I will not Bow!

Status
Not open for further replies.
montelatici, et al,

In some respects, we are in part, still applying 18th Century logic. But again, there is a mix of a much more advanced concept trying to be applied.

I know it is difficult to look at things from all angles after conditioning that makes it impossible to view a situation objectively.

To the indigenous people of Palestine, the Europeans that were settling in Palestine were no different than how the Europeans settling in the New World were viewed by the indigenous people of America.

It did not matter to the native people of the Americas that the Pope, for example, had divided the New World between Spain and Portugal, or that the British won the French and Indian War and took title to North America. To them, it was land they had lived on for many generations land it was being taken over by people from another continent.

It is the same for the indigenous non-Jews of Palestine.

Perhaps it would have gone better for the Native Americans had they peacefully allowed their land to be taken over without resistance. The same could be said about the Palestinians. But, that is something that runs counter to human nature. Put yourselves in the place of the Native Americans or the Palestinians. What would you do?
(COMMENT)

Nice analogy; thoughtful and insightful.

There is a significant difference in the two sets of conditions (North American Indian 'vs' Palestinian). In the case of the New World, whether we talk about the cultures and tribes that were made extinct (ex. Beothuk Tribes, Karankawa Tribes, Mandans Tribes, Chisca Tribes, Hachaath Tribes) or other tribes that were made near extinct (ex. Algonquian, Cherokee, Cheyennes, Iroquois, Lakotas, Pima, Seminole, Sioux, and Tuscarora). In contrast, the Arab was never in danger of extinction; even the Arab Palestinian grows in numbers (not diminishing).

Secondly, while the 18th Century treatment of the North American Indian was, to be sure, a black mark in the history of the US, today, whether you look Eskimo in the far North, the Pacific Islands (Samoans and Polynesians), or the tribes of the Continental US, these indigenous cultures are revered and granted special protections culturally, territorially, and commercially. This is a by-product of social growth within the species and recognition for the special needs over time.

I spoke-out before, for the special needs of the Jewish People. A similar theory and concept applies.

Most Respectfully,
R

Rocco, the analogy is not perfect, Europeans after WW2, were not as, what's the word, sanguine, and less driven to eliminate non-Europeans as they were 3-4 centuries ago. And, the non-Jews of Palestine had/have many millions of cultural "brothers" in close proximity. But being able to move up to 700,000 people out of an area to make it available nearly exclusively to Europeans was no mean feat.
 
Israel is defined on all maps by the 1949 armistice lines.

The armistice lines were specifically not to be political or territorial borders.

israel05.jpg

Try this instead which is the original demarcation until 1967 when Un resolution 242 came into being

150px-UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.svg.png

The partition plan was rejected by the arabs. They refused to recognize such borders.

Per the '48 Jurisdiction and Powers Ordnance, land taken in the defense of it's state became part of the state.

If Israel is willing to hand over land for the creation of a palestinian state, that will come only through negotiations, not a demand by palestinians.

Tinmore is a massive liar. Current Israel maps are NOT define by the armistice lines. The armisitce agreements were signed wayyyyyy before the Israel-Egypt and Israel-Jordan agreements, which the U.N wrote, that gave Israel internationally recognized agreements with both countries.

Israel Map - Israel Satellite Image - Physical - Political

I have told this to Tinmore many many times. Not only have I shown him the above map, but I've also shows him the U.N agreements with Israel-Egypt and Israel-Jordan from the U.N website .

Let him live in his fantasy world. It is Tinmore who is fooling himself and no one else.
 
There will never be a Palestinian state, so what is the argument about?
 
There will never be a Palestinian state, so what is the argument about?

That will be very unfortunate for the palestinians, but the arabs will have to take responsibility for the refugees and absorb or resettle them they cannot continue as a charity victim expecting the UN to support them. They will have to apply for citizenship elsewhere in the world.
It would have been to their best interest to have negotiated with Israel as a united people not half the population intent on waging war. They have been ill used by the rest of the arab world and forced to be less that human. A few managed to become billionaires at the expense of their fellow people.
It is also unfortunate that so much of the world have found yet more reason to hate and persecute jews rather than embrace their return to their ancient homeland and what they have achieved there.
 
If the present state of affairs cannot go on indefinitely...

And if the ONE-state solution cannot be made to work...

And if the TWO-state solution cannot be made to work...

We are left with...

1. the Jews are all slaughtered

2. the Jews voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

3. the Jews are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

4. the Muslim-Palestinians are all slaughtered

5. the Muslim-Palestinians voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

6. the Muslim-Palestinians are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

Did I miss anything?
 
If the present state of affairs cannot go on indefinitely...

And if the ONE-state solution cannot be made to work...

And if the TWO-state solution cannot be made to work...

We are left with...

1. the Jews are all slaughtered

2. the Jews voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

3. the Jews are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

4. the Muslim-Palestinians are all slaughtered

5. the Muslim-Palestinians voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

6. the Muslim-Palestinians are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

Did I miss anything?

Yes you sound like a repeating ukulele...
 
If the present state of affairs cannot go on indefinitely...

And if the ONE-state solution cannot be made to work...

And if the TWO-state solution cannot be made to work...

We are left with...

1. the Jews are all slaughtered

2. the Jews voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

3. the Jews are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

4. the Muslim-Palestinians are all slaughtered

5. the Muslim-Palestinians voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

6. the Muslim-Palestinians are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

Did I miss anything?

Yes you sound like a repeating ukulele...
Doesn't matter.

The question (and the options) stand, unless you have something to add...

We seem close to reaching consensus that neither a one- nor two-state solution will work...

If true, then, rather than belabor the whys-and-wherefores for the thousandth time, and wearing-out the strings on that ukulele, or beating that dead horse ad infinitum ad nauseum...

We need to be looking to the future...

The question is designed to frame the different ways in which that future might materialize...

If you have something to contribute in that context, then do so...
 
Last edited:
If the present state of affairs cannot go on indefinitely...

And if the ONE-state solution cannot be made to work...

And if the TWO-state solution cannot be made to work...

We are left with...

1. the Jews are all slaughtered

2. the Jews voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

3. the Jews are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

4. the Muslim-Palestinians are all slaughtered

5. the Muslim-Palestinians voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

6. the Muslim-Palestinians are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

Did I miss anything?

Yes you sound like a repeating ukulele...

Stop whining !
 
If the present state of affairs cannot go on indefinitely...

And if the ONE-state solution cannot be made to work...

And if the TWO-state solution cannot be made to work...

We are left with...

1. the Jews are all slaughtered

2. the Jews voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

3. the Jews are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

4. the Muslim-Palestinians are all slaughtered

5. the Muslim-Palestinians voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

6. the Muslim-Palestinians are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

Did I miss anything?

Yes you sound like a repeating ukulele...
Doesn't matter.

The question (and the options) stand, unless you have something to add...

We seem close to reaching consensus that neither a one- nor two-state solution will work...

If true, then, rather than belabor the whys-and-wherefores for the thousandth time, and wearing-out the strings on that ukulele, or beating that dead horse ad infinitum ad nauseum...

We need to be looking to the future...

The question is designed to frame the different ways in which that future might materialize...

If you have something to contribute in that context, then do so...

Pbel contributing to the debate ?? Unlikely..

Whining, very likely.

Right Peebel?
 
If the present state of affairs cannot go on indefinitely...

And if the ONE-state solution cannot be made to work...

And if the TWO-state solution cannot be made to work...

We are left with...

1. the Jews are all slaughtered

2. the Jews voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

3. the Jews are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

4. the Muslim-Palestinians are all slaughtered

5. the Muslim-Palestinians voluntarily leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

6. the Muslim-Palestinians are compelled to leave the region formerly known as (Old) Palestine

Did I miss anything?

Yes you sound like a repeating ukulele...
Doesn't matter.

The question (and the options) stand, unless you have something to add...

We seem close to reaching consensus that neither a one- nor two-state solution will work...

If true, then, rather than belobor the whys-and-wherefores for the thousandth time...

We need to be looking to the future...

The question is designed to frame the different ways in which that future might materialize...

So your answer is one should slaughter the other...I keep telling you the Palestinians are mere pawns...Military studies have shown that if Arab forces attacked all at once they win simply because Israel would run out of bullets like Sadam did with Iran that defeated him with kids and clubs...
 
Yes you sound like a repeating ukulele...
Doesn't matter.

The question (and the options) stand, unless you have something to add...

We seem close to reaching consensus that neither a one- nor two-state solution will work...

If true, then, rather than belobor the whys-and-wherefores for the thousandth time...

We need to be looking to the future...

The question is designed to frame the different ways in which that future might materialize...

So your answer is one should slaughter the other...
Incorrect.

I listed six possibilities, not two.

...I keep telling you the Palestinians are mere pawns...
Immaterial to a macro-level range of possible futures.

Military studies have shown that if Arab forces attacked all at once they win simply because Israel would run out of bullets like Sadam did with Iran that defeated him with kids and clubs...
Wake me up when the Arabs show any signs of attacking all at once in overwhelming strength.

Those days are gone... donor exhaustion and the West-Arab wars and the Arab Spring have seen to that, for generations to come.

By the time they get their heads out of their asses, decades from now, the problem will have been long-since settled, one way or another.

My own particular focus is upon how that 'settling of problems' (cutting of the Gordian Knot) will be accomplished.

And what the cost will be... in blood, and treasure, and soul.
 
Last edited:
Doesn't matter.

The question (and the options) stand, unless you have something to add...

We seem close to reaching consensus that neither a one- nor two-state solution will work...

If true, then, rather than belobor the whys-and-wherefores for the thousandth time...

We need to be looking to the future...

The question is designed to frame the different ways in which that future might materialize...

So your answer is one should slaughter the other...
Incorrect.

I listed six possibilities, not two.

...I keep telling you the Palestinians are mere pawns...
Immaterial to a macro-level range of possible futures.

Military studies have shown that if Arab forces attacked all at once they win simply because Israel would run out of bullets like Sadam did with Iran that defeated him with kids and clubs...
Wake me up when the Arabs show any signs of attacking all at once in overwhelming strength.

Those days are done... donor exhaustion and the West-Arab wars and the Arab Spring have seen to that, for generations to come.By the time they get their heads out of their asses, decades from now, the problem will have been long-since settled, one way or another.

My own particular focus is upon how that 'settling of problems' (cutting of the Gordian Knot) will be accomplished.

Without a real acceptable peace, in 50, a hundred, three hundred years of victorious Israel and then a slaughter as you predict...Let History show you the future repeated... In the game of ultimate survival, numbers have always won.
 
So your answer is one should slaughter the other...
Incorrect.

I listed six possibilities, not two.


Immaterial to a macro-level range of possible futures.

Military studies have shown that if Arab forces attacked all at once they win simply because Israel would run out of bullets like Sadam did with Iran that defeated him with kids and clubs...
Wake me up when the Arabs show any signs of attacking all at once in overwhelming strength.

Those days are done... donor exhaustion and the West-Arab wars and the Arab Spring have seen to that, for generations to come.By the time they get their heads out of their asses, decades from now, the problem will have been long-since settled, one way or another.

My own particular focus is upon how that 'settling of problems' (cutting of the Gordian Knot) will be accomplished.

Without a real acceptable peace, in 50, a hundred, three hundred years of victorious Israel and then a slaughter as you predict...Let History show you the future repeated... In the game of ultimate survival, numbers have always won.
Israel also understands this, no doubt.

Which is why I predict that Israel will not allow the situation to drag on that long, in order for such an outcome to materialize.
 
Incorrect.

I listed six possibilities, not two.


Immaterial to a macro-level range of possible futures.


Wake me up when the Arabs show any signs of attacking all at once in overwhelming strength.

Those days are done... donor exhaustion and the West-Arab wars and the Arab Spring have seen to that, for generations to come.By the time they get their heads out of their asses, decades from now, the problem will have been long-since settled, one way or another.

My own particular focus is upon how that 'settling of problems' (cutting of the Gordian Knot) will be accomplished.

Without a real acceptable peace, in 50, a hundred, three hundred years of victorious Israel and then a slaughter as you predict...Let History show you the future repeated... In the game of ultimate survival, numbers have always won.
Israel also understands this, no doubt.

Which is why I predict that Israel will not allow the situation to drag on that long, in order for such an outcome to materialize.

What can Israel do to stop the march of History? She cannot occupy the Arab Peninsula...Like America who easily defeats Stick&Stone armies, she cannot defeat a nation as Iraq and Afghanistan have shown...In this conflict of Civilizations, American and Israeli Victories are shallow and Pyrrhic.
 
Without a real acceptable peace, in 50, a hundred, three hundred years of victorious Israel and then a slaughter as you predict...Let History show you the future repeated... In the game of ultimate survival, numbers have always won.
Israel also understands this, no doubt.

Which is why I predict that Israel will not allow the situation to drag on that long, in order for such an outcome to materialize.

What can Israel do to stop the march of History? She cannot occupy the Arab Peninsula...Like America who easily defeats Stick&Stone armies, she cannot defeat a nation as Iraq and Afghanistan have shown...In this conflict of Civilizations, American and Israeli Victories are shallow and Pyrrhic.
Israel does not need to occupy the Arabian peninsula.

She need only remove either themselves or the Palestinians from the equation.

That way, the Arabs are off the hook, and there is nothing left to fight over.

Now, or three hundred years from now.

Nobody is going to go to war in the year 2314 over somebody else's great-great-great-great-great grandfather being removed from an ancient equation.

It is quite probable that we are fast approaching such a removal.

If true, then we are now dealing with the questions: Who? When? How?

This is not a very appealing answer, and the pity is that it did not have to come to this.

But if a two-state solution is not viable, and a one-state solution is not viable, and if the present state of affairs cannot be sustained for much longer, then what is left?
 
15th post
...Like America who easily defeats Stick&Stone armies, she cannot defeat a nation as Iraq and Afghanistan have shown...
Oh, America defeated both Iraq and Afghanistan easily enough.

It's just that America doesn't have the brains to blow the shit out of the enemy and then just walk away, preferring, stupidly, to Nation-Build, in places that couldn't find their own asses with both hands in a well-lit room surrounded by mirrors.
 
And since Jews aren't like Muslims or Nazis, they cannot slaughter.

So we're basically left with the only solution that everybody seems to be running away from;

Israel should just annex the West Bank and call it by its right name for the last three thousand years, Judeah and Samaria, and through a slow process provide Israeli citizenship to the Arabs and treat them as Israel is currently treating its 1.8 million Arab citizens, with equal rights.

Problem solved. The end.
 
And since Jews aren't like Muslims or Nazis, they cannot slaughter.

So we're basically left with the only solution that everybody seems to be running away from;

Israel should just annex the West Bank and call it by its right name for the last three thousand years, Judeah and Samaria, and through a slow process provide Israeli citizenship to the Arabs and treat them as Israel is currently treating its 1.8 million Arab citizens, with equal rights.

Problem solved. The end.
That is the One-State solution.

There are many who do not believe that a One-State solution will work.

It is true that the Jews cannot slaughter.

If the choice is slaughter or expulsion or demographic overwhelming, can they expel?
 
For the Zionutters the only unbiased evidence is Zionist propaganda. While waiting for the 2014 ratings, in 2013 it looks like Israel is still vying for last place in terms most unpopular countries and is still firmly entrenched in the pariah category.

"Israel, North Korea, Pakistan and Iran came out worst in terms of how they are viewed globally."

BBC News - BBC poll: Germany most popular country in the world

And, the BBC was not ever censured for the polls you lying s.o.s.


So, "Sborra in Bocca", time for some easy math:


7,000,000,000 homo sapiens on the planet.

26,000 homo sapiens in the survey


That it 0.00037% of the worlds population.

that is 37 ten-thousandths of 1%, smaller than the smallest drop of water you could imagine in a huge bucket.

The poll releases no internals. We do not know where those 26,000 are geographically located and if the proportions for such a ridiculous study are even close to what they should be.

For all we know, among the 26,000 interviewees, 500 are from the PA and only 6 are from Israel.

The poll is hardly representative.

It should be also noted that BBC's election polling is notorously off, almost as bad as Gallup is in the USA.


With enough criminal energy and a lot of propaganda, I could also make a poll look like 45% of people on the planet actually liked Hitler, a result I bet you would like, little Duce. But that doesn't mean it would be true.

Nuff said.
[MENTION=36767]Bloodrock44[/MENTION] [MENTION=15726]Hossfly[/MENTION] [MENTION=36154]Roudy[/MENTION] [MENTION=25505]Jroc[/MENTION] [MENTION=44172]Sweet_Caroline[/MENTION] [MENTION=26838]Ropey[/MENTION] [MENTION=48060]guno[/MENTION]

Oh dear, yet another poll is consistent with the BBC poll:

"new poll commissioned by the European Commission show that Israel is believed by Europeans in 15 countries to be the greatest threat to world peace, greater than North Korea, Iran or Afghanistan."

European Poll: Israel Biggest Threat To World Peace | The Jewish Federations of North America


Hello, you liar:

the "Jewish Federations of North America", to which you linked, has an entry without a date and the link to the European Commission Poll it mentions is DEFUNCT.

The entire site is also at least 8 years old and has not been updated since then - on it's Social action page, it lists Norm Coleman has having been just elected. It mentions jewish activism in government up to Clinton but nothing about either Bush or Obama, so it looks like the site has not be updated since 2000 - 14 years ago. If it is even a bona-fide jewish site. I have never seen it or heard of it before.

You really are Sborra in Bocca, what? Yepp, you are.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom