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

old europe wrote:

mysteryman wrote:
... your or any other person or countries word that they will be left alone?

Who said that?

That is my point.
Many of you keep saying that Isreal will have peace once they give in to the demands of their neighbors.
Will you give a guarantee of that?

Will any of you guarantee that Israel will never be attacked again if they accede to everyone elses demands?

Somehow,I dont think so.
I think many of you are willing to gamble with other peoples lives.

0 Replies

mysteryman, Hamas maintained a 16 month unilateral cease fire then won a fair and Democratic election. When a press conference was called with Hamas spokesmen present to announce their desire to begin new negotiations on on a 2 state solution using 1967 borders as a starting point, Shin bet stopped the Hamas leaders enroute to the press conference and warned them not to attend. The Hamas spokesmen, members of the Cabinet were later arrested. Then Israel invaded Gaza. Hamas has offered a long term ceasefire and Palestinians have embraced the Saudi Peace plan along with the EU, UN and most everyone but Bushie and Olmert. The ball is certainly in their court to join the rest of the world and accept the Saudi plan as a reasonable starting point for a solution. There is a very good reason why Olmert and Bushie are so isolated. They're unreasonable people. Israel cant wait to get rid of Olmert and Bushie still has Laura and Barney although that could be an urban myth. http://glastongog.blogspot.com/2006/07/way-out-of-gaza-crisis.html

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

old europe wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
... your or any other person or countries word that they will be left alone?

Who said that?

That is my point.
Many of you keep saying that Isreal will have peace once they give in to the demands of their neighbors.

No. You don't understand.

Who is "many of you"? Who made that claim? Can you quote a single post by a poster here?

Or are you pulling this out of the thin air?

0 Replies

blueflame1 wrote:

mysteryman, Hamas maintained a 16 month unilateral cease fire then won a fair and Democratic election. When a press conference was called with Hamas spokesmen present to announce their desire to begin new negotiations on on a 2 state solution using 1967 borders as a starting point, Shin bet stopped the Hamas leaders enroute to the press conference and warned them not to attend. The Hamas spokesmen, members of the Cabinet were later arrested. Then Israel invaded Gaza. Hamas has offered a long term ceasefire and Palestinians have embraced the Saudi Peace plan along with the EU, UN and most everyone but Bushie and Olmert. The ball is certainly in their court to join the rest of the world and accept the Saudi plan as a reasonable starting point for a solution. There is a very good reason why Olmert and Bushie are so isolated. They're unreasonable people. Israel cant wait to get rid of Olmert and Bushie still has Laura and Barney although that could be an urban myth. http://glastongog.blogspot.com/2006/07/way-out-of-gaza-crisis.html

You once before claimed that the Palestinians have agreed to the SAudi plan.
But,the link you posted even made the claim that Israel has some reservations but had not refused the plan.
Your link also said that Hamas would NOT go along with the plan because it called for the recognition of Israel.

I will find that and post it,just to refresh your memory.

0 Replies

mysteryman, Israel rejected the Saudi plan in the past. Olmert is facing greater international pressure than ever before to accept what the rest of the world has accepted. Both Olmert and Bushie are increasingly and seriously unwanted by their own citizens. Their days are numbered even as the world embraces the Saudi initiative. Maybe war with Iran will win back the hearts and minds of their nations? That seems to be what the PNAC blueprint calls for. Failure to escalate that war into the next phase could very well lead to solutions as Olmert and Bushie fade out.

0 Replies

Israel won't, and cannot, agree to a right of return to Israel. Those returning would be not only those who actually fled, but the descendants. This would destroy Israel.

Israel only attacked Gaza following being attacked with rockets, etc.

Hamas openly remains committed to the destruction of Israel, not recognizing its right to exist. Israel cannot work with such people.

0 Replies

Gee, reading Blueflame's posts, I almost began to believe that Hamas was this peace-loving organization working toward a two-state solution.

« What game is Iraqi Shia Sheikh Al Khalissi playing? | Main | French foreign Minister officially thanked Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi! »

September 26, 2005
Hamas Kidnapping
Israeli security forces announced today that a West Bank Hamas cell abducted and killed an Israeli businessman from the northern Jerusalem neighborhood of Pisgat Ze'ev. After several days of searching, Sasson Nuriel's body was found this morning in an industrial zone west of Ramallah.

Just last week "moderate" Hamas leader Sheikh Hassan Yousef threatened that Hamas intended to kidnap Israeli soldiers and to continue firing Qassam missiles at Israeli communities. "All options are open," Yousef said, "including the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers to release our prisoners from Israeli prisons." Yousef insisted Hamas would not disarm, warning, "no power on earth can take our weapons from our hands." Yousef was subsequently arrested.

The kidnapping of Sasson Nuriel -- an Israeli civilian who did business with local Palestinians, not a soldier -- may also be tied to a recent meeting Hamas and Al Aksa Martyr Brigade militants reportedly held with a senior Hezbollah operative in Egypt just after the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. According to Israeli officials, after Hamas blew a hole in a concrete barrier at the Egyptian border senior Hizballah official Kais Obeid flew from Beirut to Egypt where he met in the northern Sinai city of El Arish with terrorists from Gaza. Israeli intelligence officials describe Obeid as the Hezbollah contact for Palestinian terrorists in the West Ban and Gaza Strip and note his personal involvement in Hezbollah' kidnapping of Elhanan Tannenbaum.

More information is available on Kais Obeid here.

Posted by Matthew Levitt at 01:54 PM |

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

Israel won't, and cannot, agree to a right of return to Israel. Those returning would be not only those who actually fled, but the descendants. This would destroy Israel.

Why?

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

mysteryman wrote:
old europe wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
... your or any other person or countries word that they will be left alone?

Who said that?

That is my point.
Many of you keep saying that Isreal will have peace once they give in to the demands of their neighbors.

No. You don't understand.

Who is "many of you"? Who made that claim? Can you quote a single post by a poster here?

Or are you pulling this out of the thin air?

It is frequently argued something to the effect that the Palestinians are only reacting to the 'oppressive and discriminatory yadda yadda policies of Israel toward the Palestinians." The implication is that the Palestinians would be paragons of virtue and peace if Israel only treated them honorably and respectfully and as Israelis.

Those who are willing to factor in the fact that a) The Arabs never wanted Israel there in the first place b) It is Arabs who have invariably initiated or threatened hostilities toward Israel c) The Palestinians do not acknowledge Israel's right to exist d) The Palestinians continue terrorist actions against the Israelis...........I could go on and on, but surely you get my drift...........those see that Israel will likely not survive as Israel or as a haven for Jews if it does not retain its Jewish majority.

Those who so strongly criticize Israeli policies and actions almost never give equal attention to Arab policies and actions. Israel is presented as the oppressor and the Arabs are presented as the victims by many even on this thread.

And most of Israel's critics are not willing to acknowledge the perils faced by Israel nor what should be the international policy to guarantee Israel's protection and safety. One or two or more on this thread actually join the Arabs to deny Israel's right to exist at all.
_________________
--Foxfyre

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I?-
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

Israel won't, and cannot, agree to a right of return to Israel. Those returning would be not only those who actually fled, but the descendants. This would destroy Israel..

Which is to say htat the Zionist concept of Israel is itself contrary to peace and justice.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

...those see that Israel will not survive as Israel or as a haven for Jews if it does not retain its Jewish majority.

I don't know. That's a bit like arguing that white people would no longer be safe in South Africa, once it would get rid of Apartheid, or that white Americans would no longer be safe if African American would have the same rights...

People who have been living in this area for ages are denied the rights that other people, who recently arrived in the region from countries as remote as Russia or Argentina, are granted.

What exactly has this to do with the survival of Israel?

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Advocate wrote:
Israel won't, and cannot, agree to a right of return to Israel. Those returning would be not only those who actually fled, but the descendants. This would destroy Israel..

Which is to say htat the Zionist concept of Israel is itself contrary to peace and justice.

Perhaps, but then so are restrictive polices of all Arab nations that restrict the power to Arabs and frequently require enforcement of Sharia law.

Are there any non-Japanese in Japan's government? It's tough enough to gain any kind of economic foothold in that country if one is not a Japanese citizen. Does anybody want to say that Japan is contrary to peace and justice? (And there are Arabs on the Knesset by the way and no restrictions against law abiding Arab citizens of Israel owning property, running their own businesses, or practicing their religion in peace.)

Japan is also not forced to be identified with its less-than-peaceful and/or noble past. It is allowed to be the people it has become. Some, however, insist on bringing up the less noble parts of Israel's past as the argument for criticizing Israel now.

Why is it so unacceptable for the Jews who have experienced thousands of years of discrimination and/or oppression to now have a tiny plot of land encompassing the area of no more than 3 or 4 U.S. counties as a haven for displaced Jews? How is being Zionist contrary to a concept of peace and justice?
_________________
--Foxfyre

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I?-
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

0 Replies

As you know, there are well over a million Muslim citizens of Israel, most of whom are prospering. To allow in millions more Jew-hating Muslims, who have no valid right of return, would certainly bring down the country within a relatively short period.

0 Replies

But anybody can become a Japanese citizen (if she/he fulfills such conditions like having resided in Japan for at least five consecutive years etc).

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
...those see that Israel will not survive as Israel or as a haven for Jews if it does not retain its Jewish majority.

I don't know. That's a bit like arguing that white people would no longer be safe in South Africa, once it would get rid of Apartheid, or that white Americans would no longer be safe if African American would have the same rights...

People who have been living in this area for ages are denied the rights that other people, who recently arrived in the region from countries as remote as Russia or Argentina, are granted.

What exactly has this to do with the survival of Israel?

The Iranian president has stated his intention that Israel will be obliterated. You might argue that Iranians aren't really Arabs, but they certainly are part of the Middle East group that opposes Israel. The Palestinian govenrment refuses to acknowledge Israel's right to exist and also has refused to denounce or attempt to stop terrorists who commit atrocities against Israel. I believe Jordan and Egypt are the only Arab country who offiically acknowledges Israel's right to exist--I'm not positive about that--but I think its pretty safe to say neither would lift a finger to prevent the annihilation of Israel. As horrendous and unacceptable as Apartheid was, it was a whole different thing than the situation is Israel.

Once the Arabs have the majority in Israel they can call the shots. The Jews have no reason to think that they will even be allowed to live, much less get a fair shake from Arabs who are on the record as wanting Israel to be gone.

Do you object to Israel's right to exist? Why is a Jewish majority objectionable to you if it is? Would you be in favor of Germans becoming the minority in Germany if those moving in were on the record as favoring Germany ceasing to exist and/or the obliteration or deportation of Germans?
_________________
--Foxfyre

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I?-
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

0 Replies

Okay. Let's not start by granting Iranians or Jordanians Israeli citizenship. Let's start with granting those living within Israel's borders citizenship.

Would you find that objectionable?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

[Why is it so unacceptable for the Jews who have experienced thousands of years of discrimination and/or oppression to now have a tiny plot of land encompassing the area of no more than 3 or 4 U.S. counties as a haven for displaced Jews? How is being Zionist contrary to a concept of peace and justice?

The remedy for historical oppression, intolerance, and unequal treatment directed at one group of people is not more oppression, intolerance and unequal treatment directed by them at yet another group of people - even if the terretorial extent of it is limited.

Moreover, from the perspective of the victims here - the previous Palestinian inhabitants of Israel - the historical oppression of the Jews, which is used to rationalize what has happened to them, was done, not by them, but by others.

0 Replies

The re-founding of Israel on top of the holy sites for the three major religions of the world belies the idea that it's just a 'tiny little plot of land' that noone should give a damn about.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Right, because we know there's soooo much tension between Israel and Christendom. ;p

Be honest - Jerusalem is not the holy city of Islam; most of its value to the religion comes from religious sites that are, not to put too fine a point on it, Jewish religious sites. Islam's a successor religion, after all.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
[Why is it so unacceptable for the Jews who have experienced thousands of years of discrimination and/or oppression to now have a tiny plot of land encompassing the area of no more than 3 or 4 U.S. counties as a haven for displaced Jews? How is being Zionist contrary to a concept of peace and justice?

The remedy for historical oppression, intolerance, and unequal treatment directed at one group of people is not more oppression, intolerance and unequal treatment directed by them at yet another group of people - even if the terretorial extent of it is limited.

Moreover, from the perspective of the victims here - the previous Palestinian inhabitants of Israel - the historical oppression of the Jews, which is used to rationalize what has happened to them, was done, not by them, but by others.

Those arguing in defense of Israel, however, aren't dealing with perspectives. We are dealing with the realities.

Until the international community can assure Israel that it will defend and protect Israel and punish those who violate the peace, I don't see how Israel has any choice but to protect itself in whatever way it deems necessary. Based on their own statements, the reality is that given an opportunity to do so, the Arabs will do away with Israel.

The way I see it, is that once the Palestinians a) acknowledge Israel's right to exist and b) pledge to be law abiding productive citizens of Israel and join with other Israelis to defend it, then Israel has no excuse of any kind to deny any rights, services, or privileges to the Palestinians that are afforded any of their other million + Arab citizens who are experiencing no oppression or disadvantage of any kind as citizens of Israel.

As I have said, if the Palestinians take that step and Israel does not then accommodate the needs and rights of those Palestinians who choose to live in Israel, I'll join with you in condemning Israel.

Until then, I think my arguments, most of which you are ignoring Smile

, continue to be both reasonable and valid.

0 Replies

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know