Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) wrong, bobby. control of borders, sea, air and control of movement = occupation How do you control a border? Israel controls its side of its shared border with Gaza. Gaza controls its side of the shared border. The air and sea blockade is simply a necessary arms embargo to defend Israeli security. It is entirely legitimate. Edited April 6, 2011 by Bob Quote My blog - bobinisrael.blogspot.com - I am writing on it, again!
bud Posted April 6, 2011 Author Report Posted April 6, 2011 How do you control a border? Israel controls its side of its shared border with Gaza. The air and sea blockade is simply a necessary arms embargo to defend Israeli security. It is entirely legitimate. control of border includes the sea borders. you forgot the control of air and the control of movement. occupation, bobby. stop fighting reality. Quote http://whoprofits.org/
DogOnPorch Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 control of border includes the sea borders. you forgot the control of air and the control of movement. occupation, bobby. stop fighting reality. Try waltzing across the 49th as you please...see where you end up. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 control of border includes the sea borders. you forgot the control of air and the control of movement. occupation, bobby. stop fighting reality. There is no control of movement within Gaza. Anyways, I can see you're not going to answer my simple question. We both know why. Quote My blog - bobinisrael.blogspot.com - I am writing on it, again!
M.Dancer Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 control of border includes the sea borders. you forgot the control of air and the control of movement. occupation, bobby. stop fighting reality. So we control our borders...the air space...the sea...are we occupying the USA....wait, the USA controls their border....are they occupying us? egypt controls its border...are they occupying Gaza... all these questions must be answered before I chuckle again... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
M.Dancer Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 the term palestine was used before the christian calendar came to be. correct...but there were no palestinians then...no arabs there either. the arabs didn't arrive to the locale till a few hundred years into the christian era Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Posted April 6, 2011 correct...but there were no palestinians then...no arabs there either. the arabs didn't arrive to the locale till a few hundred years into the christian era The very name "Palestinian", used to describe the Arab residents of the area, is itself politicized in order to associate themselves with the land. The name is mentioned in the Torah, as are the people who were called "Filistinim" ("Palestinians" in Hebrew). Modern day Arabs who refer to themselves as "Palestinians" are, however, just Arabs. They're pretty much indistinguishable from neighbouring Arabs. Anyways, the falsehood that is Palestinian nationalism is entirely another subject. I guess I was silly to think to think that bud might actually answer a simple and straightforward question explaining Arab/Palestinian violence pre-1967. Quote My blog - bobinisrael.blogspot.com - I am writing on it, again!
GostHacked Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 (edited) Hmmm....how many civilians would you have killed to kill Hitler in 1943? Personally I think 500K would not have been too many...the value of the target is weighed against the non military damage, whether it is the catherdral of cologne or a family of bedouins. So obviously killing a terrorist mastermind who has attacked and killed and will attack and kill is worth at least as many as he has killed times 4 or 5... Well, how about Dresden? Not that it's really relevant to this thread. Edited April 7, 2011 by GostHacked Quote
Bonam Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 wrong, bobby. control of borders, sea, air and control of movement = occupation No, that's called a blockade, or if you wanna be melodramatic, a siege. An occupation means occupying the land inside the borders, not just controlling the borders. Quote
GostHacked Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 No, that's called a blockade, or if you wanna be melodramatic, a siege. An occupation means occupying the land inside the borders, not just controlling the borders. So, it is an occupation. Just to be clear. Quote
M.Dancer Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 Well, how about Dresden? Not that it's really relevant to this thread. Dresden was a high value target. It was a commercial centre. It was a transport hub. It was an industrial centre containing poison gas, anti aircraft and munitions factories. It was a communications centre. ....need more? The attack prevented its use as a transport hub and hobbled Nazi efforts to reinforce against the Soviet red army. and given that with the "dumb" munitions used at the time, the casualty rate of .025 means value for money. The only fault with the attacks on Dresden is; it wasn't levelled earlier. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Bonam Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 So, it is an occupation. Just to be clear. No. Quote
M.Dancer Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 No, that's called a blockade, or if you wanna be melodramatic, a siege. An occupation means occupying the land inside the borders, not just controlling the borders. Siege only refers to the encirclement or blockade of a city (or fort)... And for the record, there is only a maritime naval blockade of Gaza... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
M.Dancer Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 So, it is an occupation. Just to be clear. I swear, your wit wouldn't cut warm butter... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
GostHacked Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 I swear, your wit wouldn't cut warm butter... Don't need to cut butter when it's that warm. It just melts all over the place without any effort at all. And like in the other thread, I save the good stuff for the adults. But I'll let you get back to the regular stuff you do best. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 The very name "Palestinian", used to describe the Arab residents of the area, is itself politicized in order to associate themselves with the land. The name is mentioned in the Torah, as are the people who were called "Filistinim" ("Palestinians" in Hebrew). Alexander the Great removed the Philistines from the map of history round about 332BC after they resisted at Tyre and Gaza. Men slaughtered...women/children shipped to Macedonia and slavery. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 How about it? It's a lot more important an event in history than all the Arab-Israeli Wars put together. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Bonam Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 (edited) It's a lot more important an event in history than all the Arab-Israeli Wars put together. How so? It was one bombing of one city as part of a major war that saw the destruction of thousands of cities. It was not a turning point, it did not destroy some unparalleled historical treasures, it did not have an unusual amount of casualties, it did not demonstrate a revolutionary new weapon or tactic, it did not alter the balance of power. On the other hand, the 1948 Arab-Israeli war resulted in the creation of a new country and the following wars resulted in the changes of international borders. Edited April 7, 2011 by Bonam Quote
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 How so? It was one bombing of one city as part of a major war that saw the destruction of thousands of cities. It was not a turning point, it did not destroy some unparalleled historical treasures, it did not have an unusual amount of casualties, it did not demonstrate a revolutionary new weapon or tactic, it did not alter the balance of power. On the other hand, the 1948 Arab-Israeli war resulted in the creation of a new country and the following wars resulted in the changes of international borders. 40,000 dead...that's why. That's a lot of family trees cut off and turned into stumps. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
GostHacked Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 40,000 dead...that's why. That's a lot of family trees cut off and turned into stumps. Too bad my family tree was not one of them. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 Too bad my family tree was not one of them. Ok... Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
GostHacked Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 Ok... Well, good thing is my Opa was born in Frankfurt, and was not in Dresden when those bombs were dropped. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 Frankfurt didn't escape bombing. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
GostHacked Posted April 7, 2011 Report Posted April 7, 2011 Frankfurt didn't escape bombing. But good think some trees were cut. Right? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.