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

InfraBlue wrote:

In regard to the first development statehood recognition by the UN won't mean anything without US consent, and it's expected to vote against the measure.

The General Assembly has no power.

Oralloy wrote:

Israel is an ally, not a subject nation.

That Israel is an ally does not negate the fact that Israel is a subject nation.
Israel is a subject state because without the extensive welfare and political support that it enjoys from the US Israel would be an utterly failed state. Israel as the Zionist state would not exist without the propping of the US.

Oralloy wrote:

And Obama tried spewing anti-Semitism at Israel, and that resulted in Israel no longer taking him seriously.

What with your predilection to overuse the term "anti-Semitism" to include anything from the Nazi genocide of Jews to the criticism of Israeli policy towards the Palestinians in an attempt to obfuscate the issues and mute the opposition, one can't take you seriously.

Quote:

Nope. They were rebuffed because Palestinians like murdering children, and refuse to make peace.

There is no "Right of Return".

Yep, the crux of the issue in regard to those two Israeli PM's was the Right of Return, your obfuscatory efforts notwithstanding.

That Israel refuses to own the Palestinian's Right of Return does not negate the fact that the Palestinians have the Right of Return. It's pretty simple.

Quote:

If the Palestinians were at all capable of peace, they wouldn't be facing Netanyahu right now.

It's not that the Palestinians weren't capable of peace, it's that the Zionists insist on having their cake and eating it too.

As long as the Zionists continue to repress the Palestinians and deny them their rights in pursuit of their ethnocentric state, there will never be peace in Israel/Palestine.

Oralloy wrote:

Nope. The Palestinians have been refusing to show up at the negotiations unless Israel first agreed to an unreasonable demand to halt settlement construction.

Yep, Abbas met with Netanyahu on September 2, 2010 while Israel merely took a break from their settlement constructions.

Quote:

There was no agreement, therefore Israel did not renege on an agreement.

To be clear, Israel reneged (i.e. renounced, rejected) an agreement, therefore there was no agreement.

Oralloy wrote:

The only "Palestinian principle" is their desire to murder civilians. But if PA officials considered selling out that "principle" I can see why they'd want to keep it quiet.

More obfuscatory nonsense.

The main principle of the Palestinian peoples is the Right of Return, your gibberish notwithstanding.

Oralloy wrote:

Nope. The principle objective of the Palestinians is to murder as many civilians as they can.

More obfuscatory gibberish.

Oralloy wrote:

You're starting to sound like a Palestinian yourself with your calls to attack innocent people.

Necessarily discriminatory and oppressive states are not innocent people.

oralloy wrote:

The General Assembly has no power.

That's irrelevant.

Your referring to anything Obama has had to say concerning Israel as Anti-Semitism is obfuscatory gibberish.

Your contention that the Palestinians only care about murdering children is obfuscatory gibberish.

I've pointed to two things you've said that are obfuscatory gibberish.

The Israelis try making peace according to their own terms.

The fact that The Palestinians met with the Israelis all the while the latter took a break from their settlement building is proof that the Palestinians met with the Israelis. That they've refused to meet again is another matter.

Uh-huh. "To renege" also means "to renounce" which also means "to reject." Try reading beyond the first listed definition.

The Zionists reneged an agreement.

Uh-huh. Attempting to set the record straight with obfuscatory nonsense is obfuscatory nonsense.

Now there's a post that points up your "high" intellect, Oralloy.

Egypt has reopened its Rafah border crossing with the Gaza Strip, allowing people to cross freely for the first time in four years - a sharp departure from the policies of former president Hosni Mubarak.

The opening on Saturday morning provided long-awaited relief for Palestinians - a move ushered in by Egypt's new government in a bid to ease the suffering of Gaza residents.

Al Jazeera's Nicole Johnston, reporting from the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip, said there will still be restrictions in place, preventing men younger than 40 from leaving the coastal territory.

"It will allow basically all women to leave Gaza, also children under the age of 18 years will be allowed to leave, as well as men over the age of 40 years. However, those between the ages of 18 and 40 years will require an Egyptian visa," she said.

"Visas would have to come from Ramallah. Sources in Hamas say they have been told by the Egyptian authorities over the last few weeks that they [Egyptians] do intend to open some sort of representative office inside Gaza, so that people can get the visa from there."

Among the first to cross the reopened border post were two ambulances ferrying patients from the hitherto-blockaded Gaza Strip for treatment in Egypt as well as a minibus carrying a dozen visitors. About 400 Gazans were reported to be waiting at the crossing.

Israeli siege

The crossing is seen as the main gateway for the 1.5 million Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip. Among the other border posts, it is the only crossing not controlled by Israel.

Rafah has been mostly closed since 2007 when Israel imposed a siege on Gaza after Hamas took over the Strip.

Our correspondent said that Hamas used to have a list of people who needed to go through the border crossing, and that list currently has 12,000 names on it.

"That list used to be sent through to the Egyptians who then vetted it and allowed around 300 people a day through it - but it was very limited and now it will be free and open for most people," she said.

The crossing is to open to people for eight hours a day from 9:00am, apart from holidays and Fridays, giving Gazans a gateway to the world as Rafah is the only crossing that does not pass through Israel.

Commercial traffic will continue to have to pass through border points with Israel to enter the impoverished Palestinian enclave.

"In the future, Hamas says that it would like this to become a terminal for goods," our correspondent said.

"But a lot of people in Gaza say that if the Rafah border crossing becomes a commercial goods terminal, then Israel could place all responsibility for Gaza on the Egyptians, which people do not want because Gaza is still occupied by Israel."

The United Nations has called the Gaza blockade illegal and repeatedly demanded it be lifted.

Criticism of Israel does not constitute anti-Semitism because otherwise the majority of Israeli society would be considered anti-Semites.

Egypt has reopened its Rafah border crossing with the Gaza Strip, allowing people to cross freely for the first time in four years - a sharp departure from the policies of former president Hosni Mubarak.

The United Nations has called the Gaza blockade illegal and repeatedly demanded it be lifted.

Quote:

Criticism of Israel does not constitute anti-Semitism because otherwise the majority of Israeli society would be considered anti-Semites.

Prof. Dershowitz in Oxford

Theauthorof the above quote could hardly be an anti-Semite.

It shouldn't be too hard for Israel to seize the border and impose the blockade themselves.

The United Nations has called the Gaza blockade illegal and repeatedly demanded it be lifted.

There is a difference between "criticism of Israel" and "making outrageous false accusations against Israel and pretending that you are only criticizing them".

The latter is anti-Semitism without question.

Oralloy wrote:

It shouldn't be too hard for Israel to seize the border and impose the blockade themselves.

I wouldn't really know, but it would not be right. The way the Palestinians are blocked in is not right and I don't think Israel has the right to do it.

Perhaps if Israel did not impose so much restrictions and keep building settlements they would not have such a security problem. Its a vicious circle.

Oralloy wrote:

There is a difference between "criticism of Israel" and "making outrageous false accusations against Israel and pretending that you are only criticizing them".

The latter is anti-Semitism without question.

Any criticism of Israel is seen as outrageous by such as you and most others in the US (at least those who I have talked to in my everyday life.)