Bloodbath in Gaza

[Ned]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Chegitz,


That example doesn't work. Look, if someone steals my wallet and break my leg giving chase, the person responsible for my broken leg is still the thief who stole my wallet in the first place.

Blaming the arab world for reacting to theft of arab land just isn't right.

As for the solidarity, you do have a point. I think the arab world has convinced itself that intergrating the refugees would be doing them a disfavor, however.

You know, just like most people who wont give a quarter to a homeless justifies it by thinking 'he would only be buying booze with it anyway'. (Myself included.) See what I mean?

I actually give these folks twenty-dollar bills. To a man they are extremely thankful.

[Ned]

Siro, I think the Barak position on RoR and reparation was essentially correct. Each side should compensate the other for "stolen" property.

But, until then, why doesn't Israel intervene in the refugee situation and help out with their support? As well, Israel could demand that the Arab nations begin integration now. A lot of Americans would be very sympathetic to both these actions.

[CyberGnu]

Instead, a person would just shoot the homeless, to rid the world of him, like Lebanon murdered several hundred Palestinian refugees, to stop the rest from coming.

Is that Sharons official policy of just your interpretation?

[CyberGnu]

Ned, are you serious? You actually give every homeless $20? Where do you live?

If I did that I couldn't afford to leave my apartment anymore....

[Ned]

CyberGnu, Aptos CA. Ned

[CyberGnu]

That's in the neighbourhood of San Fran, right?

I've only been there once, but I remember homeless everywhere...

I live in Pasadena. On my way to work (I walk) I usually get accosted every other day or so. If I stop by the local Blockbuster or Ralphs, the odds increase to about 99% (there are two homeless who have claimed each store parkinglot as their own, apparently).

So if I gave $20 to each homeless, I'd be shelling out about $500 per month...

[Sirotnikov]

But, until then, why doesn't Israel intervene in the refugee situation and help out with their support? As well, Israel could demand that the Arab nations begin integration now. A lot of Americans would be very sympathetic to both these actions.

Israel did alot, both through direct donations to the refugees fund, and through actual improvement of life in the territories.

We ain't responsible for the rest, and don't intend to be suckers.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

But, until then, why doesn't Israel intervene in the refugee situation and help out with their support? As well, Israel could demand that the Arab nations begin integration now. A lot of Americans would be very sympathetic to both these actions.

Israel did alot, both through direct donations to the refugees fund, and through actual improvement of life in the territories.

We ain't responsible for the rest, and don't intend to be suckers.

OK, then, credit any out-of-pocket against anything owed. But demand that the Arab nations at least begin full integration now. Demand that they no longer wait until a full peace treaty, as that may never happen given history.

You will see a tidal change in world sympathies.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

We ain't responsible for the rest, and don't intend to be suckers.

And why wouldn't you be? It was the IDF, or more importantly, the Hagana and the other groups that joined to gether into the IDF that made them refugees (please don't use the stupid 'radio broadcast' argument- that myth has been utterly disproven by israel's own historians). It was the Jewish Fund and the israeli governemnt that razed the villages, to erase any trace of their presence in the lnad, to hide the fact they ever existed. I agree that the Arab states have failed the refugees utterly, have failed them an opressed them, but that does not atone for Israel's actions. Israel has alway, from 1950 to today, blocked any deal about refugees, never wanting to allow even a few thousand back. 750,000 thousand people were driven from their homes. Israel always likes then to metion Jewish refugees (how can there be such a thing in the Zionist idea? isn't every Jew living outside of israel the refugee? Isn't going to israel going home? If so, how can any Jew who went to israel from not israel, be a refugee?) but thats 600,000. Fine, do a one for one swapt, and you still have 150,000 palestinians.

The math of 1947 makes things simple:

1.2 million people living in the mandate of palestine, 66% Palestinians, 33% Jewish. The state divided into three parts, a Jewish, a Palestinian, and International. The international part was 50-50%. The Arab part was 98% Palestinian, 2% Jewish (20K people plus), the Jewish section was 55% jewish-45% Arab. Hmmm, now, the Zionists want to create a democratic but also Jewish state. How can that be done with 45% Arab minority? It can't , as it would call for a constitution that gives all citizen equality for the state to make it, and how then could it be Jewish? 450,000 Palestinians had to 'go away' for the jewish state to take root, and once Israel's leaders decided that the partition deal was off, and they decided to only to fight for 'their half', but go for the whole thing, far more palestinians had 'to go'.

The Palestinian refugees exist ebcause they had to- otherwise, there would have been no democratic and Jewish state. israel must acknowledge this, and talke responsibility, for it is the great sin that also made israel possible.

[Zero]

That story sounds awefully familiar Gepap... about kicking ethnic group out of the state to make ethnic pure democratic state. *coughcoughNazicoughcough

[Ned]

GePap, whether the refugees were forced to leave or left voluntarily is a question that we do have to answer. Israel has been very consistent since 1950 in being unwilling to take back more than just a handful of refugees. Despite this, the Arab states and the refugees themselves continue to insist full implementation of general assembly resolution 194 which calls for repatriation or compensation at the choice of the refugee. They know that if repatriation in large numbers were to occur Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish state. Thus the continuing existence of the refugees in their camps is testament to the continuing intention of the Arabs to destroy Israel.

This is why Israeli insistence on an immediate resolution of the refugee problem could put significant pressure on Arabs to finally acknowledge Israel's right to exist. Refusal to help the refugees after 50 years of neglect can no longer be thought of as solely Israel's fault unless one truly believes that Israel should be destroyed.

[NeOmega]

Originally posted by Eli
I want to see a US or any European army division occupying an enemy city, with gunmen everywhere and boobytrapped main streets. They will burn half of it to the ground from the air even before thinking about entering. And when asked about civilian casualties, they will say that they couldnt risk the troops.

>>>well there's your first problem.

But when the troops are Jews? Who cares, the "civilians" must be protected!

Bah, the claims of anti-semitism can only get you so far.

[NeOmega]

Originally posted by Ned
GePap, whether the refugees were forced to leave or left voluntarily is a question that we do have to answer. Israel has been very consistent since 1950 in being unwilling to take back more than just a handful of refugees. Despite this, the Arab states and the refugees themselves continue to insist full implementation of general assembly resolution 194 which calls for repatriation or compensation at the choice of the refugee. They know that if repatriation in large numbers were to occur Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish state. Thus the continuing existence of the refugees in their camps is testament to the continuing intention of the Arabs to destroy Israel.

This is why Israeli insistence on an immediate resolution of the refugee problem could put significant pressure on Arabs to finally acknowledge Israel's right to exist. Refusal to help the refugees after 50 years of neglect can no longer be thought of as solely Israel's fault unless one truly believes that Israel should be destroyed.

All for me, and nothing for you. If America were flooded by Mexicans, would it cease to be America? Jews and palestinians can't live in the same country in peace? Especially the ones whose families were pushed out?

Hmm, Israel just doesn't seem to be friendly in this case either.

Btw, for anyone keeping score, Israelis are still winning nearly 3:1.

[Ned]

Originally posted by NeOmega


All for me, and nothing for you. If America were flooded by Mexicans, would it cease to be America? Jews and palestinians can't live in the same country in peace? Especially the ones whose families were pushed out?

Hmm, Israel just doesn't seem to be friendly in this case either.

Btw, for anyone keeping score, Israelis are still winning nearly 3:1.

But there is a difference. The Mexicans are not hostile. They do not intend to drive Americans into the sea. They come to America seeking to enjoy the American way of life, America's freedoms and America's wealth. They want to be Americans.

The Palestinian situation couldn't be more different.

[CyberGnu]

GePap, whether the refugees were forced to leave or left voluntarily is a question that we do have to answer. Israel has been very consistent since 1950 in being unwilling to take back more than just a handful of refugees. Despite this, the Arab states and the refugees themselves continue to insist full implementation of general assembly resolution 194 which calls for repatriation or compensation at the choice of the refugee. They know that if repatriation in large numbers were to occur Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish state. Thus the continuing existence of the refugees in their camps is testament to the continuing intention of the Arabs to destroy Israel.

But this argument is fundamentally flawed...

Israel could easily solve the RoR by partitioning off some of the land within the green mile. Obviously citizens of a different country would not affect the demographics of Israel.

So, with that argument debunked, we are left with a very different conclusion. The continuing existence of the refugees in their camps is testament to the continuing greed of Israel.