Palestina

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

quran says that allah (or god) given israel for jews

So then how come a lot of Palestinians (well, Arabs*...not necessarily Palestinians) claim that Israel is rightfully theirs if the Quran says its not? 

 

*Leaders, not everyday people

[puddingkip]

So then how come a lot of Palestinians (well, Arabs*...not necessarily Palestinians) claim that Israel is rightfully theirs if the Quran says its not?

 

*Leaders, not everyday people

Because everybody is a hypocrite and well also because the Brits (McMahon) promised it to them and they lived there for centuries

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

Because everybody is a hypocrite and well also because the Brits (McMahon) promised it to them and they lived there for centuries

Yep, and America should return the continent to the Native Americas, and the Netherlands should be returned to the former HRE.

 

Also, the Jews lived in Israel for centuries as well; to take it a step further, Jews and Arabs all came from the same lineage. 

[puddingkip]

Yep, and America should return the continent to the Native Americas, and the Netherlands should be returned to the former HRE.

 

Also, the Jews lived in Israel for centuries as well; to take it a step further, Jews and Arabs all came from the same lineage.

 

Just to take you really deep in to Dutch facts. Some weird document says we are still part of the holy roman empire. We also housed the last German (not HRE, they are Austria) empire. But the hre was disbanded. Hitler used it to make legalise his occupation of the Netherlands. And no America should not be returned to the natives. This was a whole different time-frame. During the time, it should have stopped. Israel is still in progress. So we can stop that now. And seriously, the Jewis and Arab people are related, but the amount of Jewish lineae in present day Jews is pretty low. And the sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews are wholly different groups. The best claim the Jews got to the land is a vague promise by a British Prime Minister for a home, not a nation. It also stated no land was to be taken from non-Jewish residents of the area. If you look up the '48 ethnic cleansings done by zionits you can clearly see they broke that. Thire Palestines/Arabs were persuaded by the Brits to revolt against the Ottoman Empire, in exchange for a free nation. They did their part, but at the post-war meeting in Lausanne they simply were ignored and the Sykes-Picot secret agreement between Britain and France was instead done.

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

Just to take you really deep in to Dutch facts. Some weird document says we are still part of the holy roman empire. We also housed the last German (not HRE, they are Austria) empire. But the hre was disbanded. Hitler used it to make legalise his occupation of the Netherlands. And no America should not be returned to the natives. This was a whole different time-frame. During the time, it should have stopped. Israel is still in progress. So we can stop that now. And seriously, the Jewis and Arab people are related, but the amount of Jewish lineae in present day Jews is pretty low. And the sephardic and Ashkenazi Jews are wholly different groups. The best claim the Jews got to the land is a vague promise by a British Prime Minister for a home, not a nation. It also stated no land was to be taken from non-Jewish residents of the area. If you look up the '48 ethnic cleansings done by zionits you can clearly see they broke that. Thire Palestines/Arabs were persuaded by the Brits to revolt against the Ottoman Empire, in exchange for a free nation. They did their part, but at the post-war meeting in Lausanne they simply were ignored and the Sykes-Picot secret agreement between Britain and France was instead done.

I hate to break it to you, but Israel should be controlled by whoever won the last war. And no, England didn't "give" Israel to the Jews....They fought for it. They beat the Arabs in every single war since 1948, until the Arab nations can beat the IDF, Israel belongs to the Jews. Also, just to make something clear, Arabs are allowed into Israel, yet try going into any of the Arab nations as a Jew, i have Arab friends who are scared to go to an Arab country, let alone Jews. 

 

So what is the time frame that dictates who is the rightful controller of a country since apparently, beating a country and conquering it isn't enough anymore.... So, should America revert back to the Native Americans? or how about the chinese since they became the Native Americans....or maybe to a more recent controller--so Britain/France/Spain? 

 

I honestly don't think i've ever heard such a flawed argument.....You're telling me if a country goes to war, and wins, they should just forfeit everything they win and pretend that the war never happened? Also, in case you didn't know, virtually all countries are controlled by a group of people who weren't the original inhabitants. I'd honestly be surprised if any country was and always was controlled by the same people. 

[puddingkip]

I hate to break it to you, but Israel should be controlled by whoever won the last war. And no, England didn't "give" Israel to the Jews....They fought for it. They beat the Arabs in every single war since 1948, until the Arab nations can beat the IDF, Israel belongs to the Jews. Also, just to make something clear, Arabs are allowed into Israel, yet try going into any of the Arab nations as a Jew, i have Arab friends who are scared to go to an Arab country, let alone Jews. 

 

So what is the time frame that dictates who is the rightful controller of a country since apparently, beating a country and conquering it isn't enough anymore.... So, should America revert back to the Native Americans? or how about the chinese since they became the Native Americans....or maybe to a more recent controller--so Britain/France/Spain? 

 

I honestly don't think i've ever heard such a flawed argument.....You're telling me if a country goes to war, and wins, they should just forfeit everything they win and pretend that the war never happened? Also, in case you didn't know, virtually all countries are controlled by a group of people who weren't the original inhabitants. I'd honestly be surprised if any country was and always was controlled by the same people. 

Already answered the America question. And don't tell me the Brits didn't give Israël to the Jews. After WW2 there was a massive feeling of guilt, which led to the Brits allowing Jews to immigrate into Palestina again. Which led to ethnic tensions and fighting. The Brits decided they couldn't rule it anymore and gave it to the Jews

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

Which led to ethnic tensions and fighting. The Brits decided they couldn't rule it anymore and gave it to the Jews

No.....they didn't give it to the Jews. If they had the Jews wouldn't have had to fight for it, plus the Arab nations have tried to take it back on multiple occasions, and each time they were defeated, even when Israel didn't really have an army (war of 1948) they still won. 

 

OK....now, in May of 1948 the British Mandate was about to expire (the Brits NEVER gave Israel to the Jews). What happened was the leader (Ben Gurion) declared the state of Israel and the next day all the Arab nations converged on Israel. Never once did Britain give Israel to the Jews, they fought for it, and won. 

[Vitri]

I think , that, religions save and kill people, in this case, people are being killed for no reason. Some kind of Peace deal, would work,  the problem is the fix religion on those countries, thats the problem, countries without other religions, people cant pray for other gods, so , there´s no option.

[There]

I think , that, religions save and kill people, in this case, people are being killed for no reason. Some kind of Peace deal, would work,  the problem is the fix religion on those countries, thats the problem, countries without other religions, people cant pray for other gods, so , there´s no option.

 

I, think, so?

[F CHARLIE]

Already answered the America question. And don't tell me the Brits didn't give Israël to the Jews. After WW2 there was a massive feeling of guilt, which led to the Brits allowing Jews to immigrate into Palestina again. Which led to ethnic tensions and fighting. The Brits decided they couldn't rule it anymore and gave it to the Jews

 

Europe was very happy to have solved the "jewish problem". No one was going to oppose a jewish state and I believe the UN offered a state to palistinians at that time bit they refused.

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

I believe the UN offered a state to palistinians at that time bit they refused.

Yes they did, but the Palestinians refused it, and no plan was ultimately reached.

[F CHARLIE]

Yes they did, but the Palestinians refused it, and no plan was ultimately reached.

 

I believe a large part of the problem has been that other arabic countries convinced palistinians that they could get the palestinians the teritory back from the start. They supported the PLO and now support hezbolah which I don't think is even a palestinian entity. If not for the other arabic nations doing this the palestinians may have negotiated with isreal years ago as it is the only real option that makes any sense. These two people are already heavily integrated. If they can simply get the deal done it would make a large difference in therest of the region.

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

I believe a large part of the problem has been that other arabic countries convinced palistinians that they could get the palestinians the teritory back from the start. They supported the PLO and now support hezbolah which I don't think is even a palestinian entity. If not for the other arabic nations doing this the palestinians may have negotiated with isreal years ago as it is the only real option that makes any sense. These two people are already heavily integrated. If they can simply get the deal done it would make a large difference in therest of the region.

Yes, except the interesting part about the whole situation is that the Palestinians were actually turned away by the Arab nations (well they were, i'm not sure what would happen now if they tried to go to an Arab country). And most of the Palestinians/Arabs are decent people and just want peace, but they end up being manipulated by radicals in terrorist organizations and governments, which makes peace virtually impossible. The way i see it, these radicals are using the Palestinians to cause unrest and make the world hate Israel. (Turkey flotilla, Israel bombing "hospitals and schools", forcing the Palestinians to live in a 'shithole' (Gaza)). All you have to do is watch the news to see how biased it really is towards Israel. Theres a town called Sterrot in Israel right near the Gaza Strip that was bombarded by rockets on a daily basis (or were anyway, haven't actually heard much about them lately). Except most newspapers glanced over this and instead focused on Israel's retaliation. 

 

Long story short, the news is biased, Palestinians are controlled by radicals, America is stupid for enforcing these radicals by putting them into power. 

 

From a "whats better for society" point of view, Israel should be the state of Israel rather than a Palestinian state (i do mean a state of Israel and not a jewish state, because there are plenty of non-jews, arabs/christians/hindus/etc..., residing there and in the government. So calling it a Jewish state is like calling America a Christian one, although Israel has more religious-governmental ties).

Why? 

• Israel produces the largest (per capita) number of patents. 
• While it was controlled by the Arabs Christians and Jews weren't allowed into Jerusalem (which contains holy sites for every major religion--Western Wall, Dome of the Rock, Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
• Look at Gaza; when Israel gave Gaza to the Palestinians it was a well-maintained prosperous city, now its a shithole
• Israel is the only free country in the middle east, i.e. brining some stability and hope to the area

[F CHARLIE]

I believe the answer lies in each side seeing the other as true partners. Isreal will have to convince palestinians to adandon ties to iran, hezbollah and other arab countries. Palistinians must take up the responsibility to be a protector of Isreals needs in the region. Isreal needs to help develope of palistinian territory as well.

 

There needs to be a state for the palastinians made from the entire west bank, gaza with Jeruselam becoming an independant, shared capitol of both countries. I imagine the city to become like the vatican. Under its own control.

[Bomsusik]

I'm a Jewish Russian that lives in Israel, and I can say that Hamas invade Israel from the Gaza strip while the media doesn't watch, but when Israel attacks in Self-defence, the media for some stupid reason blame us for the "War"...

Don't get me wrong, but what is Palestine? as long as I know, there was no such country called Palestine. The land is called Palestine and whoever lives on it can be called a Palestinian, so therefor every single Jew and Arab that lives in this area are called Palestinians.

[qazz42]

I don't think Israel deserves it's own country and I do believe they stole it from the palestines. However, that's history now. My main issue is that if Israel wants to do what it wants, with it's mass killings and terrorism in the area, fine, whatever. Just stop sucking off the teat of american tax payers to fund your terror. Not a single hard working american should be forced to pay for israel's war crimes against the palestinians.

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

My main issue is that if Israel wants to do what it wants, with it's mass killings and terrorism in the area, fine, whatever. Just stop sucking off the teat of american tax payers to fund your terror. Not a single hard working american should be forced to pay for israel's war crimes against the palestinians.

Excuse me? mass killings? What war crimes? Do you even have a clue what you're talking about? 

 

Also, America gives aid to Israel (and most of the Arab countries for that matter) for a multitude of reasons, but one key reason is that Israel is the only stable government in the entire area, brining some stability, and a safe-haven for US troops. 

[puddingkip]

Excuse me? mass killings? What war crimes? Do you even have a clue what you're talking about? 

 

Also, America gives aid to Israel (and most of the Arab countries for that matter) for a multitude of reasons, but one key reason is that Israel is the only stable government in the entire area, brining some stability, and a safe-haven for US troops.

 

Syria HAD a pretty stable government. It was ruled by arrogant, selfish pricks. But it was stable. Same with Libya, but the question is which is better. Stable shit or unstable good ideas.

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

which is better. Stable shit or unstable good ideas.

explain how Israel falls into either category? 

[puddingkip]

explain how Israel falls into either category? 

Oh crap, I can't write clearly at 1 am apparently. I was admitting Israel was kinda stable, but was saying that Syria USED to be stable too. The categories were for Syria. It had a stable but shit government, now it's very unstable but there are some good ideas (but certainly not ALL rebels are good)

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

Israel was kinda stable, but was saying that Syria USED to be stable too.

How exactly is Israel unstable? and emphasis on USED to. No longer, why? too many rebellions, too many dictators, etc... 

[F CHARLIE]

explain how Israel falls into either category?

 

I think its a comment on the term stable. Isreal is one of the truely democratic countries in the middle east.

 

Also, while they are an important military and stretegic partner for us it is Saudi Arabia that is a more important partner.

[puddingkip]

How exactly is Israel unstable? and emphasis on USED to. No longer, why? too many rebellions, too many dictators, etc... 

Wait, where did I say Israel was unstable? I mean it's not 100% as stable as can be, because of different leaders, different policies etc. But it's one of the closest to stability. I mean SYRIA USED to be stable. The emphasis on USED, well if you've followed the news over the past 3 years I highly doubt you could call it a stable situation. Cities change leader every day, people run away, foreigners come in. How is that stable? Under Assad there were awful things going on, but he had everything under control. Since his dad took over a looonnggg time ago, there have been only 2 leaders, with not all that many riots/rebellions. I call that relatively stable

[AwesomeMcCoolName]

Wait, where did I say Israel was unstable? I mean it's not 100% as stable as can be, because of different leaders, different policies etc. But it's one of the closest to stability. I mean SYRIA USED to be stable. The emphasis on USED, well if you've followed the news over the past 3 years I highly doubt you could call it a stable situation. Cities change leader every day, people run away, foreigners come in. How is that stable? Under Assad there were awful things going on, but he had everything under control. Since his dad took over a looonnggg time ago, there have been only 2 leaders, with not all that many riots/rebellions. I call that relatively stable

I'm not arguing over Syrias stability. It used to be very stable, but then again so did egypt and many other arab countries. The problem is the people got sick of living under a dictator and rebelled. So yes, it was technically stable; but stability a lone isn't a good thing. (It certainly was better before since now the governments are unstable and the reasons for rebelling are still there--but stability isn't all that matters).

[puddingkip]

I'm not arguing over Syrias stability. It used to be very stable, but then again so did egypt and many other arab countries. The problem is the people got sick of living under a dictator and rebelled. So yes, it was technically stable; but stability a lone isn't a good thing. (It certainly was better before since now the governments are unstable and the reasons for rebelling are still there--but stability isn't all that matters).

So wait, what are we argueing about? And as I already said in my first post on this 

 

Syria HAD a pretty stable government. It was ruled by arrogant, selfish pricks. But it was stable. Same with Libya, but the question is which is better. Stable shit or unstable good ideas.

I said that stability wasn't all that was needed for a good country, but it is one of those things. And in Syria, stability was taken away, but I see no replacement to justify the unstableness now.