[rockwool]

That's from the 30's I think??

Palestinians land ownership was feudal.... Most of the time they owned the orange and olive groves..... but not the Land under the groves (just the trees) and Jewish imigrants from europe arived with a totally different view on land ownership......If they brought the land they owned the land and everything on it, and so when the by compasison far richer Jews moved into palestine they would buy the land off the ottoman owners and promptly boot the locals out.
Needless to say this was rather resented by familys who had been farming the land for generations.

Since then the anger of both sides has just fed off each other, till today neither side is IMO competent to make rational unclouded decisions about what to do.

Never heard that story, just that Jews have bought land. That explains a lot. That is a cultural clash. Who can say what culture has the right of way? Personaly I don't think one can own water, air or land. Those things are ours, they belong to us all.

That clash is like the one the colonizers had with the Amero Indians right?

 

[rockwool]

Well there has always been ethnic tension between both parts. Before 1947 jews were the underdogs, there were a few riots that led to "massacres" and such.

Do you mean from the 30s something until 1948?

 

[rockwool]

Are you sure your not refering to the use of Phosphorus bombs??

DAVID HARDAKER: Shabtai Gold is the Jerusalem based spokesman for Physicians for Human Rights.

That was the same organization they mentioned on the radio and it was probably the same spokesperson as I remember his surname.

ZAHAVA GAL-ON: Well, in my view, yes. It's a war crime, although they thought they are using it against military targets. But if people were injured, I can consider it as a war crime.

She must be a strong person to stand up and say the different when nobody else does.

 

[Strakar]

Do you mean from the 30s something until 1948?

That's the period when the immigration waves escalated and serious claims about a Jewish state erupted (and therefore more conflits ocurred, Hebron massacre etc), but there were conflicts before, since the late XIX century.

 

[BurlyShirley]

...so would you rather be killed immediately by a big, regular bomb, or injured by a smaller, dusty bomb and die several years later?

 

[rockwool]

...so would you rather be killed immediately by a big, regular bomb, or injured by a smaller, dusty bomb and die several years later?

I don't want to be killed by some mf horse thief that is stealing my olive trees.

 

[rockwool]

That's the period when the immigration waves escalated and serious claims about a Jewish state erupted (and therefore more conflits ocurred, Hebron massacre etc), but there were conflicts before, since the late XIX century.

Have you ever heard of the Haganah, the Irgun and the Stern gang?

 

[Strakar]

Have you ever heard of the Haganah, the Irgun and the Stern gang?

Your point beeing?

I mean, that is almost begging for a "have you ever heard of PLO, Hamas, and Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades?"

You see, the the problem of discussing this subject while making an absolute defense of one of the parties, is that you'll always find a reciprocal and equivalent action by the other.

 

[LordOpie]

You see, the the problem of discussing this subject while making an absolute defense of one of the parties, is that you'll always find a reciprocal and equivalent action by the other.

which is why you can't discuss the subject with him.

He denies it, but his obsession certainly suggests anti-semitism.


Can't we all agree that both parties don't think clearly and are pawns of the bigger war between The West (USA&Europe) and the Arab World?

 

[DRB]

He denies it, but his obsession certainly suggests anti-semitism.

I chalk it up more to being naive.

Can't we all agree that both parties don't think clearly and are pawns of the bigger war between The West (USA&Europe) and the Arab World?

I agree with this to a point. I do believe that the Palestinians are just fodder for the Islamic extremists including a number of governments. Its obvious that those governments really don't give a crap about them except to get them to blow themselves up and kill jews. It was always laughable that Saddam would give money to the families of suicide bombers but wouldn't give money for schools and hospitals. Same with Iran. The make money hand over fist on their oil revenues and say they are going to provide money to the PLO (in whatever its form) to build infrastructure but somehow that money never quite makes it for those activities. Just providing arms and explosives for terrorists attacks.

However by doing that they aren't providing any real future for those people because that violence is not going to force Israel into any meaningful concessions. The Israelis love carrots and take the stick away from you and beat you with it. The last 60 years should have made that abundantly clear to all involved.

Why? I don't know but to some extent I believe that it keeps their people focused on something other than their own oppression. There was a quote (and I can't remember the source) that says a democracies fear the law but dictatorships fear the people. So anything to keep the people focused on something else is good for them. And what better than the Jews and as a bonus the US.

As for the Israelis, I disagree to some extent. I think its more that Israel uses the West than the other way around. Israel prays upon the collective guilt of the West for support. I think that to some extent being Israel's friend causes more trouble then benefit from a pragmatic point. I think the US would be much happier using the Egyptians and Jordanians as their counterbalance in the region then Israel.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

I'm not. But if you look at how many women and children have been killed or injured during those years, you will see that they don't care who they hit. Can't explain it in any other way. Numbers speak for them selves.

thats a lot of smack talk. alexis_dh for t3h win.

lets take the al-aqsa intidada.
you can tell about the "randomness" you talk about by looking into casualties of women-old people (as the incidence of guerrilla fighters on those groups is lower).

lastly, casualties broken down by status. hardly a random pattern for the islamic terrorists.

http://wings.buffalo.edu/academic/department/law/jlsa/resources/An Engineered Tragedy.htm

 

[DRB]

whoa... graphs to prove a point? Please you know its all conjecture and speculation here.

I found this interesting:

They lump combatants in with noncombatants, suicide bombers with innocent civilians, and report Palestinian “collaborators” murdered by their own compatriots as if they had been killed by Israel.

The number of Palestinians killed by actions of their own side – including suicide bombers, “work accidents”, collaborators, and people killed in intra-Palestinian fighting – has increased strongly over time.

We have made extensive use of mainstream media outlets, both in Israel and abroad, for the details of al-Aqsa conflict incidents. Information on Palestinian casualties has been gathered from Arabic-language newspapers, cross-correlated with reports from human-rights organizations in Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Unfortunately, these sources generally disagree on many significant details, including the name, age, and circumstances of death of victims. It should be noted that, since no Israeli official body has been keeping records of Israeli actions and their results, the information reported by the Western media has come almost exclusively from Palestinian sources.

Though we are back to the no body no name. However, I suspect that isn't such an issue as reporting body count is bound to be a big thing for media in the region.

It is a study by an Israeli group so there maybe some level of bias built in but maybe not.

 

[rockwool]

You see, the the problem of discussing this subject while making an absolute defense of one of the parties, is that you'll always find a reciprocal and equivalent action by the other.

which is why you can't discuss the subject with him.

You might have missed it, but I will make it easy for you by posting a quote of my self to show that I do not take absolute defence of either party.

That's the Palestinian conflict right now. A people has the right to fight for its freedom against an occupier, but that don't mean that they are alowed to hit anything Israeli (like civilians). That in turn doesn't give the Israelis the right to crave the Palesinian people not to act irrational after 39 years of dehumanizing treatment.

He denies it, but his obsession certainly suggests anti-semitism.

It's anti zionism, get your **** correct, and please learn the difference.

I chalk it up more to being naive.

Naive about what?

Can't we all agree that both parties don't think clearly and are pawns of the bigger war between The West (USA&Europe) and the Arab World?

Whether Palestinians and Israelis are, or aren't, being used by other governments own agendas does not mean that the two parties of this conflict have reasons of their own to fight. Although, I do belive that both parties are being used by others to some extent.

I agree with this to a point. I do believe that the Palestinians are just fodder for the Islamic extremists including a number of governments. Its obvious that those governments really don't give a crap about them except to get them to blow themselves up and kill jews. It was always laughable that Saddam would give money to the families of suicide bombers but wouldn't give money for schools and hospitals. Same with Iran. The make money hand over fist on their oil revenues and say they are going to provide money to the PLO (in whatever its form) to build infrastructure but somehow that money never quite makes it for those activities. Just providing arms and explosives for terrorists attacks.

Assuming you're right, I have to add that there could be a reason for Hussein and the Iranians to give money to the famelies of suicide bombers. Did you know that their homes are allways torn down to the last bit as collective punishment? They need money to rebuild their homes.

About their infrastructure one could argue how much point it is in financing somthing that you know is going to get destroyed. Sweden finaced a building down there for ~5,5 million Euros that was destroyed the other year. I don't want to pay for that. That is even dumber than throwing money to the military.

However by doing that they aren't providing any real future for those people because that violence is not going to force Israel into any meaningful concessions. The Israelis love carrots and take the stick away from you and beat you with it. The last 60 years should have made that abundantly clear to all involved.

What would you do if the US had been occupied for 40 years by your almighty evil neighbour (choose which ), would you give up and let the unjust do as they please without a fight? Or would you hope for a better world and fight for your liberty?

It is equaly clear that the other side won't accept being occupied. The othe rside must have realized that to and accepted that their own casualties are worth it.

Why? I don't know but to some extent I believe that it keeps their people focused on something other than their own oppression. There was a quote (and I can't remember the source) that says a democracies fear the law but dictatorships fear the people. So anything to keep the people focused on something else is good for them. And what better than the Jews and as a bonus the US.

I agree with you on that, but disagree on the point that you are only adressing the Palestininas on this. Decieving peoples minds with external enemies of the state is as old as Barbara Bush... Actualy older but I can't emagine anything. Dictatorships haven't had a monopoly on that. Look at your present. They instill fear in you by claiming toothpaste bombs will kill you on flights.

Have dubya feared you at any time during this time while all his lies have been illuminated? Did he fear you in 2000 when he ****ed the word of the people and let 9 partial judges constitute the meaning of democracy? If the representatives of the law are in bed with the rulers then... there is no threat to them.

The major differance between the two is that Palestinians live under a real threat that occupation actually constitutes, while the Israelis need to have one exaggerated or even faked to them. Israel will never be attacked again as they are superiorly strong and a nuclear power.

I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said that, or another one of your founding fathers.

thats a lot of smack talk. alexis_dh for t3h win.

Damn you Riddler, Batman will get you for that!
Later.

 

[Strakar]

You might have missed it, but I will make it easy for you by posting a quote of my self to show that I do not take absolute defence of either party.

"That's the Palestinian conflict right now. A people has the right to fight for its freedom against an occupier, but that don't mean that they are alowed to hit anything Israeli (like civilians). That in turn doesn't give the Israelis the right to crave the Palesinian people not to act irrational after 39 years of dehumanizing treatment."

Wait.. so a nation has the right to fight for its freedom (I agree, but I'll address the "fight" bit later), but without targeting civilians (so, suicide bombings on markets, discos and public transportations are not acceptable right?). At the same time the occupiers don't have the right to demand a alt on the suicide bombings (so, although you've just claimed them not to be acceptable, Israelis do not have the right to do the same. I see...).

What would you do if the US had been occupied for 40 years by your almighty evil neighbour (choose which ), would you give up and let the unjust do as they please without a fight? Or would you hope for a better world and fight for your liberty?

It is equaly clear that the other side won't accept being occupied. The othe rside must have realized that to and accepted that their own casualties are worth it.

Don't even go that way. East-Timor was occupied from 1975 to 1999 and they formed a guerrilla army. Against a proportionally much more powerfully occupier, and in the middle of HUGE interests (see oil in the Timor sea), they achieved independence in 2002. How? Through diplomatic negotiations.

They suffered A LOT, with several massacres and severe oppression.

Guess what... they didn't turn suicidal in a BUS in Jakarta. My point is.. you can't justify the extreme actions with the Israeli occupation.

No to mention that the Israeli initial occupation followed an atack by the Arab Nations, the Indonesian was simply an invasion. It's clearly not just about Israel/Palestine. There are a lot of players in the region that fight Israel through the palestinians.

Deniing to see this doens't help the palestinians one bit, it just helps to perpetuate the conflict.

 

[DRB]

Naive about what?

You seem to see this from one point of view. As usual you don't really spend much time looking at both sides. Or what that these possible solutions can come from both sides.

Or maybe it is because you are the typical European and still blame the jews for your lot in life?

Assuming you're right, I have to add that there could be a reason for Hussein and the Iranians to give money to the famelies of suicide bombers. Did you know that their homes are allways torn down to the last bit as collective punishment? They need money to rebuild their homes.

Fine and good but all that does is free the mind of the suicide bomber to go blow him or her self up for NO gain well except to make one less person that can actually fight against Israel. You don't seem to understand that Israel is simply NEVER going to knuckle under to violence. EVER. The reverse isn't true. Look at the number of attacks and their severity after a big Israeli military push at the Palestinians. They go down by a non-insignificant number.

About their infrastructure one could argue how much point it is in financing somthing that you know is going to get destroyed. Sweden finaced a building down there for ~5,5 million Euros that was destroyed the other year. I don't want to pay for that. That is even dumber than throwing money to the military.

One could argue that but other governments seem adept at tossing money down that hole. Are you saying that Iran is more pragmatic then Sweden or has less money to waste? Or it could be that they simply don't give a sh!t, which from my experience in that region, is the reason. Funny how loads of foreign fighters flock to Iraq and Afghanistan to resist the foreign devils but few if any ever make it to Israel. Oddly even before the al-aqsa intidada monetary aid from Arab nations was miniscule (if non-existant) in relation to what was coming from Western nations. Saudi Arabia and Iran being the two notables on that list. Check local papers in the Persian Gulf and look how they focus on the evilness of Israel but not really the plight of the Palestinians. Its subtle but prevelant throughout the region.

The US and the rest of the West should be dropping fliers everyday showing the breakdown of where the Palestinians aid comes from showing them who their real supporters are.

It is equaly clear that the other side won't accept being occupied. The othe rside must have realized that to and accepted that their own casualties are worth it.

Well the fact of the matter is that it is hurting one side a hell of a lot more than the other. At this point Israel can just sit back and react to whatever the PLO does. If its violence then the Israelis got that covered. If its peace, I think that they would be good with that as well. But then again how do you talk with a group that has basically said anything short of your destruction is not acceptable?

So in that regards I might be looking for away to quit killing off my youth. The IRA seems to have managed that. The Palestianians pissed away a perfect opportunity after Arafat died and the Israelis came to talk. The completely gave up Gaza and were making big noise about moving out of huge chunks of the West Bank. So what do they do? The Palestinians cut Abbas off at the knees. Its really quite pathetic.

I'm going to put it in more accurate terms. If I've got my foot firmly planted on your throat maybe you might ask "Hey what can I do to get your foot off my throat?" Obviously in your mind the Palestinians and the Arabs are on the higher moral ground so should it be that big of a leap for them to try and make the first meaningful move? What do they have to lose? A lot more than the Israelis if this keeps up.

Even if the PLO changed their tactics and started focusing on Israeli military targets instead of going after soft targets, they would garner a LOT more support. But when you set a bomb off on a bus full of women, children and old people you just can't look righteous to the sane. It would also allow the everyday Israeli the chance to bring pressure for peace. But when you are a daily target...... I'd want my government ****ing up the people responsible.

 

[ohio]

DRB, why do you bother?

 

[DRB]

DRB, why do you bother?

This hurts less than the brick wall but only just.

 

[LordOpie]

DRB, why do you bother?

rockwool's like a suicide bombing cat... he's got nine lives and is prepared to use them all on this thread alone.

 

[rockwool]

so, suicide bombings on markets, discos and public transportations are not acceptable right?

Stupid question, You just quoted me on it...

At the same time the occupiers don't have the right to demand a alt on the suicide bombings (so, although you've just claimed them not to be acceptable, Israelis do not have the right to do the same. I see...).

First, you have to put the suicide bombings in to perspective. Second, you have to understand that they haven't grown up out of nowhere. Third, you have to understand what a suicide bombing really is.
I've striped it down to three things to make it easier to see, but they are all one and should be viewed so.

1, SB is the biggest weapon that the Palestinians have. What are the biggest weapons that the Israelis use against the palestinians?

2, "Every little action, means a reaction" That is physics, but also how it in practice works among humans. SB's are a reaction of a horrible and hugely uneven occupation. They are the fruit of the seed that has been sown by the Israelis for a long time.

3, It is an act of desperate human beings. That has evolved from living in a state of despair. 40 years of occupation that has the sole meaning of depriving the people of all hope and show them that there is no future, so that they will give up and MOVE.

The sum being: If you plant corn, you reap corn. When the Germans attacked with chemical weapons during WWI, they was met with the same medicin. It was wrong to use them from BOTH sides, but the Germans did not have the right to expect that they wouldn't be treated the same way.

Did you understand me now?

Don't even go that way. East-Timor was occupied from 1975 to 1999 and they formed a guerrilla army. Against a proportionally much more powerfully occupier, and in the middle of HUGE interests (see oil in the Timor sea), they achieved independence in 2002. How? Through diplomatic negotiations.

They suffered A LOT, with several massacres and severe oppression.

Guess what... they didn't turn suicidal in a BUS in Jakarta. My point is.. you can't justify the extreme actions with the Israeli occupation.

Don't go what way? You are answering something that hasn't got to do with what you've quoted!

What ever, I can answer this anyways.
Has the occupation of East Timor deprived them of their every day life in the same way it has for the Palestinians?
That means no visiting relatives in neghbouring villages, no school for the kids, no university for the youth, checkpoints that don't allow women to go have their babies at hospitals, total destruction of infrastructure, claymores that hit kids....exactly everything you can think of.

Negotiations. We've just been through this after discussing the whole Palestinian AND Lebanese conflicts just until the other month. You didn't follow that did you? Well, the negotiations part was covered too, more exactly the Camp David agreement.

The Israelis have a goal. That is, in their own words, TRANSFER. Camp David was display for the ignorant masses. Search my posts about it and read up on it.

"they didn't turn suicidal in a BUS in Jakarta". So why didn't they do that? There could be several reasons to it, right? Lets try think of a few; It had show that it didn't have any effect on the Israelis; It evoked a sence of antipathy for the Palestinians while the Israelis were met with empathy from the world; Their suffering hasn't led to the same amount of despair; They are a different people wit different histories.

What does that last sentence mean? Example: in Brazil women walk around in thongs and show that asses for everybody to see. In the States that just don't happen. It's not the lack of good wheather that keeps them from doing that. They might even get arested for doing so.

In Europe you can walk topless at a beach. In Europe they don't censor love scenes in movies, they censor violence. In the US it's the opposite. Why, many of us have the same roots, and aren't we all Christians?

People are different, we act and react differently, both as individuals and culturaly. The Germans are known as perfectionists, why haven't we heard of the perfectionist Portugese? We are different.

Tell me something, isn't occupation an extreme action? Isn't the occupation in its self a collection of numerous uncouted extreme actions?

No to mention that the Israeli initial occupation followed an atack by the Arab Nations, the Indonesian was simply an invasion. It's clearly not just about Israel/Palestine. There are a lot of players in the region that fight Israel through the palestinians.

Deniing to see this doens't help the palestinians one bit, it just helps to perpetuate the conflict.

One could argue that the UN didn't have the right to give other peoples homes to a whole new group of people. It was the Christian nations feeling guilty for the way they had oppressed the Jews for 2000 years that made them give away, by colonial powers, occupied land to create a new state.

It was the Europeans that had oppressed and exterminated the Jews. Why wasn't a bit of Europe given to them?

Man you make it sound like the Palestinians don't have a reason for fighting for their own lives so they gladly take on and give their lives for the reasons of others. That is pathetic. What other bigger reason could there be?

It is your ignorance, partiality and denial of the things I've mentioned that perpetuates this conflict.

And hey, you didn't answer my question in your quote... "What would you do if the US had been occupied for 40 years by your almighty evil neighbour (choose which ), would you give up and let the unjust do as they please without a fight? Or would you hope for a better world and fight for your liberty?"

Exchange US for Portugal and answer it.

Your point beeing?

I mean, that is almost begging for a "have you ever heard of PLO, Hamas, and Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades?"

You see, the the problem of discussing this subject while making an absolute defense of one of the parties, is that you'll always find a reciprocal and equivalent action by the other.

My point is that these organizations are considered to have invented the modern form of what we today call terrorism (the Palestinian equivalents are much younger). My other point is that it was these organizations that terrorized JEWS that lived in Arabic countries to make them move to the not yet founded state of Israel.

You said it was because of Arab oppression. Their terror was made out to look as it was Arabs, but it was in fact them zionist groups. Jews had lived in peace with the Arabs since the diaspora. The Jews didn't crusify no son of a Moslem God. They had no beef with them. The beef was served by the almighty West and the zionists.


EDIT: "Absolute defence"... That is the second time I whip you on that one in this thread. It is you, not me, that are defending one of the parties blindly.
I'm glad to see that you understand about "reciprocal and equivalent action by the other", because I now KNOW that you will understand when I talk about the "farming" Israel is doing.

 

[rockwool]

rockwool's like a suicide bombing cat... he's got nine lives and is prepared to use them all on this thread alone.

That was actually funny.

Will answer DRB later.

 

[llkoolkeg]

Back on topic, please.

Perhaps the weapon could be some sort of high-explosive frangible. If you encase the charge in, for example, something akin to particle board, it would be devastating at close range but not spray shrapnel everywhere else. Consider controlled implosion demolitions where small, well placed charges can have dramatic effects without affecting adjacent buildings.

 

[Demomonkey]

terrorists have been known to infect themselves with horrible terminal illnesses and then blow themselves up so that if you catch a piece of shrapnel you also get the aids or whatever.

Yeah, I saw that on FOX News too!

 

[DaveW]

Oh well if it's on Faux news it must be true.