Gaza army

[aris2chat]

Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza

Their way of planning for peace????

 

[Bleipriester]

You are wondering?

 

[Roudy]

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

 

[Bleipriester]

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

 

[Roudy]

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

If Israel wanted to really do that it would already have gotten it over with over 40 years ago.

 

[Challenger]

Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza

Their way of planning for peace????

"Si vis pacem, para bellum".

 

[Humanity]

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

If Israel wanted to really do that it would already have gotten it over with over 40 years ago.

Even the zionuts are not so stupid to think they would get away with genocide, now or 40 years ago!

 

[Hollie]

Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza

Their way of planning for peace????

"Si vis pacem, para bellum".

What s shame that the world community continues to provide welfare payments to support Islamic terrorism.

 

[Bleipriester]

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

If Israel wanted to really do that it would already have gotten it over with over 40 years ago.

Then, Israel could acknowledge Palestine, or not?

 

[aris2chat]

Hamas is training 25,000 new fighters in gaza

Their way of planning for peace????

"Si vis pacem, para bellum".

Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
Why do they object to Israel arming and controlling it's border and building fences and wall?
Why object to Israel controlling the 'free' flow of weapons into gaza?

they too are prepared if gaza attacks again

Gaza does not have the right to form it's own army. Any authorization for that would come from the PA.

Please don't give me that nonsense of gaza be voted to government. They were voted for seats in parliament, not to unilaterally take actions of military force or triggering a war with Israel. Gaza was taken by force.
Hamas' actions should have nullified any participation in parliament.
PLO renounced terrorism in 1988. Hamas is viewed as a terrorist group even by the PLO and is not a member.
Hamas does not have the right to act without parliaments approval.

Gaza does not have the legal authority to 'prepare for war'. They should not be armed at all.
It does not have a right to act on it's own at all

 

[RoccoR]

Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,

As a coherent political policy concerning Palestine (the 1988 State of), Israel does not have a real firm future objective.

While the various political parties have their individual agendas, and positions, a collectively Israeli Foreign Policy really has not been formulated.

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

(COMMENT)

The Israelis agree on the need to survive the long standing Arab Palestinian objective to evict the Jewish State. But much beyond that, the Israelis still are debating the future of their state and how it will develop regional relations.

The Arab Palestinians have formulated a long-term foreign policy based on the re-acquisition of the territory they believe is "their territory" as outlined by the Palestine Order in Council; within the boundaries determined by the Principal Allied Powers on the surrender of the Ottoman Empire. This has not changed substantially since 1948. And this is the contention the Israelis are still dealing with today.

As of yet, there is no reasonable expectation that any agreement made today with the Arab Palestinian will be honored for any length of time. The past history and behaviors of the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated that any agreed upon peace will be short term until the Arab Palestinians as mustered enough military might and political support to make another act of aggression to (in their eyes) liberate the territorial boundaries they consider their sovereign right; even though they have nothing that grants them that sovereign right.

The Arab Palestinians have made a solemn oath to continue the conflict until they liberate what they consider as Palestine. And until they abdicate that oath, they can be expected to be contained.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Bleipriester]

Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,

As a coherent political policy concerning Palestine (the 1988 State of), Israel does not have a real firm future objective.

While the various political parties have their individual agendas, and positions, a collectively Israeli Foreign Policy really has not been formulated.

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

(COMMENT)

The Israelis agree on the need to survive the long standing Arab Palestinian objective to evict the Jewish State. But much beyond that, the Israelis still are debating the future of their state and how it will develop regional relations.

The Arab Palestinians have formulated a long-term foreign policy based on the re-acquisition of the territory they believe is "their territory" as outlined by the Palestine Order in Council; within the boundaries determined by the Principal Allied Powers on the surrender of the Ottoman Empire. This has not changed substantially since 1948. And this is the contention the Israelis are still dealing with today.

As of yet, there is no reasonable expectation that any agreement made today with the Arab Palestinian will be honored for any length of time. The past history and behaviors of the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated that any agreed upon peace will be short term until the Arab Palestinians as mustered enough military might and political support to make another act of aggression to (in their eyes) liberate the territorial boundaries they consider their sovereign right; even though they have nothing that grants them that sovereign right.

Most Respectfully,
R

Palestinians and Israelis have the same rights regarding an own nation. If the two parties are unable to resolve their dispute, we have the UN that is up to act and make sure, the rights of both peoples are considered.

 

[Roudy]

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

If Israel wanted to really do that it would already have gotten it over with over 40 years ago.

Even the zionuts are not so stupid to think they would get away with genocide, now or 40 years ago!

Genocide is an Arab Muslim specialty. That's how all these lands in the Middle East became Muslim.

 

[Roudy]

Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,

As a coherent political policy concerning Palestine (the 1988 State of), Israel does not have a real firm future objective.

While the various political parties have their individual agendas, and positions, a collectively Israeli Foreign Policy really has not been formulated.

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

(COMMENT)

The Israelis agree on the need to survive the long standing Arab Palestinian objective to evict the Jewish State. But much beyond that, the Israelis still are debating the future of their state and how it will develop regional relations.

The Arab Palestinians have formulated a long-term foreign policy based on the re-acquisition of the territory they believe is "their territory" as outlined by the Palestine Order in Council; within the boundaries determined by the Principal Allied Powers on the surrender of the Ottoman Empire. This has not changed substantially since 1948. And this is the contention the Israelis are still dealing with today.

As of yet, there is no reasonable expectation that any agreement made today with the Arab Palestinian will be honored for any length of time. The past history and behaviors of the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated that any agreed upon peace will be short term until the Arab Palestinians as mustered enough military might and political support to make another act of aggression to (in their eyes) liberate the territorial boundaries they consider their sovereign right; even though they have nothing that grants them that sovereign right.

The Arab Palestinians have made a solemn oath to continue the conflict until they liberate what they consider as Palestine. And until they abdicate that oath, they can be expected to be contained.

Most Respectfully,
R

Even Arafat wasn't negotiating in good faith, which is why the peace deal during Clinton's years fell apart. It hasn't been as much about establishing this mythical Palestine, as much as the desire to destroy the Jewish state. At its heart this conflict is about religious ideology and will remain so.

 

[Billo_Really]

Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
Why do they object to Israel arming and controlling it's border and building fences and wall?
Why object to Israel controlling the 'free' flow of weapons into gaza?

they too are prepared if gaza attacks again

Gaza does not have the right to form it's own army. Any authorization for that would come from the PA.

Please don't give me that nonsense of gaza be voted to government. They were voted for seats in parliament, not to unilaterally take actions of military force or triggering a war with Israel. Gaza was taken by force.
Hamas' actions should have nullified any participation in parliament.
PLO renounced terrorism in 1988. Hamas is viewed as a terrorist group even by the PLO and is not a member.
Hamas does not have the right to act without parliaments approval.

Gaza does not have the legal authority to 'prepare for war'. They should not be armed at all.
It does not have a right to act on it's own at all

That is not your (or Israel's) decision to make.

You do not have any right telling others how to live their lives.

Gazan's have every right to defend themselves from Israeli aggression.

They have a right to have weapons and an army to do that with.

 

[Billo_Really]

Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,

As a coherent political policy concerning Palestine (the 1988 State of), Israel does not have a real firm future objective.

While the various political parties have their individual agendas, and positions, a collectively Israeli Foreign Policy really has not been formulated.

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

(COMMENT)

The Israelis agree on the need to survive the long standing Arab Palestinian objective to evict the Jewish State. But much beyond that, the Israelis still are debating the future of their state and how it will develop regional relations.

The Arab Palestinians have formulated a long-term foreign policy based on the re-acquisition of the territory they believe is "their territory" as outlined by the Palestine Order in Council; within the boundaries determined by the Principal Allied Powers on the surrender of the Ottoman Empire. This has not changed substantially since 1948. And this is the contention the Israelis are still dealing with today.

As of yet, there is no reasonable expectation that any agreement made today with the Arab Palestinian will be honored for any length of time. The past history and behaviors of the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated that any agreed upon peace will be short term until the Arab Palestinians as mustered enough military might and political support to make another act of aggression to (in their eyes) liberate the territorial boundaries they consider their sovereign right; even though they have nothing that grants them that sovereign right.

The Arab Palestinians have made a solemn oath to continue the conflict until they liberate what they consider as Palestine. And until they abdicate that oath, they can be expected to be contained.

Most Respectfully,
R

The "containment", is the cause of all the violence.

 

[RoccoR]

Bleipriester, et al,

To a point, I agree.

Palestinians and Israelis have the same rights regarding an own nation. If the two parties are unable to resolve their dispute, we have the UN that is up to act and make sure, the rights of both peoples are considered.

(COMMENT)

I believe that your position is --- in part --- true. But that it is not necessarily up to the UN to intervene and resolve the issues.

States shall accordingly seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. In seeking such a settlement the parties shall agree upon such peaceful means as may be appropriate to the circumstances and nature of the dispute. General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV).
​

However, I do not believe that the Arab Palestinian or the State of Palestine (1988) actually adheres to or follows the basic tenants in this regard:

General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV). Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States

Every State has the duty to refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.

In accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, States have the duty to refrain from propaganda for wars of aggression.

Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.
​

It must also be remembered that Israel never invaded or Occupied the Palestinian Territory. In 1967, the West Bank was sovereign Jordanian territory (not Palestinian Territory) --- and resolved by Treaty in 1994. Similarly, in 1967, the Gaza Strip was an Egyptian Military Governorship, with the All Palestine Government having been dissolved in 1959. This dispute was also resolved by a Peace Treaty in 1979. In the one case, Israel occupied Jordanian Territory; in the other case Israel occupied Egyptian Territory.

The disputes were mediated through the twin agreements known as the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (AKA: Oslo I) and the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (AKA: Oslo II).

At the current time, there is no reasonable expectation that either side will make the necessary break-through to achieve peace. The current policy of the Arab Palestinians set by Political Branch of HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement) is that the HAMAS Covenant is still in force and that HAMAS does not recognize of "The State of Israel" or the legitimacy of its presence on any part of Palestine.

Most Respectfully,
R

• 
  

 

[Hollie]

Then why is the arab world so afraid that Israel might have a nuclear weapon?
Why do they object to Israel arming and controlling it's border and building fences and wall?
Why object to Israel controlling the 'free' flow of weapons into gaza?

they too are prepared if gaza attacks again

Gaza does not have the right to form it's own army. Any authorization for that would come from the PA.

Please don't give me that nonsense of gaza be voted to government. They were voted for seats in parliament, not to unilaterally take actions of military force or triggering a war with Israel. Gaza was taken by force.
Hamas' actions should have nullified any participation in parliament.
PLO renounced terrorism in 1988. Hamas is viewed as a terrorist group even by the PLO and is not a member.
Hamas does not have the right to act without parliaments approval.

Gaza does not have the legal authority to 'prepare for war'. They should not be armed at all.
It does not have a right to act on it's own at all

That is not your (or Israel's) decision to make.

You do not have any right telling others how to live their lives.

Gazan's have every right to defend themselves from Israeli aggression.

They have a right to have weapons and an army to do that with.

Typically pointless, shortstop. Gaza does not have an army, it has a collection of Islamic terrorist syndicates, often hostile to one another.

The continuing Islamist terrorist attacks aimed at Israel are not undertaken by an armed, uniformed force but by Islamic terrorist networks who have every intention of launching attacks from civilian areas where there is relative safety from an aggressive Israeli retaliation. The islami. Terrorists you define as heroes are simply cowards who know full well that Israel will take steps to avoid civilian casualties.

 

[Humanity]

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

If Israel wanted to really do that it would already have gotten it over with over 40 years ago.

Even the zionuts are not so stupid to think they would get away with genocide, now or 40 years ago!

Genocide is an Arab Muslim specialty. That's how all these lands in the Middle East became Muslim.

 

[Hollie]

Bleipriester, Roudy, et al,

As a coherent political policy concerning Palestine (the 1988 State of), Israel does not have a real firm future objective.

While the various political parties have their individual agendas, and positions, a collectively Israeli Foreign Policy really has not been formulated.

It's in their charter. No peace agreements. Treaties are to be used to decieve the Zionist entity in order to be able to rearm.

Israels long term agenda is the end of a Palestine area, so why should any Palestinian consider serious agreements with Israel?

(COMMENT)

The Israelis agree on the need to survive the long standing Arab Palestinian objective to evict the Jewish State. But much beyond that, the Israelis still are debating the future of their state and how it will develop regional relations.

The Arab Palestinians have formulated a long-term foreign policy based on the re-acquisition of the territory they believe is "their territory" as outlined by the Palestine Order in Council; within the boundaries determined by the Principal Allied Powers on the surrender of the Ottoman Empire. This has not changed substantially since 1948. And this is the contention the Israelis are still dealing with today.

As of yet, there is no reasonable expectation that any agreement made today with the Arab Palestinian will be honored for any length of time. The past history and behaviors of the Arab Palestinian has demonstrated that any agreed upon peace will be short term until the Arab Palestinians as mustered enough military might and political support to make another act of aggression to (in their eyes) liberate the territorial boundaries they consider their sovereign right; even though they have nothing that grants them that sovereign right.

The Arab Palestinians have made a solemn oath to continue the conflict until they liberate what they consider as Palestine. And until they abdicate that oath, they can be expected to be contained.

Most Respectfully,
R

The "containment", is the cause of all the violence.

Awake from your coma, angry little short man.

The containment is a necessary response to Islamic terrorism. You and others need to read the Hamas Charter and to make an attempt to understand that Cult Screed.