Now back to Israel as usual

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

mickeyrat said:

BS44325 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

Again....no matter what side of the issue you are on...this is reality:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415690/no-peace-any-time-soon-not-because-bibi-charles-krauthammer

Who is Israel supposed to make a deal with?

An article written by a Zionist, gee, I wonder which way this article is going to lean. Come on man, u can do better then that. Or not.

You do realize that the Palestinians need to negotiate with zionists don't you?

A just settlement cannot be reached if you ignore them. You are proving my point that Israel has no one to negotiate with.

do you honestly believe they wish to negotiate?

Yes. Israel knows that the status quo cannot continue.

So lemme ask you then, have you questioned why those proposals were rejected throughout the years? If memory serves a major sticking point was surrounding the palestinian refugees STILL in camps to this day. PLO wanted right of return for them. Israel rejected out of hand. Is that really unreasonable for that right?

That probably is the largest sticking point for sure and I am not sure what the correct solution is. There are Israelis who believe there should be zero right of return. There are those who believe that every generation of displaced individuals with Palestinian heritage should be able to return. I am one who believes there should be "some" right of return but how we get to that number is difficult. Israel would be willing to accept some number of people as well as the handover of additional land regardless of internal opposition. Remember they once removed jewish settlers from Gaza by force and under the right conditions they would be willing to do that again. The question is whether there is a Palestinian government willing to accept that deal? Hamas runs the show now and they seek full destruction of Israel. How does one negotiate with them?

So with your theory, Israel doesn't want to negotiate with Hamas and Hamas doesn't want to negotiate with Israel. So now what?

The world joins nations such as Egypt in crushing Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will then be able to exert control and deal with Israel without having to worry about the Islamist rejectionists.

Now what about when Hamas' replacement surfaces? Hamas represents the ideology of resistance; and not to go with the cliche from V for Vendetta, but you just can't kill an idea.

Hamas has co-opted the resistance. There can be resistance without them. Think Gandhi and MLK.

Of course you've chosen not to mention Mandela and his aggressive path taken towards peace... Seems pretty naive and farfetched to assume that an oppressed people who have only known violent resistance will take the Gandhi route over that.

I didn't choose to not mention Mandela. Add him to the list if you like but don't dare compare his movement to Hamas. An Islamist he was not.

Sisi gets it and so should you

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-weekend-interview-islams-improbable-reformer-1426889862

Edit - damn...paywall. Article can be read for free elsewhere

BS44325 said:

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

mickeyrat said:

BS44325 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

Again....no matter what side of the issue you are on...this is reality:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415690/no-peace-any-time-soon-not-because-bibi-charles-krauthammer

Who is Israel supposed to make a deal with?

An article written by a Zionist, gee, I wonder which way this article is going to lean. Come on man, u can do better then that. Or not.

You do realize that the Palestinians need to negotiate with zionists don't you?

A just settlement cannot be reached if you ignore them. You are proving my point that Israel has no one to negotiate with.

do you honestly believe they wish to negotiate?

Yes. Israel knows that the status quo cannot continue.

So lemme ask you then, have you questioned why those proposals were rejected throughout the years? If memory serves a major sticking point was surrounding the palestinian refugees STILL in camps to this day. PLO wanted right of return for them. Israel rejected out of hand. Is that really unreasonable for that right?

That probably is the largest sticking point for sure and I am not sure what the correct solution is. There are Israelis who believe there should be zero right of return. There are those who believe that every generation of displaced individuals with Palestinian heritage should be able to return. I am one who believes there should be "some" right of return but how we get to that number is difficult. Israel would be willing to accept some number of people as well as the handover of additional land regardless of internal opposition. Remember they once removed jewish settlers from Gaza by force and under the right conditions they would be willing to do that again. The question is whether there is a Palestinian government willing to accept that deal? Hamas runs the show now and they seek full destruction of Israel. How does one negotiate with them?

So with your theory, Israel doesn't want to negotiate with Hamas and Hamas doesn't want to negotiate with Israel. So now what?

The world joins nations such as Egypt in crushing Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will then be able to exert control and deal with Israel without having to worry about the Islamist rejectionists.

Now what about when Hamas' replacement surfaces? Hamas represents the ideology of resistance; and not to go with the cliche from V for Vendetta, but you just can't kill an idea.

Hamas has co-opted the resistance. There can be resistance without them. Think Gandhi and MLK.

Of course you've chosen not to mention Mandela and his aggressive path taken towards peace... Seems pretty naive and farfetched to assume that an oppressed people who have only known violent resistance will take the Gandhi route over that.

I didn't choose to not mention Mandela. Add him to the list if you like but don't dare compare his movement to Hamas. An Islamist he was not.

Sisi gets it and so should you

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-weekend-interview-islams-improbable-reformer-1426889862

Edit - damn...paywall. Article can be read for free elsewhere

I'm not talking about Islamism. I'm talking about a highly violent retaliation against an oppression with the recognition that pacifist actions are not the only ones (and, in fact, if the conditions are right - are entirely ineffective) which can yield pacified regions and just results. As I stated, we're talking about the succession of Hamas by another resistance force (Islamist or not), so I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

If Hamas was stripped of its Islamist affiliation, what would you say about their tactics then?

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

mickeyrat said:

BS44325 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

Again....no matter what side of the issue you are on...this is reality:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415690/no-peace-any-time-soon-not-because-bibi-charles-krauthammer

Who is Israel supposed to make a deal with?

An article written by a Zionist, gee, I wonder which way this article is going to lean. Come on man, u can do better then that. Or not.

You do realize that the Palestinians need to negotiate with zionists don't you?

A just settlement cannot be reached if you ignore them. You are proving my point that Israel has no one to negotiate with.

do you honestly believe they wish to negotiate?

Yes. Israel knows that the status quo cannot continue.

So lemme ask you then, have you questioned why those proposals were rejected throughout the years? If memory serves a major sticking point was surrounding the palestinian refugees STILL in camps to this day. PLO wanted right of return for them. Israel rejected out of hand. Is that really unreasonable for that right?

That probably is the largest sticking point for sure and I am not sure what the correct solution is. There are Israelis who believe there should be zero right of return. There are those who believe that every generation of displaced individuals with Palestinian heritage should be able to return. I am one who believes there should be "some" right of return but how we get to that number is difficult. Israel would be willing to accept some number of people as well as the handover of additional land regardless of internal opposition. Remember they once removed jewish settlers from Gaza by force and under the right conditions they would be willing to do that again. The question is whether there is a Palestinian government willing to accept that deal? Hamas runs the show now and they seek full destruction of Israel. How does one negotiate with them?

So with your theory, Israel doesn't want to negotiate with Hamas and Hamas doesn't want to negotiate with Israel. So now what?

The world joins nations such as Egypt in crushing Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will then be able to exert control and deal with Israel without having to worry about the Islamist rejectionists.

Crushing a democratically elected government. Ok, and then what happens when "nothing" happens and the Palestinian people are "still" prisoners in their "own" country? And anther group, like Ben has stated already, comes up because again, you can't kill an idea. Just like the Zionists have an idea for Israel, the Palestinians have an idea for their own land. Goes back and forth.

Edit-here's a theory, why not America and Israel join the "rest" of the world. Seems to be them and a tiny few islands in the pacific somewhere that support any actions Israel has taken.

And Canada

Maybe the Canadian Governement who seems to have chosen the path of our own congress and senate and fill their pockets with aipac money. I doubt the people of canada support any kind of apartheid or slaughtering of innocent civilians by the Israeli regime.

Edit-maybe just you

Right...just me. Pockets loaded with aipac money. Bought and paid for by the secretive Jewish lobby that controls the world. There you go again...

Hahahahaha, are u saying they don't control the us congress/senate? Tell me you're saying that so I can finally say to myself I'm done with your credibity.

Edit-and what's with the "there you go again." You calling me anti-Semitic again? Is that all you got? Go away little boy, you're really annoying me.

The old canard that Jewish money controls the US Congress is anti-semitism. And as far you are concerned...well...to paraphrase my man Benjs "if it looks like a duck..."

Seems to me as aipac wants something, in large part congress as a whole agrees. So outright controls? Doubt it. Where pac money donations are concerned? Absolutely.

BS44325 said:

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

mickeyrat said:

BS44325 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

Again....no matter what side of the issue you are on...this is reality:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415690/no-peace-any-time-soon-not-because-bibi-charles-krauthammer

Who is Israel supposed to make a deal with?

An article written by a Zionist, gee, I wonder which way this article is going to lean. Come on man, u can do better then that. Or not.

You do realize that the Palestinians need to negotiate with zionists don't you?

A just settlement cannot be reached if you ignore them. You are proving my point that Israel has no one to negotiate with.

do you honestly believe they wish to negotiate?

Yes. Israel knows that the status quo cannot continue.

So lemme ask you then, have you questioned why those proposals were rejected throughout the years? If memory serves a major sticking point was surrounding the palestinian refugees STILL in camps to this day. PLO wanted right of return for them. Israel rejected out of hand. Is that really unreasonable for that right?

That probably is the largest sticking point for sure and I am not sure what the correct solution is. There are Israelis who believe there should be zero right of return. There are those who believe that every generation of displaced individuals with Palestinian heritage should be able to return. I am one who believes there should be "some" right of return but how we get to that number is difficult. Israel would be willing to accept some number of people as well as the handover of additional land regardless of internal opposition. Remember they once removed jewish settlers from Gaza by force and under the right conditions they would be willing to do that again. The question is whether there is a Palestinian government willing to accept that deal? Hamas runs the show now and they seek full destruction of Israel. How does one negotiate with them?

So with your theory, Israel doesn't want to negotiate with Hamas and Hamas doesn't want to negotiate with Israel. So now what?

The world joins nations such as Egypt in crushing Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will then be able to exert control and deal with Israel without having to worry about the Islamist rejectionists.

Now what about when Hamas' replacement surfaces? Hamas represents the ideology of resistance; and not to go with the cliche from V for Vendetta, but you just can't kill an idea.

Hamas has co-opted the resistance. There can be resistance without them. Think Gandhi and MLK.

Of course you've chosen not to mention Mandela and his aggressive path taken towards peace... Seems pretty naive and farfetched to assume that an oppressed people who have only known violent resistance will take the Gandhi route over that.

I didn't choose to not mention Mandela. Add him to the list if you like but don't dare compare his movement to Hamas. An Islamist he was not.

Sisi gets it and so should you

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-weekend-interview-islams-improbable-reformer-1426889862

Edit - damn...paywall. Article can be read for free elsewhere

I'm not talking about Islamism. I'm talking about a highly violent retaliation against an oppression with the recognition that pacifist actions are not the only ones (and, in fact, if the conditions are right - are entirely ineffective) which can yield pacified regions and just results. As I stated, we're talking about the succession of Hamas by another resistance force (Islamist or not), so I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

If Hamas was stripped of its Islamist affiliation, what would you say about their tactics then?

Well I guess I don't understand what you are trying to say?

Are you advocating for continued violent resistance such as kidnappings and bombings?

I'm saying that violent resistance such as kidnappings and bombings will unfortunately likely outlast Hamas, given it is the only form of meaningful resistance that has proven to have any impact in the region (how ever small). If that happens, will you have opposition if the violent resistance is in the interest of justice instead of Islamic rule?

I'm not sure if you've caught me saying this here, but for the record, I have as much issue with a one-state solution under Islamic rule as I do with one under Jewish rule. That's one thing I do wish from the Palestinian people: for them to call for secularly-governed region as opposed to an Islam-ruled one. I truly believe there is no place for religiously-dominated lands in a region which has historically invited the co-habitance of multiple sects.

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

mickeyrat said:

BS44325 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

Again....no matter what side of the issue you are on...this is reality:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415690/no-peace-any-time-soon-not-because-bibi-charles-krauthammer

Who is Israel supposed to make a deal with?

An article written by a Zionist, gee, I wonder which way this article is going to lean. Come on man, u can do better then that. Or not.

You do realize that the Palestinians need to negotiate with zionists don't you?

A just settlement cannot be reached if you ignore them. You are proving my point that Israel has no one to negotiate with.

do you honestly believe they wish to negotiate?

Yes. Israel knows that the status quo cannot continue.

So lemme ask you then, have you questioned why those proposals were rejected throughout the years? If memory serves a major sticking point was surrounding the palestinian refugees STILL in camps to this day. PLO wanted right of return for them. Israel rejected out of hand. Is that really unreasonable for that right?

That probably is the largest sticking point for sure and I am not sure what the correct solution is. There are Israelis who believe there should be zero right of return. There are those who believe that every generation of displaced individuals with Palestinian heritage should be able to return. I am one who believes there should be "some" right of return but how we get to that number is difficult. Israel would be willing to accept some number of people as well as the handover of additional land regardless of internal opposition. Remember they once removed jewish settlers from Gaza by force and under the right conditions they would be willing to do that again. The question is whether there is a Palestinian government willing to accept that deal? Hamas runs the show now and they seek full destruction of Israel. How does one negotiate with them?

So with your theory, Israel doesn't want to negotiate with Hamas and Hamas doesn't want to negotiate with Israel. So now what?

The world joins nations such as Egypt in crushing Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will then be able to exert control and deal with Israel without having to worry about the Islamist rejectionists.

Crushing a democratically elected government. Ok, and then what happens when "nothing" happens and the Palestinian people are "still" prisoners in their "own" country? And anther group, like Ben has stated already, comes up because again, you can't kill an idea. Just like the Zionists have an idea for Israel, the Palestinians have an idea for their own land. Goes back and forth.

Edit-here's a theory, why not America and Israel join the "rest" of the world. Seems to be them and a tiny few islands in the pacific somewhere that support any actions Israel has taken.

And Canada

Maybe the Canadian Governement who seems to have chosen the path of our own congress and senate and fill their pockets with aipac money. I doubt the people of canada support any kind of apartheid or slaughtering of innocent civilians by the Israeli regime.

Edit-maybe just you

Right...just me. Pockets loaded with aipac money. Bought and paid for by the secretive Jewish lobby that controls the world. There you go again...

Hahahahaha, are u saying they don't control the us congress/senate? Tell me you're saying that so I can finally say to myself I'm done with your credibity.

Edit-and what's with the "there you go again." You calling me anti-Semitic again? Is that all you got? Go away little boy, you're really annoying me.

The old canard that Jewish money controls the US Congress is anti-semitism. And as far you are concerned...well...to paraphrase my man Benjs "if it looks like a duck..."

With all do respect, take the anti-Semitic card and shove up your ass. Please

Edit-so in your theory, that makes vedder an anti-Semite for his rant in Leeds. Right BS?

Nope. I was the one that defended Eddie from those that called him anti-semitic.

http://community.pearljam.com/discussion/235373/jerusalem-post-ben-red-completely-off-base-in-criticism-of-eddie-and-pearl-jam/p1

How soon we forget.

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

benjs said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

mickeyrat said:

BS44325 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

Again....no matter what side of the issue you are on...this is reality:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415690/no-peace-any-time-soon-not-because-bibi-charles-krauthammer

Who is Israel supposed to make a deal with?

An article written by a Zionist, gee, I wonder which way this article is going to lean. Come on man, u can do better then that. Or not.

You do realize that the Palestinians need to negotiate with zionists don't you?

A just settlement cannot be reached if you ignore them. You are proving my point that Israel has no one to negotiate with.

do you honestly believe they wish to negotiate?

Yes. Israel knows that the status quo cannot continue.

So lemme ask you then, have you questioned why those proposals were rejected throughout the years? If memory serves a major sticking point was surrounding the palestinian refugees STILL in camps to this day. PLO wanted right of return for them. Israel rejected out of hand. Is that really unreasonable for that right?

That probably is the largest sticking point for sure and I am not sure what the correct solution is. There are Israelis who believe there should be zero right of return. There are those who believe that every generation of displaced individuals with Palestinian heritage should be able to return. I am one who believes there should be "some" right of return but how we get to that number is difficult. Israel would be willing to accept some number of people as well as the handover of additional land regardless of internal opposition. Remember they once removed jewish settlers from Gaza by force and under the right conditions they would be willing to do that again. The question is whether there is a Palestinian government willing to accept that deal? Hamas runs the show now and they seek full destruction of Israel. How does one negotiate with them?

So with your theory, Israel doesn't want to negotiate with Hamas and Hamas doesn't want to negotiate with Israel. So now what?

The world joins nations such as Egypt in crushing Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will then be able to exert control and deal with Israel without having to worry about the Islamist rejectionists.

Now what about when Hamas' replacement surfaces? Hamas represents the ideology of resistance; and not to go with the cliche from V for Vendetta, but you just can't kill an idea.

Hamas has co-opted the resistance. There can be resistance without them. Think Gandhi and MLK.

Of course you've chosen not to mention Mandela and his aggressive path taken towards peace... Seems pretty naive and farfetched to assume that an oppressed people who have only known violent resistance will take the Gandhi route over that.

I didn't choose to not mention Mandela. Add him to the list if you like but don't dare compare his movement to Hamas. An Islamist he was not.

Sisi gets it and so should you

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-weekend-interview-islams-improbable-reformer-1426889862

Edit - damn...paywall. Article can be read for free elsewhere

I'm not talking about Islamism. I'm talking about a highly violent retaliation against an oppression with the recognition that pacifist actions are not the only ones (and, in fact, if the conditions are right - are entirely ineffective) which can yield pacified regions and just results. As I stated, we're talking about the succession of Hamas by another resistance force (Islamist or not), so I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

If Hamas was stripped of its Islamist affiliation, what would you say about their tactics then?

Well I guess I don't understand what you are trying to say?

Are you advocating for continued violent resistance such as kidnappings and bombings?

I'm saying that violent resistance such as kidnappings and bombings will unfortunately likely outlast Hamas, given it is the only form of meaningful resistance that has proven to have any impact in the region (how ever small). If that happens, will you have opposition if the violent resistance is in the interest of justice instead of Islamic rule?

I'm not sure if you've caught me saying this here, but for the record, I have as much issue with a one-state solution under Islamic rule as I do with one under Jewish rule. That's one thing I do wish from the Palestinian people: for them to call for secularly-governed region as opposed to an Islam-ruled one. I truly believe there is no place for religiously-dominated lands in a region which has historically invited the co-habitance of multiple sects.

I did catch you say that and I do appreciate that perspective. My only point with violent resistance is that it gives the Israel right an excuse to always ask for security conditions first which just propagates the status quo.

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

mickeyrat said:

BS44325 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

badbrains said:

BS44325 said:

Again....no matter what side of the issue you are on...this is reality:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/415690/no-peace-any-time-soon-not-because-bibi-charles-krauthammer

Who is Israel supposed to make a deal with?

An article written by a Zionist, gee, I wonder which way this article is going to lean. Come on man, u can do better then that. Or not.

You do realize that the Palestinians need to negotiate with zionists don't you?

A just settlement cannot be reached if you ignore them. You are proving my point that Israel has no one to negotiate with.

do you honestly believe they wish to negotiate?

Yes. Israel knows that the status quo cannot continue.

So lemme ask you then, have you questioned why those proposals were rejected throughout the years? If memory serves a major sticking point was surrounding the palestinian refugees STILL in camps to this day. PLO wanted right of return for them. Israel rejected out of hand. Is that really unreasonable for that right?

That probably is the largest sticking point for sure and I am not sure what the correct solution is. There are Israelis who believe there should be zero right of return. There are those who believe that every generation of displaced individuals with Palestinian heritage should be able to return. I am one who believes there should be "some" right of return but how we get to that number is difficult. Israel would be willing to accept some number of people as well as the handover of additional land regardless of internal opposition. Remember they once removed jewish settlers from Gaza by force and under the right conditions they would be willing to do that again. The question is whether there is a Palestinian government willing to accept that deal? Hamas runs the show now and they seek full destruction of Israel. How does one negotiate with them?

So with your theory, Israel doesn't want to negotiate with Hamas and Hamas doesn't want to negotiate with Israel. So now what?

The world joins nations such as Egypt in crushing Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will then be able to exert control and deal with Israel without having to worry about the Islamist rejectionists.

Crushing a democratically elected government. Ok, and then what happens when "nothing" happens and the Palestinian people are "still" prisoners in their "own" country? And anther group, like Ben has stated already, comes up because again, you can't kill an idea. Just like the Zionists have an idea for Israel, the Palestinians have an idea for their own land. Goes back and forth.

Edit-here's a theory, why not America and Israel join the "rest" of the world. Seems to be them and a tiny few islands in the pacific somewhere that support any actions Israel has taken.

And Canada

Fuck Stephen Harper.