Nobel Prize For Palestinian Hero?

[Jroc]

There is no Palestinian state. A Moroccan is not a Palestinian.

Are Jordanian, Syrian, Lebanese Arabs different than Israeli Arabs?...Dummy

It's like asking if Venezuelan, Spanish, Colombian or Argentinian Hispanics are different that Mexican Hispanics, idiot. Arab is a language group, not an ethnicity.

the Arabs in that region are the same people you moron. the countries were created post WWI. Get your head out of your ass boy

They are not the same people asshole. A German speaking Swiss is not an Austrian. An Arab speaking Algerian is not a Saudi.

You win a seegar, Genius.

Jew haters have low brain function....Lack of comprehension is a huge problem. so they simply parrot what's been fed to them.

 

[montelatici]

Are Jordanian, Syrian, Lebanese Arabs different than Israeli Arabs?...Dummy

It's like asking if Venezuelan, Spanish, Colombian or Argentinian Hispanics are different that Mexican Hispanics, idiot. Arab is a language group, not an ethnicity.

the Arabs in that region are the same people you moron. the countries were created post WWI. Get your head out of your ass boy

They are not the same people asshole. A German speaking Swiss is not an Austrian. An Arab speaking Algerian is not a Saudi.

You win a seegar, Genius.

Jew haters have low brain function....Lack of comprehension is a huge problem. so they simply parrot what's been fed to them.

You are describing Hasbara parrots like yourself perfectly. When they haven't an answer they resort to calling neutral observers as "Jew haters".

Come on, tell me how all Hispanics are the same people again. And how a Syrian is the same as a Moroccan.

 

[Coyote]

No. The Palestinians ... - they're fighting to gain a state. Can you get any more ignorant in your frantic attempt to justify terrorism?

Uh no. Stabbing a few hundred Israeli Jews in the streets and blowing up buses and shooting illegal, indiscriminate rockets at civilian populations are not actions of warfare ("fighting") to gain a state. They are acts of terrorism intended to bully people into appeasing them so they don't have to do the actual work of creating a state.

Fighting for territory (a state) involves military operations which achieve military objectives. The Palestinians haven't done any fighting for a State since 1973. (Well, you could arguably say that the Palestinians themselves have NEVER done any fighting for a state -- Egypt and Jordan have).

Now, you could have argued that Palestinians want a state. But terrorism is not "fighting for a state".

They are fighting for a state.

Simply because they use terrorism, have no unified voice or goals in how to achieve it doesn't detract from that.

 

[Coyote]

And the Zionists want a Jewish state with no Arab state.

Netanyahu Says No to Statehood for Palestinians

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/17/world/middleeast/benjamin-netanyahu-campaign-settlement.html

Did you never read WHY Netanyahu rejects, at the moment, a Palestinian State? Its because of bloody terrorism and radical Islam. That is the reason he gives.

Palestinians want a state? Netanyahu is telling them how to get a state. Stop being assholes.

I totally disagree. His words were "no Palestinian state" - no conditions, no pathway to a state. His words reflect years of inaction towards peace and increased provocation in the form of settlement building. The reason's you give may be valid, but that is not Netanyahu. His claims that the Palestinians inspired the Holocaust sum up his attitudes.

 

[Coyote]

There is never ever ever a justification for targeting civilians - bombings in market places and cinemas or embassies...bus'...schools....public squares aimed to terrorize.

So who and why did the Jews terrorise bearing in mind that it must be an act to force the other to change their religion, political views or ideology.

The Palestinians are trying to force islam on the Jews who refuse to convert, and it has been so since mo'mad terrorised the Jews in Medina when they refused to convert to islam. So much so he made it a religious command to " KILL THE JEWS "

No. The Palestinians are not trying to force Islam on the Jews "who refuse to convert" - they're fighting to gain a state. Can you get any more ignorant in your frantic attempt to justify terrorism?

Can you tell an even bigger lie, excrement?


The Arabs could have had a state at any of a number of times, but were too hardened in sharing your desire for dead Jews to accept one.

I love your simplistic ideology, I'm sure it serves you well. They are not trying force Islam on the Jews "who refuse to convert" - they are fighting for territory, a state - and the fact that they have refused various offers before doesn't alter that.

 

[Shusha]

]
I totally disagree. His words were "no Palestinian state" - no conditions, no pathway to a state. His words reflect years of inaction towards peace and increased provocation in the form of settlement building. The reason's you give may be valid, but that is not Netanyahu. .

From the article linked:

“I think that anyone who is going to establish a Palestinian state today and evacuate lands is giving attack grounds to the radical Islam against the state of Israel,” he said in a video interview

 

[Hollie]

And the Zionists want a Jewish state with no Arab state.

Netanyahu Says No to Statehood for Palestinians

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/17/world/middleeast/benjamin-netanyahu-campaign-settlement.html

Did you never read WHY Netanyahu rejects, at the moment, a Palestinian State? Its because of bloody terrorism and radical Islam. That is the reason he gives.

Palestinians want a state? Netanyahu is telling them how to get a state. Stop being assholes.

I totally disagree. His words were "no Palestinian state" - no conditions, no pathway to a state. His words reflect years of inaction towards peace and increased provocation in the form of settlement building. The reason's you give may be valid, but that is not Netanyahu. His claims that the Palestinians inspired the Holocaust sum up his attitudes.

What is there to negotiate? Hamas has its Charter in place which is explicit in its goals toward israel. They represent only one franchise of the two competing Arab-Moslem terrorist franchises in the disputed territories. Fatah has its own designs for maintaining its share of the UNRWA welfare fraud at stake.

How does anyone negotiate with competing versions of Islamic terrorist organizations which are as murderously ruthless toward one another as they are individually towards Israel.

 

[Shusha]

Hmmmmmm. They are fighting for a state, huh?

And the fact that they could have a state if they just stopped fighting "doesn't alter that".
'"
And the fact that they could have a state if they accepted one of the many, many offers "doesn't alter that".

And the fact that they have no unified voice "doesn't alter that".

And the fact that they don't have clear goals "doesn't alter that".

And the fact that they use terrorism instead of attempting to obtain military objectives "doesn't alter that".


Maybe they need to sit down with themselves and ask themselves if having a state is really what they want? Because it sure doesn't look like it from here.

 

[montelatici]

Any reason for refusing to allow the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state and to maintain Jewish rule over non-Jews will do.

Understandable, close knit groups want to rule exclusively over persons of other groups. But, it is unsustainable in the long term if demographics aren't optimal long term.

 

[montelatici]

Hmmmmmm. They are fighting for a state, huh?

And the fact that they could have a state if they just stopped fighting "doesn't alter that".
'"
And the fact that they could have a state if they accepted one of the many, many offers "doesn't alter that".

And the fact that they have no unified voice "doesn't alter that".

And the fact that they don't have clear goals "doesn't alter that".

And the fact that they use terrorism instead of attempting to obtain military objectives "doesn't alter that".


Maybe they need to sit down with themselves and ask themselves if having a state is really what they want? Because it sure doesn't look like it from here.

The Palestinians were never offered a sovereign state. They were offered some autonomy but IDF was to maintain control over the territory and the Jew only citadel/settlements would have remained and would have been expanded.

 

[Hollie]

Any reason for refusing to allow the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state and to maintain Jewish rule over non-Jews will do.

Understandable, close knit groups want to rule exclusively over persons of other groups. But, it is unsustainable in the long term if demographics aren't optimal long term.

Your silly conspiracy theories are a hoot.

 

[Coyote]

]
I totally disagree. His words were "no Palestinian state" - no conditions, no pathway to a state. His words reflect years of inaction towards peace and increased provocation in the form of settlement building. The reason's you give may be valid, but that is not Netanyahu. .

From the article linked:

“I think that anyone who is going to establish a Palestinian state today and evacuate lands is giving attack grounds to the radical Islam against the state of Israel,” he said in a video interview

Ya, he's speaking as a politician. "Radical Islam" is only his latest excuse.

Why Netanyahu won’t approve a Palestinian state

...At the height of the 2014 Gaza war, Netanyahu revealed that he doesn’t envision Palestinian sovereignty in the West Bank any time soon. “I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan,” he said at a press conference in Jerusalem. In other words: no withdrawal and no Palestinian sovereignty, which means no state of Palestine.​

 

[Coyote]

And the Zionists want a Jewish state with no Arab state.

Netanyahu Says No to Statehood for Palestinians

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/17/world/middleeast/benjamin-netanyahu-campaign-settlement.html

Did you never read WHY Netanyahu rejects, at the moment, a Palestinian State? Its because of bloody terrorism and radical Islam. That is the reason he gives.

Palestinians want a state? Netanyahu is telling them how to get a state. Stop being assholes.

I totally disagree. His words were "no Palestinian state" - no conditions, no pathway to a state. His words reflect years of inaction towards peace and increased provocation in the form of settlement building. The reason's you give may be valid, but that is not Netanyahu. His claims that the Palestinians inspired the Holocaust sum up his attitudes.

What is there to negotiate? Hamas has its Charter in place which is explicit in its goals toward israel. They represent only one franchise of the two competing Arab-Moslem terrorist franchises in the disputed territories. Fatah has its own designs for maintaining its share of the UNRWA welfare fraud at stake.

How does anyone negotiate with competing versions of Islamic terrorist organizations which are as murderously ruthless toward one another as they are individually towards Israel.

I don't disagree with the problems you outline - what I disagree with is your take on Netanyahu. He has never truly endorsed a two-state solution, he has done more than any other PM in increasing settlements in occupied territories and he has done nothing (in comparison to predecessors) towards a two state solution or even peace. His actions have been mostly provocative and he has even whipped public sentiment against Arab Israeli's in order to gain an election victory. He doesn't want a two-state solution under ANY conditions. He clearly stated that, and his actions have been in line with that statement.

 

[Shusha]

The Palestinians were never offered a sovereign state. They were offered some autonomy but IDF was to maintain control over the territory and the Jew only citadel/settlements would have remained and would have been expanded.

You are going to argue that the security requirements proposed in the Olmert Plan negate Palestinian sovereignty. I am going to argue that sovereignty is not negated by control over airspace or supervision of borders.

And again, the path to sovereignty lies with them no longer attacking Israel.

 

[Shusha]

]
I totally disagree. His words were "no Palestinian state" - no conditions, no pathway to a state. His words reflect years of inaction towards peace and increased provocation in the form of settlement building. The reason's you give may be valid, but that is not Netanyahu. .

From the article linked:

“I think that anyone who is going to establish a Palestinian state today and evacuate lands is giving attack grounds to the radical Islam against the state of Israel,” he said in a video interview

Ya, he's speaking as a politician. "Radical Islam" is only his latest excuse.

Why Netanyahu won’t approve a Palestinian state

...At the height of the 2014 Gaza war, Netanyahu revealed that he doesn’t envision Palestinian sovereignty in the West Bank any time soon. “I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan,” he said at a press conference in Jerusalem. In other words: no withdrawal and no Palestinian sovereignty, which means no state of Palestine.​

For reasons of SECURITY.

 

[Coyote]

Hmmmmmm. They are fighting for a state, huh?

And the fact that they could have a state if they just stopped fighting "doesn't alter that".

Except that isn't true. What they they would get would be a semi-automous "state" under Israeli control that would be composed of discontinuous remnants of areas Israel decides it doesn't want.

'"
And the fact that they could have a state if they accepted one of the many, many offers "doesn't alter that".

What many offers?
The initial offer - would have been best to accept.
Olmert's offer would never have gone through even if they had accepted.
Refusing to accept bad deals doesn't mean they aren't fighting for a state.

And the fact that they have no unified voice "doesn't alter that".

And the fact that they don't have clear goals "doesn't alter that".


And the fact that they use terrorism instead of attempting to obtain military objectives "doesn't alter that".


Maybe they need to sit down with themselves and ask themselves if having a state is really what they want? Because it sure doesn't look like it from here.

That is certainly your opinion. Lacking a unified voice, clear goals, or using terrorism is not unique to seperatists and it doesn't mean they aren't trying to gain an autonomous state.

 

[Coyote]

The Palestinians were never offered a sovereign state. They were offered some autonomy but IDF was to maintain control over the territory and the Jew only citadel/settlements would have remained and would have been expanded.

You are going to argue that the security requirements proposed in the Olmert Plan negate Palestinian sovereignty. I am going to argue that sovereignty is not negated by control over airspace or supervision of borders.

And again, the path to sovereignty lies with them no longer attacking Israel.

Olmert was on his way out and under investigation for crimes when he made those offers - the Palestinians knew he could never have fulfilled it and it would never have passed.

 

[Coyote]

]
I totally disagree. His words were "no Palestinian state" - no conditions, no pathway to a state. His words reflect years of inaction towards peace and increased provocation in the form of settlement building. The reason's you give may be valid, but that is not Netanyahu. .

From the article linked:

“I think that anyone who is going to establish a Palestinian state today and evacuate lands is giving attack grounds to the radical Islam against the state of Israel,” he said in a video interview

Ya, he's speaking as a politician. "Radical Islam" is only his latest excuse.

Why Netanyahu won’t approve a Palestinian state

...At the height of the 2014 Gaza war, Netanyahu revealed that he doesn’t envision Palestinian sovereignty in the West Bank any time soon. “I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan,” he said at a press conference in Jerusalem. In other words: no withdrawal and no Palestinian sovereignty, which means no state of Palestine.​

For reasons of SECURITY.

And control.

No Palestinian state under ANY conditions.

 

[Hollie]

And the Zionists want a Jewish state with no Arab state.

Netanyahu Says No to Statehood for Palestinians

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/17/world/middleeast/benjamin-netanyahu-campaign-settlement.html

Did you never read WHY Netanyahu rejects, at the moment, a Palestinian State? Its because of bloody terrorism and radical Islam. That is the reason he gives.

Palestinians want a state? Netanyahu is telling them how to get a state. Stop being assholes.

I totally disagree. His words were "no Palestinian state" - no conditions, no pathway to a state. His words reflect years of inaction towards peace and increased provocation in the form of settlement building. The reason's you give may be valid, but that is not Netanyahu. His claims that the Palestinians inspired the Holocaust sum up his attitudes.

What is there to negotiate? Hamas has its Charter in place which is explicit in its goals toward israel. They represent only one franchise of the two competing Arab-Moslem terrorist franchises in the disputed territories. Fatah has its own designs for maintaining its share of the UNRWA welfare fraud at stake.

How does anyone negotiate with competing versions of Islamic terrorist organizations which are as murderously ruthless toward one another as they are individually towards Israel.

I don't disagree with the problems you outline - what I disagree with is your take on Netanyahu. He has never truly endorsed a two-state solution, he has done more than any other PM in increasing settlements in occupied territories and he has done nothing (in comparison to predecessors) towards a two state solution or even peace. His actions have been mostly provocative and he has even whipped public sentiment against Arab Israeli's in order to gain an election victory. He doesn't want a two-state solution under ANY conditions. He clearly stated that, and his actions have been in line with that statement.

While I agree his view appears absolutist, I suspect he sees it as pragmatic.

I see that the Arab-Moslem position is one of "give me" as a presumed entitlement without any requirement for them to demonstrate a willingness or even ability to build a functioning society. Hamas and Fatah can't even reign in the more pious of the Arabs-Moslems who take a literal view of the Hamas Charter. A responsible government that can manage the civil affairs of a community is nowhere to be found either in Hamas or Fatah. As opposed to being able to police their own in connection with reigning in the pious Moslems, both Hamas and Fatah aid and abet criminal acts / Islamic terrorism.

 

[Shusha]

For reasons of SECURITY.

And control.

No Palestinian state under ANY conditions.[/QUOTE]

SECURITY control. Literally the words used. The requirements for the state of Palestine to exist next to Israel is Israel's security. Seems fair to me.