The Israeli wars of attrition against the Palestinian people must END -> alternative? re-education camps and warcrimes prisons.

GavanPeacefan

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2018
Messages
4,966
Reaction score
1,554
Points
210
Location
Amsterdam, Netherlands



These wars of attrition (starvation tactics, foul drinking water tactics) from Israel towards the Palestinians must end.
They enable the Palestinians to always assume the victimhood role after any major attack of theirs, because this particular Israeli response is well-anticipated.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again (and again, if need be, even publicly!) : what we need is a massive re-education and warcrimes imprisonment campaign for the Palestinians, instituted by the Israelis + their allies + the UN.
For surely firebombing residential areas and raping young Israeli women found on festival terrains, are warcrimes. On that, there should be not a moment of doubt.

But to then starve away the Palestinian population or try to herd them through starvation is totally EVIL as well, dear Israelis, and completely counter-productive towards our combined goals : peace in the middle east.

So what we need instead is a large troop force to go in to what remains of Gaza imprison the last remaining men of fighting age, or at least shuttle them towards evaluation in detention centres (Geneva convention in hands at all possible times) by the UN and non-Israeli oversight countries like the US, Netherlands, UK, France, etc, etc.
This needs to be hyped up as the next big project, dear Israelis and Americans, it really does.
And note : I do not blame the Israelis for not asking for such troops-sent-in help. But we have the time now, and we should make good use of that time.

Let's put the UN to good use for a change.
If we don't, we risk being seen as THE source of all evil for the past century + 10 years or so..
 

Attachments

  • Gt35ygiXAAAogWD.webp
    Gt35ygiXAAAogWD.webp
    224.6 KB · Views: 104



These wars of attrition (starvation tactics, foul drinking water tactics) from Israel towards the Palestinians must end.
They enable the Palestinians to always assume the victimhood role after any major attack of theirs, because this particular Israeli response is well-anticipated.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again (and again, if need be, even publicly!) : what we need is a massive re-education and warcrimes imprisonment campaign for the Palestinians, instituted by the Israelis + their allies + the UN.
For surely firebombing residential areas and raping young Israeli women found on festival terrains, are warcrimes. On that, there should be not a moment of doubt.

But to then starve away the Palestinian population or try to herd them through starvation is totally EVIL as well, dear Israelis, and completely counter-productive towards our combined goals : peace in the middle east.

So what we need instead is a large troop force to go in to what remains of Gaza imprison the last remaining men of fighting age, or at least shuttle them towards evaluation in detention centres (Geneva convention in hands at all possible times) by the UN and non-Israeli oversight countries like the US, Netherlands, UK, France, etc, etc.
This needs to be hyped up as the next big project, dear Israelis and Americans, it really does.
And note : I do not blame the Israelis for not asking for such troops-sent-in help. But we have the time now, and we should make good use of that time.

Let's put the UN to good use for a change.
If we don't, we risk being seen as THE source of all evil for the past century + 10 years or so..

Hamas plays the huge, major role in the Gazans being starved and abused.
Start with that organization first.
As for the West and your list, only the USA would have the resources for such and the inclination for it is a coin toss, given current lack of support for Israel among the USA citizens.

Nice bong dream though.
 



These wars of attrition (starvation tactics, foul drinking water tactics) from Israel towards the Palestinians must end.
They enable the Palestinians to always assume the victimhood role after any major attack of theirs, because this particular Israeli response is well-anticipated.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again (and again, if need be, even publicly!) : what we need is a massive re-education and warcrimes imprisonment campaign for the Palestinians, instituted by the Israelis + their allies + the UN.
For surely firebombing residential areas and raping young Israeli women found on festival terrains, are warcrimes. On that, there should be not a moment of doubt.

But to then starve away the Palestinian population or try to herd them through starvation is totally EVIL as well, dear Israelis, and completely counter-productive towards our combined goals : peace in the middle east.

So what we need instead is a large troop force to go in to what remains of Gaza imprison the last remaining men of fighting age, or at least shuttle them towards evaluation in detention centres (Geneva convention in hands at all possible times) by the UN and non-Israeli oversight countries like the US, Netherlands, UK, France, etc, etc.
This needs to be hyped up as the next big project, dear Israelis and Americans, it really does.
And note : I do not blame the Israelis for not asking for such troops-sent-in help. But we have the time now, and we should make good use of that time.

Let's put the UN to good use for a change.
If we don't, we risk being seen as THE source of all evil for the past century + 10 years or so..


Wrong.
The problem has always been the Israelis.
Hamas is only justified retribution.

The Zionists started it way back when Menachem Begin blew up the British peacekeepers so that his terrorist gangs could not be stopped when they started massacring hundreds of native villages like Deir Yassin.

If that was not enough proof, the 1967 war that violated the UN partition, stole Jerusalem and the Sinai, should more than enough to convince anyone that Israel is the entire problem.
 
Last edited:
If they would have taken the billions and built a better Gaza instead of tunnels, missiles, and Oct 7.

But it's Hamas that's at fault, not Israel.

Wrong.
The Palestinians do not get more than a few hundred million a years, and that does not even cover basics like garbage collection.
Tunnels, home made missiles, Oct 7, etc. cost nothing because the illegal Israeli starvation blockade prevent them from working, and they have nothing else to do.

Hamas could not possibly be at fault since the problem is Israel has stolen 90% of Palestine, and made 90% of the Palestinians homeless.
 
Hamas plays the huge, major role in the Gazans being starved and abused.
Start with that organization first.
As for the West and your list, only the USA would have the resources for such and the inclination for it is a coin toss, given current lack of support for Israel among the USA citizens.

Nice bong dream though.

That is a ridiculous claim since Hama has only existed for less than 15 years.
And clearly the problem started in 1946 when Menachem Begin blew up the British peacekeepers in the King David Hotel, so his terrorist gangs could start massacring hundreds of native villages like Deir Yassin.

The illegal starvation blockade by Israel is over 20 years old, so clearly it is Israel and no one else who is totally at fault.

The reality is that the Ashkenazi are not even from the Mideast, and are Turkic invaders from places like Poland and Russia.
And almost no Israeli homes were ever paid for.
Instead they were deliberately stolen.
 
That is a ridiculous claim since Hama has only existed for less than 15 years.
And clearly the problem started in 1946 when Menachem Begin blew up the British peacekeepers in the King David Hotel, so his terrorist gangs could start massacring hundreds of native villages like Deir Yassin.

The illegal starvation blockade by Israel is over 20 years old, so clearly it is Israel and no one else who is totally at fault.

The reality is that the Ashkenazi are not even from the Mideast, and are Turkic invaders from places like Poland and Russia.
And almost no Israeli homes were ever paid for.
Instead they were deliberately stolen.
Hundreds of native villages? Only one, Deir Yassin. Prove there were more
 
So what we need instead is a large troop force to go in to what remains of Gaza imprison the last remaining men of fighting age, or at least shuttle them towards evaluation in detention centres (Geneva convention in hands at all possible times) by the UN and non-Israeli oversight countries like the US, Netherlands, UK, France, etc, etc.

Entirely unrealistic.
 
If that was not enough proof, the 1967 war that violated the UN partition, stole Jerusalem and the Sinai, should more than enough to convince anyone that Israel is the entire problem.
You can't "violate" a partition which never came into being and never held any legal weight.
 
Tunnels, home made missiles, Oct 7, etc. cost nothing
Seriously? Hundreds of kms of tunnels cost nothing to build? What are they made of? Seashells and donkey turds?
 
That is a ridiculous claim since Hama has only existed for less than 15 years.
And clearly the problem started in 1946 when Menachem Begin blew up the British peacekeepers in the King David Hotel, so his terrorist gangs could start massacring hundreds of native villages like Deir Yassin.

The illegal starvation blockade by Israel is over 20 years old, so clearly it is Israel and no one else who is totally at fault.

The reality is that the Ashkenazi are not even from the Mideast, and are Turkic invaders from places like Poland and Russia.
And almost no Israeli homes were ever paid for.
Instead they were deliberately stolen.


dunno if this is gonna help, but it tends to help..
let's wait and see for a few days.. maybe even into next week a bit, before launching more ideological munitions at the Israeli leaders. Not all of their people agree with those leaders after all.
 


dunno if this is gonna help, but it tends to help..
let's wait and see for a few days.. maybe even into next week a bit, before launching more ideological munitions at the Israeli leaders. Not all of their people agree with those leaders after all.

I thought you supported Israel unconditionally including supporting its mass murder of Palestinians. Am I wrong or have you changed your stance?
 
Wrong.
The Palestinians do not get more than a few hundred million a years, and that does not even cover basics like garbage collection.
Tunnels, home made missiles, Oct 7, etc. cost nothing because the illegal Israeli starvation blockade prevent them from working, and they have nothing else to do.

Hamas could not possibly be at fault since the problem is Israel has stolen 90% of Palestine, and made 90% of the Palestinians homeless.
Here. Try to leave the twilight zone, pal:

 
I thought you supported Israel unconditionally including supporting its mass murder of Palestinians. Am I wrong or have you changed your stance?
I've discovered some historical records, that if true, change everything for me, yes.

Zionism<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>a<span>]</span></a> is an ethnocultural nationalist<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>b<span>]</span></a> movement that emerged in late 19th-century Europe to establish and maintain a Jewish homeland through the colonization of Palestine,<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>2<span>]</span></a> a region corresponding to the Land of Israel in Judaism<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>3<span>]</span></a> and central to Jewish history. Zionists wanted to create a Jewish state in Palestine with as much land, as many Jews, and as few Palestinian Arabs as possible.<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>4<span>]</span></a>

Zionism initially emerged in Central and Eastern Europe as a secular nationalist movement in the late 19th century, in reaction to newer waves of antisemitism and in response to the Haskalah, or Jewish Enlightenment.<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>5<span>]</span></a><a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>6<span>]</span></a> The arrival of Zionist settlers to Palestine during this period is widely seen as the start of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. The Zionist claim to Palestine was based on the notion that the Jews' historical right to the land outweighed that of the Arabs.

In 1917, the Balfour Declaration established Britain's support for the movement. In 1922, the Mandate for Palestine, governed by Britain, explicitly privileged Jewish settlers over the local Palestinian population. In 1948, the State of Israel declared its independence and the first Arab-Israeli war broke out. During the war, Israel expanded its territory to control over 78% of Mandatory Palestine. As a result of the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight, an estimated 160,000 of 870,000 Palestinians in the territory remained, forming a Palestinian minority in Israel.<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>7<span>]</span></a>

The Zionist mainstream has historically included Liberal, Labor, Revisionist, and Cultural Zionism, while groups like Brit Shalom and Ihud have been dissident factions within the movement.<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia. (October_2024)%22%3Epage&nbsp;needed%3C/span%3E]]%3C/i%3E]%3C/sup%3E-10"><span>[</span>8<span>]</span></a> Religious Zionism is a variant of Zionist ideology that brings together secular nationalism and religious conservatism. Advocates of Zionism have viewed it as a national liberation movement for the repatriation of an indigenous people (who were subject to persecution and share a national identity through national consciousness), to the homeland of their ancestors.<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>9<span>]</span></a>[<em><a href="Wikipedia:Citing sources - Wikipedia" title="Wikipedia:Citing sources"><span title="This citation requires a reference to the specific page or range of pages in which the material appears. (March 2025)">page&nbsp;needed</span></a></em>]<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>10<span>]</span></a>[<em><a href="Wikipedia:Citing sources - Wikipedia" title="Wikipedia:Citing sources"><span title="This citation requires a reference to the specific page or range of pages in which the material appears. (March 2025)">page&nbsp;needed</span></a></em>]<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>11<span>]</span></a>[<em><a href="Wikipedia:Citing sources - Wikipedia" title="Wikipedia:Citing sources"><span title="This citation requires a reference to the specific page or range of pages in which the material appears. (March 2025)">page&nbsp;needed</span></a></em>] Criticism of Zionism often characterizes it as a supremacist,<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>12<span>]</span></a><a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>13<span>]</span></a><a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>14<span>]</span></a> colonialist,<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>15<span>]</span></a> racist,<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>16<span>]</span></a> or exceptionalist ideology or as a settler colonialist movement.<a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>17<span>]</span></a><a href="Zionism - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>18<span>]</span></a>

British support for Zionism, particularly through the Balfour Declaration of 1917, emerged from a complex interplay of factors including religious beliefs, strategic wartime considerations, and imperial ambitions. While often framed as an act of humanitarianism, it was also motivated by a desire to secure Jewish support, potentially influence the United States' entry into World War I, and gain strategic advantages in the Middle East.

Here's a more detailed breakdown:
1. Religious and Ideological Influences:
  • Many prominent British figures, including Prime Minister David Lloyd George and Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, were Christian Zionists who believed the return of Jews to the Holy Land was a divine promise and a fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
  • This belief system fueled a sense of moral obligation to support the Zionist movement.
2. Strategic Considerations During World War I:
  • Britain sought to leverage Jewish influence, particularly in the United States, to garner support for the war effort and potentially secure financial backing.

  • The British also aimed to weaken the Ottoman Empire, which controlled Palestine, and secure territorial gains after the war.

  • The Balfour Declaration was issued in part to consolidate support for Britain's war aims in the region.
3. Imperial Ambitions:
  • The British Empire sought to expand its influence in the Middle East, and the Zionist movement offered a potential avenue for achieving this goal.
  • By supporting the establishment of a Jewish homeland, Britain hoped to secure a strategic foothold in a region of growing geopolitical importance.
4. The Balfour Declaration:
  • The declaration, a letter from Arthur Balfour to Lord Rothschild, stated Britain's support for the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine.
  • While not explicitly endorsing a Jewish state, it was a significant step in legitimizing the Zionist project and laying the groundwork for future developments.
5. British Support and its Consequences:
  • Britain's support for Zionism, particularly through the Balfour Declaration, played a crucial role in the development of the Zionist movement and the subsequent establishment of the State of Israel.

  • However, this support also had significant consequences for the Palestinian population and the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

  • The declaration has been a source of ongoing debate and controversy, with some viewing it as a betrayal of promises made to Arab nationalists and others seeing it as a fulfillment of historical and religious claims.
So unless someone can explain to me how supporting Israel stops the big bad muslim machinery, I'm going to have to start posting a lot more pro-Hamas, pro-Iran messages, and publicly acknowledge my blunder of supporting Israel in the first place.
 
Last edited:
15th post
Historical documents related to what?
the establishment of Israel.

...
The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British Government in 1917 during the First World War announcing its support for the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine, then an Ottoman region with a small minority Jewish population. The declaration was contained in a letter dated 2 November 1917 from Arthur Balfour, the British foreign secretary, to Lord Rothschild, a leader of the British Jewish community, for transmission to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland. The text of the declaration was published in the press on 9 November 1917.

Following Britain's declaration of war on the Ottoman Empire in November 1914, it began to consider the future of Palestine. Within two months a memorandum was circulated to the War Cabinet by a Zionist member, Herbert Samuel, proposing the support of Zionist ambitions to enlist the support of Jews in the wider war. A committee was established in April 1915 by British prime minister H. H. Asquith to determine their policy towards the Ottoman Empire including Palestine. Asquith, who had favoured post-war reform of the Ottoman Empire, resigned in December 1916; his replacement David Lloyd George favoured partition of the Empire. The first negotiations between the British and the Zionists took place at a conference on 7 February 1917 that included Sir Mark Sykes and the Zionist leadership. Subsequent discussions led to Balfour's request, on 19 June, that Rothschild and Chaim Weizmann draft a public declaration. Further drafts were discussed by the British Cabinet during September and October, with input from Zionist and anti-Zionist Jews but with no representation from the local population in Palestine.

By late 1917, the wider war had reached a stalemate, with two of Britain's allies not fully engaged: the United States had yet to suffer a casualty, and the Russians were in the midst of a revolution. A stalemate in southern Palestine was broken by the Battle of Beersheba on 31 October 1917. The release of the final declaration was authorised on 31 October; the preceding Cabinet discussion had referenced perceived propaganda benefits amongst the worldwide Jewish community for the Allied war effort.

The opening words of the declaration represented the first public expression of support for Zionism by a major political power. The term "national home" had no precedent in international law, and was intentionally vague as to whether a Jewish state was contemplated. The intended boundaries of Palestine were not specified, and the British government later confirmed that the words "in Palestine" meant that the Jewish national home was not intended to cover all of Palestine. The second half of the declaration was added to satisfy opponents of the policy, who had claimed that it would otherwise prejudice the position of the local population of Palestine and encourage antisemitism worldwide by "stamping the Jews as strangers in their native lands". The declaration called for safeguarding the civil and religious rights for the Palestinian Arabs, who composed the vast majority of the local population, and also the rights and political status of the Jewish communities in countries outside of Palestine. The British government acknowledged in 1939 that the local population's wishes and interests should have been taken into account, and recognised in 2017 that the declaration should have called for the protection of the Palestinian Arabs' political rights.

The declaration greatly increased popular support for Zionism within Jewish communities worldwide, and became a core component of the British Mandate for Palestine, the founding document of Mandatory Palestine. It indirectly led to the emergence of the State of Israel and is considered a principal cause of the ongoing Israeli–Palestinian conflict – often described as the most intractable in the world. Controversy remains over a number of areas, such as whether the declaration contradicted earlier promises the British made to the Sharif of Mecca in the McMahon–Hussein correspondence.
...

Sounds like one big brutal British Empire fuckup due to WW1 related stress.
 
That all said, I'd like to now hear from Arab leaders or their intelligence apparatus' members, IF and how the jews leaving the Israeli territory all together along with the payment of reasonable reparations, would decrease tensions between the Middle East and The West.
 
I'd also like to add that when one talks about the future; the Israelis clearly have the more modern, more civilized society.
THAT SHOULD NOT BE UNDERESTIMATED IN OUR CALCULATIONS EITHER!

And to be honest; I think I can wrap up my own calculations with the following statement :
Israeli women are among the most free-thinking in the world.
Palestinian women are among the most nationalist AND among the most opressed-by-their-own men and brothers in the world.

Israeli men are found in all shapes and sizes, and all character types, and while they may be religiously or sociologically a bit racist, they are still among the most compatible with actually free men.
Arab men will abuse your rights, stab you in the back at unexpected times, and not repect even your human rights.

Based primarily on the statements above here, my support for Israel remains unchanged; unwaivering.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom