The Gaza Strip

[Matok]

 

 

 

I mean, crickey, it was just released in the press that Israel wanted Bush in early 2008 to help them attack Iran, THREE times. Had Rumsfeld been in charge instead of Gates, we probably would have, too.

 

Again,the blood thirsty israelis want to bomb the whole middle-east,thats what you were aiming at isn't it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

No but it does support the notion that Kadima has been looking for a war in time for the election.

 

I myself said that the Hamas was fool enough to play to Barak & Livni hands by starting this crisis, but claiming Israel leaders were just looking for a war,any war,i think its abit harsh.

 

 

 

No, what we do on this thread is denounce the killing of over 900 people in a needless war which after its 17th day has yet to yield any results for either belligerent

 

I am sorry but when people starts with facts manipulation and half truths it stops being a discussion and becomes a propaganda.

[1_man_army]

 

 

 

I mean, crickey, it was just released in the press that Israel wanted Bush in early 2008 to help them attack Iran, THREE times. Had Rumsfeld been in charge instead of Gates, we probably would have, too.

 

Again,the blood thirsty israelis want to bomb the whole middle-east,thats what you were aiming at isn't it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

No but it does support the notion that Kadima has been looking for a war in time for the election.

 

I myself said that the Hamas was fool enough to play to Barak & Livni hands by starting this crisis, but claiming Israel leaders were just looking for a war,any war,i think its abit harsh.

 

 

 

Harsh, but it isn't completely ridiculous considering how close the 2008 elections were. Plus Livni, as a female candidate, has to look tough towards Israel's enemies so she can try to mould herself into the sort of Golda Meir image the Israeli public. I didn't construct that sentence very well but you know what I mean.

[Lenticular_J]

No, what we do on this thread is denounce the killing of over 900 people in a needless war which after its 17th day has yet to yield any results for either belligerent.

 

A little off topic, but is any war actually needed?

[obfuscator]

Israel wasn't even occupying them when they broke the latest cease-fire. Counting the border checkpoints as an occupation is ridiculous.

 

 

 

boarder checkpoints isent indeed

 

 

 

but the airspace and their water was an occupation then also remind that gaza isent a countrie most of palestine in the west bank is still occupied

 

 

 

Israel has been very clear on their intentions. They will continue to attack/occupy as long as the attacks against their innocent civilians continue. The onus is now on the Palestinian people to stop.

 

 

 

That's pure stupidity then by Israel. Many of the Palestinian people are still extremely bitter about what Israel did in the past and what it is currently doing. The attacks definitely wont stop soon until Israel leaves. How can they expect the attacks to stop when they attack innocent civilians quite oftenly while attacking Hamas and occupy foreign lands?

 

 

 

The attacks won't stop untill they stop occupying foreign lands, you are completely right. However, they were given that land (right or wrong) at the end of world war 2 and I highly doubt they are willing to give up their country, and I highly doubt anyone expects them to.

[Lenticular_J]

Personally, I find it scary the world's most vibrant and successful democracy seemingly falls so easily to scaremongering and fear, and romanticised, idealogical hope.

 

I just noticed this, and wanted to say I find it an interesting take. Democracy is the voice of the people, correct? And people fall quite easily to scaremongering, fear, and hope, all at once. For example, one of the things Obama is known for is the two phrases: Change, and hope.

 

 

 

I'm just-a sayin'.

[munkis]

 

The attacks won't stop untill they stop occupying foreign lands, you are completely right. However, they were given that land (right or wrong) at the end of world war 2 and I highly doubt they are willing to give up their country, and I highly doubt anyone expects them to.

 

 

 

no but many expect them to whitraw to the 1967 limits or some even the 1949 limit the actual givin areas by the un if i remmember years right not good at that

[Ginger_Warrior]

No, what we do on this thread is denounce the killing of over 900 people in a needless war which after its 17th day has yet to yield any results for either belligerent.

 

A little off topic, but is any war actually needed?

 

I'm not sure why you only highlighted the past tense. :|

 

 

 

In an ideal world, no war is ever needed. Of course that doesn't really relate to reality. Unfortunately, there are are many wars across the world in history that we're necessary, as I'm sure anyone who's ever read into history would agree.

 

 

 

But usually wars follow the failure of a diplomatic process. It's quite clear looking at this that Israel has not ever compromised on the Gaza Strip and certainly did not gave time for diplomatic efforts to avoid this war. It was a shocking attack (in both takes of the adjective) designed to portray the Israeli government as strong and re-electable.

 

 

 

Hence why the Israeli foreign minister is so adamant to continue this war even though she is aware this war isn't achieving anything tangible, and IDF soldiers are dying.

 

 

 

As for your comments about democracy: I agree. It's exactly how Obama got elected, and how Bush stayed for two terms. Kerry was seen as an unsafe pair of hands in a time where fear of another 9/11 gripped America. It's about impressions.

[magekillr]

Well Bush was never elected the first time. If that had happened in France, there would have been absolute chaos. The second time I'll give him, but again, screwy things happened all over Ohio with electronic voting machines.

 

 

 

I picked Kucinich as my first choice, and Obama was my second, even though before the primaries I had pretty much settled that Hillary would win the primary. What got Obama elected was not necessarily his message, but his organizing of how he ran the campaign. Officials in America aren't elected by standing on a soap box giving speeches, and telling what they're going to do; it's just not what happens. It might be the case in foreign countries as their elections aren't like ours, but what gets ours elected is grass roots. His message perhaps attracted his beginning following, I know what attracted me to him was that he was the only candidate, except Kucinich, that had opposed the War in Iraq from the very beginning. However, if you have an organized campaign that floods the streets, knocks on doors, and makes phone calls, you're going to have a good shot at winning. That's how he won: his site made it so easy to volunteer and donate money. Organized campaigns and grass roots are the key to winning elections in America. I worked for John Kerry's campaign (not worked, volunteered), and it was horribly disorganized compared with Obama's. Like, there's just no comparing the two campaigns lol. After winning the nomination, Sarah Palin pretty much sealed McCain's fate.

 

 

 

Anyway, I never answered why I think the Saudis are funding al Qaeda. It's nothing more than speculation and hearsay on my part, and it's a bit of a stretch anyway, so take it with an extreme grain of salt.

 

 

 

The Saudis and al Qaeda are both Wahhabis, a specific branch of Sunni Islam. To this, they probably have the same objectives about what they want to accomplish. The Saudis used to fund extremist political parties and leaders in Pakistan, and these extremist parties/leaders were not different from al Qaeda in their goals or sometimes even their methods. I don't really think the Saudis really have a problem with how al Qaeda does their business because of this fact alone. They have to be getting their money from somewhere, and when you start narrowing down the places they can/could be getting it, Saudi Arabia doesn't necessarily get ruled out. I think the dislike of the Saudi family is more of a personal thing, and I don't think it would necessarily conflict with what they both hope to accomplish in business. Looking at who shares the same sect of Islam is, in my opinion, a much better tool in finding who agrees with whom.

 

 

 

However, they were given that land (right or wrong) at the end of world war 2 and I highly doubt they are willing to give up their country, and I highly doubt anyone expects them to.

 

 

 

They were given the West Bank? No they weren't. I already gave a brief history of what's happened in the area; they've more than doubled their land mass, when the original UN lines were biased towards them in the first place. 55% of land mass to 1/3 of the population is hardly fair, especially when the Palestinians were already living there.

 

 

 

UN resolution 242 called for Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories in 1968. Forty years later, the world still waits for Israel, buffered by their personal [wagon] kissers, the United States, to comply with that order. It hardly matters if the Palestinians get East Jerusalem anyway, considering Israel has already built illegal settlements completely surrounding the area.

 

 

 

I believe in human rights and treating people justly. So, forty years after the war ended, I don't believe that Israel has the right to degrade Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, torture them, restrict their freedom of movement, restrict their access to food and water and medical supplies, destroy their settlements, build illegal ones in their place, completely control their sea and airspace, and brush off the bombing of schools and mosques and hundreds of civilian casualties as collateral damage....

[megakiller32]

I believe in human rights and treating people justly. So, forty years after the war ended, I don't believe that Israel has the right to degrade Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, torture them, restrict their freedom of movement, restrict their access to food and water and medical supplies, destroy their settlements, build illegal ones in their place, completely control their sea and airspace, and brush off the bombing of schools and mosques and hundreds of civilian casualties as collateral damage....

 

 

 

But you do agree with using that land there to fire seemingly endless supplies of rockets across the border? If Hamas didn't abuse thier power and fire a bottomless stockpile of rockets into Israel, Israel wouldn't need to do things such as restrict movement, and they could make peace.

[RichieMcD]

I believe in human rights and treating people justly. So, forty years after the war ended, I don't believe that Israel has the right to degrade Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, torture them, restrict their freedom of movement, restrict their access to food and water and medical supplies, destroy their settlements, build illegal ones in their place, completely control their sea and airspace, and brush off the bombing of schools and mosques and hundreds of civilian casualties as collateral damage....

 

 

 

But you do agree with using that land there to fire seemingly endless supplies of rockets across the border? If Hamas didn't abuse thier power and fire a bottomless stockpile of rockets into Israel, Israel wouldn't need to do things such as restrict movement, and they could make peace.

 

 

 

You're still missing quite a simple message. Peace will never exist until the occupation of Palestinian lands stops. The troubles went on in Northern Ireland for nearly 80 years and didn't stop to the extent they're at now till the British army was withdrawn. While the Israeli's continue to occupy Palestinian lands and the Israeli army bases itself on occupied Palestinian lands peace will not exist.

[magekillr]

I believe in human rights and treating people justly. So, forty years after the war ended, I don't believe that Israel has the right to degrade Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, torture them, restrict their freedom of movement, restrict their access to food and water and medical supplies, destroy their settlements, build illegal ones in their place, completely control their sea and airspace, and brush off the bombing of schools and mosques and hundreds of civilian casualties as collateral damage....

 

 

 

But you do agree with using that land there to fire seemingly endless supplies of rockets across the border? If Hamas didn't abuse thier power and fire a bottomless stockpile of rockets into Israel, Israel wouldn't need to do things such as restrict movement, and they could make peace.

 

 

 

No, of course I don't. Israel has done these things while Fatah was in power as well. Hamas and terrorists haven't always been around, you know. Terrorist groups don't set up shop to watch the world burn, they use the only method that they feel will make their cause heard. Is it counterproductive against them? Sure it is, but so is our response to terror.

[megakiller32]

I believe in human rights and treating people justly. So, forty years after the war ended, I don't believe that Israel has the right to degrade Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, torture them, restrict their freedom of movement, restrict their access to food and water and medical supplies, destroy their settlements, build illegal ones in their place, completely control their sea and airspace, and brush off the bombing of schools and mosques and hundreds of civilian casualties as collateral damage....

 

 

 

But you do agree with using that land there to fire seemingly endless supplies of rockets across the border? If Hamas didn't abuse thier power and fire a bottomless stockpile of rockets into Israel, Israel wouldn't need to do things such as restrict movement, and they could make peace.

 

 

 

No, of course I don't. Israel has done these things while Fatah was in power as well. Hamas and terrorists haven't always been around, you know. Terrorist groups don't set up shop to watch the world burn, they use the only method that they feel will make their cause heard. Is it counterproductive against them? Sure it is, but so is our response to terror.

 

 

 

Ok, but just a question here-

 

Do you agree that Israel should continue the ground assault to wipe out Hamas, or another method?

 

I don't really think it's possible to wipe out Hamas, they've probably taught thier children in thier "cause" and the children will grow up with the Hamas morales of killing all the Jews in the world.

[magekillr]

Another method, of course. This is not a military problem, and it cannot be solved with a military solution.

 

 

 

I've already established what needs to happen to end Hamas' legitimacy, and that's for Fatah or another political party in Palestine to stop ruining its reputation by giving in to corruption. If that happens, Hamas will be out of power within a year to two years. Yes, there will still be factions within Palestine, but they'll fade out when the people of Palestine realize they don't have to resort to extremism to be helped.

 

 

 

Second, Israel needs to be more negotiable on their terms. Quite frankly, if I cared about who ruled the land and who was in power, I probably wouldn't agree to their terms either; they're pretty ridiculously biased in their own favor, and they're unwaivering in what they will accept. If the US put more pressure on Israel to negotiate their terms, we'd see some progress. [bAs the person that I am, I would give Israel any terms they wanted if it resulted in peace, if the Palestinians were treated as citizens of Israel, and if Jerusalem was accessible to Muslims. However, not everyone is like me, and some think that land ownership and some power are big deals. It's all nationalist nonsense, but I digress.

 

 

 

Third, Israel needs to stop condoning the establishment of illegal settlements in the West Bank, as well as stop removing settlements that are owned by the Palestinians. If they did that, Palestine would feel that Israel actually recognizes their sovereignty.

 

 

 

Fourth, Israel needs to end its blockages of food aid and water that they've set up throughout the strip. They also need to give Palestine some control over their own sea and airspace.

 

 

 

Fifth, once Hamas is out of power, it would be much easier to negotiate true sovereign borders with a secular/leftist Fatah in power. It will open up Israel and force them to be "less secure", but it's a solution that everyone can live with.

 

 

 

 

 

edit: And just for a little sidenote, I'd like to post some radical parties in Israel that have a lot of legitimacy in their country:

 

 

 

Likud

 

 

 

"The Likud charter continues to emphasize the right of settlement in "Judea (and) Samaria" (more commonly known as the "West Bank") and Gaza,"[2] and as such, brings it into direct conflict with Palestinian claims on the same territory, although the majority of Palestinians claim the entire territory of Israel as their own.[3] Similarly, their claims of the Jordan river as the permanent eastern border to Israel and Jerusalem as "the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel," do the same."

 

 

 

The Likud party has had great power in recent years. They claim the right to settle in land that is not Israel's, illegal settlements.

 

 

 

Jewish national front

 

 

 

"The Jewish National Front calls for a state that is more Jewish in practice than strictly in ceremony, including emplacement of Torah laws in place of the current civil ones after the Jewish majority is increased west of the Jordan River. This will be achieved through motivating mass Jewish immigration to Israel as well as encouraging emigration of Arabs through various incentives."

 

 

 

National Union

 

 

 

"The party has a joint platform, and in particular it supports the settlement of all the Land of Israel, advocates the use of more military power in the War on terror and harsher measures against Palestinian terrorism. It rejects all current Oslo-based peace efforts which it sees as dangerous to Israel and the notion of what it calls a "22nd Arab state". The party instead advocates voluntary transfer of the Arabs from the West Bank, though it has been vague as to how this could be implemented."

 

 

 

All of these parties pretty much don't recognize the Palestinians' right to exist or have their own sovereign borders by continuing the expansion of Israel.

[megakiller32]

Another method, of course. This is not a military problem, and it cannot be solved with a military solution.

 

 

 

I've already established what needs to happen to end Hamas' legitimacy, and that's for Fatah or another political party in Palestine to stop ruining its reputation by giving in to corruption. If that happens, Hamas will be out of power within a year to two years. Yes, there will still be factions within Palestine, but they'll fade out when the people of Palestine realize they don't have to resort to extremism to be helped.

 

 

 

Second, Israel needs to be more negotiable on their terms. Quite frankly, if I cared about who ruled the land and who was in power, I probably wouldn't agree to their terms either; they're pretty ridiculously biased in their own favor, and they're unwaivering in what they will accept. If the US put more pressure on Israel to negotiate their terms, we'd see some progress. [bAs the person that I am, I would give Israel any terms they wanted if it resulted in peace, if the Palestinians were treated as citizens of Israel, and if Jerusalem was accessible to Muslims. However, not everyone is like me, and some think that land ownership and some power are big deals. It's all nationalist nonsense, but I digress.

 

 

 

Third, Israel needs to stop condoning the establishment of illegal settlements in the West Bank, as well as stop removing settlements that are owned by the Palestinians. If they did that, Palestine would feel that Israel actually recognizes their sovereignty.

 

 

 

Fourth, Israel needs to end its blockages of food aid and water that they've set up throughout the strip. They also need to give Palestine some control over their own sea and airspace.

 

 

 

Fifth, once Hamas is out of power, it would be much easier to negotiate true sovereign borders with a secular/leftist Fatah in power. It will open up Israel and force them to be "less secure", but it's a solution that everyone can live with.

 

 

 

 

 

edit: And just for a little sidenote, I'd like to post some radical parties in Israel that have a lot of legitimacy in their country:

 

 

 

Likud

 

 

 

"The Likud charter continues to emphasize the right of settlement in "Judea (and) Samaria" (more commonly known as the "West Bank") and Gaza,"[2] and as such, brings it into direct conflict with Palestinian claims on the same territory, although the majority of Palestinians claim the entire territory of Israel as their own.[3] Similarly, their claims of the Jordan river as the permanent eastern border to Israel and Jerusalem as "the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel," do the same."

 

 

 

The Likud party has had great power in recent years. They claim the right to settle in land that is not Israel's, illegal settlements.

 

 

 

Jewish national front

 

 

 

"The Jewish National Front calls for a state that is more Jewish in practice than strictly in ceremony, including emplacement of Torah laws in place of the current civil ones after the Jewish majority is increased west of the Jordan River. This will be achieved through motivating mass Jewish immigration to Israel as well as encouraging emigration of Arabs through various incentives."

 

 

 

National Union

 

 

 

"The party has a joint platform, and in particular it supports the settlement of all the Land of Israel, advocates the use of more military power in the War on terror and harsher measures against Palestinian terrorism. It rejects all current Oslo-based peace efforts which it sees as dangerous to Israel and the notion of what it calls a "22nd Arab state". The party instead advocates voluntary transfer of the Arabs from the West Bank, though it has been vague as to how this could be implemented."

 

 

 

All of these parties pretty much don't recognize the Palestinians' right to exist or have their own sovereign borders by continuing the expansion of Israel.

 

 

 

I agree with some of those points, but alot of them are only really viable and safe for Israel if Hamas are out of power.

 

Anyway, it's likely Hamas would eliminate the other political parties due to the corruption and thier reign over the Gaza strip.

[magekillr]

Well Hamas won't be out of power until the other parties stop ruining their own legitimacy with corruption.

 

 

 

Anyway, it's likely Hamas would eliminate the other political parties due to the corruption and thier reign over the Gaza strip.

 

 

 

Not really. They're not that corrupt, they're just radically violent in how the want to accomplish their foreign policy goals. I would agree that they're corrupt in that they send rockets over the border because it will keep them in power. They know full well that Israel would have a response like this, and it would push their support/poll numbers up. That's really the only corruption that they have. They give 90% of their money to the citizens, and the remaining 10% is for weapons. They're not living in some upscale mansion while the citizens suffer, they suffer just like the civilians.

 

 

 

Fatah is the corrupt party that took all of the money and kept it for themselves.

 

 

 

Hamas has legitimacy because no one that matters seems to care about the Palestinians except for Iran. Hamas might be giving them a lot of social infrastructure, but it's really nothing more than a guise to keep themselves in power. If they cared for the civilians, they wouldn't lob rockets in the first place; they're not dumb, and neither are the Israelis that are in power.

[1_man_army]

Yeah there is certainly some common ground between Al Qaeda and the Saudi's but their conflict is too great to get over. I couldn't find a link to back directly but both of these skirt around the issue enough to make my point.

 

 

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 984547.stm

 

http://www.elkhabar.com/quotidienFrEn/l ... ida=139172

 

 

 

edit - Here is another link which is supposedly an interview with Bin Laden where he explains his dispute with the Saudi royals. I can't guarantee its authenticity as it isn't from a source I've used before. Even if it is a fake it does detail the points well.

 

 

 

http://www.justresponse.net/Bin_Laden4.html

 

 

 

 

Likud

 

 

 

"The Likud charter continues to emphasize the right of settlement in "Judea (and) Samaria" (more commonly known as the "West Bank") and Gaza,"[2] and as such, brings it into direct conflict with Palestinian claims on the same territory, although the majority of Palestinians claim the entire territory of Israel as their own.[3] Similarly, their claims of the Jordan river as the permanent eastern border to Israel and Jerusalem as "the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel," do the same."

 

 

 

The Likud party has had great power in recent years. They claim the right to settle in land that is not Israel's, illegal settlements.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Since you're referring to Likud, it's interesting to note that Bejamin Netanyahu (Likud's leader) was part of a grour who celebrated the 60th anniversary of The King David Hotel Bombing which killed 91 people.

 

 

 

That is a big part of why I dislike Netanyahu. I also distrust Livni as a politician. Yitzak Rabin is the only recent Israeli leader who I have respect for, at least he was pragmatic enough to sign the Oslo Accords and brave enough to put himself against public opinion by doing so.

[i_love_burritos]

Ok, but just a question here-

 

Do you agree that Israel should continue the ground assault to wipe out Hamas, or another method?

 

I don't really think it's possible to wipe out Hamas, they've probably taught thier children in thier "cause" and the children will grow up with the Hamas morales of killing all the Jews in the world.

 

 

 

Will stop posting as my views anger some.

[magekillr]

Ok, but just a question here-

 

Do you agree that Israel should continue the ground assault to wipe out Hamas, or another method?

 

I don't really think it's possible to wipe out Hamas, they've probably taught thier children in thier "cause" and the children will grow up with the Hamas morales of killing all the Jews in the world.

 

 

 

All the more reason for the Israeli military, to keep using the force they have been using to "destroy" HAMAS. Regardless of civilian casualties. Civilians who will eventually become like HAMAS themselves.

 

 

 

Well you're not ignorant at all.

 

 

 

Hey look, Obama is about to be inaugurated, and Israel declares a ceasefire. Hmmmmmm, didn't see that one coming :roll:

 

 

 

Israel has declared a unilateral cease-fire in the fighting in Gaza beginning at 2 a.m. Sunday (7 p.m. ET Saturday), Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said.

 

 

 

"We can say that the conditions have been brought about that enable us to say that the aims that we laid down for the operation have been completely achieved, if not more than that, " Olmert said. "Hamas has been dealt a very serious blow."

 

 

 

But Olmert said Israel is prepared to respond if Hamas militants continue fighting in the Palestinian territory.

 

 

 

"If foes decide to continue to fight against us, then we will be ready and we shall consider ourselves justified in replying," he said. "If Hamas still is not able to correctly evaluate the blow that has been inflicted on it, if it continues to attack us, it will be surprised at Israel's determination.

 

 

 

"I do not suggest that Hamas or other terrorist organizations try us."

 

 

 

"Hamas' military machine has been substantially destroyed," the official added. "They have been given a sufficient deterrence that they will think twice before attacking again."

 

 

 

The announcement followed a Cabinet meeting meant to vote on the basics of a plan that could end the fighting in Gaza. It also came a day after Israeli and U.S. diplomats signed an agreement designed to stop arms smuggling into the Palestinian territory through tunnels.

 

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/ ... index.html

[1_man_army]

 

 

 

Hey look, Obama is about to be inaugurated, and Israel declares a ceasefire. Hmmmmmm, didn't see that one coming :roll:

 

[hide=]

Israel has declared a unilateral cease-fire in the fighting in Gaza beginning at 2 a.m. Sunday (7 p.m. ET Saturday), Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said.

 

 

 

"We can say that the conditions have been brought about that enable us to say that the aims that we laid down for the operation have been completely achieved, if not more than that, " Olmert said. "Hamas has been dealt a very serious blow."

 

 

 

But Olmert said Israel is prepared to respond if Hamas militants continue fighting in the Palestinian territory.

 

 

 

"If foes decide to continue to fight against us, then we will be ready and we shall consider ourselves justified in replying," he said. "If Hamas still is not able to correctly evaluate the blow that has been inflicted on it, if it continues to attack us, it will be surprised at Israel's determination.

 

 

 

"I do not suggest that Hamas or other terrorist organizations try us."

 

 

 

"Hamas' military machine has been substantially destroyed," the official added. "They have been given a sufficient deterrence that they will think twice before attacking again."

 

 

 

The announcement followed a Cabinet meeting meant to vote on the basics of a plan that could end the fighting in Gaza. It also came a day after Israeli and U.S. diplomats signed an agreement designed to stop arms smuggling into the Palestinian territory through tunnels.

[/hide]

 

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/ ... index.html

 

 

 

It looks like Israel is putting across a ceasefire that they know Hamas will never agree to, it is another PR exercise. A unilateral ceasefire with unagreeable terms that will just provoke Hamas more and allow Israel to react again when it suits them. It is a waste of time, they need to get a multilateral agreed ceasefire in place for this to have any effect, a Hamas spokesman has already declared that there is no way they will agree to the terms.

[Echofish]

A classmate of mine just posted pictured of him taking part in an anti-Israel campaign here in London. He was wearing a moustache like Hitler and written the words "Slags" all over his face. The ironic thing is that he word a shirt saying "peace" and just 2 days ago, he told me he wanted to massacre everyone in Israel :roll:

[jjrox32]

A classmate of mine just posted pictured of him taking part in an anti-Israel campaign here in London. He was wearing a moustache like Hitler and written the words "Slags" all over his face. The ironic thing is that he word a shirt saying "peace" and just 2 days ago, he told me he wanted to massacre everyone in Israel :roll:

 

 

 

Well that's a little ironic.

[magekillr]

A classmate of mine just posted pictured of him taking part in an anti-Israel campaign here in London. He was wearing a moustache like Hitler and written the words "Slags" all over his face. The ironic thing is that he word a shirt saying "peace" and just 2 days ago, he told me he wanted to massacre everyone in Israel :roll:

 

 

 

Ugh, this hatred needs to stop. This is what I don't like about Israel overreacting; now there's antisemitic happenings all around the world.

 

 

 

I saw a rally for "pro-Israel" people on youtube, and there was violence there as well. I just don't get it! Peace is the priority, not the massacre of any innocent civilians! The damn governments on both sides just...ugh!

[RichieMcD]

Ok, but just a question here-

 

Do you agree that Israel should continue the ground assault to wipe out Hamas, or another method?

 

I don't really think it's possible to wipe out Hamas, they've probably taught thier children in thier "cause" and the children will grow up with the Hamas morales of killing all the Jews in the world.

 

 

 

All the more reason for the Israeli military, to keep using the force they have been using to "destroy" HAMAS. Regardless of civilian casualties. Civilians who will eventually become like HAMAS themselves.

 

 

 

So should a huge amount of Catholic Northern Irish be killed since a very small minority will join the IRA / INLA? Or should a huge amount of Protestant Northern Irish be killed since a very small minority will join the UDA / UDF? In essence what you're promoting is genocide. I like how much you value human life.

 

 

 

There's no telling who will become what, so technically what you're promoting is genocide. I hope to god you never end up with power in an armed force.

 

 

 

Edit: Speaking of clashes, last Saturday in Dublin there was a pro-Palestine (not pro-Hamas) rally beside Dublin's biggest landmark calling for an end to Israeli violence. They eventually marched towards the Israeli embassy to further show their message, when a pro-Israel rally heard of this they went to the embassy and ended up with 20 arrests for violence, public disorder and racial slurs. They're still trying to identify people over CCTV.

 

 

 

Shows how big this "struggle" is becoming when there is fighting and arrests occurring in countries thousands of miles away with a relatively small amount of Jews / Israelis and something only like 20,000 Islamic immigrants in a country as small and peaceful as Ireland.

[dragoonson]

Why is Israel to blame?The Jews were displaced by Hitler in WWII,given land around their holy land,which coincidentally Islam's THIRD holiest land (first and second are in their possession) and constantly attacked by Palestine for that.Now they retaliate and they're at fault.Excuse me,who is in Iraq searching for a man from Iran?

 

 

 

Oh wait,who is in Iraq for nothing anymore?

[RichieMcD]

Why is Israel to blame?The Jews were displaced by Hitler in WWII,given land around their holy land,which coincidentally Islam's THIRD holiest land (first and second are in their possession) and constantly attacked by Palestine for that.Now they retaliate and they're at fault.Excuse me,who is in Iraq searching for a man from Iran?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Emphasize the given land statement, it wasn't their land beforehand. It was sold to them but they eventually took a huge amount more of land, something like 55% the land in that region is populated by 33% of the population, the 33% being Israelis, the rest being a huge majority Islamic. Obviously Palestine is going to be pissed when it's own rightful land is taken from them and then occupied by a foreign group claiming rightful ownership to it.

 

 

 

Just because your religion / color / ancestry was persecuted doesn't mean you should be given land, it's simply bad luck.