Well said Ron Huldai...

[Humanity]

Now, you can argue that Israel does not occupy Gaza, you can argue that attacks against Israel are 'freedom fighters'.... But factually or conceptually, if you like, it remains that Israel does control air, land and sea of Gaza and attacks are carried out against Israel under the 'premise' of this fact...

Actually, I would argue that not only does Israel not occupy Gaza, but that the meaning of the term "occupy" has actually been changed in order to continue to demonize Israel.

Israel does not control one square foot of land in Gaza. (Proof of this is the ability of Gazans to build tunnels, import and store weapons (in schools!), attack Israel, subvert material for belligerent acts, etc.) Neither does Israel entirely control Gaza's sea.

What Israel does (try) to control, through embargos and blockades, is the borders of Gaza specifically for the purpose of preventing the entry of certain types of weapons and material into Gaza. This is outside the traditional meaning of "occupy".

So, I believe that while this is the perception of much of the (uneducated) world about Israel -- it is not the truth. And further, anything which supports that perception, including supporting the idea that Israel has no right to defend itself, or should not defend itself and that it should be left to an international force, further entrenches the idea that Israel is a "special case". I think it would be far more beneficial to adjust the perception of the world that Israel is acting entirely appropriately (as you agree to, since you permit the international military to act with the same, or higher, level of force).

Firstly Shusha... I would like to say how nice it is to have a proper discussion/debate with someone with some intelligence, rather than the trolls that lurk around this forum, bleating with nonsensical garbage!

The word "occupy", I agree, can be used to demonise Israel... I cannot argue with that... However, when you look at the facts, Israel really DOES wave a heavy hand over Gaza... That you cannot deny... To the extent that Israel does have total control over Gaza, an independant state, who SHOULD have unilateral control of their own statehood...

However, Gaza does not have that 'status'... There is no free movement or trade within Gaza... Unless Israel says so! That is why Gaza is considered "occupied"...

The control/embargoes/blockades is exactly why Israel is considered an "occupier"... Yes, in the eyes of ISRAEL, there is a 'need'... That is not as perceived by the rest of the world...

I love your use of "perception of much of the (uneducated) world about Israel", without heading down the "hate" road, why do you feel that much of the world is uneducated in comparison to Israel?

Israel has every right to defend itself against terrorist attacks, in the same way that EVERY nation has the right to defend itself.... No arguement from me on that one...

If you looked at my previous posts you would see that I do consider Israel a "special case"...

As a "special case" there needs to be "special" considerations that should be implemented by allied forces and NOT by the oft demonized forces of Israel...

Israel exists, long live Israel... Gaza exists, long live Gaza...

Do I believe that the leaders of either state have "good intentions".... NO!

That is why I believe a 3rd party is required to intervene and make a powerful step in between the two 'belligerent' states..

Just my open, honest thoughts... I'm not defending Hamas, nor am I defending , and I use this term loosely, the Likud party...

And just who IS this "3rd party" that will be around 4 years from now?

Damn, have you been living under a rock for the past 20+ years?

Do you not think that 'allied forces' are capable of monitoring, controlling, overthrowing governments?

 

[Roudy]

Gaza who are Egyptians anyhow

You mean like the Jews...

Roodboy, join the adult conversation, drop the propaganda or move to the kindergarten forum...

Your constant derailing of threads, posting off topic comments is boring... Join the debate as an adult or piss off!

You said Gaza is occupied, so tell us who Israel should return these occupied lands back to? Who was controling / ruling these lands when Israel was attacked in 1948 and then 1967? You're the one who brought it up, little Achmed, keep up.

 

[Roudy]

Right up until hamas demand the UN remove the troops under the terms of the UN charter, and then we are back to illegal weapons being destroyed by concerted attacks.

WRONG...

In any 'agreement' on these terms there would be NO possibility of Hamas demanding the removal of allied forces...

Not even without re-writing the UN charter and many thousands of UN resolutions that says this is a right for all people

Wrong Phoney...

There is NOTHING to stop Israel and Gaza drawing up an agreement that works for everyone...

That is not what you said, so why change the rules half way through. You said the enforcement of the treaty was to be by International force and not by a deal between Israel and hamas. It was to be an unnegotiated unilateral move by Israel. Cant you read your own posts ?

Oh I'm sorry Phoney...

Sorry that your bigoted, racist hatred mind is incapable of even basic thought...

Please do go and read my posts, and the intelligent posts of others, once you have grasped even the most basic of comprehension of this thread, then please do come back, when you feel ready, and comment...

Until such time, take your blind zionut, neo marxist racism somewhere else, there's a good chap!

Don't you love it, the little jihadi thinks he's smarter than everybody else.

 

[Roudy]

Subhumanity still can't tell us who was ruling these lands that is now "occupying". Amazing.

 

[Shusha]

Firstly Shusha... I would like to say how nice it is to have a proper discussion/debate with someone with some intelligence, rather than the trolls that lurk around this forum, bleating with nonsensical garbage!

Ditto.

The word "occupy", I agree, can be used to demonise Israel... I cannot argue with that... However, when you look at the facts, Israel really DOES wave a heavy hand over Gaza... That you cannot deny...

Nor do I deny it. While it does not meet the legal standard of an "occupation", Israel does lay a heavy hand over the BORDERS (land and sea) it shares with Gaza. Why does Israel do this? What purpose does it serve? What conditions would end this?

To the extent that Israel does have total control over Gaza, an independant state, who SHOULD have unilateral control of their own statehood...

Firstly, I think the argument that Gaza meets all the requirements for Statehood is strong. I agree they should have unilateral control within their own State. Fortunately, they have already do. What they do not have is good relations with their neighbors. How can that be rectified, do you think?

There is no free movement or trade within Gaza... Unless Israel says so! That is why Gaza is considered "occupied"...

Um. No. There is complete freedom within Gaza. Witness their ability to take 800 million tons of concrete, and counting (much funded by foreign aide specifically for humanitarian projects) and co-opt it for belligerent uses.

The control/embargoes/blockades is exactly why Israel is considered an "occupier"... Yes, in the eyes of ISRAEL, there is a 'need'... That is not as perceived by the rest of the world...

But again, don't you find it conceptually problematic that a sovereign nation which is being attacked regularly is perceived as not "needing" to defend itself?

I love your use of "perception of much of the (uneducated) world about Israel", without heading down the "hate" road, why do you feel that much of the world is uneducated in comparison to Israel?

I think you misunderstand. Much of the world is uneducated about Israel. The perception is largely based on demonization of Israel, double standards, ridiculous expectations, and frankly, is rooted, at least partially, in anti-semitism. (We can discuss that reasonably can't we? You and I?)

Israel has every right to defend itself against terrorist attacks, in the same way that EVERY nation has the right to defend itself.... No argument from me on that one...

If this is true, why are you requiring Israel to NOT defend itself and let someone else do it on her behalf?

If you looked at my previous posts you would see that I do consider Israel a "special case"...

Yes. I do see that. Many others do as well. Many perceive Israel as being a special case because they reject the idea that Israel has the SAME rights as others. What I am wishing you would do is articulate WHY you think Israel is a special case.

Israel exists, long live Israel... Gaza exists, long live Gaza...

We agree.

Do I believe that the leaders of either state have "good intentions".... NO!

Here we disagree. Israel has exhibited her good intentions by unilaterally disengaging, by thoughtfully creating a Judenrein space for Gazans, by not bombing the shit out of them (and she surely could!), by not reasserting its military strength, by not ousting their government (and she surely could!). Further, she has contributed to Gaza's well-being by providing medical care for Gaza's citizens, by exceeding the required provisions of necessities, especially water, by being flexible with restricted "dual use" materials as the situation warrants, by allowing foreign aide (even though that aide is usurped for belligerent causes).

The trouble I am having with your responses, thus far on this thread, as much as I truly appreciate your ability to discuss this objectively and rationally, is your utter lack of assignation of responsibility to Gaza and her government. And your inability to demand that IF Gaza wants peace and trade and Statehood that the VERY FIRST STEP must be a cessation of the hostilities, followed nearly immediately by a true effort to build the infrastructure necessary for a viable nation.

 

[Phoenall]

So what? My point was that there is nothing to stop member countries of the U.N. contributing naval assets to an anti-smuggling operation; the mechanics of how that's done is frankly irrelevant to the point.

Smuggling?

What laws are the Palestinians violating by importing weapons?

The UN charter for 10 or so, as that spells it out. Then the Geneva conventions and IHL. All detailed in full previously and you ignored them then as you will now because they destroy your POV

Where?

Links?

Charter of the United Nations | United Nations


ICRC service

I've already read them. Where do they say what you say?

Here


" As of L 334/20 EN Official Journal of the European Union 22.12.2015 (updated accordingly and Decision (CFSP) 2015/1334), Annex of - GROUPS AND ENTITIES the LIST OF PERSONS, GROUPS AND ENTITIES REFERRED TO IN ARTICLE 1

• ‘Hamas’, including ‘Hamas-Izz al-Din al-Qassem’
17. ‘Palestinian Islamic Jihad’ — ‘PIJ’.
18. ‘Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine’ — ‘PFLP’.
19. ‘Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine — General Command’ (a.k.a. ‘PFLP — General Command’). "



Seems that you are having trouble reading English again ?

 

[Phoenall]

Gaza who are Egyptians anyhow

You mean like the Jews...

Roodboy, join the adult conversation, drop the propaganda or move to the kindergarten forum...

Your constant derailing of threads, posting off topic comments is boring... Join the debate as an adult or piss off!

That's rich coming from you who has derailed more threads, deflected more posts and gone of topic more times than the rest of the board combined

 

[Phoenall]

Why is that, do you think? Why is it perceived to be "evil" and "hated" when Israel does it, but acceptable when someone else does the exact same thing?

I believe that, as Israel is classified as an 'occupier' by most of the world, any attack against those are 'occupied' is seen as simply wrong...

Occupier and attacker combined is not a good combination...

Now, you can argue that Israel does not occupy Gaza, you can argue that attacks against Israel are 'freedom fighters'.... But factually or conceptually, if you like, it remains that Israel does control air, land and sea of Gaza and attacks are carried out against Israel under the 'premise' of this fact...

You could say that Turkey attacking Kurds is "evil" yet the Kurds are attacking Turkey!

As I said previously, I really don't find any 'attacks' acceptable, however, IF it became necessary, I do believe that an 'allied force', on the ground, within Gaza, would be the better option...

Ha ha ha. Who should give give this "occupied" land back to?

Again, the land was Ottoman territory for the last 700 years, then British for a short period of time, and then for 20 years it was "occupied" by the Jordanians and the Egyptians after they failed attempt to destroy Israel, which at no time during these 20 years did ANYBODY speak of this mythical invented Palestine or Palestinian people. Instead the Arabs who never recognized a "Palestine" used this land they "occupied" for 20 years to attack Israel once again, only this time they got their butts kicked once more and lost the land as well.

So who exactly does Israel give this land back to? The Turks or the British? I don't think the Jordanians and Egyptians even want the land back. They prefer to point fingers at Israel for a problem they created.

If you bothered to read the thread Roodboy you would see it is in relation to Gaza...

As you know, despite Israel withdrawal in 2005, the international community still consider Gaza as occupied...

"...the United Nations, International human rights organisations, and the majority of governments and legal commentators consider the territory to be still occupied by Israel, supported by additional restrictions placed on Gaza by Egypt. Israel maintains direct external control over Gaza and indirect control over life within Gaza: it controls Gaza's air and maritime space, and six of Gaza's seven land crossings. It reserves the right to enter Gaza at will with its military and maintains a no-go buffer zone within the Gaza territory. Gaza is dependent on Israel for its water, electricity, telecommunications, and other utilities."

That is certain individuals words and not the worlds views at all. The relevant international law states that Israel does not occupy gaza and has not since 2005

Certain "individuals words" that carry far more weight than YOUR bleatings...

Care to provide any links to your statement that "The relevant international law states that Israel does not occupy gaza" or is everyone expected to just accept your word for it?

Hague conventions of 1907 that state
"that "[t]erritory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army." The form of administration by which an occupying power exercises government authority over occupied territory is called "military government."



Good enough for you . Something that you refuse to do is give links to your claims that is 100 you owe me

 

[Phoenall]

Now, you can argue that Israel does not occupy Gaza, you can argue that attacks against Israel are 'freedom fighters'.... But factually or conceptually, if you like, it remains that Israel does control air, land and sea of Gaza and attacks are carried out against Israel under the 'premise' of this fact...

Actually, I would argue that not only does Israel not occupy Gaza, but that the meaning of the term "occupy" has actually been changed in order to continue to demonize Israel.

Israel does not control one square foot of land in Gaza. (Proof of this is the ability of Gazans to build tunnels, import and store weapons (in schools!), attack Israel, subvert material for belligerent acts, etc.) Neither does Israel entirely control Gaza's sea.

What Israel does (try) to control, through embargos and blockades, is the borders of Gaza specifically for the purpose of preventing the entry of certain types of weapons and material into Gaza. This is outside the traditional meaning of "occupy".

So, I believe that while this is the perception of much of the (uneducated) world about Israel -- it is not the truth. And further, anything which supports that perception, including supporting the idea that Israel has no right to defend itself, or should not defend itself and that it should be left to an international force, further entrenches the idea that Israel is a "special case". I think it would be far more beneficial to adjust the perception of the world that Israel is acting entirely appropriately (as you agree to, since you permit the international military to act with the same, or higher, level of force).

Firstly Shusha... I would like to say how nice it is to have a proper discussion/debate with someone with some intelligence, rather than the trolls that lurk around this forum, bleating with nonsensical garbage!

The word "occupy", I agree, can be used to demonise Israel... I cannot argue with that... However, when you look at the facts, Israel really DOES wave a heavy hand over Gaza... That you cannot deny... To the extent that Israel does have total control over Gaza, an independant state, who SHOULD have unilateral control of their own statehood...

However, Gaza does not have that 'status'... There is no free movement or trade within Gaza... Unless Israel says so! That is why Gaza is considered "occupied"...

The control/embargoes/blockades is exactly why Israel is considered an "occupier"... Yes, in the eyes of ISRAEL, there is a 'need'... That is not as perceived by the rest of the world...

I love your use of "perception of much of the (uneducated) world about Israel", without heading down the "hate" road, why do you feel that much of the world is uneducated in comparison to Israel?

Israel has every right to defend itself against terrorist attacks, in the same way that EVERY nation has the right to defend itself.... No arguement from me on that one...

If you looked at my previous posts you would see that I do consider Israel a "special case"...

As a "special case" there needs to be "special" considerations that should be implemented by allied forces and NOT by the oft demonized forces of Israel...

Israel exists, long live Israel... Gaza exists, long live Gaza...

Do I believe that the leaders of either state have "good intentions".... NO!

That is why I believe a 3rd party is required to intervene and make a powerful step in between the two 'belligerent' states..

Just my open, honest thoughts... I'm not defending Hamas, nor am I defending , and I use this term loosely, the Likud party...

Since when was gaza an independent state, does the UN know that hamas has declared statehood. Who is their representative when dealing with the UN.

When you look at the facts you see that gaza is in fact Jewish land destined to be part of their National Home, it is defined as such in International law

 

[Phoenall]

Right up until hamas demand the UN remove the troops under the terms of the UN charter, and then we are back to illegal weapons being destroyed by concerted attacks.

WRONG...

In any 'agreement' on these terms there would be NO possibility of Hamas demanding the removal of allied forces...

Not even without re-writing the UN charter and many thousands of UN resolutions that says this is a right for all people

Wrong Phoney...

There is NOTHING to stop Israel and Gaza drawing up an agreement that works for everyone...

That is not what you said, so why change the rules half way through. You said the enforcement of the treaty was to be by International force and not by a deal between Israel and hamas. It was to be an unnegotiated unilateral move by Israel. Cant you read your own posts ?

Oh I'm sorry Phoney...

Sorry that your bigoted, racist hatred mind is incapable of even basic thought...

Please do go and read my posts, and the intelligent posts of others, once you have grasped even the most basic of comprehension of this thread, then please do come back, when you feel ready, and comment...

Until such time, take your blind zionut, neo marxist racism somewhere else, there's a good chap!

Caught by your own words and you don't like it, proves that it is you derailing and deflecting your own posts when the arguments stack up against your stance.

Proven by your immature name calling and childish foot stomping, time to grow up and act your, not your shoe size.

 

[Phoenall]

Subhumanity still can't tell us who was ruling these lands that is now "occupying". Amazing.

Not really as his two history books, history for islamonazis and the fascist book of history, don't give any details of this

 

[Humanity]

Subhumanity still can't tell us who was ruling these lands that is now "occupying". Amazing.

I don't need to roodboy...

It is not relevant

WRONG...

In any 'agreement' on these terms there would be NO possibility of Hamas demanding the removal of allied forces...

Not even without re-writing the UN charter and many thousands of UN resolutions that says this is a right for all people

Wrong Phoney...

There is NOTHING to stop Israel and Gaza drawing up an agreement that works for everyone...

That is not what you said, so why change the rules half way through. You said the enforcement of the treaty was to be by International force and not by a deal between Israel and hamas. It was to be an unnegotiated unilateral move by Israel. Cant you read your own posts ?

Oh I'm sorry Phoney...

Sorry that your bigoted, racist hatred mind is incapable of even basic thought...

Please do go and read my posts, and the intelligent posts of others, once you have grasped even the most basic of comprehension of this thread, then please do come back, when you feel ready, and comment...

Until such time, take your blind zionut, neo marxist racism somewhere else, there's a good chap!

Don't you love it, the little jihadi thinks he's smarter than everybody else.

A country mile smarter than you roodboy!

 

[Roudy]

Subhumanity still can't tell us who was ruling these lands that is now "occupying". Amazing.

I don't need to roodboy...

It is not relevant

Not even without re-writing the UN charter and many thousands of UN resolutions that says this is a right for all people

Wrong Phoney...

There is NOTHING to stop Israel and Gaza drawing up an agreement that works for everyone...

That is not what you said, so why change the rules half way through. You said the enforcement of the treaty was to be by International force and not by a deal between Israel and hamas. It was to be an unnegotiated unilateral move by Israel. Cant you read your own posts ?

Oh I'm sorry Phoney...

Sorry that your bigoted, racist hatred mind is incapable of even basic thought...

Please do go and read my posts, and the intelligent posts of others, once you have grasped even the most basic of comprehension of this thread, then please do come back, when you feel ready, and comment...

Until such time, take your blind zionut, neo marxist racism somewhere else, there's a good chap!

Don't you love it, the little jihadi thinks he's smarter than everybody else.

A country mile smarter than you roodboy!

You can't answer because you can't face the truth that the oft repeated "occupation" is a hoax as is the concept of a Palestine or Palestinian people. The land was never controled or ruled by these Arabs who now call themselves "Palestinians".

 

[Phoenall]

Subhumanity still can't tell us who was ruling these lands that is now "occupying". Amazing.

I don't need to roodboy...

It is not relevant

Not even without re-writing the UN charter and many thousands of UN resolutions that says this is a right for all people

Wrong Phoney...

There is NOTHING to stop Israel and Gaza drawing up an agreement that works for everyone...

That is not what you said, so why change the rules half way through. You said the enforcement of the treaty was to be by International force and not by a deal between Israel and hamas. It was to be an unnegotiated unilateral move by Israel. Cant you read your own posts ?

Oh I'm sorry Phoney...

Sorry that your bigoted, racist hatred mind is incapable of even basic thought...

Please do go and read my posts, and the intelligent posts of others, once you have grasped even the most basic of comprehension of this thread, then please do come back, when you feel ready, and comment...

Until such time, take your blind zionut, neo marxist racism somewhere else, there's a good chap!

Don't you love it, the little jihadi thinks he's smarter than everybody else.

A country mile smarter than you roodboy!

That smart you act like an 8 year old spoilt brat who cant get their own way. Expect zionut, hasbara and a whole host of other racist terms to be bandied around

 

[Humanity]

Nor do I deny it. While it does not meet the legal standard of an "occupation", Israel does lay a heavy hand over the BORDERS (land and sea) it shares with Gaza. Why does Israel do this? What purpose does it serve? What conditions would end this?

I think we all know what the reason is for Israel refusing to 'free' Gaza... Security... My problem is that this 'reason', I'm avoiding using the word 'excuse' here, is that one rarely sees, if ever, a mighty force, armed to the teeth being 'afraid' of a 'non army'...

Firstly, I think the argument that Gaza meets all the requirements for Statehood is strong. I agree they should have unilateral control within their own State. Fortunately, they have already do. What they do not have is good relations with their neighbors. How can that be rectified, do you think?

Unfortunately, I can't agree that there is unilateral control within their own state... Israel is free to carry out incursions into Gaza at ANY time, and they do... Unilateral control within their own state would HAVE to include air and sea, which as you state later in your post, they do not have...

Um. No. There is complete freedom within Gaza. Witness their ability to take 800 million tons of concrete, and counting (much funded by foreign aide specifically for humanitarian projects) and co-opt it for belligerent uses.

The use of materials, or rather, the misuse of materials would not happen under the terms of what I am proposing.

But again, don't you find it conceptually problematic that a sovereign nation which is being attacked regularly is perceived as not "needing" to defend itself?

I have never said that Israel doesn't need to defend itself... I am simply stating that having an allied force in Gaza not only monitoring but also being able to 'defend' Israel would make 'press releases' for more favorable for Israel.

I think you misunderstand. Much of the world is uneducated about Israel. The perception is largely based on demonization of Israel, double standards, ridiculous expectations, and frankly, is rooted, at least partially, in anti-semitism. (We can discuss that reasonably can't we? You and I?)

There is a lot of misunderstanding of Israel... You cannot get a true understanding of Israel unless you visit Israel... You can't say that about too many countries... And even then, it is difficult to quantify, in words, how best to describe israel... Yes I have been to Israel... I found the country enjoyable and pretty chilled out... That doesn't show the underlying 'tension' that is around some of the major cities...

If this is true, why are you requiring Israel to NOT defend itself and let someone else do it on her behalf?

I have answered this one on a number of occasions now....

Yes. I do see that. Many others do as well. Many perceive Israel as being a special case because they reject the idea that Israel has the SAME rights as others. What I am wishing you would do is articulate WHY you think Israel is a special case.

Israel is a 'special case', being the homeland for Jews... I may not agree with 'religious states' but if there is a need, a desire, then go for it...

Here we disagree. Israel has exhibited her good intentions by unilaterally disengaging, by thoughtfully creating a Judenrein space for Gazans, by not bombing the shit out of them (and she surely could!), by not reasserting its military strength, by not ousting their government (and she surely could!). Further, she has contributed to Gaza's well-being by providing medical care for Gaza's citizens, by exceeding the required provisions of necessities, especially water, by being flexible with restricted "dual use" materials as the situation warrants, by allowing foreign aide (even though that aide is usurped for belligerent causes).

Yes, sorry, I don't agree... Israel still controls land, air and seas of Gaza... Israel Has done a pretty good job of "bombing the shit out of them" over the years... Israel regularly has military incursions into Gaza... Israel regularly fires across border into Gaza...

Yes, why has Israel never attempted to oust Hamas?

The trouble I am having with your responses, thus far on this thread, as much as I truly appreciate your ability to discuss this objectively and rationally, is your utter lack of assignation of responsibility to Gaza and her government. And your inability to demand that IF Gaza wants peace and trade and Statehood that the VERY FIRST STEP must be a cessation of the hostilities, followed nearly immediately by a true effort to build the infrastructure necessary for a viable nation.

Firstly, I do not support the government of Gaza! Let me make that one very clear! I would suggest that it is VERY difficult for average Gazans to promote 'change' within Gaza under a dictatorial government.

The VERY FIRST STEP is to bring both parties together and agree on an allied force being placed in Gaza... It's very difficult to get one side OR the other to make the FIRST move so, leave the status quo, as has been suggested by one or two people on this board, and get the agreement for an allied force in place...

Cessation of hostilities would be a very good first step but I really do not see that happening... A shame but, it won't happen...

Neither Gaza nor Israel would be willing to make the FIRST concession...

 

[Humanity]

Subhumanity still can't tell us who was ruling these lands that is now "occupying". Amazing.

I don't need to roodboy...

It is not relevant

Wrong Phoney...

There is NOTHING to stop Israel and Gaza drawing up an agreement that works for everyone...

That is not what you said, so why change the rules half way through. You said the enforcement of the treaty was to be by International force and not by a deal between Israel and hamas. It was to be an unnegotiated unilateral move by Israel. Cant you read your own posts ?

Oh I'm sorry Phoney...

Sorry that your bigoted, racist hatred mind is incapable of even basic thought...

Please do go and read my posts, and the intelligent posts of others, once you have grasped even the most basic of comprehension of this thread, then please do come back, when you feel ready, and comment...

Until such time, take your blind zionut, neo marxist racism somewhere else, there's a good chap!

Don't you love it, the little jihadi thinks he's smarter than everybody else.

A country mile smarter than you roodboy!

You can't answer because you can't face the truth that the oft repeated "occupation" is a hoax as is the concept of a Palestine or Palestinian people. The land was never controled or ruled by these Arabs who now call themselves "Palestinians".

The question has NO bearing on this thread roodboy...

You are off topic!

 

[Humanity]

Subhumanity still can't tell us who was ruling these lands that is now "occupying". Amazing.

I don't need to roodboy...

It is not relevant

Wrong Phoney...

There is NOTHING to stop Israel and Gaza drawing up an agreement that works for everyone...

That is not what you said, so why change the rules half way through. You said the enforcement of the treaty was to be by International force and not by a deal between Israel and hamas. It was to be an unnegotiated unilateral move by Israel. Cant you read your own posts ?

Oh I'm sorry Phoney...

Sorry that your bigoted, racist hatred mind is incapable of even basic thought...

Please do go and read my posts, and the intelligent posts of others, once you have grasped even the most basic of comprehension of this thread, then please do come back, when you feel ready, and comment...

Until such time, take your blind zionut, neo marxist racism somewhere else, there's a good chap!

Don't you love it, the little jihadi thinks he's smarter than everybody else.

A country mile smarter than you roodboy!

That smart you act like an 8 year old spoilt brat who cant get their own way. Expect zionut, hasbara and a whole host of other racist terms to be bandied around

Oh dear, it's like an funny double act...

roodboy and phoney....

 

[Roudy]

Subhumanity still can't tell us who was ruling these lands that is now "occupying". Amazing.

I don't need to roodboy...

It is not relevant

That is not what you said, so why change the rules half way through. You said the enforcement of the treaty was to be by International force and not by a deal between Israel and hamas. It was to be an unnegotiated unilateral move by Israel. Cant you read your own posts ?

Oh I'm sorry Phoney...

Sorry that your bigoted, racist hatred mind is incapable of even basic thought...

Please do go and read my posts, and the intelligent posts of others, once you have grasped even the most basic of comprehension of this thread, then please do come back, when you feel ready, and comment...

Until such time, take your blind zionut, neo marxist racism somewhere else, there's a good chap!

Don't you love it, the little jihadi thinks he's smarter than everybody else.

A country mile smarter than you roodboy!

You can't answer because you can't face the truth that the oft repeated "occupation" is a hoax as is the concept of a Palestine or Palestinian people. The land was never controled or ruled by these Arabs who now call themselves "Palestinians".

The question has NO bearing on this thread roodboy...

You are off topic!

If it has no bearing then why did you bring up and refer to "the occupation".

These Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians never ruled or controled the land, and are now trying to construct solution to a problem that was caused by the aggression of other Arabs towards the Jews. The truth you can't face is the so called Palestinians aren't deserving of any inherent rights. In fact it can be argued that they aren't deserving of ANYTHING... just refugees of failed wars initiated by fellow Arabs.

 

[Humanity]

Subhumanity still can't tell us who was ruling these lands that is now "occupying". Amazing.

I don't need to roodboy...

It is not relevant

Oh I'm sorry Phoney...

Sorry that your bigoted, racist hatred mind is incapable of even basic thought...

Please do go and read my posts, and the intelligent posts of others, once you have grasped even the most basic of comprehension of this thread, then please do come back, when you feel ready, and comment...

Until such time, take your blind zionut, neo marxist racism somewhere else, there's a good chap!

Don't you love it, the little jihadi thinks he's smarter than everybody else.

A country mile smarter than you roodboy!

You can't answer because you can't face the truth that the oft repeated "occupation" is a hoax as is the concept of a Palestine or Palestinian people. The land was never controled or ruled by these Arabs who now call themselves "Palestinians".

The question has NO bearing on this thread roodboy...

You are off topic!

If it has no bearing then why did you bring up and refer to "the occupation".

These Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians never ruled or controled the land, and are now trying to construct solution to a problem that was caused by the aggression of other Arabs towards the Jews. The truth you can't face is the so called Palestinians aren't deserving of any inherent rights. In fact it can be argued that they aren't deserving of ANYTHING... just refugees of failed wars initiated by fellow Arabs.

I didn't!

Did you even bother to read what this thread is about???

No, unlikely... Just prefer to keep up with your dumbass zionut mantra as usual rather than debating the topic...

Tel Aviv mayor says the occupation is a cause of Palestinian terror

 

[Shusha]

Israel is a 'special case', being the homeland for Jews...

So, remember when I said that some of this antipathy toward Israel is rooted in anti-semitism? This is exactly what I mean. (Not saying you are anti-semitic. Truly not). But when I ask WHY Israel, of all the hundreds of nations in the world, should be treated differently, as a special case, your response is simply .... "Well, because they are Jewish".

I would like you to explain to me how being Jewish makes any sort of difference in how we should interact with the world.

If my home is invaded, should I NOT defend myself, because well -- Jewish -- and I might be perceived as having "caused" the problem. If I am accosted on the street, should I not defend myself, because well -- Jewish -- and someone might think I had "provoked" the attack. If a man attempts to rape me, should I not defend myself, because well -- Jewish -- and obviously, even if I haven't "asked for it", someone will assume that I have asked for it. So, I should make sure that someone else defends me on my behalf. Because -- Jewish.

Why should there be special rules, individually, for people who are Jewish? Why should there be special rules, collectively, for people who are Jewish? Explain to me why I should NOT take your comment as anti-semitism.