- Banned
- #501
Arab-Moslem occupation of land does not mean ownership.
"Stolen slogans" are still just slogans.
The debates
- Thread starter P F Tinmore
- Start date
"Stolen slogans" are still just slogans.
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,192
- 4,677
- 1,815
- Thread starter
- #502
Israel claims that the Arabs, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, lost the 1948 war (they didn't) that Israel won Palestinian land.
That is an interesting twist of International law. Only Israel's shysters can come up with a story like that.
- Banned
- #503
I understand. You want to claim the failed, combined Arab-Moslem assault on the nascent Israeli state, intended to drive the Jews into the sea being a failure and the Arabs-Moslems being repelled was not a loss.
Call it a
RoccoR
Gold Member
RE: The Debates
SUBTOPIC: Treaties and Conflicts
※→ P F Tinmore, el at,
There are two competing philosophies here:
Now there is always a third possibility that a "third observer" (of an Allied Power 'vs' Opposing Power conflict). And this "third observer" has sympathetically sided with the Opposing Power. It is often the case that the "third observer" will continue to support conflict (armed struggle as opposed to Peace settlement). The "third observe" will not be satisfied until there is the destruction of the other. In the US we have (I use this only as an example) still fighting the civil war. And one side will not believe that the reasons for the conflict have been settled. One post-War aspect wants to remove the "States and Bars" teardown every commemorative statue to CSA Heroic Figures and change the name of every Army Fort named after CSA Person. They too, will not be satisfied until the other side is wiped away.
There will always be those that hold extremist attitudes. In the case of the Middle East, Israel and Jordan have closure on the issues. But the "third observer" has lost all sense of humanity. The third observer has passed down hatred from generation to generation. Even children are used as a propaganda prop to incite hatred. The "third observer" sees the other side as less than human. And the "third observer" will not be satisfied until they control all the territories from the river to the sea. It creates a paradox: How do you deal with a nation of psychopaths that refuse to adhere to the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
In order to be the victim of a crime (Theft), the Arab Palestinians had to actually have the territory in their possession. The Israeli's never took territory in the hands of the Arab Palestinians of the disputed territory. The West Bank and Jerusalem were occupied by the Arab Legion of Jordan - NOT the Arab Palestinians of the territory. And the Israelis pursued the Arab Legion across the Jordan River. It was not until 1988 that the Jordanians cut all ties with the West Bank and Jerusalem.
No matter what acreage (within the territories formerly under the Mandate) you believe that the Israelis took from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinian sovereignty, that never happened.
To the best of my knowledge, Israel never acquired effective control of any territory that was first under the sovereign control and independence of the Arab Palestinians.
Most Respectfully,
R
SUBTOPIC: Treaties and Conflicts
※→ P F Tinmore, el at,
(COMMENT)
There are two competing philosophies here:
◈ That a decisive victory on the battlefield determines the outcome (Win or lose).
◈ That a successful post-War posture establishes a compatible nation with the community of nations.
Now there is always a third possibility that a "third observer" (of an Allied Power 'vs' Opposing Power conflict). And this "third observer" has sympathetically sided with the Opposing Power. It is often the case that the "third observer" will continue to support conflict (armed struggle as opposed to Peace settlement). The "third observe" will not be satisfied until there is the destruction of the other. In the US we have (I use this only as an example) still fighting the civil war. And one side will not believe that the reasons for the conflict have been settled. One post-War aspect wants to remove the "States and Bars" teardown every commemorative statue to CSA Heroic Figures and change the name of every Army Fort named after CSA Person. They too, will not be satisfied until the other side is wiped away.
There will always be those that hold extremist attitudes. In the case of the Middle East, Israel and Jordan have closure on the issues. But the "third observer" has lost all sense of humanity. The third observer has passed down hatred from generation to generation. Even children are used as a propaganda prop to incite hatred. The "third observer" sees the other side as less than human. And the "third observer" will not be satisfied until they control all the territories from the river to the sea. It creates a paradox: How do you deal with a nation of psychopaths that refuse to adhere to the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
(COMMENT)
In order to be the victim of a crime (Theft), the Arab Palestinians had to actually have the territory in their possession. The Israeli's never took territory in the hands of the Arab Palestinians of the disputed territory. The West Bank and Jerusalem were occupied by the Arab Legion of Jordan - NOT the Arab Palestinians of the territory. And the Israelis pursued the Arab Legion across the Jordan River. It was not until 1988 that the Jordanians cut all ties with the West Bank and Jerusalem.
No matter what acreage (within the territories formerly under the Mandate) you believe that the Israelis took from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinian sovereignty, that never happened.
To the best of my knowledge, Israel never acquired effective control of any territory that was first under the sovereign control and independence of the Arab Palestinians.
Most Respectfully,
R
P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 83,192
- 4,677
- 1,815
- Thread starter
- #506
Nice word salad, but where does that address my post?RE: The Debates
SUBTOPIC: Treaties and Conflicts
※→ P F Tinmore, el at,
(COMMENT)
There are two competing philosophies here:
◈ That a decisive victory on the battlefield determines the outcome (Win or lose).◈ That a successful post-War posture establishes a compatible nation with the community of nations.
Now there is always a third possibility that a "third observer" (of an Allied Power 'vs' Opposing Power conflict). And this "third observer" has sympathetically sided with the Opposing Power. It is often the case that the "third observer" will continue to support conflict (armed struggle as opposed to Peace settlement). The "third observe" will not be satisfied until there is the destruction of the other. In the US we have (I use this only as an example) still fighting the civil war. And one side will not believe that the reasons for the conflict have been settled. One post-War aspect wants to remove the "States and Bars" teardown every commemorative statue to CSA Heroic Figures and change the name of every Army Fort named after CSA Person. They too, will not be satisfied until the other side is wiped away.
There will always be those that hold extremist attitudes. In the case of the Middle East, Israel and Jordan have closure on the issues. But the "third observer" has lost all sense of humanity. The third observer has passed down hatred from generation to generation. Even children are used as a propaganda prop to incite hatred. The "third observer" sees the other side as less than human. And the "third observer" will not be satisfied until they control all the territories from the river to the sea. It creates a paradox: How do you deal with a nation of psychopaths that refuse to adhere to the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
(COMMENT)
In order to be the victim of a crime (Theft), the Arab Palestinians had to actually have the territory in their possession. The Israeli's never took territory in the hands of the Arab Palestinians of the disputed territory. The West Bank and Jerusalem were occupied by the Arab Legion of Jordan - NOT the Arab Palestinians of the territory. And the Israelis pursued the Arab Legion across the Jordan River. It was not until 1988 that the Jordanians cut all ties with the West Bank and Jerusalem.
No matter what acreage (within the territories formerly under the Mandate) you believe that the Israelis took from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinian sovereignty, that never happened.
To the best of my knowledge, Israel never acquired effective control of any territory that was first under the sovereign control and independence of the Arab Palestinians.
Most Respectfully,
R
- Banned
- #507
Throughout.
watchingfromafar
Gold Member
- Aug 6, 2017
- 5,445
- 1,311
- 140
No other country on the face of our planet uses its military sniper teams to single out and murder children. Israel is the one and only exception and I pray to God to punish them & if extension is the only solution, then so be it.
The land now being unjustly occupied by the Zionists will be removed one way or another.
The Jews of Israel can save themselves by welcoming the Palestinians as one of their own with open arms of friendship.
-
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 23,394
- 4,953
- 290
No other country on the face of our planet uses its military sniper teams to single out and murder children. Israel is the one and only exception and I pray to God to punish them & if extension is the only solution, then so be it.
The land now being unjustly occupied by the Zionists will be removed one way or another.
The Jews of Israel can save themselves by welcoming the Palestinians as one of their own with open arms of friendship.
When you pray to God to punish someone else for your abuse of children
for military operations and propaganda, who do you think gets the punishment?
RE: The Debates
SUBTOPIC: Treaties and Conflicts
※→ P F Tinmore, el at,
(COMMENT)
There are two competing philosophies here:
◈ That a decisive victory on the battlefield determines the outcome (Win or lose).◈ That a successful post-War posture establishes a compatible nation with the community of nations.
Now there is always a third possibility that a "third observer" (of an Allied Power 'vs' Opposing Power conflict). And this "third observer" has sympathetically sided with the Opposing Power. It is often the case that the "third observer" will continue to support conflict (armed struggle as opposed to Peace settlement). The "third observe" will not be satisfied until there is the destruction of the other. In the US we have (I use this only as an example) still fighting the civil war. And one side will not believe that the reasons for the conflict have been settled. One post-War aspect wants to remove the "States and Bars" teardown every commemorative statue to CSA Heroic Figures and change the name of every Army Fort named after CSA Person. They too, will not be satisfied until the other side is wiped away.
There will always be those that hold extremist attitudes. In the case of the Middle East, Israel and Jordan have closure on the issues. But the "third observer" has lost all sense of humanity. The third observer has passed down hatred from generation to generation. Even children are used as a propaganda prop to incite hatred. The "third observer" sees the other side as less than human. And the "third observer" will not be satisfied until they control all the territories from the river to the sea. It creates a paradox: How do you deal with a nation of psychopaths that refuse to adhere to the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
(COMMENT)
In order to be the victim of a crime (Theft), the Arab Palestinians had to actually have the territory in their possession. The Israeli's never took territory in the hands of the Arab Palestinians of the disputed territory. The West Bank and Jerusalem were occupied by the Arab Legion of Jordan - NOT the Arab Palestinians of the territory. And the Israelis pursued the Arab Legion across the Jordan River. It was not until 1988 that the Jordanians cut all ties with the West Bank and Jerusalem.
No matter what acreage (within the territories formerly under the Mandate) you believe that the Israelis took from the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinian sovereignty, that never happened.
To the best of my knowledge, Israel never acquired effective control of any territory that was first under the sovereign control and independence of the Arab Palestinians.
Most Respectfully,
R
The European Jews destroyed over 300 Arab villages.
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 23,394
- 4,953
- 290
Arabs indeed lost big time failing to drive the Israelis into the sea,
and establish exclusive Arab domination over the entire Middle East.
The only reason you must resort to strawman fallacies, because
your narrative holds no water without misrepresenting both positions.
Last edited:
Families always flee a war zone.
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 23,394
- 4,953
- 290
Arab supremacists much willingly pay
the price for their vile ideology.
They want a "million martyrs",
what is the likely result?
Last edited:
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 23,394
- 4,953
- 290
Historic justice is a wonderful thing, don't you see that?
Arabs really shouldn't have expelled the Jews from all their holy cities.
Last edited:
When Jews returned to Palestine after the expulsion from Spain and Portugal, there was no upheaval or conflict. What holy cities are you talking about?
For a long time Jerusalem had a Christian majority from the 5th century to the 11th century.
Demographic history of Palestine (region) - Wikipedia
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 23,394
- 4,953
- 290
When Jews returned after the Spanish inquisition,
the Ottoman Caliphate proposed Rabbi Avraham Aboulafia,
and Dona Gracia to revive Jewish sovereignty from Tiberias in Galilee.
Jerusalem, Hebron, Sefad, and Tiberias are the four Jewish holy cities,
where Arab pogroms took place in the 19th century expelling the Jewish community.
Every attempt to recognize Christians and Jews as equal to Muslims in law - was met with violence.
Last edited:
By the 15th century Muslims were the majority... Why would Jews seek sovereignty?
Demographic history of Palestine (region) - Wikipedia
rylah
Gold Member
- Jun 10, 2015
- 23,394
- 4,953
- 290
By the 15th century Muslims were the majority... Why would Jews seek sovereignty?
Demographic history of Palestine (region) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Muslims didn't gain the majority by peaceful means.
Sovereignty is the result of taking responsibility for one's duties.
Last edited:
Having babies is pretty peaceful. Why don't you actually LOOK at the demographics?
Demographic history of Palestine (region) - Wikipedia
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
-
Black chicago mayor admits he prefers hiring black people
- Started by StatesRightsForever
- Replies: 2
-
-
African Coaltan, Gold, Platinum, minerals are going to be fought over in future war.!!?$$
- Started by 52ndStreet
- Replies: 1
Latest Discussions
-
-
Make a Sentence from the Last Word of the Previous Sentence- Latest: SaxonJackson
-
-
