Palestinians fire dozens of rockets into Israel in retaliation

[A.P. Richelieu]

@A.P. Richelieu

You're Swedish right? Let Israelis and Palestinians discuss this. Unless you're Jewish? So you're more Israeli then Swedish? I don't get it.

Okay so you're saying a two state solution is out of question so why are Israelis telling us they support a two state solution? Why don't you also find nothing wrong with that fact that they want all of the Palestinian West Bank?

It seems you see nothing wrong in their actions.

You are making the mistake to assume that there is one opinion about the West Bank, which is not true.
In a democratic state, there is for every issue (A) groups that want (A) and groups that does not want (A).
(and some that do not know if they wan A or does not want A)
If you ask if people want (A), and then ask the same question one year later there might be
totally different answers.

So some Israelis want the West Bank, and definitely quite a few ministers in the current government
want the West Bank. That does not mean that all Israeli voters that vote for them, wants the West Bank
as a primary goal.
Some voters did not vote for them, because they think that there should be a Palestinian State
on the West Bank.
Some vote for them exactly because they want the West Bank and are hopeless cases.
These are the one that uproot Palestinian Olive trees.
Some people has immigrated to Israel and were only given the option to live on the West Bank.
They do not want to cause any harm, but they also want not to move, because thats how people
function. Does not like change, if it can be avoided.
Some voters vote for them just because they think thats the best option not getting a rocket through Your roof
while having Breakfast. These are your target voters.
And some older bimbos will vote for Netanyahu just because they find him handsome.

Your first problem is that too many Israelis vote for a government which is impossible to negotiate with.
You have to find a way to induce your target voters to vote in a way that is acceptable to you,
and then be prepared to really negotiate.
That takes the courage and leadership of someone like Nelson Mandela or Mahatma Gandhi.
Yassir Arafat was sofar the only leader of significance, but he chickened out.
Any negotiation must be accepted by the Palestinians as a group, so it does not result in a myth
that the leaders sold out.

Then a two state solution is possible. A lot of the smartest people have engaged themselves in this
without a solution, so it wont be easy, and the extremist on both sides will try to stop any progress.

Most people are not evil, if given a choice.

 

[Falcon29]

Why are you telling me things that are already known? I don't need your suggestions, the western world is out there to dominant and the concept of 'manifest destiny' is still strong to this day. Those people you mention ran social movements with no results and Nelson Mandela was despised by the West and the only reason they honor him to today is to make themselves appear as if they're on the side of justice. We know that's all a joke, I'm not making assumptions and you're justifying Israel's occupation.

What is this:

"Some Jews are left with no option than to live in the West Bank"?

Who are you joking were you being serious about that? European and American Jewish immigrants 'left with no choice' but to live on Israeli settlements which are on Palestinian land due to the brutal occupation conducted through force. You're far from neutral you're a joke let me continue my discussion with the Israeli member here. He's yet to respond.

There are international guarantees, and it won't be the first time we evacuated land for peace.
We can have confidence building measures, like pulling out in stages, but we won't do it until there's a mutual acknowledgement. This must be the first step.
Every Israeli knows we'll have to perform painful concessions, but a true peace can benefit both nations, that's my opinion.

Also, have a nice night, I must go.

You're not telling us anything, it's in Israel's hands to flip the situation around to enable an opportunity for a two state solution. Everything you're telling us is not clear.

What do all of these mean?

-'Confidence building measures'
-'Pulling out stages'
-'Mutual acknowledgment'
-'Painful concessions' (This one is funny because Israel isn't making any concessions, the rights of the Palestinian people would be restored)

......

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

What is this:
"Some Jews are left with no option than to live in the West Bank"?
......

That is not what I said.
I said that when they arrived in Israel the Israeli government would only give them
help with appartments & other things on the West Bank, and not within pre-67 borders.

Choice then is limited, if they are not very rich.

Once they are established they can move elsewhere - if they can sell their appartment
and can afford to move somewhere else, - or vote for Netanyahu.

If the appartments in the West Bank are much cheaper than within pre-67 borders,
then there is actually very little practical choice for low-income families.

Money problems can be solved.

 

[500]

Yes, Situation so far:
Israel made an incursion into Gaza, by moving within 100 meters of the border (according to Hazzy997)
Mortar was fired in response without damage.
Israel killed three Palestinians as a response to the Mortar.
PIJ fired some 150 rockets which slightly damaged a paveway.
Israel bombed some 30 odd targets in Gaza, noone killed, damage unclear.
PIJ did a cost-benefit analysis, and fighting ended, and most impotent, (sorry my mistake, most important)
Hazzy997 declared a Strategic Victory!

Glad everyone is happy about the outcome...

Thats true except that there was no any Israeli incursion and Israelis are not happy about rockets at all, even if they did not damage.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Thats true except that there was no any Israeli incursion and Israelis are not happy about rockets at all, even if they did not damage.

Was just using Hazzy997s definition of incursion which may or may not involve crossing a border.

WARNING: My postings may contain understatements or irony.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Those people you mention ran social movements with no results and Nelson Mandela was despised by the West and the only reason they honor him to today is to make themselves appear as if they're on the side of justice.

European and American Jewish immigrants 'left with no choice' but to live on Israeli settlements which are on Palestinian land due to the brutal occupation conducted through force.
......

I doubt that any Indian would agree with You that Mahatma Gandhi had no results.
And you comment on Nelson Mandela is an insult to South Africa which I find tasteless.
He was imprisoned for terrorism, and this was part of his agenda.
When he was released from prison, he showed his great leadership,
and that is what gained him respect worldwide.

As for immigrants, there certainly has been American Jews which moved to Israel
specifically to establish settlements on the West Bank, but I am talking about people coming from
Russia, Africa and Asia which are not well off.

 

[Falcon29]

That is not what I said.
I said that when they arrived in Israel the Israeli government would only give them
help with appartments & other things on the West Bank, and not within pre-67 borders.

Choice then is limited, if they are not very rich.

Once they are established they can move elsewhere - if they can sell their appartment
and can afford to move somewhere else, - or vote for Netanyahu.

If the appartments in the West Bank are much cheaper than within pre-67 borders,
then there is actually very little practical choice for low-income families.

Money problems can be solved.

What in the world are you talking about? An occupation is an occupation and is illegal. Why in the world are you talking about insignificant things? I want to resume where I responded to Oriels post. If you feel you have an answer to that answer it, leave your other meaningless gibberish out of it.

 

[Duvdevan]

What in the world are you talking about? An occupation is an occupation and is illegal.

Wrong.

Occupations can be perfectly legal.

Was just using Hazzy997s definition of incursion which may or may not involve crossing a border.

WARNING: My postings may contain understatements or irony.

It's changed a few times.

First of all they made an incursion, then the story was that they were going to make an incursion - and lastly, he claims their were approaching the border.

So we can see this propagandist shifts the goal posts all the time.

Of course the rest of the world acknowledges that the 'palestinains' attacked without provocation.

 

[Falcon29]

@A.P. Richelieu

You seem to be placing the onus on the occupied people's when in reality we know the Palestinians are being clear on what they want, the restoration of their rights. The Israelis on the other hand leave us to guess when they make statements. Which is a Jewish tactic I and others are very familiar with. The onus is on Israel to enable an opportunity for a two state solution, since they are responsible for the occupation.

So tell me, what is the Israelis want? What proposal are they presenting? What do they want the on the framework papers? What is exactly? A solution will only be achieved once Israel is being clear and straightforward about its intentions.

Give me either an detailed answer as one option or the other option is a short answer that the Israelis don't want peace but total domination.

We will move on from there.

Wrong.

Occupations can be perfectly legal.



.

The whole state of Israel is illegal, the British empire came to an area known as Palestine and established an Jewish colony on that land and told anyone who wasn't Jewish that they couldn't decide whether they'll do it or not.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

What in the world are you talking about? An occupation is an occupation and is illegal. Why in the world are you talking about insignificant things? I want to resume where I responded to Oriels post. If you feel you have an answer to that answer it, leave your other meaningless gibberish out of it.

Why would You care, since you do not care about International Law ;-)

To be correct, occupation is an act of war, and *is* legal.
It should be terminated after a peace agreement which seems far out.

You are confusing this with settlements in occupied territories.
It is not legal to for citizens of an occupying force to settle in occupied territories
and it is not legal to send unguided rockets vs purely civilian targets,
with the latter being a worse crime.

Israelis at this point cannot stop Palestinians from shooting rockets, so their
strategy is to minimize by punishment of rocket attacks, and the legal
(but undesirable) occupation. Since this seems te best Israelis can hope for,
this is what they are voting for.

You want a change of Status Quo, then you figure out what YOU need to do
to make it happen, and ignoring the fact that you have a non willing Israeli
government will not produce results.

You have a selling job to do, and you are doing exceptionally poor.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

@A.P. Richelieu
The whole state of Israel is illegal, the British empire came to an area known as Palestine and established an Jewish colony on that land and told anyone who wasn't Jewish that they couldn't decide whether they'll do it or not.

The British Empire won a war against the Ottoman Empire and as a result, Turkey lost its Middle East
holdings which it had conquered from other Muslims, which they had conquered from the Byzantine Empire,
resulting from the split of the Roman Empire which conquered Israel and so on....

After the war, the League of Nations decided how the area should be governed, and Palestine
was awarded to the Brits. Perfectly legal according to the laws at the time.
From 1880 to 1948 about 600,000 Jews emigrated to the area, of which about 200,000
was during the time the British limted immigration.
Total amount of immigrants are about 4 million, so about 5 % were originally illegal,
but they are of course pardoned by the current government like Mexicans illegal immigrants
are sometimes accepted in the US, or non-refugee Muslims are eventually accpted in Europe.

Israel was created as a result of a resolution in the U.N. so this is perfectly legal.

 

[Falcon29]

The British Empire won a war against the Ottoman Empire and as a result, Turkey lost its Middle East
holdings which it had conquered from other Muslims, which they had conquered from the Byzantine Empire,
resulting from the split of the Roman Empire which conquered Israel and so on....

After the war, the League of Nations decided how the area should be governed, and Palestine
was awarded to the Brits. Perfectly legal according to the laws at the time.
From 1880 to 1948 about 600,000 Jews emigrated to the area, of which about 200,000
was during the time the British limted immigration.
Total amount of immigrants are about 4 million, so about 5 % were originally illegal,
but they are of course pardoned by the current government like Mexicans illegal immigrants
are sometimes accepted in the US, or non-refugee Muslims are eventually accpted in Europe.

Israel was created as a result of a resolution in the U.N. so this is perfectly legal.

Absolutely not, there was an MacMahon agreement before the British went to war against the Ottomans. The UN had nothing to do with the partition plan it was an illegal plan by the colonialist British empire to establish a Jewish colony by bringing hundreds of thousands of Jews into Palestine in a short period, it's not like the actual indigenous Jewish population which was less than 4% grew so fast in a couple decade that they had to divide the land. The plan also had zero to do with the 'holocaust', it was pushed well before during the Kate 1800's.

I'm still waiting for you to respond to my questions instead jumping all over the place, relax, people know the few Jews here including you will justify Israel's existence. We non Jewish people are well aware of that mentality, we just why to hear from you and the current peace talks. Answer my questions if you want us to get an idea of what the foreign Jewish people and European Jewish people in Palestine envision and want.

If it is to seize all of historic Palestine then just tell us that quit leaving us to guess, that just tells us about your indecent character and makes my wonder why Israel is under North Korea in polls around the world. It seems this arrogant and extremist approach is part of the Jewish instinct. That may be why every population in the world in the past few thousand years sought to drive Jews out of their society.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Absolutely not, there was an MacMahon agreement before the British went to war against the Ottomans. The UN had nothing to do with the partition plan it was an illegal plan by the colonialist British empire to establish a Jewish colony by bringing hundreds of thousands of Jews into Palestine in a short period, it's not like the actual indigenous Jewish population which was less than 4% grew so fast in a couple decade that they had to divide the land. The plan also had zero to do with the 'holocaust', it was pushed well before during the Kate 1800's.

I'm still waiting for you to respond to my questions instead jumping all over the place, relax, people know the few Jews here including you will justify Israel's existence. We non Jewish people are well aware of that mentality, we just why to hear from you and the current peace talks. Answer my questions if you want us to get an idea of what the foreign Jewish people and European Jewish people in Palestine envision and want.

If it is to seize all of historic Palestine then just tell us that quit leaving us to guess, that just tells us about your indecent character and makes my wonder why Israel is under North Korea in polls around the world. It seems this arrogant and extremist approach is part of the Jewish instinct. That may be why every population in the world in the past few thousand years sought to drive Jews out of their society.

The war between Turkey and Great Britain was declared in 1914. The McMahon agreement entered 1915, and the Balfour declaration happened 1917.

And by the way. I am Christian - but not very religious.

 

[Falcon29]

The war between Turkey and Great Britain was declared in 1914. The McMahon agreement entered 1915, and the Balfour declaration happened 1917.

And by the way. I am Christian - but not very religious.

I'm pretty sure you're half Jewish or have Jewish ties. No Swedish Christian just randomly joins a message board and gets heavily involved in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. While at the same time not being independent about it. Maybe Israel is offering you pay checks to defend their reputation online since that is part of their national budget, which is embarrassing because people see Israel for what it is. The chronology doesn't matter, the British lied and went against their promise and decided to establish a Jewish colony on Palestinian land when their population was tiny, during the late 1800's they were planning this and the Jewish population was small at the time. It's not a partition, it was an move to establish a Jewish colony on Palestinian land.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

I'm pretty sure you're half Jewish or have Jewish ties. No Swedish Christian just randomly joins a message board and gets heavily involved in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. While at the same time not being independent about it. Maybe Israel is offering you pay checks to defend their reputation online since that is part of their national budget, which is embarrassing because people see Israel for what it is. The chronology doesn't matter, the British lied and went against their promise and decided to establish a Jewish colony on Palestinian land when their population was tiny, during the late 1800's they were planning this and the Jewish population was small at the time. It's not a partition, it was an move to establish a Jewish colony on Palestinian land.

Or maybe not, I wouldn't even know where a synagogue is located in Sweden.
Been to Israel for one week, but then I have been to Egypt for a week as well.
My main interest in this forum is the MMRCA contract in India which SAAB lost.
This I do for the fun of it.

Or maybe not, I wouldn't even know where a synagogue is located in Sweden.
Been to Israel for one week, but then I have been to Egypt for a week as well.
My main interest in this forum is the MMRCA contract in India which SAAB lost.
This I do for the fun of it.

And as for the British they certainly promised Palestine to both the Arabs and The Jews.