The topic - from the OP - we're talking about 2 or 3 state solutions to end the conflict. Here's a refresher:
The Palestine Solution
- Thread starter Shusha
- Start date
Thank you for the refresher
I think any more states crammed into the original mandate would be detrimental to the survival of the Jewish state. Jordan ( roughly 80% of the original territory and 100% palestinian ) already takes up the lions share. Soon enough we'll have Gaza seeking statehood and then of course there is Israel. The palestinians who don't want to live within the Israeli sphere or that can't live in peace should be deported to one of the Arab areas OUTSIDE of Israeli influence and problem solved.
Not one more inch should be given over to Arab interests in destroying Israel
I think any more states crammed into the original mandate would be detrimental to the survival of the Jewish state. Jordan ( roughly 80% of the original territory and 100% palestinian ) already takes up the lions share. Soon enough we'll have Gaza seeking statehood and then of course there is Israel. The palestinians who don't want to live within the Israeli sphere or that can't live in peace should be deported to one of the Arab areas OUTSIDE of Israeli influence and problem solved.
Not one more inch should be given over to Arab interests in destroying Israel
Kondor3
Cafeteria Centrist
Never said they did.
In truth, the only numbers that signify in such a context are those of authoritative and statistically reliable census operations.
And even then...
None of that old shit matters in the slightest any longer, in the Reality of today...
What truly matters is who has possession now...
And who has the muscle to hold it...
Bottom line... when you get right down to where the bear shits in the woods,that's all that's ever mattered...
It belongs to the Jews now, and you can't have it back...
There will be no two- or three-state solution, forthcoming...
There has been no practical possibility of a multi-state solution, for quite some time now...
And, of course, there is no longer sufficient land remaining under so-called Palestinian control, to establish and sustain a viable Palestinian state...
The dumbass Palestinians are already standing on each others' shoulders, in a handful of disconnected scraps and slivers of land, fenced off, to keep the mad dog Palestinians from harming others...
There will be no further surrender of Israeli-controlled land, but there will be a continuation of construction on the Barrier Wall, and further encroaching on what tiny slivers of land are left to the Palestinians, as that Wall continues to grow, and as the Wall continues to be flexed and pushed outwards, to seize more and more of the small fragments of land remaining outside of Israeli control...
This isn't a state of affairs that lends itself to equitable division of land and resources...
This is a state of affairs that lends itself to a complete Jewish victory and take-over, and expulsion of hostile Muslim populations, who will be absolutely powerless to stop it...
This is a Reconquista...
One that is nearly completed already, and that cannot be stopped...
All foolish pie-in-the-sky hopes on the part of militant Muslims and their fifth-columnist supporters in The West, notwithstanding...
Last edited:
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
What makes you think they are not? And those numbers have increased. Arabs are still the majority population and they deserve to have a state for themselves.
Israel got theirs; the Palestinian's have a right to have theirs as well. And the only way possible for that to occur, is by obeying (or honoring) the law. As an American citizen, living in a country based on the rule of law, that is the way I see is the only possible solution to this conflict.
You, on the other hand, think differently...
Old shit? You mean old shit like this?
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Or old shit like this?
Article 1
The Purposes of the United Nations are:
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.
The Purposes of the United Nations are:
- To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
- To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.
- The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
- All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
- All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
- All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
Old shit like that? Or shit like this...
Given [the] authoritarian direction of the state...Ignorant of the crimes of which we know today, the people have fought with loyalty, self-sacrifice, and courage, and they have suffered too in this life-and-death struggle into which they were arbitrarily thrust. The [Israeli] people are free from blame.
The victor will always be the judge, and the vanquished the accused.
the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
Yeah, that's the shit you're in to!
There's only one shit for you; and that is this shit...
Get the fuck out of this country and go live somewhere else. I'm sure the Israeli's will take you in, since you don't embrace American values.
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
Palestinian's have a legal right to resist occupation; Israel does not have a legal right to continue it.
The only possible, non-violent solution, is to end the occupation.
Kondor3
Cafeteria Centrist
They lost that right when they skedaddled in 1948.
"He who pees his pants, then runs away, lives to regret it, for many a day."
Welcome to your consequences.
Enjoy.
There are many ways to interpret law.
Just as there are many laws from which interpretation may be gleaned.
Yes. It is understood that you see a two-state solution as the only way out.
Trouble is, that way was tried, time and again, to no avail.
Consequently, that window of opportunity has now closed... permanently.
Time's up.
Indeed I do. When calls for compromise are ignored time and again, as the Palestinians have ignored such calls over time, eventually, the other side stops offering.
Whatever in the world makes you think that foreigners are bound by our history or governing guidelines?
How does any of this address my observation that the time is now past for a two- or three-state solution?
Observations that I served-up without resorting to childish personal attacks.
Perhaps you can photo-shop us another American battleship, firing-off its 16" naval guns at the Israelis, to better illustrate that little boy's fantasy world that you and your ideas about the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict live within...
Sit down, Princess, and behave yourself.
Oh, and, DO try to stay on-topic, yes?
Last edited:
There is no occupation, the Israeli's are doing exactly what was intended exactly where it was intended. And the palestinians already received 80+% of the mandated territories. So whats the problem ?
The palestinians have no right to MORE land. They already have enough and we can all see what they've done with it. Open pit sewers, hopelessly inefficient use of fresh clean water, garbage everywhere, they are simply despicable custodians of the land. Not to mention the constant desecration of religious sites.
No the correct response to palestinain violence in Israel ( which of course includes ALL of the disputed territories ) is deportation. But humanely, family groups should not be separated, nor should households regardless of marital status. as groups they should be packed up and driven to the Jordanian border.
It would be another nonviolent restriction to combat the violent among them.
Condor #126
A bit harsh but well done. I agree.
While many legal avenues remain to justify Israeli's position on the map one of the more overlooked is the simple reality of military victory.
Virtually all countries were born out of military action. So why not Israel. we have many countries today who were formed very recently from military action. Yet the palestinian narrative would have us believe only Israel is the culprit. And demand retroactive action. We've seen how well that works in Vietnam.
But well done Condor. A bit harsh but well done.
A bit harsh but well done. I agree.
While many legal avenues remain to justify Israeli's position on the map one of the more overlooked is the simple reality of military victory.
Virtually all countries were born out of military action. So why not Israel. we have many countries today who were formed very recently from military action. Yet the palestinian narrative would have us believe only Israel is the culprit. And demand retroactive action. We've seen how well that works in Vietnam.
But well done Condor. A bit harsh but well done.
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
There can be no solution with people who have reality issues, as you have so demonstrated.
The existence of the occupation is not a debatable issue and you must be on crack, if you think the Pals have 80% of that land.
The sewers and water are probably a result of Israel targeting their sewage and water treatment plants. Both are war crimes.
So is the IDF writing "death to Arabs" with their own feces on the walls or deliberately targeting mosques with 2000 pound bombs.
Interesting how you never talk about Israeli violence? Which outnumbers Palestinian violence 75 to 1.
There are currently 75 UN resolutions against Israel; only 1 against the Pals.
You have no right restricting the movement of people on their own land.
Why don't you come over to my house and try to tell me what to do on my own property and see what happens next? I would personally show you how wrong that is.
Billo_Really
Litre of the Band
Not according to UN resolution 54/152.
It's pretty hypocritical thinking the idea and philosophy behind those words only apply to America.
It says, "All men are created equal...".
It doesn't say, "All Americans are created equal...".
Because your position is the exact same as Goering's.
...
The thing is - you can not "deport" people to countries they have no ties to - they were never citizens of Jordan or any other Arab country. They are displaced people (those in refugee camps) and people currently living where there ancestors have lived for generations (both the Jewish community and the Palestinian community include immigrants).
Jordan has no obligation to take them nor does any other Arab country. If they say "no" what are you going to do - create more refugee camps?
What you are proposing is no different than the Jewish expulsions from Arab lands that took place during the formation of Israel and that would never fly - particularly given the current humanitarian crisis in displaced people. Countries like Jordan, Lebenon and Turkey are overwelmed with refugees (having taken the bulk of them). I don't think the Mandate is a useful template anymore for peace anymore, there have been far too many changes.
Another complication - ok, let's say Israel annexes all that territory and, for the sake of argument the majority of the citizens agree to become Israeli citizens - how will that affect the demographics of Israel and it's ability to retain it's identity as a "Jewish State"?
I think Gaza would have to become it's own state - there is no reasonable way to connect it with other Palestinian territory....Egypt doesn't want it either.
Billo you seem to be quite enamored of the UN
Maybe you should do some reading on the issue.
Israel at the UN: A History of Bias and Progress - 2013 - Anti ...
Australia is right to challenge the UN's anti-Israel bias ...
UN chief admits bias against Israel - Israel News, Ynetnews
Articles: UN Bias Against Israel Continues - American Thinker
The amount of literature supporting my view that the UN is an extremely bias organization is staggering.
I would also add that the UN failure initially to establish the second ( a Jewish state ) within the mandated area is the root cause of this bias. Jordan was established without difficulty, however when it came time to establish the Jewish state it resulted in a display of prejudice and bigotry like no other. The Arabs refused all agreements and began a war of terrorism against the British. Some Judaic groups also engaged in military force. The simple reality is the UN has been thoroughly embarrassed by its failures and to this day belittles Israel's efforts to establish its homeland within the prescribed borders.
If you notice one of those links speaks of a two state solution. Two stated within the mandated area. One Jewish and one Arab. And today we have them. The Jewish state called Israel and the Arab state called Jordan. So whats the problem ?
The UN has reacted with bias against the Israeli's were they are simply outvoted. Its called tyranny by majority.
Maybe you should do some reading on the issue.
Israel at the UN: A History of Bias and Progress - 2013 - Anti ...
Australia is right to challenge the UN's anti-Israel bias ...
UN chief admits bias against Israel - Israel News, Ynetnews
Articles: UN Bias Against Israel Continues - American Thinker
The amount of literature supporting my view that the UN is an extremely bias organization is staggering.
I would also add that the UN failure initially to establish the second ( a Jewish state ) within the mandated area is the root cause of this bias. Jordan was established without difficulty, however when it came time to establish the Jewish state it resulted in a display of prejudice and bigotry like no other. The Arabs refused all agreements and began a war of terrorism against the British. Some Judaic groups also engaged in military force. The simple reality is the UN has been thoroughly embarrassed by its failures and to this day belittles Israel's efforts to establish its homeland within the prescribed borders.
If you notice one of those links speaks of a two state solution. Two stated within the mandated area. One Jewish and one Arab. And today we have them. The Jewish state called Israel and the Arab state called Jordan. So whats the problem ?
The UN has reacted with bias against the Israeli's were they are simply outvoted. Its called tyranny by majority.
No ties to ? really ?
Its been made quite clear over decades of history that Jordan IS THE ARAB state suggested in the original charter for the British mandate.
If you don't want to hear it from me thats fine. But what would you believe if not one, but several of the Heshimite palestinian Kings says it.
Quote
Jordan is Palestine. Palestine is Jordan.This is the royal decree and sentiments of two of the kings of Jordan.
“Palestine and Jordan are one…” said King Abdullah in 1948.
“The truth is that Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan,”said King Hussein of Jordan, in 1981.
Let’s closely examine the facts of history from the Arab perspective, rather than the Jewish one, regarding Jordan and Palestine.
“Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine; there is only one land, with one history and one and the same fate,” Prince Hassan of the Jordanian National Assembly was quoted as saying on February 2, 1970.
Accordingly, Abdul Hamid Sharif, Prime Minister of Jordan declared, in 1980, “The Palestinians and Jordanians do not belong to different nationalities. They hold the same Jordanian passports, are Arabs and have the same Jordanian culture.”
In other words, Jordan is Palestine. Arab Palestine. There is absolutely no difference between Jordan and Palestine, nor between Jordanians and Palestinians (all actually Arabs).
This fact is also confirmed by other Arabs, Jordanians and ‘Palestinans’ who were either rulers or scholars.
“There should be a kind of linkage because Jordanians and Palestinians are considered by the PLO as one people,”according to Farouk Kaddoumi, then head of the PLO Political Department, who gave the statement to Newsweek on March 14, 1977. Distinguished Arab-American Princeton University historian Philip Hitti testified before the Anglo-American Committee,
End Quote.
See
Jordan is Palestine. Palestine is Jordan. « IsraelAmerica
I have numerous references to this simple fact of history if you require more proof.
I think this pretty well lays to rest any further argument about Jordan having no ties to the palestinian people. Obviously it does and obviously Jordan being an Arab state and it being set up by the British in the area designated for the two peoples to enjoy states of their own it is the Arab state held within the two state solution.
Kondor3
Cafeteria Centrist
Too late... 50 years after the events of 1948-1949...
Besides, nobody pays attention to the General Assembly anymore... a.k.a. the New York Old Ladies International Debating Club
Plenty of small-time players in there, kissing Arab ass, to keep the oil flowing.... MEH.
Quite true. Nolo contendere. It is silent, however, regarding our own role in implementing such ideals on a global scale.
Especially amongst barbarians like your Palestine brethren, to the detriment of our friends and allies.
Hell, the Founding Fathers didn't much care for 'Mohammedans', and we've been fighting them off and on since the days of Adams and Jefferson.
With good reason... and having great fun while doing it.
Fatso Goering also believed that a two-state solution in Palestine was impossible? Wow! Who knew? Go figure! Oh, well... at least Fatso got one thing right, eh?
The people that are now called "Palestinians" have lived there, as indiginous people for thousands of years. They are a mixture of many peoples - including Jews - who have been conquered and reconquered but have stayed essentially in that area and converted to what ever faith the conquerers brought with them. There have also been migrations of others into that area. But they didn't march over from modern Jordan.
Playing games with semantics doesn't alter the fact that many of them are indiginous to where they now are and they have a right to stay there. The same mandate you refer to did not include widespread population transfers such as you are suggesting. If you want to give that land to Jordan, that is one thing but if you want to forceably transfer whole native populations (this is also known as ethnic cleansing) - that will be very problematic for Israel. It's like suggesting a forceable transfer of Jews back to Europe. Jordan has no obligation to take the people, unless it annexes the land.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2010/07/2010748131864654.html
Immoral and illegal
Today Jordan is home to about 1.9 million Palestinian refugees, more than 337,000 of whom live in the country's 10 official refugee camps.
The argument that the majority of Jordanians are of Palestinian origin and that Jordan is therefore already the de facto homeland of the Palestinians is hypocritical and erroneous.
There are no precise statistics but it is true that at least half of Jordan's population of about 6.2 million people are of Palestinian origin. But that is a result of Israeli expansionism and a deliberate policy of emptying Palestinian lands of Palestinians.
If Jordan was the original home of the Palestinian people, Israel would not have had to demolish around 450 Palestinian villages or to devise policies to expel the Palestinian population.
Moreover, there was already a community with its own traditions, costumes and dialect specific to the east of Jordan before the establishment of Israel.
Furthermore, the whole principle of evicting a population, erasing their villages, and bringing in settlers so as to change an area's demographics is simply immoral and illegal under international law.
Quote
But they didn't march over from modern Jordan.
Playing games with semantics doesn't alter the fact that many of them Jordan has no obligation to take the people, unless it annexes the land.
End Quote
WOW you just aren't able to grasp this. JORDAN IS THE NAME GIVEN TO THE PALESTINIAN ARAB STATE.
Need I repeat it ?
JORDAN IS THE PALESTINIAN STATE
Try it with me
JORDAN IS THE PALESTINIAN STATE
How are we doing over there. Need I repeat also what the Jordanians themselves have to say about this simple fact
Quote
Jordan is Palestine. Palestine is Jordan.This is the royal decree and sentiments of two of the kings of Jordan.
“Palestine and Jordan are one…” said King Abdullah in 1948.
“The truth is that Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan,”said King Hussein of Jordan, in 1981.
Let’s closely examine the facts of history from the Arab perspective, rather than the Jewish one, regarding Jordan and Palestine.
“Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine; there is only one land, with one history and one and the same fate,” Prince Hassan of the Jordanian National Assembly was quoted as saying on February 2, 1970.
Accordingly, Abdul Hamid Sharif, Prime Minister of Jordan declared, in 1980, “The Palestinians and Jordanians do not belong to different nationalities. They hold the same Jordanian passports, are Arabs and have the same Jordanian culture.”
In other words, Jordan is Palestine. Arab Palestine. There is absolutely no difference between Jordan and Palestine, nor between Jordanians and Palestinians (all actually Arabs).
This fact is also confirmed by other Arabs, Jordanians and ‘Palestinans’ who were either rulers or scholars.
“There should be a kind of linkage because Jordanians and Palestinians are considered by the PLO as one people,”according to Farouk Kaddoumi, then head of the PLO Political Department, who gave the statement to Newsweek on March 14, 1977. Distinguished Arab-American Princeton University historian Philip Hitti testified before the Anglo-American Committee,
End Quote
This simple reality is so well established its seldom argued today other than by the revisionists who seek to run a new palestinian narrative up the flag pole after all the others have failed.
Maybe a map might help you comprehend the issue.
I'm not sure why you would refuse to admit this simple fact other than in an effort to maintain the pro palestinian revisionist narrative. In which case I think its fair to use one of the more polite references to this kind of behavior
LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE
Ergo removing palestinian Arabs to the palestinian Arab state should be perfectly legal, before spin. After spin, and to no ones great surprise the palestinan Arabs are simply demanding more land in order to destabilize Israel through political means when violent means have failed.
IE
Your not fooling anyone
But they didn't march over from modern Jordan.
Playing games with semantics doesn't alter the fact that many of them Jordan has no obligation to take the people, unless it annexes the land.
End Quote
WOW you just aren't able to grasp this. JORDAN IS THE NAME GIVEN TO THE PALESTINIAN ARAB STATE.
Need I repeat it ?
JORDAN IS THE PALESTINIAN STATE
Try it with me
JORDAN IS THE PALESTINIAN STATE
How are we doing over there. Need I repeat also what the Jordanians themselves have to say about this simple fact
Quote
Jordan is Palestine. Palestine is Jordan.This is the royal decree and sentiments of two of the kings of Jordan.
“Palestine and Jordan are one…” said King Abdullah in 1948.
“The truth is that Jordan is Palestine and Palestine is Jordan,”said King Hussein of Jordan, in 1981.
Let’s closely examine the facts of history from the Arab perspective, rather than the Jewish one, regarding Jordan and Palestine.
“Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine; there is only one land, with one history and one and the same fate,” Prince Hassan of the Jordanian National Assembly was quoted as saying on February 2, 1970.
Accordingly, Abdul Hamid Sharif, Prime Minister of Jordan declared, in 1980, “The Palestinians and Jordanians do not belong to different nationalities. They hold the same Jordanian passports, are Arabs and have the same Jordanian culture.”
In other words, Jordan is Palestine. Arab Palestine. There is absolutely no difference between Jordan and Palestine, nor between Jordanians and Palestinians (all actually Arabs).
This fact is also confirmed by other Arabs, Jordanians and ‘Palestinans’ who were either rulers or scholars.
“There should be a kind of linkage because Jordanians and Palestinians are considered by the PLO as one people,”according to Farouk Kaddoumi, then head of the PLO Political Department, who gave the statement to Newsweek on March 14, 1977. Distinguished Arab-American Princeton University historian Philip Hitti testified before the Anglo-American Committee,
End Quote
This simple reality is so well established its seldom argued today other than by the revisionists who seek to run a new palestinian narrative up the flag pole after all the others have failed.
Maybe a map might help you comprehend the issue.
I'm not sure why you would refuse to admit this simple fact other than in an effort to maintain the pro palestinian revisionist narrative. In which case I think its fair to use one of the more polite references to this kind of behavior
LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE
Ergo removing palestinian Arabs to the palestinian Arab state should be perfectly legal, before spin. After spin, and to no ones great surprise the palestinan Arabs are simply demanding more land in order to destabilize Israel through political means when violent means have failed.
IE
Your not fooling anyone
Last edited:
Kondor3
Cafeteria Centrist
True, at least in large part.
True, at least in large part.
True, at least in large part.
True, at least in large part.
True, at least in large part, or, more accurately, they HAD (past tense) a right to stay there. They are now being squeezed off the land and driven out. Vae victus.
Happens all the time throughout history. The difference between HAVING a right and having the ability to ENFORCE a right is vast, and is measured by Victory and Defeat.
Just ask the American Indians... the Native Americans who were displaced, in order to provide you with a country of your own... same principle... natural selection.
The nature of the mandate is immaterial... we are dealing with a clear case of Vae Victus here.
True.
The Israelis need to divide-up the Palestinians and scatter them to the Four Winds, anyway.
Then again, the Jordanians extended Jordanian citizenship to the Palestinians, so, it's of little consequence.
Some go to Jordan, some to Egypt, some to Lebanon, some to Saudi Arabia, and the rest can be walked across the border to Syria, through the Golan Heights gateway.
If a one-state solution will not work...
If a two-state solution will not work...
If the Israelis refuse to surrender their vast military advantage and bare their throats to the barbarians at the gate...
That leaves the so-called 'Palestinians' on the short end of the stick...
And all the legalities (real and imagined and spun) in the world aren't going to make a lick of difference...
Under such circumstances, the party with the upper hand has two remaining options...
1. exterminate the Enemy...
2. expel the Enemy
Expulsion is far more humane then Extermination; at least the Expelled are alive at the end of the sequence, and can build new lives and a future, in safety, elsewhere.
Expulsion is also far less messy... otherwise, there's all that gore and goo to mop up... too much fuss... too much paperwork... too much bad long-term P(ublic) R(elations).
Expulsion will be met with a few years' worth of light-to-medium sanctions that will fizzle and fade over the course of a handful of years... with little or no permanent impact.
From the Israeli perspective, it's the only way out.
Last edited:
You are funny
Virtually every contention you are making is based off a false premise. You are misrepresenting what I've said.
Lets take them one at a time or at least some of them
I didn't argue that Jordan is the defacto home of the palestinians. I argued that Jordan is the Arab state set up by the British within the mandated area. I didn't argue that Jordan was a defacto palestinian state. I said it was the palestinian state assuming we are using the term to define the Arab residence of Judea or the mandated area. The mandate included provisions for two states within the area specified, one for the Arabic peoples and one Judaic . IT DID NOT specify what those states were to be named.
Being that Jordan lies entirely within the British mandate for palestine its reasonable to say that all its inhabitants at this time would be referred to as palestinians. Ergo 100% of the people of Jordan at its inception were palestinian. Same holds true of Israel. Its not I who is playing semantic games ;--)
Also you have provided no proof that palestinians or the group of palestinians you say lived in its own separate culture from other palestinians east of the Jordan but within the british mandate area designated as palestine were culturally distinct. I'm extensively read on the middle east conflict and its origins. So I would be most interested to read whatever references you are using to establish your position.
Lastly you claim that the exchange of populations is illegal. However you have the cart ahead of the horse again. Once more you have forgotten the element of time. In the period when this whole mess started it was perfectly acceptable to exchange populations. It wasn't until after the war of 67. Right around 74 as I recall that provisions were established by that ever so unbiased organization the UN that support your view. You are very convieniently applying these provisions retroactively to one single group, the Judaic people, and that smacks of bigotry, since you are not applying those edicts universally
Last edited:
Kondor, bloody great post.
I don't often take up the vae victus approach as there are many other avenues to disassemble the revisionist diatribe however it is the defining factor in the way things are today.
I guess I just find it more entertaining to place the revisionist nonsense under closer scrutiny so as to expose it for what it is. Which is miles form historically accurate. And its always interesting to gauge the pro terrorist response to what the basic history says.
Denial is most entertaining.
Anyway many good and accurate points, which are always appreciated
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
Would you rather live in liberal California or a red state?- Started by Mortimer
- Replies: 21
-
-
-
Columbia university: Oh, just another fascist Islamic genocide pusher [Tarek Bazrouk]
- Started by Pastelli
- Replies: 0
