Israel least peaceful countries.

[Markle]

Israel and the united states should be ranked dead last and second to dead last as the most peaceful nations on the country.

Israel's existence has caused much turmoil.



the CIA and mossad work hand in hand together in starting wars around thew world.

Who, specifically, would you choose to replace the United States in "policing" the world.

Well surely you would not hire the fox to watch the hen house.

Why did you dodge such a simple question?

For your convenience, here it is again: "Who, specifically, would you choose to replace the United States in "policing" the world."

 

[P F Tinmore]

Israel and the united states should be ranked dead last and second to dead last as the most peaceful nations on the country.

Israel's existence has caused much turmoil.



the CIA and mossad work hand in hand together in starting wars around thew world.

Who, specifically, would you choose to replace the United States in "policing" the world.

Well surely you would not hire the fox to watch the hen house.

Why did you dodge such a simple question?

For your convenience, here it is again: "Who, specifically, would you choose to replace the United States in "policing" the world."

The UN should do that but the UN was designed to fail. So, more often than not, it does.

 

[Hollie]

Israel and the united states should be ranked dead last and second to dead last as the most peaceful nations on the country.

Israel's existence has caused much turmoil.



the CIA and mossad work hand in hand together in starting wars around thew world.

Who, specifically, would you choose to replace the United States in "policing" the world.

Well surely you would not hire the fox to watch the hen house.

Why did you dodge such a simple question?

For your convenience, here it is again: "Who, specifically, would you choose to replace the United States in "policing" the world."

The UN should do that but the UN was designed to fail. So, more often than not, it does.

The UN was designed to fail?

Your conspiracy theories are a hoot.

 

[USAF 2023]

So then, what is the "blue line?"

Well, according to actual international law and signed treaties -- it is the Armistice line which follows the recognized international border between the State of Lebanon and the State of Israel.

Article V of the Israel-Lebanon Armistice reads:

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

Yeah, yeah. I know it says "Palestine". Palestine was the recognized name of the territory. But who are the PARTIES to the Agreement. Its not the State of Palestine or the Government of Palestine. Its the Government of Israel and the Government of Lebanon. Here's the text:


For and on behalf of the Government of Israel

Signed:

Lieutenant-Colonel Mordechai Makleff
Yehoshua Pelman
Shabtai Rosenne

For and on behalf of the Government of the Lebanon

Signed:

Lieutenant-Colonel Toufic Salem
Commandant J. Harb


The sovereign of the territory formerly known as "Palestine", with respect to the international boundary with Lebanon, is ISRAEL. This isn't hard.

But who are the PARTIES to the Agreement. Its not the State of Palestine or the Government of Palestine.

Palestine was not a party to the armistice agreements because it was not a party to the 1948 war.

Palestine could not lose a war it was not a party to.

Palestine could not lose land in a war it could not lose.

Palestine's borders were the same after the war as before.

Please tell us why “ Palestine “ didn’t exist before 1967

 

[ForeverYoung436]

So then, what is the "blue line?"

Well, according to actual international law and signed treaties -- it is the Armistice line which follows the recognized international border between the State of Lebanon and the State of Israel.

Article V of the Israel-Lebanon Armistice reads:

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

Yeah, yeah. I know it says "Palestine". Palestine was the recognized name of the territory. But who are the PARTIES to the Agreement. Its not the State of Palestine or the Government of Palestine. Its the Government of Israel and the Government of Lebanon. Here's the text:


For and on behalf of the Government of Israel

Signed:

Lieutenant-Colonel Mordechai Makleff
Yehoshua Pelman
Shabtai Rosenne

For and on behalf of the Government of the Lebanon

Signed:

Lieutenant-Colonel Toufic Salem
Commandant J. Harb


The sovereign of the territory formerly known as "Palestine", with respect to the international boundary with Lebanon, is ISRAEL. This isn't hard.

But who are the PARTIES to the Agreement. Its not the State of Palestine or the Government of Palestine.

Palestine was not a party to the armistice agreements because it was not a party to the 1948 war.

Palestine could not lose a war it was not a party to.

Palestine could not lose land in a war it could not lose.

Palestine's borders were the same after the war as before.

Please tell us why “ Palestine “ didn’t exist before 1967

Yes, ILOVEISRAEL, not only that, but with respect to Lebanon, it doesn't really matter. Even before Israel's 1948 War of Independence, there was already a division between the State of Lebanon and the territory known as Palestine. The 1949 Armistice Agreement between the State of Israel and the State of Lebanon merely reaffirmed that division.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

So then, what is the "blue line?"

Well, according to actual international law and signed treaties -- it is the Armistice line which follows the recognized international border between the State of Lebanon and the State of Israel.

Article V of the Israel-Lebanon Armistice reads:

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

Yeah, yeah. I know it says "Palestine". Palestine was the recognized name of the territory. But who are the PARTIES to the Agreement. Its not the State of Palestine or the Government of Palestine. Its the Government of Israel and the Government of Lebanon. Here's the text:


For and on behalf of the Government of Israel

Signed:

Lieutenant-Colonel Mordechai Makleff
Yehoshua Pelman
Shabtai Rosenne

For and on behalf of the Government of the Lebanon

Signed:

Lieutenant-Colonel Toufic Salem
Commandant J. Harb


The sovereign of the territory formerly known as "Palestine", with respect to the international boundary with Lebanon, is ISRAEL. This isn't hard.

But who are the PARTIES to the Agreement. Its not the State of Palestine or the Government of Palestine.

Palestine was not a party to the armistice agreements because it was not a party to the 1948 war.

Palestine could not lose a war it was not a party to.

Palestine could not lose land in a war it could not lose.

Palestine's borders were the same after the war as before.

Please tell us why “ Palestine “ didn’t exist before 1967

Sure, but Palestine which didn't exist until 1967, somehow collaborated with the Nazis in the 1940s & did the 1929 Massacre.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

So then, what is the "blue line?"

Well, according to actual international law and signed treaties -- it is the Armistice line which follows the recognized international border between the State of Lebanon and the State of Israel.

Article V of the Israel-Lebanon Armistice reads:

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

Yeah, yeah. I know it says "Palestine". Palestine was the recognized name of the territory. But who are the PARTIES to the Agreement. Its not the State of Palestine or the Government of Palestine. Its the Government of Israel and the Government of Lebanon. Here's the text:


For and on behalf of the Government of Israel

Signed:

Lieutenant-Colonel Mordechai Makleff
Yehoshua Pelman
Shabtai Rosenne

For and on behalf of the Government of the Lebanon

Signed:

Lieutenant-Colonel Toufic Salem
Commandant J. Harb


The sovereign of the territory formerly known as "Palestine", with respect to the international boundary with Lebanon, is ISRAEL. This isn't hard.

But who are the PARTIES to the Agreement. Its not the State of Palestine or the Government of Palestine.

Palestine was not a party to the armistice agreements because it was not a party to the 1948 war.

Palestine could not lose a war it was not a party to.

Palestine could not lose land in a war it could not lose.

Palestine's borders were the same after the war as before.

Please tell us why “ Palestine “ didn’t exist before 1967

Yes, ILOVEISRAEL, not only that, but with respect to Lebanon, it doesn't really matter. Even before Israel's 1948 War of Independence, there was already a division between the State of Lebanon and the territory known as Palestine. The 1949 Armistice Agreement between the State of Israel and the State of Lebanon merely reaffirmed that division.

You are laughing, Tinmore, which means you believe there was no division before 1949, even though the Lebanon territory was controlled by the French, and the Palestine Mandated territory was controlled by the British. Even in ancient times, King Solomon of Israel enlisted the aid of King Hiram from the Lebanon area to build the Temple with Lebanese cedar trees. Those cedar trees are now on the flag of Lebanon.

 

[MJB12741]

So, there we have it, Israel didn't rank well.

Ranked: The most and least peaceful countries in the world - Israel not looking good

OUTSTANDING POST! Indeed, Israel says they want peace. So what does Israel do? They make peace offerings to Palestinians, build a security fence & grant their demand for a Jew free Gaza. And then those Zionists bitch about receiving rocket missiles for a thank you. Face it folks, not even once has Israel tried to free the Palestinians back to their native homelands. And not even once has Israel learned from Jordan how to establish a lasting peace from the Palestinians. When will Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

 

[USAF 2023]

So then, what is the "blue line?"

Well, according to actual international law and signed treaties -- it is the Armistice line which follows the recognized international border between the State of Lebanon and the State of Israel.

Article V of the Israel-Lebanon Armistice reads:

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

Yeah, yeah. I know it says "Palestine". Palestine was the recognized name of the territory. But who are the PARTIES to the Agreement. Its not the State of Palestine or the Government of Palestine. Its the Government of Israel and the Government of Lebanon. Here's the text:


For and on behalf of the Government of Israel

Signed:

Lieutenant-Colonel Mordechai Makleff
Yehoshua Pelman
Shabtai Rosenne

For and on behalf of the Government of the Lebanon

Signed:

Lieutenant-Colonel Toufic Salem
Commandant J. Harb


The sovereign of the territory formerly known as "Palestine", with respect to the international boundary with Lebanon, is ISRAEL. This isn't hard.

But who are the PARTIES to the Agreement. Its not the State of Palestine or the Government of Palestine.

Palestine was not a party to the armistice agreements because it was not a party to the 1948 war.

Palestine could not lose a war it was not a party to.

Palestine could not lose land in a war it could not lose.

Palestine's borders were the same after the war as before.

Please tell us why “ Palestine “ didn’t exist before 1967

Sure, but Palestine which didn't exist until 1967, somehow collaborated with the Nazis in the 1940s & did the 1929 Massacre.

No, you Pollack Please show us where anyone stated it was the Palestinians who were responsible for the Hebron Massacre or collaborated with the Nazis

 

[Shusha]

Yes, ILOVEISRAEL, not only that, but with respect to Lebanon, it doesn't really matter. Even before Israel's 1948 War of Independence, there was already a division between the State of Lebanon and the territory known as Palestine. The 1949 Armistice Agreement between the State of Israel and the State of Lebanon merely reaffirmed that division.

And, in fact, Tinmore constantly argues that the international boundary between Lebanon and the State on the other side of the boundary exists so to suddenly argue that it does not seems silly.

Further, if there is no international boundary between Lebanon and Israel (or Palestine) and he is using that as an argument that "Israel has no borders" then Lebanon also has no borders, nor does Palestine.

Just goes to show you how ridiculous and flimsy all his arguments are.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Yes, ILOVEISRAEL, not only that, but with respect to Lebanon, it doesn't really matter. Even before Israel's 1948 War of Independence, there was already a division between the State of Lebanon and the territory known as Palestine. The 1949 Armistice Agreement between the State of Israel and the State of Lebanon merely reaffirmed that division.

And, in fact, Tinmore constantly argues that the international boundary between Lebanon and the State on the other side of the boundary exists so to suddenly argue that it does not seems silly.

Further, if there is no international boundary between Lebanon and Israel (or Palestine) and he is using that as an argument that "Israel has no borders" then Lebanon also has no borders, nor does Palestine.

Just goes to show you how ridiculous and flimsy all his arguments are.

You are confused.

 

[Indeependent]

Yes, ILOVEISRAEL, not only that, but with respect to Lebanon, it doesn't really matter. Even before Israel's 1948 War of Independence, there was already a division between the State of Lebanon and the territory known as Palestine. The 1949 Armistice Agreement between the State of Israel and the State of Lebanon merely reaffirmed that division.

And, in fact, Tinmore constantly argues that the international boundary between Lebanon and the State on the other side of the boundary exists so to suddenly argue that it does not seems silly.

Further, if there is no international boundary between Lebanon and Israel (or Palestine) and he is using that as an argument that "Israel has no borders" then Lebanon also has no borders, nor does Palestine.

Just goes to show you how ridiculous and flimsy all his arguments are.

You are confused.

No one is confused about what an idiot you are.

 

[Shusha]

Yes, ILOVEISRAEL, not only that, but with respect to Lebanon, it doesn't really matter. Even before Israel's 1948 War of Independence, there was already a division between the State of Lebanon and the territory known as Palestine. The 1949 Armistice Agreement between the State of Israel and the State of Lebanon merely reaffirmed that division.

And, in fact, Tinmore constantly argues that the international boundary between Lebanon and the State on the other side of the boundary exists so to suddenly argue that it does not seems silly.

Further, if there is no international boundary between Lebanon and Israel (or Palestine) and he is using that as an argument that "Israel has no borders" then Lebanon also has no borders, nor does Palestine.

Just goes to show you how ridiculous and flimsy all his arguments are.

You are confused.

What?! Even you can’t follow your own arguments?

 

[The Original Tree]

These are Israel’s Borders

Everyone else can pound sand up their ass and get The Hell out of The Promised Land.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Israel least peaceful countries.
⁜→ The Original Tree, et al,


Just like any other country, Israel has its rediculous and extremist views.

These are Israel’s Borders

​

(COMMENT)

The moderate majority in Israel knows that suggesting such thinking as a hidden agenda for the political development and growth of Israel is counterproductive in terms of regional peace and security. But, I don't think that anyone with their gray-cells still intact would actually give this proposal any credence.

But the danger here is that there will always be those anti-Israel strings that will, sometime in the future pickup this published view and use it as evidence of the threat Israel poses to its adjacent states. This is not so dissimilar to the (as an example) the use of phrase "colonial project" that some anti-Israelis pull-up from a century ago as evidence of Israel's future intentions.

This is nonsense and no Israeli in their right mind would take this as anything other than the ravings of a very few extremists and radicals with no real support.

..........
Most Respectfully,
R

 

[rylah]

RE: Israel least peaceful countries.
⁜→ The Original Tree, et al,


Just like any other country, Israel has its rediculous and extremist views.

These are Israel’s Borders

View attachment 285667​

(COMMENT)

The moderate majority in Israel knows that suggesting such thinking as a hidden agenda for the political development and growth of Israel is counterproductive in terms of regional peace and security. But, I don't think that anyone with their gray-cells still intact would actually give this proposal any credence.

But the danger here is that there will always be those anti-Israel strings that will, sometime in the future pickup this published view and use it as evidence of the threat Israel poses to its adjacent states. This is not so dissimilar to the (as an example) the use of phrase "colonial project" that some anti-Israelis pull-up from a century ago as evidence of Israel's future intentions.

This is nonsense and no Israeli in their right mind would take this as anything other than the ravings of a very few extremists and radicals with no real support.

..........View attachment 285668
Most Respectfully,
R

I think this branding as "extremists" comes from a basic ignorance regarding what is actually being envisioned, and the context of this point of view, or what it actually means in practice in a wider framework.

Some 100 years ago, the mere thought of Israel actually gaining independence sounded outright impossible and extreme even among Jews themselves, with many great nations predicting eventual dire consequences for even attempting that, up to '67, when Israel was already independent for 2 decades, and yet all of them were proven wrong, with history taking a completely opposite direction in favor of Israel, actually fulfilling beyond any doubt some major Biblical predictions to the letter, and still proceeding.

Who would've imagined that after 2000 years of total subjugation and a nation literally burnt into ashes, a Rabbi running with a Torah scroll with a handful of soldiers would eventually liberate Jerusalem and blow a Ram's horn at Mount Zion.

While it may sound somewhat shocking to the average observer, the leaders of Israel and the biggest Jewish communities in the diaspora, already then suggested taking Damascus when Israeli tanks stood at 60km away from it, with little force that could push them back during those days. Not some typical poster extremists, but much respectable figures not only in Jewish community but also among world nations. It didn't sound extreme then, just hard to believe.

Today they predict that moving an embassy to Jerusalem or Jews praying on Mount Zion (on the Mount not the Western Wall) would end the world in weeks...and yet, in spite of all the noise sun still rises in the east and sets in the west, while just recently there was a record number of Jews ascending the Mount and, yes actually praying there without it even reaching global news.

Seeing all that become reality in such short time against all odds, how it fulfills much of what the Torah predicts, along with shuttering all the threats thrown at Israel from every direction, and especially in light of the constant irrational threats and attacks proceeding when Israeli governments try to align with and appease the world nations' demands - leads many to a conclusion that doubting and objecting those predictions, abstaining from acting on them, rather to be THE extreme point of view.

Now back to the vision - to understand it in the correct context, unlike the wars of '48-'72, where Israel had no choice but to battle on the ground, it's based on a rather different approach we see as well proceeding for the past decade or so - a trend of normalization and even cooperation, with the nation dwelling in Zion taking a leading position in the whole region in relationship to their Arab neighbors in the continent.

To help grasp this direction, and the underlying collective archtypes being brought forth, one has to learn about the burial process of Abraham Avinu A"H, the forefather of Israel and the original Ishmaelites.
It depicts the later who's been a sworn enemy of Yitzhak Avinu A"H, making Tshuvah ('repentance' for lack of better term in English) by giving Yitzhak A"H priority in the process, and respecting his birthright, as intended by their father.

This is not to say, it's all gonna be hugs and celebrations, but Ishmael eventually makes Teshuvah, sparks of which can be already seen today, in the extreme opposition of what is commonly expected.
There will be war, but it's not the war leading to the realization of the promise, rather respect and submission to G-d and our common ancestor.

This I'm sure, currently may sound extremely unlikely to most.

 

[USAF 2023]

What a nation under existential threat and constant attack for nearly a hundred years isn’t peaceful?

NO WAY?!

Also, have you looked at the list of criteria it measures? This is above your pay grade, Sobie.

Israel's existence has caused much turmoil.

The Pollack objects to Israel’s existence; yet he doesn’t believe Countries should tolerate the religious and ethnic differences of their citizens.

 

[USAF 2023]

Israel is always sneak attacking its neighbors and claiming it was a preemptive strike to protect itself. ...

Yes; the 67 War was a sneak attack. Egypt, Syria and Jordan didn’t do a thing. Keep talking to yourself and telling yourself that.

Actually, in the 67 War AKA the 6 Day War, Israeli jets started it in Operation Focus.

Sorry; you Pollack Moron. Egypt initiated it by blocking the Straits of Titan. The U. N. Actually assisted them in doing so

 

[USAF 2023]

Yes, ILOVEISRAEL, not only that, but with respect to Lebanon, it doesn't really matter. Even before Israel's 1948 War of Independence, there was already a division between the State of Lebanon and the territory known as Palestine. The 1949 Armistice Agreement between the State of Israel and the State of Lebanon merely reaffirmed that division.

And, in fact, Tinmore constantly argues that the international boundary between Lebanon and the State on the other side of the boundary exists so to suddenly argue that it does not seems silly.

Further, if there is no international boundary between Lebanon and Israel (or Palestine) and he is using that as an argument that "Israel has no borders" then Lebanon also has no borders, nor does Palestine.

Just goes to show you how ridiculous and flimsy all his arguments are.

You are confused.

No one is confused about what an idiot you are.

No one is confused about what a bigot he is. Condemns the Israelis for not allowing the Palestinians to visit Bethlehem but condones Jews not being allowed there or at their religious sites prior to 67

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Yes, ILOVEISRAEL, not only that, but with respect to Lebanon, it doesn't really matter. Even before Israel's 1948 War of Independence, there was already a division between the State of Lebanon and the territory known as Palestine. The 1949 Armistice Agreement between the State of Israel and the State of Lebanon merely reaffirmed that division.

And, in fact, Tinmore constantly argues that the international boundary between Lebanon and the State on the other side of the boundary exists so to suddenly argue that it does not seems silly.

Further, if there is no international boundary between Lebanon and Israel (or Palestine) and he is using that as an argument that "Israel has no borders" then Lebanon also has no borders, nor does Palestine.

Just goes to show you how ridiculous and flimsy all his arguments are.

You are confused.

No one is confused about what an idiot you are.

No one is confused about what a bigot he is. Condemns the Israelis for not allowing the Palestinians to visit Bethlehem but condones Jews not being allowed there or at their religious sites prior to 67

Bethlehem is under total Palestinian control right now. Israelis are not allowed in that city, just like it was before 1967. Are you talking about Rachel's Tomb, which is on the outskirts of Bethlehem?