dre Posted August 2, 2014 Report Posted August 2, 2014 What he did was completely trash your statement regarding the water dispute. And you failed to dispute any of that information, which makes YOUR statement so much garbage. No he didnt. He did not dispute a SINGLE factual assertion I made. In fact he verified most of them. He expressed a different opinion on the importance of these events than me (and more other historians) but thats all. Its YOUR cherry picked version of events and bogus narrative that was torn to shreds. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
-TSS- Posted August 2, 2014 Report Posted August 2, 2014 There can be no peace without a two state-solution but more probably the reality of any two state-existence would be exactly like what we are seeing today. However, it is demographically necessary for Israel to agree to a two state-solution because the birth-rate of the Palestinians is much higher than that of the Jewish people in Israel. Quote
Argus Posted August 2, 2014 Report Posted August 2, 2014 No he didnt. He did not dispute a SINGLE factual assertion I made. In fact he verified most of them. He expressed a different opinion on the importance of these events than me (and more other historians) but thats all. Its YOUR cherry picked version of events and bogus narrative that was torn to shreds. What you said was The current stretch of violence started in the early 60's when Israel built its National Water Carrier which diverted water away from Arab and Hashemite populations Rue then pointed out: Dre refers to the Johnston Plan which set up a unified water resource development of the Jordan Valley, sponsored by UNRWA 9which was then as it is now anti Israeli) and in fact accepted by Gamel Abnel Nasser of egyp as well as King Hussein in Jordan and not just Israel. Based on this plan created for and set up by UNWRA with these nations In 1964, Israel began drawing water from the Jordan River for its National Water Carrier,in accordance with the Johnston Plan. They broke no laws. That is completely counter to what you stated, and you said nothing which indicated he was incorrect. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted August 2, 2014 Report Posted August 2, 2014 There can be no peace without a two state-solution but more probably the reality of any two state-existence would be exactly like what we are seeing today. However, it is demographically necessary for Israel to agree to a two state-solution because the birth-rate of the Palestinians is much higher than that of the Jewish people in Israel. Israel is not going to survive the twin demographic time bombs in its midst if it doesn't do something drastic. The populations of Israeli Arabs and the Haradim continue to grow far faster than the regular Jewish population of Israel. In fifty years they will outnumber the Jews (unless you consider the Haradim Jews, as opposed to lunatics). Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
-TSS- Posted August 2, 2014 Report Posted August 2, 2014 Israel has the mowing the grass-ideology against Hamas: http://www.vox.com/2014/7/22/5926275/israel-gaza-mowing-the-grass "Obviously, Israel recognizes that the threats from groups like the Gaza-based militant group Hamas aren't the same as the Cold War-era threats it faced from Arab invasions. So it's developed a new version of its long-held threat management strategy, which is often called "mowing the grass." It's a pretty creepy term, as it implies that periodically killing people is the same as keeping your lawn groomed. But that's the basic analogy: Hamas, like grass, can't disappear, but it can be regularly cut down to size. And, like mowing the grass, it's implied that this is a routine that will be continued forever.According to Efraim Inbar and Eitan Shamir, Israeli academics based at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, the basic difference between "mowing the grass" and Israel's old strategy is that the end-goal has changed. In the era of wars with Arab conventional armies, Israel hoped that eventually "a long and violent struggle, punctuated by decisive battlefield victories, could eventually lead Arab states to accept the notion of Israel's permanence." In other words, Israel believed that its threat-management strategy would eventually lead to peace, which in cases such as Egypt it did.Israel does not believe the same thing today about applying this strategy to non-state militant groups. Israel sees Hamas and other militants as "implacable enemies, who want to destroy the Jewish state and there is very little Israel can do on the political front to mitigate this risk."That thinking points to regular Israeli military assaults, like the Gaza invasion, designed to "cripple" Hamas' military capabilities such as its ability to launch rockets, without any regard to finding a political solution. Mowing the grass attacks are also, according to Inbar and Shamir, designed to make future wars less likely. The idea is that if Hamas is afraid of Israeli retaliation, it'll voluntarily reduce its rocket fire into Israel, thus requiring fewer "mowing the grass" attacks by the Israeli military.Inbar and Shamir see this week's Gaza incursion as a textbook example of this strategy. Sasley sees things similarly. Israel, according to Sasley, wants "quiet." He believes that Israel would actually tolerate a number of rockets out of Gaza, so long as those rockets are not from Hamas, "they don't cause any damage, certainly don't kill any Israelis, and there's nothing else that requires a bigger response." Once that's happened, Israel will see — here's that stomach-churning metaphor again — the grass as cut down to an acceptable length (until it grows back, anyway)." Quote
jbg Posted August 3, 2014 Report Posted August 3, 2014 There can be no peace without a two state-solution but more probably the reality of any two state-existence would be exactly like what we are seeing today. However, it is demographically necessary for Israel to agree to a two state-solution because the birth-rate of the Palestinians is much higher than that of the Jewish people in Israel. I agree. But the Palestinian leadership isn't dumb enough to accept a "two-state solution" that leaves their state what they bill, in Gaza, to be an "open-air prison." Israel will never agree to an armed Palestinian state. Israel does not want to "Gazify" the West Bank. Thus, the Arabs are on a crash course to what some will call "ethnic cleansing." Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
eyeball Posted August 3, 2014 Report Posted August 3, 2014 If it's so hopeless why on Earth are so many people so determined to keep their ginch in a knot over this quagmire? I mean, from where I'm sitting it looks like the only people with anything to gain are arms manufacturers or religious quacks. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
dre Posted August 4, 2014 Report Posted August 4, 2014 (edited) What you said was The current stretch of violence started in the early 60's when Israel built its National Water Carrier which diverted water away from Arab and Hashemite populations Rue then pointed out: Dre refers to the Johnston Plan which set up a unified water resource development of the Jordan Valley, sponsored by UNRWA 9which was then as it is now anti Israeli) and in fact accepted by Gamel Abnel Nasser of egyp as well as King Hussein in Jordan and not just Israel. Based on this plan created for and set up by UNWRA with these nations In 1964, Israel began drawing water from the Jordan River for its National Water Carrier,in accordance with the Johnston Plan. They broke no laws. That is completely counter to what you stated, and you said nothing which indicated he was incorrect. No it doesnt counter anything I said at all. The two statements you posted are not even contradictory. All Rue said there is that Israel was allowed to take that water under the Johnstone place. I never made any claim to the contrary what-so-ever. What I said is that Arabs responded to the constuction to the NWC with their own project, and Israel bombed it setting off a chain of clashes along the border. Edited August 4, 2014 by dre Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Rue Posted August 4, 2014 Report Posted August 4, 2014 (edited) Lol what I also stated Dre was that your decision to isolate the water issue as the reason for the 1967 war was nonsensical because it was one of a continuous chain of attacks and border skirmishes between Israel, Syria,Jordan,Lebanon and Egypt that continued non stop since in fact 1949. I stated these countries were all in a declared state of war with Israel and therefore the war was on-going. In your world Dre you selectively ignore not only that the war continued, that the border clashes continued non stop since 1949, but then you ignore what I said as to the water dispute and the very point that they attacked Israel for something Israel was legally allowed to do. Argus I appreciate your intervention. Lol. With Dre of course, he will select only what he wants out of history or someone's words, and ignore the rest. Edited August 4, 2014 by Rue Quote
dre Posted August 5, 2014 Report Posted August 5, 2014 Lol what I also stated Dre was that your decision to isolate the water issue as the reason for the 1967 war was nonsensical because it was one of a continuous chain of attacks and border skirmishes between Israel, Syria,Jordan,Lebanon and Egypt that continued non stop since in fact 1949. More fake facts. There WAS sporadic violence post-armistice but the ammount of events greatly accelerated between 1964 and 1967 during the conflict over water that eventually lead to the 6 day war. This period was known at the time as HaKrav al HaMaim (War over water). In your world Dre you selectively ignore This from the MASTER cherry picker. The guy that ignores every single transgression on the Israeli side in the entire history of the conflict. The guy that wants to pretend Israel wasnt shelling its neighbors less than a year before the 6 day war. ROFLMAO. Argus I appreciate your intervention. Lol. Awwwwww! Kiss kiss With Dre of course, he will select only what he wants out of history or someone's words, and ignore the rest. No thats your schtick. Im aware of, and I accept that both sides have behaved poorly. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Argus Posted August 5, 2014 Report Posted August 5, 2014 (edited) No it doesnt counter anything I said at all. The two statements you posted are not even contradictory. All Rue said there is that Israel was allowed to take that water under the Johnstone place. I never made any claim to the contrary what-so-ever. What I said is that Arabs responded to the constuction to the NWC with their own project, and Israel bombed it setting off a chain of clashes along the border. The slant you put on it was that Israel was responsible for the clashes because of something IT did. The implication was very strong that it was Israel's fault. The fact what Israel was doing was perfectly legal and set up under a plan the Arabs had agreed to, well, you conveniently left that out. Even now you say "The Arabs responded to the construction with their own project" without at all stating their 'project' was to divert the water away from Israel. Was this project legal under the UN Johnston plan? Edited August 5, 2014 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Hudson Jones Posted June 5, 2015 Report Posted June 5, 2015 (edited) Despite what some people in this thread have tried to tell us, the BDS movement has become the biggest worry for the Zionists. More and more people around the world, including in the Western countries are getting behind this powerful movement. Here is proof that the ZIonists are scared of BDS: Adelson to host secret anti-BDS fundraiser, strategy summit Conference reportedly being organized by top Jewish donors, including Hollywood entertainment mogul Haim Saban. Yet despite the growth in pro-Israel activism, pro-Palestinian-driven protests and resolutions have been on the rise. The past year has seen a record number of 15 universities adopt resolutions demanding divestiture of college funds from Israel. Company after company in Europe are pulling out of contracts with Israeli companies who do business in the illegal settlements. The latest one looks to be the French telecommunication company, Orange. Artists are cancelling their dates in Israel, the latest being Lauryn Hill. High profile people, such as Stephen Hawking have boycotted Israel for its treatment of Palestinians. Academic organizations both in Europe and in North America are also getting behind BDS. The BDS movement spread has been slower in North America, but it is happening and it's getting bigger. I think it has gone past the point of no return so the only thing these billionaire Zionists can do is to slow it down through their influence over politicians and through lobby groups at schools. Edited June 5, 2015 by Hudson Jones Quote When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi
Rue Posted June 6, 2015 Report Posted June 6, 2015 Your attempt to revive this thread with a new topic has been reported to the moderator. Start a new topic. Quote
marcus Posted June 8, 2015 Report Posted June 8, 2015 Your attempt to revive this thread with a new topic has been reported to the moderator. Start a new topic. It looks like you need to be reported for not reading threads and thread names. If you had, you would see that Hudson Jones' post has everything to do with the thread and the original post. Quote "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
Hudson Jones Posted June 9, 2015 Report Posted June 9, 2015 The following article clearly shows two things: 1) The BDS movement has created a lot of anxiety in the Zionist community. The little meeting in Sin City smells of major panic. 2) Adelson (GOP super donor) and Saban (Dem super donor) acknowledge their huge influence over the U.S. government. Saban even throws threats such as: "for one thing, any company that chooses to boycott business in Israel, is gonna look at this case, and once we’re done, they’re gonna think twice whether they wanna take on Israel or not." “Adelson, Saban: ‘Anti-Semitic tsunami’ on the way Businessmen Sheldon Adelson and Haim Saban warned Saturday night of an “anti-Israeli tsunami” and the growing strength of the BDS movement. Saban, the controlling shareholder of Partner Communications, said he would evaluate responses to Orange SA CEO Stephane Richard’s remarks last week about wanting to end the French company’s brand licensing deal with the Israeli carrier. … …“BDS and … all the other anti-Israel and anti-Semitic organizations are making a lot of headway on the campuses in the United States” and in industry, Adelson said. He said that Jewish organizations must cooperate to fight BDS, while admitting that “it’s a challenge to get Jewish groups to work together … it was the arguments between Jews that brought down the Temple.” Adelson and Saban were asked about Richard’s statement to the effect that he acted on business rather than political considerations. “It’s blatant lie,” Saban said. “Therefore, we’re gonna weigh all of our options, and one thing is for sure, this isn’t over. It’s the beginning, and for one thing, any company that chooses to boycott business in Israel, is gonna look at this case, and once we’re done, they’re gonna think twice whether they wanna take on Israel or not.” Asked if the protest in U.S. campuses is associated with the Israeli government’s policy, Saban said: I don’t want to get into what Israel’s policy is or is not. One thing is for sure: We do have an anti-Semitic tsunami that’s coming at us. “Maybe the Israeli audience is not aware of, that based on pure research, only 10 percent of Americans are anti-Semites. Just to be mathematically accurate, that’s 33 million people. So, we have to be aware of the fact that it our duty to put Israel’s right image forth to the people, so they see what the real Israel is.” Adelson added: “Today, there’s little or no sign that in … American society that anti-Semitism is even 10 percent, but I’m absolutely positive that there’s a lot of anti-Semitism on campus. Now, the people that are buying it, I don’t believe are intentionally bigots, but they’re buying the arguments that are only reacted to by the various groups that are here [at the summit] today.” Saban is one of the Democratic Party’s largest donors and fundraisers and is close to the Clintons. Asked about his own political differences with Adelson, Saban said, “When it comes to Israel, we are absolutely on the same page. Our interest is to take care of Israel’s interests in the U.S. … when it comes to [bDS] there is no light between us at all.” Adelson: “We can use our influence … with anybody we know in the administration and in Congress for the betterment of the relations between the U.S. and Israel.”” haaretz.com Power Ranger Haim “gonna” git you! Look, if that’s the way Saban threatens folks, I wonder if he talks to the Clintons this way. These guys are poison to democracy. Organized crime bosses. Quote When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi
PIK Posted June 9, 2015 Report Posted June 9, 2015 Arabs are their own worst enemy, to bad people here cant grasp that. If they actually wanted peace with Israel , it could have been done a long time ago. But the Arabs do not want peace they want blood. Only Israel wants peace. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
dre Posted June 9, 2015 Report Posted June 9, 2015 Arabs are their own worst enemy, to bad people here cant grasp that. If they actually wanted peace with Israel , it could have been done a long time ago. But the Arabs do not want peace they want blood. Only Israel wants peace. Sad this kind of pap-smear is what often passes for a post around here. First you try to boil down a complex and long running conflict into "one side is right, the other is wrong" even though historical events over there just flat out dont support it. Then you follow up that piece of fetid cammel dung with "Arabs do not want peace they want blood", which is a racist generalization against a whole race of people... the vast majority of whom dont try to spill anyones blood at all. If I posted something that stupid... I would shoot myself in the face. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
Rue Posted June 10, 2015 Report Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) PIK Arabs or to be more accurate the people of the Middle East are often their own worst enemy as the thousands of years of fighting shows and you echo what many Arab leaders have said, particularly Nasser. T,E.Laurence, Churchill, Sadat, all said it as well to name just a few. Interesting, because when Arabs say it, I can guarantee you-you won' hear from the Dres of the world. Within the Arab world, particularly the Muslim peoples, there are literally hundreds of thousands of leaders. You can impose all the governments you want, but it comes down to village elders or mullahs at a very grass roots level, each with their own following. That pretty much can be said of all the other peoples at certain stages of their social development, some in the past, some in the present. With we Jews of the Middle East the very definition of how we define our collective identity as a Jew remains an open ended never ending debate and if it weren't for the constant threat to our existence in Israel, there would be more disunity. Israelis like the Arab peoples are a boiling pot of volatile differences of opinion. Its a world where identity changes as fast as the sand dune structures. No alliance lasts long, everyone's expressed collective identities change constantly. The definition Gamel Nasser tried to reinvent Arab to mean to try unify the Middle East's non Jews by calling them all Arab failed. The true and remaining Arabs in the old sense not the one Nasser reinvented we now use, I.., the Beduin do not define themselves as a collective-they don't use concepts like that. They define themselves as how hey are connected together or individually to the earth at any given point in time as an approximation that always changes. Each group of Beduins has certain things in common learned as life skills to survive in the desert but they have no need to label themselves and they do not.Modern Arabs might identify because of the common Arabic language but there are so many dialects and cultural variations in the Arab countries, language alone won't unify. I would say to you PIK that trying to get consensus in the Middle East because of the rich, deeply entrenched,often rigid, stubborn regionally distinct behaviours is overwhelming and eats up attempts to unify. It's sort of like looking at the history of Italy and trying to understand at one point it was so many kingdoms. The history of the region is of decentralized power structures that have fought for ever and then thousands of years later colonial powers trying to step in for their own natural resource exploitation needs exasperating the tensions by forcing feuding factions that into the same state. Some believe that was deliberate to enable ruling by the colonials through divide and conquer. While I believe there is some truth in that but I also believe colonial powers simply often were shot sighted and only concerned about access to oil and did not realize the true instability they would create and had they realized it would impair their access to oil, in hindsight might have acted differently As well I think in the Middle East the very inherent decentralized structure of Islamic law which is the source of any organized control remains with each Mullah and village leader and what we call government in fact are the military of those countries who by default run them as no government really can and these military regimes have a very rigid mandate and its not to provide social services, education, health, just to assure taxes are collected to fund and feed it so it can prevent people from killing each other and work long enough to pay the taxes-its not a developed vision of state. Its one of brutal control. As for the other Arabs of the Middle East, i.e., Jews, Christians, Berbers, etc., we all have histories of violence, disunity, civil wars. Some argue the disunity particular to the Muslim Arab world is caused by the fact that the majority of the Middle East still can not read and until that happens a basic foundation to build unity on can't exist and its like building a foundation out of sand. So your point is taken and feed back given. Dre as usual had nothing to contribute and passes of what I call affected moral outrage because I believe he has no clue as to the subject you were referring to but felt the need to show you moral superiority. That is interesting since Dre and others say I have over-reacted and been wrong about smeers about Israelis and Zionists and Jews, while engaging in the same oral outrage about Arabs. In this case, if you had written we Jews can often be our own worst enemy with a lack of unity, I would most certainly agree. Sometimes our lack of unity enables Jew haters to exploit that and try use the words of certain Jews to justify hating and smeering other Jews. When I criticize the Arab world it is with the exact same standard of criticism I already use on Israel and with so many other regions of the world. I know you do too PIK. I know exactly what you referred to. Tribalism is alive and well and our worst enemy-we are our worst enemy of course. Edited June 10, 2015 by Rue Quote
Hudson Jones Posted June 10, 2015 Report Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Rue: Whatever similarities you want to draw, the truth is that the Israeli people continue to support and elect a government that engages in colonialism and severe human rights violations. You can muddy the water with twists, turns and semi-truths, but it's very clear that Israel is a criminal state in a very high degree and should not be supported by the West. Just like Apartheid South Africa, the Zionist government should be side-stepped as it's clear that they will not abandon their violations of human rights of the Palestinians, both in the Occupied Territories and to a lesser degree, inside Israel. The BDS movement is a powerful international movement that has the potential of causing significant damage to Israel. That`s if Israel and Israelis decide not to stop its criminal behaviour towards Palestinians. Edited June 10, 2015 by Hudson Jones Quote When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 Don't just "BDS" Israel....BDS the United States as well, as it strongly supports Israel in the way of BILLION$ in military and economic aid. What's that....can't BDS the U.S. because it would hurt trade and economic growth ? OK....that's what I thought. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 Don't just "BDS" Israel....BDS the United States as well, as it strongly supports Israel in the way of BILLION$ in military and economic aid. What's that....can't BDS the U.S. because it would hurt trade and economic growth ? OK....that's what I thought. Why not...it worked to sort out the apartheid in South Africa. Quote
Rue Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) The script is monotonous Abou. Constantly repeating the poo poo ka ka tune is spent. Edited June 11, 2015 by Rue Quote
marcus Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 The script is monotonous Abou. Constantly repeating the poo poo ka ka tune is spent. Why are you constantly fighting to normalize and want people to just accept all the poo poo ka ka Israel has been doing for so long? You're fighting a losing battle. The BDS movement cannot be stopped. Quote "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
marcus Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 Don't just "BDS" Israel....BDS the United States as well, as it strongly supports Israel in the way of BILLION$ in military and economic aid. What's that....can't BDS the U.S. because it would hurt trade and economic growth ? OK....that's what I thought. Did we go too long without mentioning the U.S.? Don't worry. The U.S. will either have to stop the billions in welfare cheques to Israel or put a condition on it. The BDS movement will eventually be too strong for the prostitutes in the U.S. government to continue to turn tricks for Israel. Quote "What do you think of Western civilization?" Gandhi was asked. "I think it would be a good idea," he said.
Canada_First Posted June 11, 2015 Report Posted June 11, 2015 Did we go too long without mentioning the U.S.? Don't worry. The U.S. will either have to stop the billions in welfare cheques to Israel or put a condition on it. The BDS movement will eventually be too strong for the prostitutes in the U.S. government to continue to turn tricks for Israel. Will the US have to stop the Billions in "welfare cheques" to Arab countries as well? 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.