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

Parados, the Palestinian Arabs launched massive terror attacks on the Jews in Palestine as early as 1920 and 1921 and 1929. Finally, the Jews in Palestine retaliated in 1929 and ever since with each subsequent attack by the Palestinian Arabs.

When and only when the Gazians agree to stop firing rockets into Israel and stop trying to steal Israel, Israel will return the land belonging to the Palestinian Arabs that it currently occupies.

Prove me wrong if you can.

Now reporters are getting into Gaza, and the stories are coming out.

One little girl said "The soldiers came to the door, and shouted for the owner of the house. My father unlocked the door, and went outside. And they shot him."

Rejoice, Foxy, your boys have achieved a "victory".

Plenty to read of a similar nature in The Guardian today, for those who have the stomach for it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/20/gaza-israel-ban-ki-moon

Even reports in the (very) conservative press, too:




Daily Telegraph report

Two paragraphs from the article spell out how the Jews are treating Palestinians in the goal to "seek peace."



Some bigots has the audacity to call us "antiIsraelis."

Well I tell ya what McTag. The next time your country has its butt in a sling when some aggressor is trying to bomb you into submission, you just hold on to your idealism and trust that the Israelis are being honestly portrayed by those who are on record as wanting them exterminated. And we'll trust that the aggressor will back off and be wonderful to you if you just refrain from shooting back and especially if you choose not to invade their country. I'm sure that the Nazis described the American and British soldiers as paragons of virtue and charity.

Certainly the war would have ended and the Nazis would have left your people in peace if the U.K. had just held their fire and refused to fight. Never mind what they did to the Jews and Poles et al.

Right?

Now, that's just silly to compare Hamas to Nazi Germany...

We declared war on them, remember?

I'm pretty sure when the USA supplied Israel with all those advanced munitions they did suppose they would be used against hospitals, schools and civilian refugee centres.

I'm not comparing Hamas to Nazi Germany and people who aren't being silly would know that. But the analogy works. I think even McTag knows that since he isn't stupid, but if he admitted it he would have to admit how biased and prejudiced and inane his point of view on this has been.

I think the analogy would work if Hamas actually had the capability of bombing Israel into submission.

Then again, I don't think that that's really the case. Comparing Hamas to the IRA and to the threat they posed to Britain would probably work, though...

Submit who into submission? Are you sane?

When and only when the Gazians agree to stop firing rockets into Israel and stop trying to steal Israel, Israel will stop firing into Gaza.

Prove me wrong if you can.

You're so wrong, it's hopeless.

It's interesting to note here that photos were produced earlier on this thread that shows the comparison between Nazi Germany and Israel.

Pictures speak louder than words, but some people will "never get it."

You can use whatever analogy you wish, but the IRA was fighting for their independence and England was fighting to prevent them from having that.

Hamas already has its independence. It is fighting for the rights to what Israel has and to drive Israel into oblivion while Israel is defending its rights to keep what it has and to protect its citizens from those who would injure, maim, or murder them.

I see the difference between those two things. Do you?

Fox wrote (which reveals her total ignorance on this subject):

If were actually "so wrong, it's hopeless," then proving me wrong ought to be simple even for you. So prove me wrong and cut the bull puke.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/24/world/middleeast/24gaza.html?ref=world

Well, I have to say that I also think it's silly to compare Israel to Nazi Germany. I think the photos that were posted were silly in making that comparison. For example, there was a photo posted of the "Rampe" (the train platform) in Auschwitz, and of people being lined up on the platform for Selektion - where people were sorted into those that would be sent into the gas chambers right away, and into those that would be sent into the concentration camps to work for the Nazis.

Juxtaposing that photo with any other kind of photo of people being lined up somewhere for, in comparison, rather harmless reasons is just silliness.

Again...for the second time....I did not compare Israel to Nazi Germany.

Here is the analogy:

Engliand was attacked, without legitimate provocation, by Nazi Germany. Germany did not have any good intentions of any kind toward the British. The intention was to take England and all it possessed and make it part of Hitler's empire. The Germans didn't mind at all injuring, maiming, or murdering innocent civilians. And they tried very much to do so.

England did fight back and, when able to do so, bombed and invaded Germany at great cost of innocent German civilian lives. England's only alternative was to share the fate of Poland, Belgium, Austria, France and possibly the Jews. And that would have been the case if England had chosen to submit rather than fight and also if others had not come to England's defense. Nobody (except possibly McTag) considers England inappropriate or evil in doing what it had to do to defend itself.

Would England have had less provocation to defend itself against Nazi Germany if Germany had been content to simply send over buzz bombs and V-2 Rockets at intervals over a period of decades? Would Germans tolerate such a situation now even from people who thought that the German government was being unfair or discriminatory toward them? Would they lower their defenses and open their borders and invite the enemy in?

Israel has been attacked, without legitimate provocation, by Palestinians and Palestinian sympathisers over the past 60+ years. Israeli citizens in southern and northern Israel are in constant threat of having a rocket coming down on their heads or being where a sucide bomber has been coerced into blowing himself up. Israeli parents can't feel they can safely send their kids out to play or that they are safe on necessary trips to the market or to work.

Hamas is not attacking Israel to obtain independence. It wants Israel. It wants the Jews dead or gone. It willingly targets innocent men, women, and children in hopes of injuring, maiming, or murdering them and making life as miserable as it can for the Israelis. It hides its weapons and ammunition intentionally among civilians to ensure that Israel will kill as many civilians as possible should it retaliate. It has been suspected of creating its own casualties when Israel is less successful. And then it parades those before the press to convince the anti-Israel and gullible of Israel's evil.

If the USA and a very few others were not sympathetic to and helped Israel, Hamas would prevail.

But a lot of you seem to think Israel should just take it or open its borders and allow the Palestinians to have Israel without any form of retaliation.

Exactly. That's why it would be such a good analogy. Also, Ireland did claim rights to the whole territory of the island, prior to the Good Friday Agreement. That's really similar to Hamas's claim to the whole territory of Palestine and Israel.




It has no souvereignty over its borders. Israel unilaterally carries out military incursions, like the one in November. Hamas may have nominal autonomy over the Gaza Strip, but it has no independence.




Actually, I can kind of agree with that above interpretation of facts. Of course, the drastic measures Israel imposes on the Gaza Strip - like the effective embargo, or the military incursions - help Hamas enormously in claiming that Israel is the aggressor, while they are only leading the revolution against the Israeli repression.




In rethoric, yes. Ireland or the IRA claimed the whole territory of the island, but didn't necessarily declare that it wanted to destroy all of Britain. Hamas claims the whole territory of Israel, which at the same time means an end to Israel as it exists now.

For all practical purposes, though, I don't see any difference at all. It is absolutely ridiculous to claim that Hamas has the wherewithal to actually make good on their threat to destroy Israel by using homemade rockets or bombs which claim less Israeli victims than car accidents in Tel Aviv do.