Israeli protests against Iran war rage on [W:41]

[ecofarm]

Just as easily as you can blame israel for the 6 day war, as they imported european jew's from across the globe, and displaced the indiginous Palestinian population.:shrug:

That map is intentionally deceptive, and I'd expect the average person could see that. It includes uninhabited desert, and the land was not "Palestine", it was a possession of the Ottomans (following a long line of previous ownership). It also ignores that Jews were living there, so labelling it "Palestine" is no more legit than labelling it "Israel" and then claiming that Israel lost the heart of their land and a piece of the coast to the "Palestinians".

 

[apdst]

Palestine was recognized as a province of Syria by 500 BC.

And, in 1948, it was called, "Trans-Jordon". Again, Palestine was never a soveriegn nation.

 

[washunut]

Nobody in the ME really wants war except a faction of hardline Israelis.

God knows it would be bad for everyone.[/QUO

Not sure that you are close to correct. You think that the Iranians are kidding about wanting to participate in a second holocaust. Sorry if there are people who care more about living than if you gas prices increases for a couple of months.

 

[apdst]

Iran is a powerful country now. Trust me, their army will shock you if you believe them to be weak.

They have no battle hardened veterans, a disadvantage that neither the U.S., nor Israel suffer from.

According to Wikipedia, the Iranians can field 400,000 professionals, 65,000 conscripts and 350,000 reservists. 815,000 effectives--all in--isn't much to work with. Employ an attritional type strategy and you can kiss the Iranian army good buy in 90 days.

No nation would pull a bluff as big as to threaten to stand against the strongest military force ever known if they didn't have reason to believe that they have a fighting chance.

Saddamn did it. How did that work out for him? In 1990, he had the fourth largest army in the world and it was chock-a-block full of seasoned veterans, who could fix a tank engine with a piece of Double-Bubble, a pencil and a rubber band.

 

[24107]

That map is intentionally deceptive, and I'd expect the average person could see that. It includes uninhabited desert, and the land was not "Palestine", it was a possession of the Ottomans (following a long line of previous ownership). It also ignores that Jews were living there, so labelling it "Palestine" is no more legit than labelling it "Israel" and then claiming that Israel lost the heart of their land and a piece of the coast to the "Palestinians".

That map is not deceptive.

And the Palestinian's have ancestral roots to that land.

the Palestinians are an Arab people in linguistic and cultural affiliation. Since the seventh century, Palestine's indigenous peoples came under the influence of the Arabic-speaking conquerors of the region, and this confluence was formative for Palestinian culture.[15] Genetic research study suggests that present-day Palestinians have roots that go back to the ancient inhabitants of the area.[94]

Palestinian people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[ecofarm]

That map is not deceptive.

Yes, it is. And if you hadn't slid this Israel thread into Breaking News instead of the Mideast forum (what's the matter, too many dings there?) where it belongs, then there would be a few people ripping it apart.

And the Palestinian's have ancestral roots to that land.

Jews don't?

We could just as easily label all of the land "Israel" and show how Palestinians have grabbed chunks of it. What, Israel didn't exist then? Well neither did Palestine! So wtf is the difference. Not to mention the desert. I bet it has other errors as well. It's a propaganda piece that Hamas would be proud of.

 

[24107]

It is not a propaganda piece, just because you find a fact you don't like.

 

[ecofarm]

Dude, the land was not "Palestine". It was a chunk of land owned by the Ottomans. Labelling it as "Palestine" and then pretending Israel took chunks of an existing nation is flat-out propaganda. It's tantamount to claims of land stealing. If we were in ME, where this thread belongs but apparently you can't go, that map should be a ding for claiming 'land stealing'.

But no, you use a picture to make your claims of land stealing, and you do it by opening an Israel thread in the wrong place. And don't pretend like you didn't know the rule and like you don't know damn well that you're pulling a fast one avoiding using the ME forum to spread your BS.

The map is propaganda.

 

[apdst]

That map is not deceptive.

And the Palestinian's have ancestral roots to that land.

Palestinian people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Palestinians", as a people, didn't exist prior to the 1960's. Before that, "Palestinian", was used to refer to anyone--Jew, Christian, Muslim--that came from the region known as, "Palestine". Historically, it equates to calling Americans who live in the former Confederate states as, "Southerners".

 

[24107]

The Palestinian's were living under ottoman rule, but that does not change the fact they were inhabiting that land.

 

[apdst]

Dude, the land was not "Palestine". It was a chunk of land owned by the Ottomans. Labelling it as "Palestine" and then pretending Israel took chunks of an existing nation is flat-out propaganda. It's tantamount to claims of land stealing. If we were in ME, where this thread belongs but apparently you can't go, that map should be a ding for claiming 'land stealing'.

But no, you use a picture to make your claims of land stealing, and you do it by opening an Israel thread in the wrong place. And don't pretend like you didn't know the rule and like you don't know damn well that you're pulling a fast one to avoid using the ME forum to spread your propaganda.

The map is propaganda. End of story.

I think, "propaganda", is an under-statement. "A ****ing lie", would be more fitting, IMO.

 

[apdst]

The Palestinian's were living under ottoman rule, but that does not change the fact they were inhabiting that land.

The, "Palestinians", weren't and aren't an ethinic group. Get over it!

 

[24107]

"Palestinians", as a people, didn't exist prior to the 1960's. Before that, "Palestinian", was used to refer to anyone--Jew, Christian, Muslim--that came from the region known as, "Palestine". Historically, it equates to calling Americans who live in the former Confederate states as, "Southerners".

With all do respect, genetic research has shown that Palestinian's have root's there since pre-historic times, as indicated in the link.

 

[ecofarm]

The Palestinian's were living under ottoman rule, but that does not change the fact they were inhabiting that land.

And so were Jews. Why doesn't the map label all the land as "Israel" to begin?

Because there were non-Jews there also, we're just gonna pretend that a country called Palestine existed.

BS. You're busted.

 

[24107]

And so were Jews. Why doesn't the map label all the land as "Israel" to begin?

Because there were non-Jews there also, we're just gonna pretend that a country called Palestine existed.

BS. You're busted.

It was called ''british mandate'' Palestine after occupying turks were replaced with the brits.

 

[Serenity]

Moderator's Warning:

This thread is to discuss Israels citizens protesting regarding a possible attack against Iran. As it has degenerated into a discussion regarding Israel and Palestine it is now being transferred to the ME Forum. Please note that the ME forum Martial Law Concordance now applies.

 

[Sherman123]

Iran is a powerful country now. Trust me, their army will shock you if you believe them to be weak. No nation would pull a bluff as big as to threaten to stand against the strongest military force ever known if they didn't have reason to believe that they have a fighting chance.

Like Saddam did in Iraq? As I recall he was drumming about the impending doom of coalition forces until troops crossed the bridges into Baghdad. There is utility in a mask of perception, both for domestic and foreign consumption. Don't get me wrong, Iran is stronger than Iraq was and would require significant preparation for an invasion. But it is still a second tier power at best conventionally speaking, which is why Iranian doctrine is designed to maximize unconventional threats like missiles and harrying vessels with ASCM's and mines.

 

[Sherman123]

With all do respect, genetic research has shown that Palestinian's have root's there since pre-historic times, as indicated in the link.

I find this to be the most exhausting and pointless argument. It is irrelevant. The Palestinians can feel as aggrieved and righteously indignant as they want, it wont move a boundary line or shift a soldier. Supporters of Israel can be as confident in the justness of their founding, but it wont bring about stability and separation from the Palestinian issue. The problem is one of mostly tangible issues, including territory, troop disposition, security arrangement, Palestinian diaspora settlement, etc. This is the impediment. My opinions on the origin of the conflict, and who is 'right' historically speaking I'll leave reserved for another thread.

 

[CJ 2.0]

It was called ''british mandate'' Palestine after occupying turks were replaced with the brits.

Yes, a british mandate to establish a jewish national home, which used a name for an administrative territory that was following a long tradition in naming the territory administrered by a foreign power.

But in any event, pretending Israel is an aggresor vis-a-vis Iran is just silly. Iran has openly declared its desire to see Israel destroyed, has spent BILLIONS of dollars funding terrorist organizations that routinely attack Israel, and has directly sponsored and supported terrorism against Israelis and Jews in foreign countries.

Even though Israel would not give two s**ts about Iran otherwise.

And let me repeat that. Israel has lots of problems, domestic and international. Those problems are much more immediate proximately and in terms of geostrateigc interests. Were it not for Iranian aggresion against Israel, Israel would have absolutely no interest or incentive in any hostilities with Iran. None.

All hostilities between Iran and Israel are driven by Iran, its objectives and its actions. Anyone saying anything else is either lying or selling something.

 

[TheLastIndependent]

Like Saddam did in Iraq? As I recall he was drumming about the impending doom of coalition forces until troops crossed the bridges into Baghdad. There is utility in a mask of perception, both for domestic and foreign consumption. Don't get me wrong, Iran is stronger than Iraq was and would require significant preparation for an invasion. But it is still a second tier power at best conventionally speaking, which is why Iranian doctrine is designed to maximize unconventional threats like missiles and harrying vessels with ASCM's and mines.

Oh trust me, I don't believe that they can stand toe to toe with America. I only can foresee two nations with that capability. However, they certainlyncan with Israel, despite Israels advanced military. However, I do not believe that Iran will attack because they know that we will be tappin on their shoulder if they do.

 

[Sherman123]

Oh trust me, I don't believe that they can stand toe to toe with America. I only can foresee two nations with that capability. However, they certainlyncan with Israel, despite Israels advanced military. However, I do not believe that Iran will attack because they know that we will be tappin on their shoulder if they do.

What do you mean by stand toe to toe? In what way?

 

[TheLastIndependent]

What do you mean by stand toe to toe? In what way?

There is no way Iran can carry on a legitimate war with the United States. We are too strong. Could they break us down with insurgent type fighting? Over a 10 year period I'd give a lot of money to see a nation that could withstand that. All I'm saying is that Iran is strong enough to take on Israel, but not us

 

[Sherman123]

There is no way Iran can carry on a legitimate war with the United States. We are too strong. Could they break us down with insurgent type fighting? Over a 10 year period I'd give a lot of money to see a nation that could withstand that. All I'm saying is that Iran is strong enough to take on Israel, but not us

Right, but what do you mean by that? How can they 'take on' Israel?

 

[Mya]

There is no way Iran can carry on a legitimate war with the United States. We are too strong. Could they break us down with insurgent type fighting? Over a 10 year period I'd give a lot of money to see a nation that could withstand that. All I'm saying is that Iran is strong enough to take on Israel, but not us

Iran recognises that it should not tempt the US into any type of war as Iran would quickly suffer huge consequences.

Israel has had a lot of experience in warfare against vastly superior Arab numbers and has won in all cases. As Iran does not wish to engage Israel's ally the US it is probably that only limited warfare using Hezbollah and Hamas would be undertaken by Iran, even if limited attacks against the nuclear installations were made.

Of course, everything is fluid and things can change.

 

[ido_]

Right, but what do you mean by that? How can they 'take on' Israel?

You know they'll invade Israel from our joint border... oh wait, then they will use their mighty marine force for an invasion from the sea... oh wait, well airborne assault, I bet they can para drop millions of paratroopers into Israel, market garden would be child play comparing to what Iranians can do.