M.Dancer Posted November 3, 2006 Report Posted November 3, 2006 The International Criminal Court plans to include blockades against coasts and ports in its list of acts of war in 2009. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade Soooo, when you said: The egyptian blocade of the Red Sea port was an act of war, as defined by acts of war.... Were you simply completely mistaken, or ... you know ... lying again? Are you thick? Or are you merely playing the retard? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Figleaf Posted November 3, 2006 Report Posted November 3, 2006 Are you thick? Or are you merely playing the retard? Explain. Quote
normanchateau Posted November 3, 2006 Report Posted November 3, 2006 Israel probably could be accused of being a terrorist state had Israel elected Shamir in 1948. Shamir became Prime Minister in 1980 after decades of political rehabilitation. Is that why they took so long to elect Sharon? Sharon was never a member of the right-wing, murderous terrorist group Irgun which Shamir belonged to. Or can you not distinguish Haganah from Irgun? Quote
jbg Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 When Israel starts planting bombs in Argentina, get back to me......... Well there was a little episode during which it was planting them in theatres and mailboxes in Egypt. Does that qualify? I don't seem to recall that. Was it, like, way before I was even born? That was in 1953, 1954 or thereabouts. Not sure when you were born. It seems that the Jew-haters demand perfection. If the Jews or Israel are responsible for one or two rogue episodes it seems it puts them on a moral plane with people who do nothing in life but scheme for the destruction of other people. Makes you wonder. 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).
jbg Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 You think the conflict started then? You need to brush up on history, it seems. In any event, what do you understand to have been the objective of the (second) intifada?More importantly, Argus, on what premise do you propose that the Palestinians are unworthy of the right to self-determination? The same reason that Mississippians, New Jerseyites, New Yorkers, etc. are not entitled to a separate level of self-determination. No one proposed a "self-determining state" for the "Palestinians" while Egypt ruled Gaza and Jordan ruled the West Bank. This suddenly became very important when Israel finally established secure, defensible borders. Your hypocrisy sickens me. 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).
jbg Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 Well, they could make peace. The peace of the grave? 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).
jbg Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 Thanks for the advice, but they merely pre-empted an invasion by their neighbours. Right -- Israel started it. (Also, it's highly questionable that Israel's neighbors had any serious intention of attacking.) Then why did Egypt ask the UN peacekeepers to leave the Sinai in May 1967, and impose a naval blockade on the Gulf of Aqaba, sealing off the Israeli city of Eilat? For recreation? 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).
jbg Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 Negotiating with such a government ... ... makes sense if you want peace with it. Before Fatah recognized Israel, how do you think it was brought around to doing so? Answer: through negotiations. Wrong! The fall of the USSR destroyed their only real ally prior to the "Palestinian's" re-alignment from "Marxism" to "Islamism". Thus, until "Islamism" replaced "Marxism" as the power in a position to topple the West (and get the support of misguided leftists) Fatah had nowhere to go but into Israel's arms, temporarily. 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).
jbg Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 Deleted - duplicate. 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).
Figleaf Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 You think the conflict started then? You need to brush up on history, it seems. In any event, what do you understand to have been the objective of the (second) intifada? More importantly, Argus, on what premise do you propose that the Palestinians are unworthy of the right to self-determination? The same reason that Mississippians, New Jerseyites, New Yorkers, etc. are not entitled to a separate level of self-determination. No one proposed a "self-determining state" for the "Palestinians" while Egypt ruled Gaza and Jordan ruled the West Bank. This suddenly became very important when Israel finally established secure, defensible borders. Your hypocrisy sickens me. What hypocrisy, exactly, does your imagination make you perceive? Well, they could make peace. The peace of the grave? No, a peace with its oppressed victims. Quote
Figleaf Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 Thanks for the advice, but they merely pre-empted an invasion by their neighbours. Right -- Israel started it. (Also, it's highly questionable that Israel's neighbors had any serious intention of attacking.) Then why did Egypt ask the UN peacekeepers to leave the Sinai in May 1967, and impose a naval blockade on the Gulf of Aqaba, sealing off the Israeli city of Eilat? For recreation? You want my interpretation? Egypt did those things in response to Isreal's provocations. In any event, they don't change the fact that it's highly questionable that the Arab states intended to attack. Quote
Figleaf Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 Negotiating with such a government ... ... makes sense if you want peace with it. Before Fatah recognized Israel, how do you think it was brought around to doing so? Answer: through negotiations. Wrong! The fall of the USSR destroyed their only real ally prior to the "Palestinian's" re-alignment from "Marxism" to "Islamism". Thus, until "Islamism" replaced "Marxism" as the power in a position to topple the West (and get the support of misguided leftists) Fatah had nowhere to go but into Israel's arms, temporarily. So you're trying to say that Israel did NOT negotiate with Fatah? JBG, my dear fellow, were you drinking this morning? Quote
White Doors Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 Thanks for the advice, but they merely pre-empted an invasion by their neighbours. Right -- Israel started it. (Also, it's highly questionable that Israel's neighbors had any serious intention of attacking.) Then why did Egypt ask the UN peacekeepers to leave the Sinai in May 1967, and impose a naval blockade on the Gulf of Aqaba, sealing off the Israeli city of Eilat? For recreation? You want my interpretation? Egypt did those things in response to Isreal's provocations. In any event, they don't change the fact that it's highly questionable that the Arab states intended to attack. You keep repeating this but have provided nothing to back your claim. I have provided resources to back up my claim and you have not - yet you expect people here to take your word for it.. that's telling. Quote Those Dern Rednecks done outfoxed the left wing again.~blueblood~
Figleaf Posted November 4, 2006 Report Posted November 4, 2006 Thanks for the advice, but they merely pre-empted an invasion by their neighbours. Right -- Israel started it. (Also, it's highly questionable that Israel's neighbors had any serious intention of attacking.) Then why did Egypt ask the UN peacekeepers to leave the Sinai in May 1967, and impose a naval blockade on the Gulf of Aqaba, sealing off the Israeli city of Eilat? For recreation? You want my interpretation? Egypt did those things in response to Isreal's provocations. In any event, they don't change the fact that it's highly questionable that the Arab states intended to attack. You keep repeating this but have provided nothing to back your claim. I have provided resources to back up my claim and you have not - yet you expect people here to take your word for it.. that's telling. You don't believe me? Who would you believe? Would you believe senior Israeli officials? Quote
White Doors Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 Thanks for the advice, but they merely pre-empted an invasion by their neighbours. Right -- Israel started it. (Also, it's highly questionable that Israel's neighbors had any serious intention of attacking.) Then why did Egypt ask the UN peacekeepers to leave the Sinai in May 1967, and impose a naval blockade on the Gulf of Aqaba, sealing off the Israeli city of Eilat? For recreation? You want my interpretation? Egypt did those things in response to Isreal's provocations. In any event, they don't change the fact that it's highly questionable that the Arab states intended to attack. You keep repeating this but have provided nothing to back your claim. I have provided resources to back up my claim and you have not - yet you expect people here to take your word for it.. that's telling. You don't believe me? Who would you believe? Would you believe senior Israeli officials? Who would you believe? Would you beleive 'the majority of historical scholars' who side with me on this issue? Quote Those Dern Rednecks done outfoxed the left wing again.~blueblood~
Figleaf Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 Thanks for the advice, but they merely pre-empted an invasion by their neighbours. Right -- Israel started it. (Also, it's highly questionable that Israel's neighbors had any serious intention of attacking.) Then why did Egypt ask the UN peacekeepers to leave the Sinai in May 1967, and impose a naval blockade on the Gulf of Aqaba, sealing off the Israeli city of Eilat? For recreation? You want my interpretation? Egypt did those things in response to Isreal's provocations. In any event, they don't change the fact that it's highly questionable that the Arab states intended to attack. You keep repeating this but have provided nothing to back your claim. I have provided resources to back up my claim and you have not - yet you expect people here to take your word for it.. that's telling. You don't believe me? Who would you believe? Would you believe senior Israeli officials? Who would you believe? Would you beleive 'the majority of historical scholars' who side with me on this issue? You've done a survey of historical scholars to confirm this 'majority' I suppose? Would you or would you not believe senior Israeli officials? Quote
White Doors Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 Thanks for the advice, but they merely pre-empted an invasion by their neighbours. Right -- Israel started it. (Also, it's highly questionable that Israel's neighbors had any serious intention of attacking.) Then why did Egypt ask the UN peacekeepers to leave the Sinai in May 1967, and impose a naval blockade on the Gulf of Aqaba, sealing off the Israeli city of Eilat? For recreation? You want my interpretation? Egypt did those things in response to Isreal's provocations. In any event, they don't change the fact that it's highly questionable that the Arab states intended to attack. You keep repeating this but have provided nothing to back your claim. I have provided resources to back up my claim and you have not - yet you expect people here to take your word for it.. that's telling. You don't believe me? Who would you believe? Would you believe senior Israeli officials? Who would you believe? Would you beleive 'the majority of historical scholars' who side with me on this issue? You've done a survey of historical scholars to confirm this 'majority' I suppose? Would you or would you not believe senior Israeli officials? The BBC did. Quote Those Dern Rednecks done outfoxed the left wing again.~blueblood~
Figleaf Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 You've done a survey of historical scholars to confirm this 'majority' I suppose? Would you or would you not believe senior Israeli officials? The BBC did. Did they? How many scholars did they survey? What was their sample-selection methodology? What questions did they ask, and what replies were received? And you forgot to answer: Would you or would you not believe senior Israeli officials? Quote
jbg Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 You keep repeating this but have provided nothing to back your claim. I have provided resources to back up my claim and you have not - yet you expect people here to take your word for it..that's telling. He has a proof. A proof is a proof. What is a proof? It's a proof. 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).
jbg Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 And you forgot to answer: Would you or would you not believe senior Israeli officials? Given that Israel has a free press, usually I would. If they lied they'd "outed" fast in their press. 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).
Higgly Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 Sharon was never a member of the right-wing, murderous terrorist group Irgun which Shamir belonged to.Or can you not distinguish Haganah from Irgun? Haganah. Irgun. Who gives a shite. This fat f#ck invaded a number of Arab countries and masssacred entire villages, police posts, and cities. The Yanks are gonna hang Saddam. When are they gonna get around to Pinochet and Sharon? Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
Higgly Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 It seems that the Jew-haters demand perfection. If the Jews or Israel are responsible for one or two rogue episodes it seems it puts them on a moral plane with people who do nothing in life but scheme for the destruction of other people.Makes you wonder. Arab life is cheap but an Argentinian life is useful. Is that your point? Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
Higgly Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 You think the conflict started then? You need to brush up on history, it seems. In any event, what do you understand to have been the objective of the (second) intifada? More importantly, Argus, on what premise do you propose that the Palestinians are unworthy of the right to self-determination? The same reason that Mississippians, New Jerseyites, New Yorkers, etc. are not entitled to a separate level of self-determination. No one proposed a "self-determining state" for the "Palestinians" while Egypt ruled Gaza and Jordan ruled the West Bank. This suddenly became very important when Israel finally established secure, defensible borders. Your hypocrisy sickens me. Sure. Please let us all know when the Palestinians have any say at all in the bizarro world of Isra-ayli politics. Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
Higgly Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 Then why did Egypt ask the UN peacekeepers to leave the Sinai in May 1967, and impose a naval blockade on the Gulf of Aqaba, sealing off the Israeli city of Eilat? For recreation? Well in fact, they did it entirely for recreation. You left yourself open to this one dckhead. Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
Higgly Posted November 5, 2006 Report Posted November 5, 2006 Negotiating with such a government ... ... makes sense if you want peace with it. Before Fatah recognized Israel, how do you think it was brought around to doing so? Answer: through negotiations. Wrong! The fall of the USSR destroyed their only real ally prior to the "Palestinian's" re-alignment from "Marxism" to "Islamism". Thus, until "Islamism" replaced "Marxism" as the power in a position to topple the West (and get the support of misguided leftists) Fatah had nowhere to go but into Israel's arms, temporarily. Who gives a shite. Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
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.