Romy

What the [bleep] ... ? What's wrong?

Can I be the once-in-a-story visitor? You know, kind of mysterious, and no-one understands why she's there... 5206.

Today I cried. A lot. It's a Memorial Day in Israel (in memory of Israel's fallen soldiers) and with all the ceremonies to mark the occasion, I got over-excited and couldn't stop. It was liberating though.

Zionism = Patriotism. Don't just throw statements into the basket, atleast try to support them. Really? What was their land then? Europe of antisemitism or Russia of endless pogroms?

Jews and other Middle Eastern groups, specifically the Shamis (Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Palestine) have coincided together for a long time in peace. It was only until the European Jews started coming to the Middle East starting in 1897 when Zionism started to pick up that people were started to get annoyed with the Jews in Al Sham, particularly Palestine. The opinion of non-European Jews who resided mostly out of Palestine in the Middle East remained the same, as a brother-religion sort of view. The Middle East only completely erupted against the Jews when Israel was created from taking land away from the British Mandate of Palestine/Trans-Jordan by a UN resolution to create the dual states. From this we can see that (1) Arabs are not against Jews; rather, they are against Zionist European Jews who seize land from them and (2) It was acknowledged as Palestine unanimously internationally until 1947. It also just so happens that every major migration of Jews to Palestine in the pre-Israel period coincide with the beginning of a revolt. The mindset is not that Jews have to die, it is that the Zionist takeover of Palestine. I also know of the coexistence and peace between Middle Eastern people and Jews seeing as how my family ruled Walaayeh Al Sham and I have to hear stories like every day my grandmother feels like talking about it, it might not have been Palestine but they were in the same province. The point of my post was to show hostility against Israel is because of their own intrusiveness and how it wasn't because they were Jews, it was because the Zionists were threatening the dream of having an independent Al Sham unjustly as they were a foreign element. What are you talking about? Jews were highly discriminated against, and I'm being gentle with that statement, in Iraq, Iran, Morroco, and many others, before and after Israel was established. Violent treatment was not out of the ordinary during the Ottoman and British rule in Israel aswell. It wasn't a one-sided war, but you can be sure hatred is nothing new, to say the least.

Even if the written paper in general loses it's status, I can still see agenda-promoting-free-kind-of-papers available in 20 years.

[/hide] You look so cute together ! I just hope she's not that girl... Sorry to dissapoint you m'lady, but she is in fact that girl :) Naw! Get back! Get out of there....! :(

I'm better than you because I can do this.

82.

I'm better than you because I speak 3 language fluently, and can understand a conversation in 2 more (although it has to be a basic one, and I'll probably not be able to participate).

This thread was first about me needing background music for a documentary, but now that I have it, this thread can just be about any gay music. Post away! [hide=old thread] Hi. I'm currently working on a documentary about gays, and need some background music. Any music you think that fits the title is great, a combination of a succesful gay artist and a song that encourages accepting the different is absolutly blessed. Thanks guys :). EDIT: Simply list the name of the song, and the name of the singer/band/etc.[/hide] And keep it clean :geek: !

[hide] [/hide] You look so cute together <3: ! I just hope she's not that girl...

I can't believe someone seriously wrote that. The facts there couldn't be any more wrong, the article writer took a quote of Netanyahu, completely spinned it, and then drew conclusions. I stopped taking it seriously after seeing the article started with- "The history of Israel as a geopolitical fraud will fill entire libraries as those defrauded marvel at how so few deceived so many for so long. Those duped include many naive Jews who-even now-identify their interests with this extremist enclave." And later continued with- "More than six decades ago the Joint Chiefs of Staff cautioned Truman about the "fanatical concepts of the Jewish leaders" and their plans for "Jewish military and economic hegemony over the entire Middle East."" And then- "Israel betrayed the U.S. by allying with the British and the French to invade Egypt." Not only is it wrong, but frankly I find it funny anyone truely believes the "facts" presented there. This article is just filled with senseless bashing and biased hatred based on nothing. Next time, please atleast present an article that has it's facts right. 1) your arguments against everyone else who opposes Israel diplomatic issues are a simple matter of only your opinion just like the author of the article i posted 2) many others will agree and disagre with your point of view as well as mine, the difference is you do not have any respect for those who disagree with ur point of view by trying to bash their arguments and belittle them 3) At least a great deal of 1st world countries are not blind by the corruption and atrocities Israel commits against the Palestinians unlike the U.S. (who's media is heavily controlled by the Jews) 4) You would think the Jewish people would learn from the Holocaust but instead theyre committing a new kind of holocaust towards the Palestinians while the world turns a blind eye all in the name of "self-defense" and kill 1000s of innocent palestinians because of a few radicals trying to destroy israel 5) Romy, I gotta admit you probably get off bashing all the people who blast Israel as well as the article i posted but you seemed to have purposely not answered my important question. 6) Romy, you are a tool 1. No, that's my opinion based on real facts, wheras the author is basing his/her opinion on false facts. Can you not see the difference? 2. If I didn't have any respect I wouldn't bother to answer their arguments. I'm not "bashing" their arguments, I'm counterpointing and answering. Belittle? You mean like say that the articles they presented are based on false facts? Sure, I do that. 3. Hey, guess what? "corruption and atrocities Israel" is clearly your opinion, which is presented in a very disrespectful way.... isn't that what you accused me for on #2? Atleast make sure your points don't contradict each other in a hypcritical kind of way. I'm not going to adress your conspiracy theories. 4. Having studied about the holocaust from every single point of view that exists, having interviewed 20-some holocaust survivors, having read countless books and watched countless movies about it, I believe it's safe to say there's no point of comparison here, and any comparison that exists isn't based. Oh, and these may be only because of a few radicals who try to destroy Israel (I'd argue against the 'few' part, but meh), but these radicals are hiding inside civillian homes, and launch their rockets at Sderot from there. Israel has two choices- leave it be, let it's citizens deal with the rockets on their own, or understand the consequences of letting it's citizens deal with the rockets on their own, understand that these radicals know hurting civillians is considered wrong and that's why they do that, and take the necessary steps in order to stop them, while being completely aware to the situation. Just to make it clear, I'm not saying killing these 1,000 civillians was right, I'm saying there's no other choice. 5. I didn't answer your question because I thought you based it off that article. If you want my own opinion- I don't think it's made the world any safer than when the USA, Italy, Poland or Eygept were established, it's not about "safe". Countries are not established so the world will be a safer place, countries are establishsed on the basis of either- 1. An ideology (such as the USA). 2. A people without a country (such as Poland). I trust Israel fits both. To talk about safe? I'm not sure Iran or Iraq made it any safer, to say the least. 6. Yeah, same as 3, just more personal. 1- Rather then saying that everything the author says is based on 'false' facts as you call them, give us the 'real' facts and actually make a decent post rather then just screaming i'm right your wrong. 2- all i ever see from you regarding this subject is personal attacks and the i'm right your wrong attitude as i said above. 3- what would you have it say instead? I'm sorry we tried to be kind and peaceful and make it so you can't eat a decent meal never mind making a bomb so were gonna blast you all back to the stone age? 4- Have you ever dealt with people who have lost everything in just an hour? In the morning you leave the house where your wife, your children, your parents live. You return and you find a smoking pit. Then something happens to you -to a certain exteny you stop being human. You do not need any glory, money anymore;revenge becomes your only joy. And because you no longer cling to life, death avoids you, bullets fly past. you become a wolf. -rusian general aleksander lebed vet of afghanistan The russians learned a long time ago that you you can't just expect to pacify a country with a scorched earth policy. Any one who survives will have lost everything and will make sure that when he joins his family in whatever afterlife he believes in he will take as many people with him as possible. Unfortunatly the U.S. and israel have not learned this yet. Everytime an innocent is killed you make a dozen devils who will try to make you suffer as much as possible for the lives you do take. Rather then just capet bomb an entire village to get one insurgant has no one in israel actually considered a tactical strike with spec or black ops to minamalize casualties? 1. I have done so, read up. Any fact presented by me on this thread can be checked, they're all definitely valid. 2. Care to show me? 3. I'm pretty sure I didn't get what you're trying to say here, so to avoid any misunderstandings, please clarify. 4. I don't think you fully understand the situation. Citizens and Hamas members all live together, most even hidden in citizens' homes. Weapons are stocked in the very same homes aswell. You can't minimize the damage when a "radical" uses a living child as a shield, it's either you shoot or you don't. I'll repeat what I said before in a chronological way- 1. Sderot is bombed at, on an average of 2 rockets a week for 8 years. 2. Israel tries to stop the bombing in different ways, including using anti-missle missles (which unfortunately, aren't that affective because the location the missles are launched from is too close to the target). 3. Eventually Israel decides to react, and begins preparing for an operation- Oferet Yetzuka. 4. Israeli forces are sent to the Gaza strip. 5. After a period of about 3 weeks, Hamas agrees to stop attacking Sderot if Israel ends the operation. 6. The operation ends. 7. 3 days later, missles are launched at Sderot, again. [/hide] 1- pretty much the only fact that you state in any thread on this issue is that Israel retaliated after being bombed twice a week for eight years. i believe i asked you this question on another thread i don't remember you ever answering. Why?? Why are the Palestinians attacking israel? The world isn't just black and grey where one day people wake up and decide their neighbor has to die. 2- i'm not going to go digging through threads just to prove one point. i believe it was in the religouse fanatasism thread, or one of my very old ones where we started listing things that israel bans from entering gaza you then just kept repeating the same arguement your using on this thread, that israel put up with it for eight years. which of course never explained why building materials, food, heck even coloring books were banned from gaza. ' 3- any article regarding the issue will most likly be biased. you either find people for palestinians or for israel. i've yet to see an article with the title "israel retaliates for rocket attack" theres always the extra savage rocket attack or brutally retaliates. If you find an article that is completely nuetral then please post it. other wise we can just view any article in favour of israel the same way that you view one in favour of the palastinians. 4- The united states sends 3 billion dollars a year to Israel. If they can't train a decent special ops unit with that much money what are they using it for? Send in a team to a supposed insurgants house, search it, if they find rockets blow it up. But just blowing up an entire neighbor hood to get at one person is just asking for escalation. 1. I don't remember this question, and I also don't see why I didn't answer- the answer is fairly simple. They never wanted Israel there- the minute Israel declared it's independent, all the bordering countries rushed to war against Israel. They didn't wake up one day and decide their neighbor has to die, that's what they've been thinking since day 1 (or even before that, issues had occured between Jews and arabs even during the Ottoman rule, and the British rule). 2. I clearly remember answering that question on the other thread, aswell as on this thread. The reason is that any resources that reach Gaza other than from Israel, also contain weapons and ammo used against Israeli civillians. Israel's only choice is to block other sources and be the sole one. Israel never banned specific supplies, it banned specific sources. 3. I'm not saying the article isn't good because it's biased, I'm saying it isn't good because it presents certain things as facts, even though they're not facts. I'd be happy to address other articles, both biased and not biased, as long as the facts are right. 4. Execuse my ignorance when it comes to millitay- but I can't think of any training or equipment that could do that- a soldier can't walk into a house that probably contains people wanting to kill him so he could find them. And whole neighborhoods were not bombed, the IDF used special techs to try and see who is inside the house. The reason there were so many civillians hurt/killed is not because the IDF wasn't prepared, it was because Hamas members and civillians live together, and Hamas members use human bodies (both dead and alive) to protect them. Also, you're off by 450 million dollars. Just saying.

This sounds a little to me like: "I'll stop being a criminal to get what I want, when I don't get it I'll just go back to being a criminal again". Maybe I have expectations too high, but Israel does have the opportunity to be the better man, at least in regards to the illegal settlements. I admit its far less easy in regards to the invasions. No, Israel stopped the illegal settlements because that's what it took to start discussing anything- as a term. To tell you the truth, I don't think (as in opinion...) the other side even wants discussion, if even after the terms set to discussion were made, and no discussion was held. You have to understand that Israel's prime ministers, aswell as wanting to develop diplomatic issues, also wish to retain their popularity, and there's pressure from the religous side of the people. It's wrong, sure, but instead of declaring how wrong it is, the best thing to do is solve that. The Israeli prime ministers may want to retain their popularity amongst the people, but they also want to retain Israel's popularity in the world, which would mean not agreeing to discuss things is not something they'd do - even if they wanted to. So yes, this whole situation is twisted and wrong, but if negotiations is all it takes to change things, why the hell not? Except, unfortunately, this is a very childish issue. If there's one thing I learned about politics, it's that all politicians, all diplomats, all of that mumbo jumbo- is purely childish. And I agree - its unfathomable that Israel would stop retaliating. But here's my question: Let's say 100 Israelis died every month from the rocket strikes, back when Israel was not retaliating. What's happening now? Now 1000 Palestinians are dying every month - but those 100 Israelis are dying too. It doesn't seem like their current strategy is very effective. I mean....I have no easy answers for this. It's unlikely an Israeli government that refused to retaliate would be able to maintain popular support - it just seems to me that something's gotta give - someone has to be willing to try to embrace a drastic makeover of the way the situation is handled - and I think that Israel is in a better position to do so. What? 1000 Palestinians are not dying every month, 1000 Gazans died in 1 month because of Oferet Yetzuka- an operation that is no longer taking place. And Israel, as I already mentioned, is willing to discuss things, it's the other side that's listing terms to discuss anything. When you fight with another kid, and the teacher tries to solve things, if one of you sets terms to discuss anything, that's just illogical- I assure you that the teacher would tell him to discuss those terms by sitting and talking about it, and not set them before discussing. Some of the terms are rediculous, some aren't- those that aren't can definitely be achieved through discussion. However, considering the rediculous terms, I'm not sure the Palestinians even wish to discuss anything. I agree completely - and I think that in order for peace to be achieved Israel will have to be the better man - and that could involve political suicide and a lot of sacrifice...but if it works in the end, it would be worth it. I don't think there's a point in adressing that after what I said up this post. And of course, the UN gave away their own land. And of course, they consulted Palestine first. Again, there's no point in discussing whether Israel deserves the land, or if it should have gotten it, because Israel's here to stay. Some would say it deserves it, some would say it does not, but everyone has to understand that even if it does not, it's not going anywhere for now. The best thing to do now, is try to change things. I'd be careful with that statement, you can't know if that dog won't ever bite. Anyway, USA getting rid of it's nuclear weapons is not feasible and will not happen. Personally, I'm not too sorry about that. Whether any countries own nuclear weapons or not, the one thing I'm certain of is that Iran should not. Israel is willing to be the better man, but only to an extent. It's willing to sit and discuss, it's willing to agree to some of the terms made to discussion, despite how ill this request is, it's willing to use a third party to help solve things if that's what it takes, but it's not willing to shoot it's own leg to get things going, there's a red line there too. I don't think you understand how serious this is. A city of innocent citizens was getting attacked by bombs and constantly, for eight years. I can only imagine the American people reacting one way if that ever happend to say... Seattle. Yes, I do think the USA would attack without paying much attention to human rights given that situation, all countries would. And they have (iraq war/911). And how's that working out for them? What? How could they react to something that never happend? As far as I remember, no american city was bombed by a terror organization for 8 years. You expect one side to agree to help it's enemy at getting stronger, even though you claim that side won't be happy until the other is destroyed? I never said Israel should help Palestine get stronger, all I'm trying to say is that any diplomatic solution ends up shafting Palestine in the long run. Dual states automatically means Palestine is getting stronger, and that can only happen if Israel agrees to it. In other words, by agreeing to a dual states solution, Israel is making Palestine stronger. So I present my question again- You expect one side to agree to help it's enemy at getting stronger, even though you claim that side won't be happy until the other is destroyed?

Execuse me? I was there, a missle literally hit a home right next to me when I visited Sderot. I also watch the news, and every rocket launched was covered the same day, with pictures, and witnesses interviewed about it. As for citing online information. Sure, 1 source could be wrong, but you don't have to count on only 1 source. Maybe I'm nuts, but the point is that you shouldn't prance around saying "Look what they did!" when everything you've ever seen or known could be a lie. How could it be a lie if I saw it with my own 2 eyes? Ok so you sight a missile that misses the target. My cousins who live across the street (not biologically my cousins but Middle Eastern people consider each other cousins when you're close) were forcefully removed from their houses and forced to leave their homeland to a quarantined area but they escaped to Jordan and took a plane here [they are Palestinian]. Which seems worse? Not only do the Israelis illegally settle they also forcefully remove people so that they may illegally settle. And this story is unique because I've heard almost the same story from like four different families with a slight variation to where they fled (some Syria, some Egypt, some Lebanon). How could the belligerent display of Israel injustice be a lie if these first hand testimonies so blatantly voice it? I told you, I'm all against the illegal settlements, I think they're incredibly wrong on Israel's part and should be stopped ASAP. However, the illegal settlements CAN be stopped, through negotiations. And negotiations can be had, if only both sides wish to- and without pre-made terms. I agree Israel could and should stop those even without first discussing it, but knowing my people, and knowing my religion, they simply wouldn't agree, and I regret that. I admit that I could be wrong on this one, I never checked it, only said what seems most probable to me. I assume you're referring to the war of October with that? It's war, when you can move forward, you do. Israel reached about 40 Kilometers away from Beirut, and could stay there. However, it did not, and not because it had to. This war wasn't even initiated by Israel and came as quite a surprise, which led to an incredible amount of life losses throughout the war.

8/10 I see your on /fg/ all the time :).

69.

Execuse me? I was there, a missle literally hit a home right next to me when I visited Sderot. I also watch the news, and every rocket launched was covered the same day, with pictures, and witnesses interviewed about it. As for citing online information. Sure, 1 source could be wrong, but you don't have to count on only 1 source. Maybe I'm nuts, but the point is that you shouldn't prance around saying "Look what they did!" when everything you've ever seen or known could be a lie. How could it be a lie if I saw it with my own 2 eyes?

Execuse me? I was there, a missle literally hit a home right next to me when I visited Sderot. I also watch the news, and every rocket launched was covered the same day, with pictures, and witnesses interviewed about it. As for citing online information. Sure, 1 source could be wrong, but you don't have to count on only 1 source.

I learned that he works as an ISP :ohnoes: ...

Or, you're being pointlessly sensitive. About something that doesn't matter. A joke. You're taking this too seriously. Sure, that's it.

It's been a weird day so far... I can't really say if it was a good one or a bad one. although it's definitely not neutral.

I can't believe someone seriously wrote that. The facts there couldn't be any more wrong, the article writer took a quote of Netanyahu, completely spinned it, and then drew conclusions. I stopped taking it seriously after seeing the article started with- "The history of Israel as a geopolitical fraud will fill entire libraries as those defrauded marvel at how so few deceived so many for so long. Those duped include many naive Jews who-even now-identify their interests with this extremist enclave." And later continued with- "More than six decades ago the Joint Chiefs of Staff cautioned Truman about the "fanatical concepts of the Jewish leaders" and their plans for "Jewish military and economic hegemony over the entire Middle East."" And then- "Israel betrayed the U.S. by allying with the British and the French to invade Egypt." Not only is it wrong, but frankly I find it funny anyone truely believes the "facts" presented there. This article is just filled with senseless bashing and biased hatred based on nothing. Next time, please atleast present an article that has it's facts right. 1) your arguments against everyone else who opposes Israel diplomatic issues are a simple matter of only your opinion just like the author of the article i posted 2) many others will agree and disagre with your point of view as well as mine, the difference is you do not have any respect for those who disagree with ur point of view by trying to bash their arguments and belittle them 3) At least a great deal of 1st world countries are not blind by the corruption and atrocities Israel commits against the Palestinians unlike the U.S. (who's media is heavily controlled by the Jews) 4) You would think the Jewish people would learn from the Holocaust but instead theyre committing a new kind of holocaust towards the Palestinians while the world turns a blind eye all in the name of "self-defense" and kill 1000s of innocent palestinians because of a few radicals trying to destroy israel 5) Romy, I gotta admit you probably get off bashing all the people who blast Israel as well as the article i posted but you seemed to have purposely not answered my important question. 6) Romy, you are a tool 1. No, that's my opinion based on real facts, wheras the author is basing his/her opinion on false facts. Can you not see the difference? 2. If I didn't have any respect I wouldn't bother to answer their arguments. I'm not "bashing" their arguments, I'm counterpointing and answering. Belittle? You mean like say that the articles they presented are based on false facts? Sure, I do that. 3. Hey, guess what? "corruption and atrocities Israel" is clearly your opinion, which is presented in a very disrespectful way.... isn't that what you accused me for on #2? Atleast make sure your points don't contradict each other in a hypcritical kind of way. I'm not going to adress your conspiracy theories. 4. Having studied about the holocaust from every single point of view that exists, having interviewed 20-some holocaust survivors, having read countless books and watched countless movies about it, I believe it's safe to say there's no point of comparison here, and any comparison that exists isn't based. Oh, and these may be only because of a few radicals who try to destroy Israel (I'd argue against the 'few' part, but meh), but these radicals are hiding inside civillian homes, and launch their rockets at Sderot from there. Israel has two choices- leave it be, let it's citizens deal with the rockets on their own, or understand the consequences of letting it's citizens deal with the rockets on their own, understand that these radicals know hurting civillians is considered wrong and that's why they do that, and take the necessary steps in order to stop them, while being completely aware to the situation. Just to make it clear, I'm not saying killing these 1,000 civillians was right, I'm saying there's no other choice. 5. I didn't answer your question because I thought you based it off that article. If you want my own opinion- I don't think it's made the world any safer than when the USA, Italy, Poland or Eygept were established, it's not about "safe". Countries are not established so the world will be a safer place, countries are establishsed on the basis of either- 1. An ideology (such as the USA). 2. A people without a country (such as Poland). I trust Israel fits both. To talk about safe? I'm not sure Iran or Iraq made it any safer, to say the least. 6. Yeah, same as 3, just more personal. 1- Rather then saying that everything the author says is based on 'false' facts as you call them, give us the 'real' facts and actually make a decent post rather then just screaming i'm right your wrong. 2- all i ever see from you regarding this subject is personal attacks and the i'm right your wrong attitude as i said above. 3- what would you have it say instead? I'm sorry we tried to be kind and peaceful and make it so you can't eat a decent meal never mind making a bomb so were gonna blast you all back to the stone age? 4- Have you ever dealt with people who have lost everything in just an hour? In the morning you leave the house where your wife, your children, your parents live. You return and you find a smoking pit. Then something happens to you -to a certain exteny you stop being human. You do not need any glory, money anymore;revenge becomes your only joy. And because you no longer cling to life, death avoids you, bullets fly past. you become a wolf. -rusian general aleksander lebed vet of afghanistan The russians learned a long time ago that you you can't just expect to pacify a country with a scorched earth policy. Any one who survives will have lost everything and will make sure that when he joins his family in whatever afterlife he believes in he will take as many people with him as possible. Unfortunatly the U.S. and israel have not learned this yet. Everytime an innocent is killed you make a dozen devils who will try to make you suffer as much as possible for the lives you do take. Rather then just capet bomb an entire village to get one insurgant has no one in israel actually considered a tactical strike with spec or black ops to minamalize casualties? 1. I have done so, read up. Any fact presented by me on this thread can be checked, they're all definitely valid. 2. Care to show me? 3. I'm pretty sure I didn't get what you're trying to say here, so to avoid any misunderstandings, please clarify. 4. I don't think you fully understand the situation. Citizens and Hamas members all live together, most even hidden in citizens' homes. Weapons are stocked in the very same homes aswell. You can't minimize the damage when a "radical" uses a living child as a shield, it's either you shoot or you don't. I'll repeat what I said before in a chronological way- 1. Sderot is bombed at, on an average of 2 rockets a week for 8 years. 2. Israel tries to stop the bombing in different ways, including using anti-missle missles (which unfortunately, aren't that affective because the location the missles are launched from is too close to the target). 3. Eventually Israel decides to react, and begins preparing for an operation- Oferet Yetzuka. 4. Israeli forces are sent to the Gaza strip. 5. After a period of about 3 weeks, Hamas agrees to stop attacking Sderot if Israel ends the operation. 6. The operation ends. 7. 3 days later, missles are launched at Sderot, again.

68.