and here's where we part company exodus. i am a socialist. i don't own a house. nor a boat. i don't see the absolute need. but i do ride on public buses. i do not believe that 'having money' is the answer. i prefer to think that people need to be treated decently. they need access to education, shelter and food. people need to be respected for who they are not for what they possess. governments should be for ALL the people not just those with money.
Well I did not literally mean boats and houses. But I think you did get the point which was simply that if people have food, shelter, and some level of personal or individual freedom, they will generally not be inclined to wage war or commit acts of brutal terrorism. I don't think it matters if a capitalist or socialist system provides those mean, so long as means are provided for the average citizen.
Well I did not literally mean boats and houses. But I think you did get the point which was simply that if people have food, shelter, and some level of personal or individual freedom, they will generally not be inclined to wage war or commit acts of brutal terrorism. I don't think it matters if a capitalist or socialist system provides those mean, so long as means are provided for the average citizen.
So you blame the plight of the Palestinians on the Palestinian leadership - whoever that happens to be at the time - and regard Israel as innocent in all of this?
Well I did not literally mean boats and houses. But I think you did get the point which was simply that if people have food, shelter, and some level of personal or individual freedom, they will generally not be inclined to wage war or commit acts of brutal terrorism. I don't think it matters if a capitalist or socialist system provides those mean, so long as means are provided for the average citizen.
i know you didn't. it just struck me as a materialist answer. which is really no answer at all.
i find the view that the world's woes can be 'cured' by 'democratic' capitalism and 'free trade' to be absolute bullshit. too many people are allowed to slip through the system.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
hey, everyone... this is getting my goat... if you want to drag south africa into a debate about israel, please refer to PRE-1994 south africa.
POST-1994 south africa is in fact much more in favour of the palestinians, primarily because palestine is struggling for freedom in the same way black south africa did.
Where is this it you refer to? The West Bank and Gaza? Is that the It? Last time I checked half of it was just given back and now serves as a Qassam missile launching base.
didn't they grab more land as they gave some back?
Maale Adumim is one of the largest settlements in the West Bank
The Israeli government says it plans to build 700 new homes in two settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank.
have you taken math? how do you get less from adding?
it's also telling, very telling, that you again ignore the question of what would be an acceptable source, i guess i hit the nail on the head; whatever agreees w/ you
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
my point is that these people cant live side by side with israel
Your comment makes no sense. They've never been given the opportunity of living side by side with Israel. If you expect them to accept life under a military occupation then you are a racist and a bigot.
I never intimated that the plight of the Palestinians was any one parties fault. The issue is far more complex. Rather than fully state the case again I simply urge the bashers to dig a little and so some reading. Bottom line, the Arab states fucked the Palestinians. Jordan and Egypt occupied land meant for the "palestinians" and did indeed occupy it until Israel threw them off in 1967. Israel never intended to occupy those lands and has never formally annexed them. The fact is, the war of 67 took six days. The Israeli army, vastly outnumbered, was largely in a defensive posture as they were surrounded and being bombarded by Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. The Israeli armies swift advance surpised even them.
Their goal was simply to secure their then existing borders from the mounting onslaught. Remember, Nasser at that time, was outwardly threatening a second holocaust. Many palestinians fled after the war, and some chose to stay. Those that fled after the combined arab defeat were treated like shit by their host countries. There is no real lovefest between the arab states and the Palestinians. If there were, Jordan and Egypyt had the ability to give the West Bank and Gaza to the Palestinian Arabs and they did not. But you dont call them occupiers.
As for today's situation, it's very simple. Recognize Israel's right to exist and the settlements will be gone. The average Israeli wants no part of it and only the most hard core extremists actually live there. You, clearly, agree with Hamas and thus there lies the problem. If you refuse Israel's right to exist, which all of the major international bodies do, there will continue to be no solution. They just want to live in peace.
Maale Adumim is one of the largest settlements in the West Bank
The Israeli government says it plans to build 700 new homes in two settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank.
have you taken math? how do you get less from adding?
it's also telling, very telling, that you again ignore the question of what would be an acceptable source, i guess i hit the nail on the head; whatever agreees w/ you
I dont need to refer to European news agencies for my information. I have a good deal of respect for the BBC. I can post enumerous articles from the BBC that have negative things to say about Hamas. But what's the point really? If you have something to say, say it yourself.
As did Egypt and Lebanon and the Gulf States. Truth be told, the arabs cant get it together amongst themselves. Their internal wars have been going on for centuries. The reality is you can't put borders in areas that have been tribal areas for centuries and expect it to work. This is the problem in the Middle East and in Africa. The Euro powers drew lines because they like to draw lines and do things like plant flags. Ever seen any of Eddie Izzard's stand up on flags? Funny shit. It's true! Ths stuff we are seeing in Gaza and Iraq has been going on long before the US of A got there.
If you refuse Israel's right to exist, which all of the major international bodies do, there will continue to be no solution. They just want to live in peace.
I refuse it's right to exist in it's present form. As do the Palestinians. Israel needs to withdraw baeyond the 19676 borders before any serious negotiations can take place. That's all i'm saying.
And the 6 day war isn't as simple as you make out. The Israelis weren't in any way caught off guard by those events. They had been instigating them for months.
Did the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war, as Israel originally claimed?
"The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was 'no threat of destruction' but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could 'exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.'...Menahem Begin had the following remarks to make: 'In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.' "Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."
Was the 1967 war defenisve? - continued
"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it." Yitzhak Rabin, Israel's Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde, 2/28/68
Moshe Dayan posthumously speaks out on the Golan Heights
"Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, as Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan...[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the Government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for the farmland...[Dayan stated] 'They didn't even try to hide their greed for the land...We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot.
And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was...The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.'" The New York Times, May 11, 1997
The history of Israeli expansionism
"The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan; one does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today. But the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them." David Ben-Gurion, in 1936, quoted in Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."
Expansionism - continued
"The main danger which Israel, as a 'Jewish state', poses to its own people, to other Jews and to its neighbors, is its ideologically motivated pursuit of territorial expansion and the inevitable series of wars resulting from this aim...No zionist politician has ever repudiated Ben-Gurion's idea that Israeli policies must be based (within the limits of practical considerations) on the restoration of Biblical borders as the borders of the Jewish state." Israeli professor, Israel Shahak, "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3000 Years."
Expansionism - continued
In Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharatt's personal diaries, there is an excerpt from May of 1955 in which he quotes Moshe Dayan as follows: "[Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no - it must - invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge...And above all - let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space." Quoted in Livia Rokach, "Israel's Sacred Terrorism."
But wasn't the occupation of Arab lands necessary to protect Israel's security?
"Senator [J.William Fulbright] proposed in 1970 that America should guarantee Israel's security in a formal treaty, protecting her with armed forces if necessary. In return, Israel would retire to the borders of 1967. The UN Security Council would guarantee this arrangement, and thereby bring the Soviet Union - then a supplier of arms and political aid to the Arabs - into compliance. As Israeli troops were withdrawn from the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank they would be replaced by a UN peacekeeping force. Israel would agree to accept a certain number of Palestinians and the rest would be settled in a Palestinian state outside Israel.
"The plan drew favorable editorial support in the United States. The proposal, however, was flatly rejected by Israel. 'The whole affair disgusted Fulbright,' writes [his biographer Randall] Woods. 'The Israelis were not even willing to act in their own self-interest.'" Allan Brownfield in "Issues of the American Council for Judaism." Fall 1997.[Ed.-This was one of many such proposals]
What happened after the 1967 war ended?
"In violation of international law, Israel has confiscated over 52 percent of the land in the West Bank and 30 percent of the Gaza Strip for military use or for settlement by Jewish civilians...From 1967 to 1982, Israel's military government demolished 1,338 Palestinian homes on the West Bank. Over this period, more than 300,000 Palestinians were detained without trial for various periods by Israeli security forces." Intifada: The Palestinian Uprising Against Israeli Occupation," ed. Lockman and Beinin.
I refuse it's right to exist in it's present form. As do the Palestinians. Israel needs to withdraw baeyond the 19676 borders before any serious negotiations can take place. That's all i'm saying.
And the 6 day war isn't as simple as you make out. The Israelis weren't in any way caught off guard by those events. They had been instigating them for months.
Did the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war, as Israel originally claimed?
"The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was 'no threat of destruction' but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could 'exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.'...Menahem Begin had the following remarks to make: 'In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.' "Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."
Was the 1967 war defenisve? - continued
"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it." Yitzhak Rabin, Israel's Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde, 2/28/68
Moshe Dayan posthumously speaks out on the Golan Heights
"Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, as Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan...[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the Government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for the farmland...[Dayan stated] 'They didn't even try to hide their greed for the land...We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot.
And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was...The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.'" The New York Times, May 11, 1997
The history of Israeli expansionism
"The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan; one does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today. But the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them." David Ben-Gurion, in 1936, quoted in Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."
Expansionism - continued
"The main danger which Israel, as a 'Jewish state', poses to its own people, to other Jews and to its neighbors, is its ideologically motivated pursuit of territorial expansion and the inevitable series of wars resulting from this aim...No zionist politician has ever repudiated Ben-Gurion's idea that Israeli policies must be based (within the limits of practical considerations) on the restoration of Biblical borders as the borders of the Jewish state." Israeli professor, Israel Shahak, "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3000 Years."
Expansionism - continued
In Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharatt's personal diaries, there is an excerpt from May of 1955 in which he quotes Moshe Dayan as follows: "[Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no - it must - invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge...And above all - let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space." Quoted in Livia Rokach, "Israel's Sacred Terrorism."
But wasn't the occupation of Arab lands necessary to protect Israel's security?
"Senator [J.William Fulbright] proposed in 1970 that America should guarantee Israel's security in a formal treaty, protecting her with armed forces if necessary. In return, Israel would retire to the borders of 1967. The UN Security Council would guarantee this arrangement, and thereby bring the Soviet Union - then a supplier of arms and political aid to the Arabs - into compliance. As Israeli troops were withdrawn from the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank they would be replaced by a UN peacekeeping force. Israel would agree to accept a certain number of Palestinians and the rest would be settled in a Palestinian state outside Israel.
"The plan drew favorable editorial support in the United States. The proposal, however, was flatly rejected by Israel. 'The whole affair disgusted Fulbright,' writes [his biographer Randall] Woods. 'The Israelis were not even willing to act in their own self-interest.'" Allan Brownfield in "Issues of the American Council for Judaism." Fall 1997.[Ed.-This was one of many such proposals]
What happened after the 1967 war ended?
"In violation of international law, Israel has confiscated over 52 percent of the land in the West Bank and 30 percent of the Gaza Strip for military use or for settlement by Jewish civilians...From 1967 to 1982, Israel's military government demolished 1,338 Palestinian homes on the West Bank. Over this period, more than 300,000 Palestinians were detained without trial for various periods by Israeli security forces." Intifada: The Palestinian Uprising Against Israeli Occupation," ed. Lockman and Beinin.
Let's just have a pint and forget the whole thing ever happened. Look on the bright side, Pearl Jam in England very soon.
Id like to. Haven't been back to Europe in many years. Waiting to see which dates are added and which other bands join the festivals. Im following the Who around North America and am holding out for a Who/PJ show to happen. Not looking good for North America but the Who are wrapping up their tour in Europe this summer. My guess is Werchter is going to be the place to be. Cheers!
I guess bakeries are legitimate military targets? NOW do you understand the need for the walls and watch towers? Yes, let's give these guys a State staight away. More land to commit these acts of barbaraism from is a brilliant idea...As if Gaza wasnt enough.
I guess bakeries are legitimate military targets? NOW do you understand the need for the walls and watch towers? Yes, let's give these guys a State staight away. More land to commit these acts of barbaraism from is a brilliant idea...As if Gaza wasnt enough.
I dont need to refer to European news agencies for my information. I have a good deal of respect for the BBC. I can post enumerous articles from the BBC that have negative things to say about Hamas. But what's the point really? If you have something to say, say it yourself.
huh? you said israel left the gaza strip and west bank...i posted 2 recent articles that proved otherwise...your reply makes little sense
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
huh? you said israel left the gaza strip and west bank...i posted 2 recent articles that proved otherwise...your reply makes little sense
i guess making no sense whatsoever was what you were going for???
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Israeli security forces killed 660 Palestinians in 2006 - three times more than in 2005, according to an Israeli human rights group.
B'Tselem, which monitors human rights in the occupied territories, said the figure included 141 children.
At least 322 had taken no part in hostile acts, the group said.
In the same period, the number of deadly Palestinian attacks on Israelis has fallen - 23 Israelis were killed in 2006 compared with 50 last year.
Look man, we dont need to keep beating this to death. I know your side, you know mine. Im not denying Israel has been over the top. They have. But on the other hand, since you presumably aren't Jewish, you can't possibly understand the Israeli mindset. Nor can I.
As did Egypt and Lebanon and the Gulf States. Truth be told, the arabs cant get it together amongst themselves. Their internal wars have been going on for centuries. The reality is you can't put borders in areas that have been tribal areas for centuries and expect it to work. This is the problem in the Middle East and in Africa. The Euro powers drew lines because they like to draw lines and do things like plant flags. Ever seen any of Eddie Izzard's stand up on flags? Funny shit. It's true! Ths stuff we are seeing in Gaza and Iraq has been going on long before the US of A got there.
In fact Bagdhad was the centre of culture, arts and exploration of the world over 1000 years AD. In truth the Middle East is far from the decrepid war ravaged land you betray it as.
Comments
Well I did not literally mean boats and houses. But I think you did get the point which was simply that if people have food, shelter, and some level of personal or individual freedom, they will generally not be inclined to wage war or commit acts of brutal terrorism. I don't think it matters if a capitalist or socialist system provides those mean, so long as means are provided for the average citizen.
So you blame the plight of the Palestinians on the Palestinian leadership - whoever that happens to be at the time - and regard Israel as innocent in all of this?
i know you didn't. it just struck me as a materialist answer. which is really no answer at all.
i find the view that the world's woes can be 'cured' by 'democratic' capitalism and 'free trade' to be absolute bullshit. too many people are allowed to slip through the system.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Fair point.
didn't they grab more land as they gave some back?
and does this sound like giving land back??
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6210721.stm
Tuesday, 26 December 2006
Israel approves W Bank settlement
Israel has approved the construction of a new settlement in the occupied West Bank, Israeli officials have said.
also note:
"Settlements in the West Bank are illegal under international law, although Israel rejects this"
and 3 months before that article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5312084.stm
Israel begins new settlement push
Maale Adumim is one of the largest settlements in the West Bank
The Israeli government says it plans to build 700 new homes in two settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank.
have you taken math? how do you get less from adding?
it's also telling, very telling, that you again ignore the question of what would be an acceptable source, i guess i hit the nail on the head; whatever agreees w/ you
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
yea i want them to have their own country.lol
The Confederates and the Yankees were killing each other in the streets. So what's your point?
my point is that these people cant live side by side with israel
Your comment makes no sense. They've never been given the opportunity of living side by side with Israel. If you expect them to accept life under a military occupation then you are a racist and a bigot.
I never intimated that the plight of the Palestinians was any one parties fault. The issue is far more complex. Rather than fully state the case again I simply urge the bashers to dig a little and so some reading. Bottom line, the Arab states fucked the Palestinians. Jordan and Egypt occupied land meant for the "palestinians" and did indeed occupy it until Israel threw them off in 1967. Israel never intended to occupy those lands and has never formally annexed them. The fact is, the war of 67 took six days. The Israeli army, vastly outnumbered, was largely in a defensive posture as they were surrounded and being bombarded by Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. The Israeli armies swift advance surpised even them.
Their goal was simply to secure their then existing borders from the mounting onslaught. Remember, Nasser at that time, was outwardly threatening a second holocaust. Many palestinians fled after the war, and some chose to stay. Those that fled after the combined arab defeat were treated like shit by their host countries. There is no real lovefest between the arab states and the Palestinians. If there were, Jordan and Egypyt had the ability to give the West Bank and Gaza to the Palestinian Arabs and they did not. But you dont call them occupiers.
As for today's situation, it's very simple. Recognize Israel's right to exist and the settlements will be gone. The average Israeli wants no part of it and only the most hard core extremists actually live there. You, clearly, agree with Hamas and thus there lies the problem. If you refuse Israel's right to exist, which all of the major international bodies do, there will continue to be no solution. They just want to live in peace.
So read on
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0028632613/ref=sib_dp_pt/002-2128312-1681648#reader-link
Beginners reading for the Middle East - http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0028632613/ref=sib_dp_pt/002-2128312-1681648#reader-link (MrBrian Ill even buy you your own copy). No seriously this is a good objective read.
I dont need to refer to European news agencies for my information. I have a good deal of respect for the BBC. I can post enumerous articles from the BBC that have negative things to say about Hamas. But what's the point really? If you have something to say, say it yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTduy7Qkvk8
One of the best British exports in years!
I refuse it's right to exist in it's present form. As do the Palestinians. Israel needs to withdraw baeyond the 19676 borders before any serious negotiations can take place. That's all i'm saying.
And the 6 day war isn't as simple as you make out. The Israelis weren't in any way caught off guard by those events. They had been instigating them for months.
http://www.cactus48.com/1967war.html
Did the Egyptians actually start the 1967 war, as Israel originally claimed?
"The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman, regarded as a hawk, stated that there was 'no threat of destruction' but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could 'exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies.'...Menahem Begin had the following remarks to make: 'In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.' "Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."
Was the 1967 war defenisve? - continued
"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it." Yitzhak Rabin, Israel's Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde, 2/28/68
Moshe Dayan posthumously speaks out on the Golan Heights
"Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, as Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan...[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the Government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for the farmland...[Dayan stated] 'They didn't even try to hide their greed for the land...We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot.
And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was...The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.'" The New York Times, May 11, 1997
The history of Israeli expansionism
"The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan; one does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today. But the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concern of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them." David Ben-Gurion, in 1936, quoted in Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle."
Expansionism - continued
"The main danger which Israel, as a 'Jewish state', poses to its own people, to other Jews and to its neighbors, is its ideologically motivated pursuit of territorial expansion and the inevitable series of wars resulting from this aim...No zionist politician has ever repudiated Ben-Gurion's idea that Israeli policies must be based (within the limits of practical considerations) on the restoration of Biblical borders as the borders of the Jewish state." Israeli professor, Israel Shahak, "Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3000 Years."
Expansionism - continued
In Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharatt's personal diaries, there is an excerpt from May of 1955 in which he quotes Moshe Dayan as follows: "[Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no - it must - invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge...And above all - let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space." Quoted in Livia Rokach, "Israel's Sacred Terrorism."
But wasn't the occupation of Arab lands necessary to protect Israel's security?
"Senator [J.William Fulbright] proposed in 1970 that America should guarantee Israel's security in a formal treaty, protecting her with armed forces if necessary. In return, Israel would retire to the borders of 1967. The UN Security Council would guarantee this arrangement, and thereby bring the Soviet Union - then a supplier of arms and political aid to the Arabs - into compliance. As Israeli troops were withdrawn from the Golan Heights, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank they would be replaced by a UN peacekeeping force. Israel would agree to accept a certain number of Palestinians and the rest would be settled in a Palestinian state outside Israel.
"The plan drew favorable editorial support in the United States. The proposal, however, was flatly rejected by Israel. 'The whole affair disgusted Fulbright,' writes [his biographer Randall] Woods. 'The Israelis were not even willing to act in their own self-interest.'" Allan Brownfield in "Issues of the American Council for Judaism." Fall 1997.[Ed.-This was one of many such proposals]
What happened after the 1967 war ended?
"In violation of international law, Israel has confiscated over 52 percent of the land in the West Bank and 30 percent of the Gaza Strip for military use or for settlement by Jewish civilians...From 1967 to 1982, Israel's military government demolished 1,338 Palestinian homes on the West Bank. Over this period, more than 300,000 Palestinians were detained without trial for various periods by Israeli security forces." Intifada: The Palestinian Uprising Against Israeli Occupation," ed. Lockman and Beinin.
Let's just have a pint and forget the whole thing ever happened. Look on the bright side, Pearl Jam in England very soon.
True. The beers are on me!
Are ya going to any of the shows?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/29/israel.blast.ap/index.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6215769.stm
Israeli security forces killed 660 Palestinians in 2006 - three times more than in 2005, according to an Israeli human rights group.
B'Tselem, which monitors human rights in the occupied territories, said the figure included 141 children.
At least 322 had taken no part in hostile acts, the group said.
In the same period, the number of deadly Palestinian attacks on Israelis has fallen - 23 Israelis were killed in 2006 compared with 50 last year.
huh? you said israel left the gaza strip and west bank...i posted 2 recent articles that proved otherwise...your reply makes little sense
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
i guess making no sense whatsoever was what you were going for???
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Look man, we dont need to keep beating this to death. I know your side, you know mine. Im not denying Israel has been over the top. They have. But on the other hand, since you presumably aren't Jewish, you can't possibly understand the Israeli mindset. Nor can I.
1. Recognize a Palestinian state
OR
2. Kill all Palestinians
There's not a ton of option for Palestine in this conflict:
1. Recognize an Israel state
OR
2. Kill all Israelis
Unfortunatly, right now they both seem to think that the second option is the best...
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
In fact Bagdhad was the centre of culture, arts and exploration of the world over 1000 years AD. In truth the Middle East is far from the decrepid war ravaged land you betray it as.