16 Jun 09
Originally posted by sh76I agree that the Palestinians aren't going to ever be allowed a "right to return" and that compensation is all that can be asked for. I think they know that and the "right to return" is a negotiating position.
My post was mostly an attempt to be funny.
Incidentally, my moving out of the neighborhood had absolutely nothing to do with race. The neighborhood changed from primarily whites to primarily different whites.
Compensation? Fine. I agree to that. Let's figure out what's fair and make it part of an over-all settlement. Giving every Palestinian back the hou ...[text shortened]... d in 1946? Impractical and at odds with what's always been done in these sorts of situations.
16 Jun 09
Originally posted by kmax87I disagree that the particular land dispossession mentioned was "par for the course". By 1948, international law, as codified in the UN Charter and other places, was supposed to prevent such abuses. The denial of the Palestinian people's right to self-determination was a particularly heinous violation of IL principles and Israel's banning of Palestinian refugees from returning along with the seizure of their property was outrageous. Israel continues to spit on IL by expanding settlements in Palestinian areas - an action condemned repeatedly in UN Security Council resolutions.
To paraphrase a quote I wrote, "Just because you've neatly tagged it, didn't undo the processes of historical land dispossession that make the State of Israel par for the course"
Israel is a rogue nation and should be compelled to reach a just settlement with those it has consistently oppressed and brutalized.
16 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76The outline of an eventual Israeli-Palestinian agreement are well-known. As of yet, Israel has not been pressured enough to make it happen. Perhaps Netty will be the one to finally make the deal; the "Nixon to China" analogy could hold though his far-right allies weren't very happy about the very limited concessions the speech contained.
Good. We agree.
16 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderWay to tell one side of the story.
I disagree that the particular land dispossession mentioned was "par for the course". By 1948, international law, as codified in the UN Charter and other places, was supposed to prevent such abuses. The denial of the Palestinian people's right to self-determination was a particularly heinous violation of IL principles and Israel's banning of Palestinian ...[text shortened]... ompelled to reach a just settlement with those it has consistently oppressed and brutalized.
The repeated invasions of Israel and other acts of war by its Arab neighbors and sustained campaigns of terrorism that have been repeatedly launched since 1948 are completely irrelevant, right?
Since you're such a big reader, read up a little on the "destroy Israel" frenzy that Nasser and Co. whipped up the Arab World into in the lead-up to the '67 war.
16 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76LMAO!
Way to tell one side of the story.
The repeated invasions of Israel and other acts of war by its Arab neighbors and sustained campaigns of terrorism that have been repeatedly launched since 1948 are completely irrelevant, right?
Since you're such a big reader, read up a little on the "destroy Israel" frenzy that Nasser and Co. whipped up the Arab World into in the lead-up to the '67 war.
The 1967 War was started by the most successful sneak attack in modern military history. And it wasn't launched by Nasser.
Israel has never been anywhere near being "destroyed" - notwithstanding Zionist propaganda to the contrary.
16 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderThe creation of the american state displaced native-americans, are you willing to give the land back to them as well?
The continued, stubborn refusal to admit that the creation of a Zionist state foisted on the majority of Palestinian people was a wrong that needs to be compensated for remains an impediment to the settlement of the problem.
Your post is disingenuous or willfully ignorant.
Ok, you can help the palestinians, and improve their situation, but leave Israel as it is.
16 Jun 09
Originally posted by generalissimoOnly Isreal is expected to give back land in wins in wars. It is such a joke to expect any country to give up its security to appease stated enemies. The Arab word own 99+% of the land in the region and has far more in common with the Palestians (including their hatered of Isreal and the Western world). Perhaps it is time for the Arabs to chip in and give land to the Palestinians. Instead of ensuring that conditions are bad and encouraging violence.
The creation of the american state displaced native-americans, are you willing to give the land back to them as well?
Ok, you can help the palestinians, and improve their situation, but leave Israel as it is.
16 Jun 09
Originally posted by generalissimoNative Americans have been compensated as I have pointed out in several threads. So your "argument" is misinformed.
The creation of the american state displaced native-americans, are you willing to give the land back to them as well?
Ok, you can help the palestinians, and improve their situation, but leave Israel as it is.
16 Jun 09
Originally posted by quackquackOccupying people's lands and brutally repressing them leads invariably to violence. The solution is in front of Israel; perhaps if they ignore hatemongers like yourself they might finally get around to a peaceful resolution.
Only Isreal is expected to give back land in wins in wars. It is such a joke to expect any country to give up its security to appease stated enemies. The Arab word own 99+% of the land in the region and has far more in common with the Palestians (including their hatered of Isreal and the Western world). Perhaps it is time for the Arabs to chip in and g ...[text shortened]... land to the Palestinians. Instead of ensuring that conditions are bad and encouraging violence.
16 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderIsrael is not occupying anyone's land anymore than the United States occupies land they stole from Great Britian who stole from Native americans. If Israel chooses to give back land again (which I certainly would not recommend as no one else gives back land they win in wars to people who wish to whipe them out) they certainly need to make sure that their safety in ensured.
Occupying people's lands and brutally repressing them leads invariably to violence. The solution is in front of Israel; perhaps if they ignore hatemongers like yourself they might finally get around to a peaceful resolution.
16 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderAnd, is it your position that the sneak attack you reference was not a pre-emptive strike and that it did not take place after acts of war were already committed against it by Egypt and the UAR?
LMAO!
The 1967 War was started by the most successful sneak attack in modern military history. And it wasn't launched by Nasser.
Israel has never been anywhere near being "destroyed" - notwithstanding Zionist propaganda to the contrary.
I didn't say they were close to being destroyed. I said that the goal of Egypt, Syria, et al. was to destroy it.
And, is it possible for us to discuss Israel/Palestine just once without your referring to every point I make as "Zionist propaganda"? I admit I sympathize with Israel, but I'm certainly not a Zionist.
16 Jun 09
Originally posted by quackquackThere is a majority Palestinian population in the Occupied Territories, and 20% of Israeli citizens are Palestinian Arabs. There are few Native Americans left anywhere now.
Israel is not occupying anyone's land anymore than the United States occupies land they stole from Great Britian who stole from Native americans. If Israel chooses to give back land again (which I certainly would not recommend as no one else gives back land they win in wars to people who wish to whipe them out) they certainly need to make sure that their safety in ensured.