Abbas 'Diplomatic surprise' - Deadline for Israel to withdraw from WB

[P F Tinmore]

Just within the last week or so Israel killed an unarmed civilian in Gaza.

I thought they were under a ceasefire.

And two Palestinians slaughtered 4 people in a synagogue with knives and axes.

Israel always insists that agreements in Gaza do not apply to the West Bank.

Are you making stuff up again ?

No.

Look it up.

But you are the one that made the claim.

Hamas, the Islamic militant group, controls Gaza only. But Haniya said the truce should also apply to the West Bank, where the Israeli army and the forces of Abbas hold sway.

Israel has refused Palestinian demands to stop operations in the West Bank in the past. Early Wednesday, another senior militant from Islamic Jihad was killed by Israeli fire in a village near Jenin, in the northern West Bank.

Israeli troops kill 4 militants Deseret News​

 

[Beelzebub]

Stop dreaming Beezle. Wake up. Snap out of it. Israel is going nowhere, no matter how much hate you harbor .

You wish.
Israel is unsustainable.
The guys up top know it, which is why they are in a constant panic about who to kill or what land to grab to try to make it stick.

As said earlier, you might have up to three generations. That would be as much as what 60 years, so you could be dead before it happens. But demographics and a desire to be seen as democratic will crush a hateful Israel, when a civilised Israel might have been cherished by the new majority.

But then again, it could happen in a rush of history, even in the next five years.

So yes, you might die before Israel does, or you might not.
But it will not be sustained. It has been standing on a precipice since 1948. Though it hasn't fallen the ground is now shaking.

I know that you are not stupid enough to believe what you just wrote.
After nearly 7 decades of hearing the same garbage, it starts to lose any meaning. If Israel has proved one thing, it is that is very much a sustainable country surrounded by unsustainable countries. Like I said, your hate is clouding your judgment .

Time is Israel's enemy.
It is constantly evading the inevitable, with more weapons, more racist laws, more lawbreaking and more atrocities.

It has less standing in the world today than it had in the 1980's.
Populations are much more aware of what Israel is, and there is no longer much bar on pointing out the systematic ways it has chosen to be the same as Nazi Germany.

Western power sustained Israel early on, and Western power is becoming increasingly reluctant to do that just as the West becomes less important than the developing nations: Which do not appreciate colonialist tyrannies.

So saying Israel hasn't died, so it wont die is like saying an old man has never once died, so he will obviously not die. Israel's time is ending.

 

[toastman]

Stop dreaming Beezle. Wake up. Snap out of it. Israel is going nowhere, no matter how much hate you harbor .

You wish.
Israel is unsustainable.
The guys up top know it, which is why they are in a constant panic about who to kill or what land to grab to try to make it stick.

As said earlier, you might have up to three generations. That would be as much as what 60 years, so you could be dead before it happens. But demographics and a desire to be seen as democratic will crush a hateful Israel, when a civilised Israel might have been cherished by the new majority.

But then again, it could happen in a rush of history, even in the next five years.

So yes, you might die before Israel does, or you might not.
But it will not be sustained. It has been standing on a precipice since 1948. Though it hasn't fallen the ground is now shaking.

I know that you are not stupid enough to believe what you just wrote.
After nearly 7 decades of hearing the same garbage, it starts to lose any meaning. If Israel has proved one thing, it is that is very much a sustainable country surrounded by unsustainable countries. Like I said, your hate is clouding your judgment .

Time is Israel's enemy.
It is constantly evading the inevitable, with more weapons, more racist laws, more lawbreaking and more atrocities.

It has less standing in the world today than it had in the 1980's.
Populations are much more aware of what Israel is, and there is no longer much bar on pointing out the systematic ways it has chosen to be the same as Nazi Germany.

Western power sustained Israel early on, and Western power is becoming increasingly reluctant to do that just as the West becomes less important than the developing nations: Which do not appreciate colonialist tyrannies.

So saying Israel hasn't died, so it wont die is like saying an old man has never once died, so he will obviously not die. Israel's time is ending.

This is what I'm talking about. You are being completely irrational. You have no idea what you're talking about, and I'm guessing it's a mixture of being brainwashed and immense hatred.
Nazi Germany? What a disgusting, idiotic and false comparison. I would say the Palestinians are much more like Nazis, with their desire to destroy Israel and commit genocide against Israel.
Anyway, the ACTUAL truth is that Israel is very much alive, and there is no clock ticking time down, except for the one in your head. All the time we hear that "this WILL happen to Israel and that WILL happen to Israel", but none of it has happened, so out of frustration, you come up with these completely irrational outcomes for Israel.
Israel is alive and well, and you know that, but you obviously cannot handle it. Let me know when you decide to leave the planet you're on and come back down to earth.

 

[toastman]

And two Palestinians slaughtered 4 people in a synagogue with knives and axes.

Israel always insists that agreements in Gaza do not apply to the West Bank.

Are you making stuff up again ?

No.

Look it up.

But you are the one that made the claim.

Hamas, the Islamic militant group, controls Gaza only. But Haniya said the truce should also apply to the West Bank, where the Israeli army and the forces of Abbas hold sway.

Israel has refused Palestinian demands to stop operations in the West Bank in the past. Early Wednesday, another senior militant from Islamic Jihad was killed by Israeli fire in a village near Jenin, in the northern West Bank.
acks up
Israeli troops kill 4 militants Deseret News​

Good for Israel

But nothing you posted backs up your earlier claim

 

[P F Tinmore]

...Then I am curious as to why you hook your wagon to Israel. My heritage is quite similar to yours yet I obviously have taken a different path.

Because, for as much as you perceive the Muslim-Arab Palestinians to be the underdog in this short-lived (only 66 years) situation...

I perceive the Jews to have been the underdog for the better part of 2000 years, and to have suffered so much more than the Palestinians so as to exceed them by several orders of magnitude...

I side with them because Christians and Muslims both have vast tracts of land, and entire nations, and ancient cities, that serve as the Spiritual Mothership and home-bases for those other faiths, but the Jews lost theirs some 1900 years ago, and had none, until 1948...

I side with them because I grew up sensitive to their horrific pain and their tribulations spread across the vast sprawl of many centuries of pogrom and slaughter and Dhimmitude.

I side with them because the pain of the Palestinians in the past 66 years is a drop in the bucket compared to that of the Jews.

I side with them because the Muslims of the region could not part with a tiny sliver carved out of the vast tracts of land that they hold, to let the Jews come home again.

I side with them because they kicked the Muslims' arses, good and proper, against frightful odds, time and again - demonstrating a long-lost, now-recovered ability to fight.

I side with them because - after so many generations of cowering in their isolated little enclaves - they found their courage again, to stand up and fight for themselves.

I side with them because - after so many generations of Dhimmitude and being obliged to hide in the shadows - they now stand like men again, in the open light of day.

I side with them because they managed to hold themselves together as a community of faith - and because they managed to keep sight of a goal (returning to the Holy Land) for nearly two millennia - the All-Time World Record Holders, for cohesion, faith, loyalty and dedication in the face of Diaspora and catastrophic persecution.

I side with them because I perceive the Jews - collectively - to have a measure of courage and character so far in excess of the Muslim-Arabs of Palestine so as to defy measurement.

And other reasons, I suppose, but that's good for a start.

If I were King of the World and if I could spare the Muslim-Arab Palestinians their trials and tribulations while still giving the Jews what they need, I would.

But I cannot.

The world is what it is.

In any situation where compromise is no longer possible and peaceful coexistence is no longer possible, one either walks away, or chooses a side.

I chose mine, long ago.

For the reasons outlined here, among others.

--------------------

You asked, and you got a straight answer.

See you on the barricades.

Thank you for an honest and thoughtful response. From what I get from what you say that because Jews have been persecuted over the centuries (little if any by the Palestinians) they have the right to wipe another country off the map killing and expelling the people at will.

I have a different value system.

 

[Beelzebub]

...
Israel is alive and well, and you know that, ....

Yes. We both do.
We both know that things are completely alive, right up until the moment that they are dead.
But once they are dead ... well .. That's it.

 

[Daniyel]

1.Israel kept all agreements and treaties signed with the Palestinians(At least most of them, you didn't bother to disprove that so lets go with 'all of them')

2.The Palestinians never kept any agreement or treaty with Israel.

Ok:

Do you REALLY want to discuss this?
I mean, when you are proven wrong, which you are will you change your mind, will you reconsider Israel's crimes?
Will you realise that Israel is systematically against a negotiated agreement which places any limits on Israel other than total control of all of Palestine?

Really Danny boy, what are you prepared to put on the line over this question, because I don't willingly waste my time just so you can say, "Yeah, but I think you don't understand that Israel couldn't follow the agreement honestly."

Yes,
You went way too far Beezlebub and you know that, so you try to intimidate me somehow...? or maybe you think you have a good answer for that - or maybe you think someone else here does and you wait for them to suggest it, probably, but you might realize you don't so you'll play offended and avoid, bingo?
I'm still waiting for you to remind us all which agreement or treaty the Palestinians kept?

 

[Daniyel]

Israel does "one-sided steps" all the time.
It seems to be Israel's game-plan to have two or three moves each turn, and begrudge Palestinians having any, and maneuvers them into "fight or surrender" as the only options.

Palestinians need to stop expecting Israel to play a fair game.
Every move they make diplomatically should be without regard to Israeli feelings or pressure.

Press on to the legal consequences and the societal and international consequences of Israel trying to always have the upper hand. And just do it.

When Israel behaves as badly as it does, you cannot hold off because they say they would not approve.

Good morning.
Now remind me one agreement or treaty the Palestinians actually kept?

Why would they keep a treaty when Israel drives a bulldozer though them as soon as they are signed?

Israel kept them all and this is a fact you...ignored..back to my question, what agreement or treaty the Palestinians kept?
You keep whining about Israel but when its time for the Palestinians to prove themselves - they fail, and you're claiming Israel "will" break the agreements or treaties to be signed in the future, although the past showed the complete opposite of that.
So don't bother to wait for anyone's help, you made your position based on these facts:

1.Israel kept all agreements and treaties signed with the Palestinians(At least most of them, you didn't bother to disprove that so lets go with 'all of them')

2.The Palestinians never kept any agreement or treaty with Israel.

And later on you actually expect Israel to sign ANOTHER treaty and withdraw from the WB, because THEN it will all be different.

See my point?

Just within the last week or so Israel killed an unarmed civilian in Gaza.

I thought they were under a ceasefire.

Nope.

 

[Beelzebub]

Yes,
You went way too far Beezlebub and you know that, so you try to intimidate me somehow...? or maybe you think you have a good answer for that - or maybe you think someone else here does and you wait for them to suggest it, probably, but you might realize you don't so you'll play offended and avoid, bingo?
I'm still waiting for you to remind us all which agreement or treaty the Palestinians kept?

Eh?
Is your comprehension THAT weak? If Israel runs a bulldozer through each agreement why would the Palestinians keep to their side?

If you feel intimidated that is your weak mind. I only offer you things to read.
I haven't gone too far.

I do intend to go a lot further matey in opposing you and your fascist dreams. The whole world does with the exception of a few zealots with dreams of world domination.

Must dash.

 

[Daniyel]

And two Palestinians slaughtered 4 people in a synagogue with knives and axes.

Israel always insists that agreements in Gaza do not apply to the West Bank.

Are you making stuff up again ?

No.

Look it up.

But you are the one that made the claim.

Hamas, the Islamic militant group, controls Gaza only. But Haniya said the truce should also apply to the West Bank, where the Israeli army and the forces of Abbas hold sway.

Israel has refused Palestinian demands to stop operations in the West Bank in the past. Early Wednesday, another senior militant from Islamic Jihad was killed by Israeli fire in a village near Jenin, in the northern West Bank.

Israeli troops kill 4 militants Deseret News​

Israeli troops kill 4 militants

• Print
• Font Leave a comment »

By Isabel Kershner and Taghreed el-Khodary
New York Times News Service

Published: Thursday, March 13 2008 12:14 a.m. MDT

 

[Phoenall]

It seems Israel will do everything it can to prevent any resolution to their occupation and gradual annexation of Palestine.

Why would that be?

CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW that says Israel is right. The UN has told both sides to sit down and talk, and the P.A. refuse to talk until pre conditions are met. So there is a stalemate until the UN step in and force the P.A. to talk peace and mutual borders.

No it doesn't.
You made that up. Again.

Israel has all the options here. It just wants everything. The best deals it has offered involve Israel holding all the roads with checkpoints and Palestinians controlled by Israel security. With the intention of Israel sidelining them and stealing their land out of existence.

You live in a fantasy world Phoney.
Your Customary International Law is just another term for Zionist Israel and American Congress (bought and paid for) desires. Its bollocks. You know that, and keep saying it because your mouth is full of bollocks most of the time.

If not, show me an unpartizan link to proof that your mouth is NOT full of bollocks all of the time Phoney. Go on. I double dare you.

Geneva conventions cover occupation of enemy land for defence, which is what Israel has done with the west bank. The UN charter and many resolutions calls on the Palestinians to take part in peace talks that set out mutual borders.

LINK ? to your fantasy claim that the best deal involving Israel keeping control of the land.

Wrong again as it is the Geneva conventions and the UN charter

 

[Phoenall]

Israel does "one-sided steps" all the time.
It seems to be Israel's game-plan to have two or three moves each turn, and begrudge Palestinians having any, and maneuvers them into "fight or surrender" as the only options.

Palestinians need to stop expecting Israel to play a fair game.
Every move they make diplomatically should be without regard to Israeli feelings or pressure.

Press on to the legal consequences and the societal and international consequences of Israel trying to always have the upper hand. And just do it.

When Israel behaves as badly as it does, you cannot hold off because they say they would not approve.

Good morning.
Now remind me one agreement or treaty the Palestinians actually kept?

Why would they keep a treaty when Israel drives a bulldozer though them as soon as they are signed?

LINK or you will be admitting that you are lying.................

 

[Phoenall]

If you don't like the green line as a border, then no problem. I don't much like it either.

So the only borders we can agree on are the 1948 borders.
Use them.

What 1948 borders as none were ever negotiated after the arab muslims refused res 181

 

[Daniyel]

Yes,
You went way too far Beezlebub and you know that, so you try to intimidate me somehow...? or maybe you think you have a good answer for that - or maybe you think someone else here does and you wait for them to suggest it, probably, but you might realize you don't so you'll play offended and avoid, bingo?
I'm still waiting for you to remind us all which agreement or treaty the Palestinians kept?

Eh?
Is your comprehension THAT weak? If Israel runs a bulldozer through each agreement why would the Palestinians keep to their side?

If you feel intimidated that is your weak mind. I only offer you things to read.
I haven't gone too far.

I do intend to go a lot further matey in opposing you and your fascist dreams. The whole world does with the exception of a few zealots with dreams of world domination.

Must dash.

Evasive again, still waiting for the simple answer that you CAN'T provide.
Israel credibility with agreements and peace treaties is proved decades ago, don't go around and talk about Israel, focus -
Which agreement or treaty the Palestinians kept?

 

[Phoenall]

Yes,
You went way too far Beezlebub and you know that, so you try to intimidate me somehow...? or maybe you think you have a good answer for that - or maybe you think someone else here does and you wait for them to suggest it, probably, but you might realize you don't so you'll play offended and avoid, bingo?
I'm still waiting for you to remind us all which agreement or treaty the Palestinians kept?

Eh?
Is your comprehension THAT weak? If Israel runs a bulldozer through each agreement why would the Palestinians keep to their side?

If you feel intimidated that is your weak mind. I only offer you things to read.
I haven't gone too far.

I do intend to go a lot further matey in opposing you and your fascist dreams. The whole world does with the exception of a few zealots with dreams of world domination.

Must dash.

Again where is your evidence of this being the case from an unbiased source, none of your ISLAMONAZI PROPAGANDA SITES.

Mosque time is it ?

 

[P F Tinmore]

If you don't like the green line as a border, then no problem. I don't much like it either.

So the only borders we can agree on are the 1948 borders.
Use them.

What 1948 borders as none were ever negotiated after the arab muslims refused res 181

Resolution 181 suggested the redrawing of Palestine's borders. Resolution 181 was rejected leaving Palestine's borders intact.

 

[Kondor3]

...Thank you for an honest and thoughtful response. From what I get from what you say that because Jews have been persecuted over the centuries (little if any by the Palestinians) they have the right to wipe another country off the map killing and expelling the people at will. I have a different value system.

You and I quite probably share similar values in connection with Peoples and Lands and Warfare and International Conventions, outside the context of Israel-Palestine.

We are, however, and, of course, at polar opposites in connection with the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.

We are also at-odds, in connection with whether the Jews (1) wiped another country off the map or (2) stepped into a political vacuum and set up a new country.

Your perception is the former, mine is the latter.

There was a time when I, too, would have been content, that the Muslim-Arabs take their side of the 1949 (pre-1967) armistice line, and make that Palestine, while the Jews took their side of the 1949 (pre-1967) armistice line, and made that Israel - and to lock those down as permanent borders.

You see a return to those lines as an interim step on the way to wiping out Israel.

I see a return to those lines as the first step in a long, slow string of demands that would be tantamount to slow national suicide for Israel.

We also differ greatly, as to whether the Jews had any right to any land whatsoever.

Your position is that old legal understandings or status continue to hold true regardless of whether the polity(ies) upholding them continued extant or present or not.

My position is that physical survival can trigger struggle or warfare which, in turn, can trigger changes in legal status, created and sustained by victory on the battlefield.

Your position is that the Jews had no right (to the land).

My position is that the Jews created that right for themselves, and that they sustain it against all comers; manifesting the courage to seize control of their own destiny for the first time in 1900 years, rather than running like rabbits and foolishly relying upon the kindness of neighboring countries to do their fighting for them and to sustain them.

Your position is that the Jews should abandon the territories formerly known as Palestine, in their entirety.

My position is that the Palestinians have lost the struggle, and should pack-up and leave their dirty, choked, tiny little remaining enclaves, and go build new lives, elsewhere.

You have some aspects of International Law and the sympathies of the domains of Islam to reinforce your position.

I have some aspects of International Law and the sympathies of much of the world beyond the domains of Islam, as well as the IDF, and Reality, to reinforce mine.

For two thousand years, the Jews have played the part of the Lilliutians, to whatever power du jour happened to be extant.

Nobody likes to see a sucker wise up and take-on the mantle of Gulliver, with the oppressing side (Islam) obliged to play the part of the Lilliputians.

What goes around comes around, and now, finally, it's the Muslims' turn in the barrel.

There is a great deal of justice in such an outcome, when viewed in the light of 1300 years of Muslim-imposed Dhimmitude for the Jews residing within the domains of Islam.

For the first time in centuries, the Muslims are just gonna have to suck it up and learn to play nice with Different People in their midst.

Forgive me for not hosting a Pity Party.

For me: "Give 'em their tiny little goddamned sliver of land, move over a bit and let somebody else in, stop freaking out, and shut the phukk up already."

 

[Hossfly]

So you admit its Israel's intention to sabotage any resolution.

Well done Daniyel. That's very honest of you.

As to your rationalisation: You make a fair peace, withdraw, even to just the 1967 borders (1948 would be better) and you just see how much support comes to Israel. You could shoot across those borders with the blessings of nearly everyone, while Palestinians would finally be told to get a life and enjoy it.

Even Israel's opponents outside of Palestine recognise it would be more trouble to cancel than to exist IF it was to stick to a territory limited by treaty. Of course, while you insist on sabotaging any just peace arrangements, there is no end to your mischief, so it makes more sense to cancel Israel.

How does one cancel a country ?

Israel will be the first, so we will need to get some lawmakers onto it.
I expect an early step will be to reverse the UN recognition and UN member recognition of it as a state separate from Palestine.

I expect Israel would tell the United Muslims to take a flying leap. The UN is as impotent as a used tire.

 

[Phoenall]

If you don't like the green line as a border, then no problem. I don't much like it either.

So the only borders we can agree on are the 1948 borders.
Use them.

What 1948 borders as none were ever negotiated after the arab muslims refused res 181

Resolution 181 suggested the redrawing of Palestine's borders. Resolution 181 was rejected leaving Palestine's borders intact.

So Jordan is still part of Palestine then, as that was what your borders defined the mandate of Palestine, not the Islamic nation of Palestine. UN res 181 defined no borders it was just a proposal of what the ad hoc committee decided would be the best demographic lines, once the Palestinians had rejected 181 then it left Israel holding all the land. Remember it was an either or resolution either one side agreed or neither side agreed or both sides agreed. So Israel won the day once again.

Now remind the board again just what are the Islamic nation of Palestine's international borders again, as opposed to ther mandate of palestines international borders.

 

[Kondor3]

Israel and international law cannot exist at the same time. When the world decides to enforce international law Israel will have to fold its tent.

The UN will not overturn one of its own recognized members.

The UN will also not eject Israel from its membership.

The UN will do nothing against Israel.

The world is not willing to go to war against Israel, for the sake of the under-performing low-brow and foolhardy Palestinians.

Israel and International Law coexist very nicely already, thank you.