What would you do to solve the middleeast crisis?

[Volker]

Volker, please tell us what definition of Zionism you are using. The way you are using it seems 'uncomfortable'.

Zionists are people who follow an idea which advocates a Jewish state in Palestine.

 

[Volker]

BTW I need a bit of advice from any members willing to give it. The not so bold Gardener has stated that its not his intention to debate with the likes of me but to simply prod me with a stick every now and then. To that end should I put him on my ignore list?

No, ignore lists are for people who can't deal with what other people think.

Don't take him too serious.

 

[Volker]

Oh really ?

Do you think Mubarak can say "No" to a U.S. Ship of war that want to go through ?

If he can't say "No", then he dont OWN it.

It depends on the contracts and international law. If you own a restaurant and people come there and you don't like them, you can't make them go without a reason, too. But it's still your restaurant.

 

[EAGLE1]

Perhaps a comma in your sentence would have made it read as you claimed you meant it. Of course, the comment 'if one could be a tad more generous' does not sound like much of a positive.

The other positives are fine, but when you add the sarcasm on this issue to it, it becomes insincere. If you are that one-sided on the issue, I'm not completely sure what you are trying to prove.

Well ok I get you. But if one is so in need of positives about Isreal it surely tells you something about the situation doesnt it? After all on the other thread its the first time Ive ever asked for something +ve about the Pals but I get asked for a +ve Isreali statement often.

Mind you Ill give you the backhandedness of my compliments to Isreal. The fact of Israels modernity and democracy is the reason I hold it up to a higher standard, after all they are often european or american immigrants.
Previously I was all for Isreal, some years ago. 'Plucky little Isreal', who speak english and are not always angry and not always wanting to blow things up was what I thought.
Then I found out how it had all came to be, the conditions their captives lived in and the slow squeezing of land by settlement building, settler subsidising and protection and housing demolition. I realised then that like much of our political economic and cultural life underneath the fairly respectable first image is a horrible nightmare.

How did you come to your current thinking and what do think about my development of thought?

 

[EAGLE1]

Well, you might judge too harshly, considering they have been surrounded by hostility and the ever existing question their legitimacy. Getting a nervous trigger finger under those conditions are to be expected to some extent.

Actually though Id love to disagree here instead Ill throw you a bone.

Its a simple fact of military logic that while Isreals neighbours can afford to lose battle after battle and war after war Isreal on the other hand can only lose one really big war.

This more than anything probably explains the military history of the area, simple desperation.

 

[Voidwar]

It depends on the contracts and international law. If you own a restaurant and people come there and you don't like them, you can't make them go without a reason, too. But it's still your restaurant.

" We Reserve the right to refuse service to ANYONE. "

Ever seen this sign ?

 

[EAGLE1]

" We Reserve the right to refuse service to ANYONE. "

Ever seen this sign ?

Now Im really confused.. Is it Egypt's canal or not?

 

[VTA]

Actually though Id love to disagree here instead Ill throw you a bone.

Its a simple fact of military logic that while Isreals neighbours can afford to lose battle after battle and war after war Isreal on the other hand can only lose one really big war.

This more than anything probably explains the military history of the area, simple desperation.

Awww, shucks. You're too nice to me.

Under those conditions, you can't really call Israel the aggressor; that's just a tactic, used ad nauseum by the aggressor with the smaller army. At some point everyone's going to have to wake up and recognize this; there are two sides and one has to stop being petulant.

I hope that bone has some grsitle on it...

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Zionists are people who follow an idea which advocates a Jewish state in Palestine.

This is correct. It is also NOT a disparaging description.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Well ok I get you. But if one is so in need of positives about Isreal it surely tells you something about the situation doesnt it? After all on the other thread its the first time Ive ever asked for something +ve about the Pals but I get asked for a +ve Isreali statement often.

Actually it tells me nothing about the situation. What it tells me is that those around here who are asked for positives, present an absolutely biased position, seeing only negatives in Israel, totally oblivious to the fact that there is blame all the way around. This tends to be how you post, EAGLE1, and why you get confronted on this issue. And when you give positives with the dripping sarcasm that you do, it solidifies this perception.

Mind you Ill give you the backhandedness of my compliments to Isreal. The fact of Israels modernity and democracy is the reason I hold it up to a higher standard, after all they are often european or american immigrants.
Previously I was all for Isreal, some years ago. 'Plucky little Isreal', who speak english and are not always angry and not always wanting to blow things up was what I thought.
Then I found out how it had all came to be, the conditions their captives lived in and the slow squeezing of land by settlement building, settler subsidising and protection and housing demolition. I realised then that like much of our political economic and cultural life underneath the fairly respectable first image is a horrible nightmare.

How did you come to your current thinking and what do think about my development of thought?

I enjoy reading a lot about history and the ME is a part of the world that fascinates me. I've also lived through a lot the events we discuss, here. Munich, The Yom Kipper War, Entebbe... I've read about the conflict from both a pro-Israeli and a pro-Palestinian side. Certainly, the one thing I disagree with Israel on is the settlements. That being said, the development of my current thinking on this issue, is that there has been a consistent call for Israel's destruction, consistent violence against Israel's citizenry, and a consistent refusal by many Arab nations/groups to compromise in any way, yet demanding that Israel give into each and every one of their demands. I lean towards the side that is showing signs of wanting peace, not the side that doesn't. Perhaps if Munich had been condemned or Arabs had attempted to bring the planners to justice, I'd have a different view. Perhaps if Palestine hadn't elected a government bent on Israel's destruction I'd have a different view. Perhaps if Arab countries (with the exceptions of Egypt and Jordan) had ever seemed serious to solve this issue, I'd have a different view. None of these things occurred or are occurring. This is the basis of my siding with Israel on this issue.

As far as the development of your thought, to me, your position and those who agree with your position stems from a false premise: the state of Israel should not exist as resolved by the UN. This is where the problems begin. If you accept that Israel should exist in accordance with the UN, it is not possible, IMO, to not side with Israel, due to the unprovoked violence reaped by Arabs. Once you start with this false premise, however, I understand how your thought developed.

 

[Rick]

If you mean israel/palestinians, there is NO "SOLUTION" to the middle east crisis - the refusal to grasp this has caused a lot of wasted time and effort.

 

[Volker]

" We Reserve the right to refuse service to ANYONE. "

Ever seen this sign ?

I've seen it in the "Giants" movie only.

There are examples, like Turkey doesn't let Cypriot ships to their harbors at this time. But if there are contracts about letting ships in or airplanes, then it's ok. The Americans wanted to fly North Atlantic route to Europe and Pan Am had the airplanes to do so, but they had to wait until Europeans had suitable airplanes to fly to America, these are contracts.

 

[Volker]

This is correct. It is also NOT a disparaging description.

It depends on the location, I guess.

 

[Volker]

If you mean israel/palestinians, there is NO "SOLUTION" to the middle east crisis - the refusal to grasp this has caused a lot of wasted time and effort.

Wouldn't this be the only historical conflict then, which has no solution?

 

[EAGLE1]

Awww, shucks. You're too nice to me.

Under those conditions, you can't really call Israel the aggressor; that's just a tactic, used ad nauseum by the aggressor with the smaller army. At some point everyone's going to have to wake up and recognize this; there are two sides and one has to stop being petulant.

I hope that bone has some grsitle on it...

Well..I try to be sweet rather than sour sometimes. Maybe its the weather..

I agree that re 67 under those conditions you could call it tactics instead, especially as it was all done in a continued state of tension. However, if you go down that road then you cant call any of the Arab actions aggression either, its just Arab tactics too, and that wouldnt sit too well with our 'friends of Isreal' on this forum.

But looking at it that way does bring it all into focus as it reveals really that everything since approx 1887 has simply been tactics in a long game for land.

 

[EAGLE1]

CaptainCourtesy;603656]Actually it tells me nothing about the situation. What it tells me is that those around here who are asked for positives, present an absolutely biased position, seeing only negatives in Israel, totally oblivious to the fact that there is blame all the way around. This tends to be how you post, EAGLE1, and why you get confronted on this issue. And when you give positives with the dripping sarcasm that you do, it solidifies this perception.

Hmmm. I rather think my posting is a fair response to the continual rubbish expressed about the arabs and the Pals and the muslims. No reasonable person can sit back and accept this stuff about, to quote 'Islamotards', or that 'they attacked...they lost...sucks to lose', or the best used one, to paraphrase 'hey guys Isreal beat up five nations at once, like David vs Goliath..isnt that sooo cool and dont they therefore deserve any land they get?!'. Nor even should one accept the 'you side with the cause of the terrorist...therefore you're a terrorist' line of attack.
Given all this I think my responses and argument are a well needed balancing and thats why I do it.

I enjoy reading a lot about history and the ME is a part of the world that fascinates me. I've also lived through a lot the events we discuss, here. Munich, The Yom Kipper War, Entebbe... I've read about the conflict from both a pro-Israeli and a pro-Palestinian side. Certainly, the one thing I disagree with Israel on is the settlements. That being said, the development of my current thinking on this issue, is that there has been a consistent call for Israel's destruction, consistent violence against Israel's citizenry, and a consistent refusal by many Arab nations/groups to compromise in any way, yet demanding that Israel give into each and every one of their demands. I lean towards the side that is showing signs of wanting peace, not the side that doesn't. Perhaps if Munich had been condemned or Arabs had attempted to bring the planners to justice, I'd have a different view. Perhaps if Palestine hadn't elected a government bent on Israel's destruction I'd have a different view. Perhaps if Arab countries (with the exceptions of Egypt and Jordan) had ever seemed serious to solve this issue, I'd have a different view. None of these things occurred or are occurring. This is the basis of my siding with Israel on this issue.

Yes a fairly considered viewpoint, as I said I agreed with all that until I found out what was really happening and how it all started.

As far as the development of your thought, to me, your position and those who agree with your position stems from a false premise: the state of Israel should not exist as resolved by the UN. This is where the problems begin. If you accept that Israel should exist in accordance with the UN, it is not possible, IMO, to not side with Israel, due to the unprovoked violence reaped by Arabs. Once you start with this false premise, however, I understand how your thought developed.

Well its a premise certainly, I beg to differ on the falsity of that premise. After all the UN partition plan was a bit of a fix from the start. I liked the previous one by the Peel commision in 1937 better, much fairer. However, your consideration of my considerations is appreciated...

Sigh...this is less like intellectual mortal combat and more like discussing the neighbourhood gossip over a cup of tea and a biscuit..such a nice change.:lol:

 

[Vader]

Aha. Shia were bathists too. Inter marriage between sunni and shia was abundant. No clashes between them.



hey a.s.s.h.o.l.e. I am an honest muslim, proud to be a muslim and your racist allegations can go down the tube with your ignorance and emperor bush.

It sounds to me like you're regurgitating the hate spewage of your clerics (most of who are lying, racist, imperialistic, Islam-o-nazi brainwashers) without stopping to think for yourself.

:mrgreen:

 

[EAGLE1]

It sounds to me like you're regurgitating the hate spewage of your clerics (most of who are lying, racist, imperialistic, Islam-o-nazi brainwashers) without stopping to think for yourself.

:mrgreen:

See that CC? Why do I get accused of some awful bias when this sort of thing goes by unoticed? Done you think thats strange?

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

See that CC? Why do I get accused of some awful bias when this sort of thing goes by unoticed? Done you think thats strange?

Stop complaining, EAGLE1. Ask Vader how many times I've warned him in the past...plenty. Focus on your own posting.

 

[Volker]

See that CC? Why do I get accused of some awful bias when this sort of thing goes by unoticed? Done you think thats strange?

I'm gonna tell mom :mrgreen:

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

I'm gonna tell mom :mrgreen:

:rofl
Thanks Volker. I needed a laugh, tonight.

 

[EAGLE1]

Aaaaawww...no fair...

Stupid vader...always getting his way...I never get any credit....mumble, mumble whine....

Stalks off to his room, slams the door..

...:2razz:

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Aaaaawww...no fair...

Stupid vader...always getting his way...I never get any credit....mumble, mumble whine....

Stalks off to his room, slams the door..

...:2razz:

And if you're going to behave like that, you're grounded. :2razz:

 

[cherokee]

See that CC? Why do I get accused of some awful bias when this sort of thing goes by unoticed? Done you think thats strange?

But see what he says is true while 99% of your posts are just basically full of $hit. Maybe you could take some night classes or something …...:lamo.

 

[Volker]

Maybe you could take some night classes or something …...:lamo.

There must be this course where people learn to form sentences with the words "brainwashed, clerics and theocracy" and make like 300 variations of it. I don't know the name of the course, but some guys here seem to have taken it, what was the name of the course again?