jews passed as Gentiles. One, Hans Rosenthal - a popular entertainer after the war - found work as a gravedigger. On one occasion he had to dig a grave for two SS officers. He recalled: 'I told myself later that I was probably the only Jew in Germany who was burying Nazis.

[TLAM Strike]

<snip>

Interestingly the Bismarck was built and crewed by many Jews since they were the only professional shipbuilders and sailors the Germans had access too.

[The Avon Lady]

<snip>

Interestingly the Bismarck was built and crewed by many Jews since they were the only professional shipbuilders and sailors the Germans had access too.
Maybe they mistakenly thought it had something to do with herring before they signed on. :hmm:

[Sixpack]

Maybe they mistakenly thought it had something to do with herring before they signed on. :hmm:


Oh damn, you're telling us those Jews tried to squeeze a buck even out of that ship and regardless the circumstances ? ;)

[The Avon Lady]

Maybe they mistakenly thought it had something to do with herring before they signed on. :hmm:
Oh damn, you're telling us those Jews tried to squeeze a buck even out of that ship and regardless the circumstances ? ;)
No, I'm telling you we have an affinity for good herring.

Darn, I'm hungry. :cry:

[Sixpack]

:lol: Bon appetit !

[Happy Times]

Maybe they mistakenly thought it had something to do with herring before they signed on. :hmm:
Oh damn, you're telling us those Jews tried to squeeze a buck even out of that ship and regardless the circumstances ? ;)
No, I'm telling you we have an affinity for good herring.

Darn, I'm hungry. :cry: I, like many Finns love herring. How do you like it? Allways nice to get reputation with a new recipe. ;) http://www.dlc.fi/~marianna/gourmet/herring.htm

[Sixpack]

I was raised in a small city in Holland which is historically known for it herring fishing.

The inhabitants of that inland port town , near Rotterdam, are to this very day nicknamed herringheads.

I now get me my herring every week in IJmuiden port, right next to the Fishing boats. My toddlers love it too.

[The Avon Lady]

Here in Israel, the quality of the matjes herring we get is pretty lousy compared to abroad. The herrings come whole in brine barrels, the shops fillet them sloppily and then dump them into oil as is.

I buy the fillets and then Mr. Avon or my oldest son removes them from the oil they came in, removes all the bones left behind, places them back in a clean container in rows, with large whole rings of fresh white onions between the rows and refills with new oil - makes no difference if its canola, soy, etc.

Close tight and keep in the fridge for 5 to 7 days. Enjoy.

NOTE: Do NOT eat the onions in this case. Their purpose is twofold: 1) to enhance the flavor of the herring, and; 2) to absorb all the excess brine the herring came with.

Now I'm even more hungry than before. :damn: Thank goodness it's soon time to put supper on the table.

[Happy Times]

Here in Israel, the quality of the matjes herring we get is pretty lousy compared to abroad. The herrings come whole in brine barrels, the shops fillet them sloppily and then dump them into oil as is.

I buy the fillets and then Mr. Avon or my oldest son removes them from the oil they came in, removes all the bones left behind, places them back in a clean container in rows, with large whole rings of fresh white onions between the rows and refills with new oil - makes no difference if its canola, soy, etc.

Close tight and keep in the fridge for 5 to 7 days. Enjoy.

NOTE: Do NOT eat the onions in this case. Their purpose is twofold: 1) to enhance the flavor of the herring, and; 2) to absorb all the excess brine the herring came with.

Now I'm even more hungry than before. :damn: Thank goodness it's soon time to put supper on the table.Never tried it that way, have to try it out, thanks!

[The Avon Lady]

Wow! Was I ever messed up! Before I thought it was almost 5PM here when it was actually before 4PM.

Now I'm even hungrier! Gotta nosh! :down: :nope: :down:

[kiwi_2005]

Interestingly the Bismarck was built and crewed by many Jews since they were the only professional shipbuilders and sailors the Germans had access too.

The Bismark was crewed by many Jews? :rotfl: I dont think they would be that stupid to man a Bismark, why would they want to do that, and then sail and help attack there allies..... If they did the only reason was probably to sabotage the ships.?

[TLAM Strike]

Interestingly the Bismarck was built and crewed by many Jews since they were the only professional shipbuilders and sailors the Germans had access too.

The Bismark was crewed by many Jews? :rotfl: I dont think they would be that stupid to man a Bismark, why would they want to do that, and then sail and help attack there allies..... If they did the only reason was probably to sabotage the ships.? ... they were German Jews... :roll:

[kiwi_2005]

they were German Jews :o

If you know about nazism, your know that not even German Jews were spared. There is no way German Jews would of been allowed to man a Bismark. Maybe they used them as slave labour to build the ships but never to man one. The Jewish solution was to rid germany of all jews. If a german had one ounce of Jewish blood he/she was on the next train to the deathcamps.

[TLAM Strike]

they were German Jews :o

If you know about nazism, your know that not even German Jews were spared. There is no way German Jews would of been allowed to man a Bismark. Maybe they used them as slave labour to build the ships but never to man one. The Jewish solution was to rid germany of all jews. If a german had one ounce of Jewish blood he/she was on the next train to the deathcamps. I guess you don't know as much about Nazi Germany as you think, Ernst Lindemann the CO of the Bismarck refused to dismiss his Jewish officers due to his old school-ness. Towards the end of the war everyone who had Jewish blood was rounded up to be sent to the death camps but early on there were lots of Jews and other undesirables in the German military, most were cannon fodder but some were in technical positions where their skills were rare.

You might want to check this book out at you're local library:
http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/righit.html

[Sheppard]

Towards the end of the war everyone who had Jewish blood was rounded up to be sent to the death camps but early on there were lots of Jews and other undesirables in the German military, most were cannon fodder but some were in technical positions where their skills were rare.

He's right. Early on, there was a sort of expediency in the Nazi structure, but as the war ground on, they fell further and further back onto Nazi racial theories, and started cleaning out the "undesirables"

[kiwi_2005]

I guess you don't know as much about Nazi Germany as you think, Ernst Lindemann the CO of the Bismarck refused to dismiss his Jewish officers due to his old school-ness. Towards the end of the war everyone who had Jewish blood was rounded up to be sent to the death camps but early on there were lots of Jews and other undesirables in the German military, most were cannon fodder but some were in technical positions where their skills were rare.

Ive read many books, biographies, etc., and have never come across what you state. Maybe there was two different types of nazis i doubt it though. The Jews were rounded up since the begining of the war in Germany. German/jews were overlooked until near the end of the war. But hitler would of not allowed German/Jews in the Military.

There have been alot of stories that came out after the war stating that some germans actually did not mind German/Jews in the military - but this just proved that they the germans of that time were trying to save there own skin after the war.