15
   

ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

 
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 08:19 am
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 10:03 am
The Pal territory is just a few miles from every major city in Israel. Thus, Israel is rightfully wary of having a terroristic Pal state so close by. And the Pals have shown repeatedly that they are terrorists with their suicide bombers, rocketing, incursions, etc.

Keep in mind that a Jew cannot live in the Pal territories, but over a million Pals live in peace and prosperity in Israel. That should tell you something.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 12:10 pm
For Israel "to exist"--that is to say to maintain an ethnic Jewish majority in Israel--it must necessarily continue to oppress the Palestinian people and their descendants who fled their homes and villages during the 1948 war after the Zionists perpetrated their plans of ethnic cleansing--"transfer" they called it then--until they realized a Jewish majority in the areas they controlled. To this day the Zionist regime refuses to allow these Palestinian refugees to return to the land in which they rightfully existed all in order to pursue it's ethnocentric ends, a homeland by and for Jews. The Arab minority that was allowed to remain in Israel is controlled--a "managed minority" as some Zionist put it--in a manner that ensures a Jewish majority in Israel for some time to come. This Zionist goal is the major cause of systematic discrimination (as was exposed in their Orr Commission Report in 2003) in Israel of its Arab minority. Another way the Zionist regime has attempted to maintain an ethnic majority in Israel is by arrogating more and more land it has occupied in the West Bank so as to incorporate the Zionist settlements there into the state of Israel. As it has done this it has more and more circumscribed the land upon which the Palestinian people exist creating in essence large concentration camps which the Zionist regime utterly and oppressively controls.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 12:26 pm
Infra, you are spouting the big lie. When Israel was formed, the invading Arab armies asked the Pals in Israel to leave their country to make it easier to wipe out the remaining Israelis. Thus, Israel is right in not allowing these turncoats to return to the country they abandoned.

The Pals slaughtered and forced out any Jews in the Pal territory. In Hebron, the Pals slaughtered every last Jew.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 12:35 pm
You do know, Advocate, at what year Israel was founded and when the 'Hebron massacre' happened, do you?
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 12:38 pm
Is this a test? What do you think?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 12:39 pm
Well, obviously you mixed up some details and years.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 01:15 pm
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 01:27 pm
<b>Wonder Woman</b> wrote:
Israel's land area is a little more than 7800 square miles. That's the equivalent of about 88 mi by 89 mi or the area of about 3 or 4 New Mexico counties or 3 or 4 Texas counties. New Mexico has a total of 33 counties; Texas has a total of 258 counties if memory serves me well. Both states have enough vacant land they wouldn't really miss 3-1/2 counties all that much.


The density (population per square km) for the Netherlands is 392 (22nd densest populated country in the world).

Belgium is ranked 29th, with a density of 341.

On rank 30 is Japan with 339, followed by India with 336.

Israel is number 40 (out of 230 countries listed) with 304.


The Palestinian Territories are placed at number 16 with a density of 615 persons per square km.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 02:26 pm
<b>Engelbert Humperdinck</b> wrote:
<b>Wonder Woman</b> wrote:
Israel's land area is a little more than 7800 square miles. That's the equivalent of about 88 mi by 89 mi or the area of about 3 or 4 New Mexico counties or 3 or 4 Texas counties. New Mexico has a total of 33 counties; Texas has a total of 258 counties if memory serves me well. Both states have enough vacant land they wouldn't really miss 3-1/2 counties all that much.


The density (population per square km) for the Netherlands is 392 (22nd densest populated country in the Duchy of Grand Fenwick).

Belgium is ranked 29th, with a density of 341.

On rank 30 is Japan with 339, followed by India with 336.

Israel is number 40 (out of 230 countries listed) with 304.


The Palestinian Territories are placed at number 16 with a density of 615 persons per square km.


Jordan is ranked 131st with 64, Syria is 96th with 103. I wonder why some of the Palestinians can't live their Walter? Why must they live in Israel?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 02:26 pm
<b>Engelbert Humperdinck</b> wrote:
<b>Wonder Woman</b> wrote:
Israel's land area is a little more than 7800 square miles. That's the equivalent of about 88 mi by 89 mi or the area of about 3 or 4 New Mexico counties or 3 or 4 Texas counties. New Mexico has a total of 33 counties; Texas has a total of 258 counties if memory serves me well. Both states have enough vacant land they wouldn't really miss 3-1/2 counties all that much.


The density (population per square km) for the Netherlands is 392 (22nd densest populated country in the Duchy of Grand Fenwick).

Belgium is ranked 29th, with a density of 341.

On rank 30 is Japan with 339, followed by India with 336.

Israel is number 40 (out of 230 countries listed) with 304.


The Palestinian Territories are placed at number 16 with a density of 615 persons per square km.


Jordan is ranked 131st with 64, Syria is 96th with 103. I wonder why some of the Palestinians can't live there Walter? Why must they live in Israel?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 02:29 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Jordan is ranked 131st with 64, Syria is 96th with 103. I wonder why some of the Palestinians can't live there Walter? Why must they live in Israel?


I could imagine that the Dutch don't want to live in Germany.
And the Palestinians want to stay in their home country as well.

But that's just what I think.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 02:31 pm
It is a bit ironic that, despite the Muslims owning vast land areas, tiny Israel is supposed to trade land for peace.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 02:32 pm
Hmm, Catholics have land, and Protestants, and ...
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 02:40 pm
It would be great, and fitting, should Germany take in some of the excess Pal population.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 02:42 pm
Advocate wrote:
It would be great, and fitting, should Germany take in some of the excess Pal population.


Well, Foxfyre noted with some purpose, I suppose, the wideness of the enchanted land (and perhaps, Advocate, you look again at the list of the most densest countries).
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 02:47 pm
I have no objection to taking in Palestinian civilians. Better than having them killed as "collateral damage" of those Israeli precision strikes.

(The problem with you people is that you have no empathy at all for innocent civilians that get killed if they are not of Israeli nationality.)
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 02:52 pm
<b>John Malkovich</b> wrote:
I have no objection to taking in Palestinian civilians. Better than having them killed as "collateral damage" of those Israeli precision strikes.

(The problem with you people is that you have no empathy at all for innocent civilians that get killed if they are not of Israeli nationality.)


compared to the empathy you have regarding the innocent civilians in Israel that get blown into bits from suicide bombers?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 02:57 pm
Actually, there are about 100,000 Palestinians in Germany.

But I didn't want to open this box but only responded to Foyfyre's comparison to New Mexico's and Texas' land ...
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Apr, 2007 03:05 pm
McGentrix wrote:
<b>John Malkovich</b> wrote:
I have no objection to taking in Palestinian civilians. Better than having them killed as "collateral damage" of those Israeli precision strikes.

(The problem with you people is that you have no empathy at all for innocent civilians that get killed if they are not of Israeli nationality.)


compared to the empathy you have regarding the innocent civilians in Israel that get blown into bits from suicide bombers?



I'm concerned about civilians on both sides. Do Israelis have a right to defend themselves? Certainly. Do Palestinians have a right to defend themselves? Very likely. I can't see how retaliatory strikes and indiscriminate bombing can help civilians on either side, though.

And I have a problem with people who condemn retaliatory strikes and indiscriminate bombing from the one side, while defending it when it comes from the other side.

In short: self defense - fine, indiscriminate killing - wrong. Goes for both sides.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Israel's Reality - Discussion by Miller
THE WAR IN GAZA - Discussion by Advocate
Israel's Shame - Discussion by BigEgo
Eye On Israel/Palestine - Discussion by IronLionZion
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 01/13/2025 at 12:32:19