Deep down, we all know that peace is best

[Phoenall]

Pffft, where is your proof?

Try the actual video

OK, where is it? Got a link?

You posted it, so you provide the link, I am not in the habit of being a repository for some dumb NAZI ANTI SEMITIC JEW HATER

 

[Mojo2]

That does not give foreigners the right to overthrow an elected government.

Bad analogy though.

The analogy isn't bad.

And it wasn't America who forced Morsi down, it was Egypt itself.

I was thinking that Hitler was a bad analogy.

I was thinking about the US coup in Palestine.

I feel sorry for Egypt. They are torn between the Muslim Brotherhood and a US stooge military.

Try this:

They are torn between freedom and a never ending bigoted religious tyranny which intends to dominate the entire world.

And the modernist Muslims in Egypt are fighting to prevent the extremist Brotherhood and their ilk from imposing their slavish, hate filled version of Islam on them.

 

[P F Tinmore]

"...I was thinking about the US coup in Palestine..."

Why did the US (and the UK, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, etc.) decide to back Fatah rather than Hamas, despite the vote in 2006 going in favor of Hamas?

Could it be because of the fact that hamas is a proven terrorist organisation, and fatah is the lesser of two evils.

OMG, now you are playing the terrorist card.

 

[Phoenall]

No they weren't.

WANT TO BET.

Jordanian occupation of the West Bank - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Occupation of the Gaza Strip by Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Occupied territory is not part of the occupying country.

Did you read were they annexed the land and laid claim to it as their land, and the UN did not say anything

"Jordan formally annexed the West Bank on April 24, 1950, giving all residents automatic Jordanian citizenship. West Bank residents had already received the right to claim Jordanian citizenship in December 1949"

from the above link

 

[Phoenall]

DEfine "their land"

What kind of a dumbass question is that?

If you don't know what land we are referring to, then you don't know enough about this subject to even participate in a conversation about it.

So why don't you just go to some other thread where you know something about the topic, like maybe "bounce ball" or "four square" or "kickball"?

This one appears to be way above your pay grade.

Only to you because now you are out on a limb so I will ask again in the context of your post


Define "their land"

I know a damn sight more about the area than you could ever hope to, not being a NAZI ANTI SEMITIC JEW HATING RACIST

 

[P F Tinmore]

WANT TO BET.

Jordanian occupation of the West Bank - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Occupation of the Gaza Strip by Egypt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Occupied territory is not part of the occupying country.

Did you read were they annexed the land and laid claim to it as their land, and the UN did not say anything

"Jordan formally annexed the West Bank on April 24, 1950, giving all residents automatic Jordanian citizenship. West Bank residents had already received the right to claim Jordanian citizenship in December 1949"

from the above link

Jordan’s annexation was regarded as illegal and void by the Arab League and others. It was recognized only by Britain, Iraq and Pakistan

 

[Phoenall]

It's an opinion thread. People have the right to express their opinion. Much more ridiculous threats were created here, anyway.

His opinion was disingenuous.

People who want peace will do what it takes to get it. People who don't, will keep playing these bullshit little word games designed to cleanse any blame on the Israeli's.

Just like the muslims are doing when they agree to talk and then make illegal demands before they will talk about peace. The favourite seems to be illegally claiming that 242 demand Israel goes back to 1967 borders. But they wont entertain 1948 borders that would result in them losing Jerusalem and a large part of the land stolen from israel

 

[Phoenall]

Pffft, where is your proof?

Try the actual video

HE did.

Why don't you?

I have and seen the cracks, which is why he refuses to repost it for the world to see his LIES

 

[Hollie]

Deep down we all know that peace is best, but we need to better define "we".

Islamist history is one of perpetual war and conquest. Those wars have also included Islam's wars among the competing sects and subdivisions. Those internecine wars are still raging. Islam has always been expansionist and xenophobic. It has always been spread by the sword, and through rapine and as we see with words and actions from an understanding of islamist history, war and conquest still serves the ideology. Islamism is still thoroughly outraged at the ascendancy of the non-Moslem world and Western advancements in the arts, sciences and culture. Islamists have kept their inferiority complex and indignant grudge smoldering for 1,300 years.

 

[Kondor3]

My own contribution...

Obvious answers...

1. Hamas is identified by many countries (the US included) as a 'Terrorist Organization'.

Pfffft, third grade name calling...

I'd hardly call the US State Dept official list of terror organizations, and Hamas' appearance on that list, to be third-grade name-calling.

Foreign Terrorist Organizations

I'd hardly call Egypt's declaration of Hamas' parent organization (the Muslim Brotherhood) as a terror organization, to be third-grade name-calling.

Egypt declares Brotherhood 'terrorist group' - Middle East - Al Jazeera English

2. Hamas' hard-line stance against Israel and related intransigence precludes negotiating any meaningful and lasting Peace with them.

Fatah works for Israel. Hamas works for the people. Why do you think Fatah lost the elections?

Fatah comes closer to being able to work with Israel, but not for Israel.

Fatah lost because people were dissatisfied with the pace of progress under Fatah, and were led to believe that Hamas could accelerate the pace and get more done and improve the lives of Palestinians and lead them to victory.

When you have an uncompromising enemy that is unwilling to consider concluding a lasting peace on any terms but their own, and when that enemy has a demonstrable history in perpetrating acts of terrorism on an international scale, folks tend to shy-away from backing such miscreants, and, instead, choose a more reasonable alternative, if that exists.

Hamas does not operate outside of Palestine's borders...

You can take that up with the US State Dept.

Hamas wants peace but they do not want Israel's version of peace.

Hamas wants it all, won't settle for less, and they can't have that. If they won't compromise and negotiate, there's no point including them as a negotiating partner.

Using my own words and my own thoughts, and not a lick of cut-and-paste.

Indeed. I was beginning to wonder if you even had that in you. Good for you. Thank you.

 

[Hollie]

Why did the US (and the UK, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, etc.) decide to back Fatah rather than Hamas, despite the vote in 2006 going in favor of Hamas?

Could it be because of the fact that hamas is a proven terrorist organisation, and fatah is the lesser of two evils.

OMG, now you are playing the terrorist card.

What a shame you are unable to comprehend a reality based worldview.

Islamic terrorist groups such as Hamas have no intention of accepting any compromise in connection with recognizing Israel.

It's as though you're incapable of moving beyond your personal hatreds and support for fascist, islamist ideology.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Try the actual video

HE did.

Why don't you?

I have and seen the cracks, which is why he refuses to repost it for the world to see his LIES

That report was by a Canadian journalist.

How about a British journalist?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGKzP9EhJMY]Iran-Contra 2.0- how bush armed Fatah to fight Hamas - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Phoenall]

Never mind the 'duh' emoticons, Tinny.

What the heck does 'because illegal is the only way they can fly' mean in this context?

Why did the US, the UK, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, et al, decide to back Fatah rather than Hamas?

Plain speech would be best here, Tinny.

Not metaphors from left field.

Plain speech.

You really do not follow this conflict, do you?

Otherwise I would not have to go back to square one on things you should know.

Gaza – Two decades ago, Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin grabbed each other’s hands on the White House lawn in Washington DC. They celebrated the birth of the Oslo Declaration of Principles. However, Oslo was not the latest step in the national liberation project launched by Yasser Arafat in 1960, aiming for "revolution until victory." It was to put an end to that revolution and remove the term “victory” from the Palestine Liberation Organization's (PLO) dictionary, replacing it with "permanent defeat."

The defeat was called a "transitional self-authority" over the territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Occupied Jerusalem and the interior of Palestine were not covered. At that time, the PLO’s thoughts did not go beyond peaceful coexistence and a just and comprehensive solution. It was no longer the time or place for arms. All efforts were dedicated to building the state before achieving liberation.

Institutions were built and a Palestinian police force was formed to protect security and internal order in the lands occupied in 1967. Oslo provided the Israeli enemy the full right to self-defense. This was without any objection from the Palestinian side, which supported and entrenched these measures, transforming itself into a tool in the hands of the enemy to disarm the resistance in areas under its control.

Two Decades After Oslo: The Agreement That Uprooted Palestine | Al Akhbar English

As your link says the Palestinians agreed to the formation of an interim governing body presided over by Arafat, or as your link calls it a "transitional self-authority". This was not a government nor was it a nation, and set in stone the full meaning of statehood. It showed the muslims that they had to step up to the mark and act in a civilised manner or face punitive action. Yet to this very day the Palestinians are refusing to abide by the UN charter and stop all acts of belligerence and warfare, making a mockery of the UN charter in the process. Do not be surprised if many of the western nations don't pull the plug on the UN and tear up its biased and racist charter

 

[SAYIT]

Never mind the 'duh' emoticons, Tinny.

What the heck does 'because illegal is the only way they can fly' mean in this context?

Why did the US, the UK, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, et al, decide to back Fatah rather than Hamas?

Plain speech would be best here, Tinny.

Not metaphors from left field.

Plain speech.

You really do not follow this conflict, do you?

Otherwise I would not have to go back to square one on things you should know.

Gaza – Two decades ago, Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin grabbed each other’s hands on the White House lawn in Washington DC. They celebrated the birth of the Oslo Declaration of Principles. However, Oslo was not the latest step in the national liberation project launched by Yasser Arafat in 1960, aiming for "revolution until victory." It was to put an end to that revolution and remove the term “victory” from the Palestine Liberation Organization's (PLO) dictionary, replacing it with "permanent defeat."

The defeat was called a "transitional self-authority" over the territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Occupied Jerusalem and the interior of Palestine were not covered. At that time, the PLO’s thoughts did not go beyond peaceful coexistence and a just and comprehensive solution. It was no longer the time or place for arms. All efforts were dedicated to building the state before achieving liberation.

Institutions were built and a Palestinian police force was formed to protect security and internal order in the lands occupied in 1967. Oslo provided the Israeli enemy the full right to self-defense. This was without any objection from the Palestinian side, which supported and entrenched these measures, transforming itself into a tool in the hands of the enemy to disarm the resistance in areas under its control.

Two Decades After Oslo: The Agreement That Uprooted Palestine | Al Akhbar English

A hardcore position from Al Akhbar which I surmise you posted to explain your POV.
Having admittedly hid under your bed when called upon to serve this country, for you to require the Palestinians to continue tossing generation after generation of their kids into the fire that is the Arab/Israeli conflict from the comfort of the America you so clearly hate is hypocritical war-mongering.

 

[Phoenall]

My own contribution...

Obvious answers...

1. Hamas is identified by many countries (the US included) as a 'Terrorist Organization'.

Pfffft, third grade name calling.

2. Hamas' hard-line stance against Israel and related intransigence precludes negotiating any meaningful and lasting Peace with them.

Fatah works for Israel. Hamas works for the people.

Why do you think Fatah lost the elections?

When you have an uncompromising enemy that is unwilling to consider concluding a lasting peace on any terms but their own, and when that enemy has a demonstrable history in perpetrating acts of terrorism on an international scale, folks tend to shy-away from backing such miscreants, and, instead, choose a more reasonable alternative, if that exists.

Hamas does not operate outside of Palestine's borders.

Hamas wants peace but they do not want Israel's version of peace.

----------

Using my own words and my own thoughts, and not a lick of cut-and-paste.

Here you go all outside of the Palestinian "borders", and even outside of the 1967 "borders"

List of Palestinian suicide attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[SAYIT]

Why did the US (and the UK, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, etc.) decide to back Fatah rather than Hamas, despite the vote in 2006 going in favor of Hamas?

Could it be because of the fact that hamas is a proven terrorist organisation, and fatah is the lesser of two evils.

OMG, now you are playing the terrorist card.

Hypocritical, America-hatin' Georgie likes to play the "terrorist card" when discussing America.

 

[Phoenall]

Where have I posted a map showing Jordan inside Palestine?


No it wasn't.

Trans Jordan was created by the British out of part of their Palestinian mandate as a homeland for the Palestinian arab muslims

Where does it say that?

Link?

Here you go Adolph

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine_(legal_instrument)

The mandate document formalised the division of Palestine, to include a national home for the Jewish people under direct British rule, and Transjordan, an Emirate governed semi-autonomously from Britain under the rule of the Hashemite family.[1]

 

[P F Tinmore]

You really do not follow this conflict, do you?

Otherwise I would not have to go back to square one on things you should know.

Gaza – Two decades ago, Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin grabbed each other’s hands on the White House lawn in Washington DC. They celebrated the birth of the Oslo Declaration of Principles. However, Oslo was not the latest step in the national liberation project launched by Yasser Arafat in 1960, aiming for "revolution until victory." It was to put an end to that revolution and remove the term “victory” from the Palestine Liberation Organization's (PLO) dictionary, replacing it with "permanent defeat."

The defeat was called a "transitional self-authority" over the territories of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Occupied Jerusalem and the interior of Palestine were not covered. At that time, the PLO’s thoughts did not go beyond peaceful coexistence and a just and comprehensive solution. It was no longer the time or place for arms. All efforts were dedicated to building the state before achieving liberation.

Institutions were built and a Palestinian police force was formed to protect security and internal order in the lands occupied in 1967. Oslo provided the Israeli enemy the full right to self-defense. This was without any objection from the Palestinian side, which supported and entrenched these measures, transforming itself into a tool in the hands of the enemy to disarm the resistance in areas under its control.

Two Decades After Oslo: The Agreement That Uprooted Palestine | Al Akhbar English

As your link says the Palestinians agreed to the formation of an interim governing body presided over by Arafat, or as your link calls it a "transitional self-authority". This was not a government nor was it a nation, and set in stone the full meaning of statehood. It showed the muslims that they had to step up to the mark and act in a civilised manner or face punitive action. Yet to this very day the Palestinians are refusing to abide by the UN charter and stop all acts of belligerence and warfare, making a mockery of the UN charter in the process. Do not be surprised if many of the western nations don't pull the plug on the UN and tear up its biased and racist charter

Actually, the "Palestinians" did not agree. Arafat was appointed to represent the Palestinians. The Palestinians (not all of them) were happy for a while because they were duped into believing that there was going to be peace. Others saw through the farce.

What part of the UN Charter are they refusing to abide by?

 

[Phoenall]

Why did the US (and the UK, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, etc.) decide to back Fatah rather than Hamas, despite the vote in 2006 going in favor of Hamas?

Could it be because of the fact that hamas is a proven terrorist organisation, and fatah is the lesser of two evils.

OMG, now you are playing the terrorist card.

Are you now saying that 90% of the worlds sovereign nations are wrong in putting hamas at the top of the list of terrirst groups ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Trans Jordan was created by the British out of part of their Palestinian mandate as a homeland for the Palestinian arab muslims

Where does it say that?

Link?

Here you go Adolph

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine_(legal_instrument)

The mandate document formalised the division of Palestine, to include a national home for the Jewish people under direct British rule, and Transjordan, an Emirate governed semi-autonomously from Britain under the rule of the Hashemite family.[1]

The mandate was a monumental flop. Britain left Palestine without accomplishing any of its goals.

And where does it say that Jordan was for the Palestinian Arabs?