First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Should American Funding to Israel Halt?
4053 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Yo Mommas House
Offline
Posted 7/30/09

Yei wrote:


Karkarov wrote:

If anything we should stop funding them because it has become a political handicap. They do very little to help America, they don't keep their word to us, and it puts us in a bad light internationally. Sure they will be in a bad spot if we stop and they wont like us, but the cold hard truth is that without American and UN support Israel would have already been subjugated by a neighbor one way or the other. Also again, they are no threat to us militarily.

The reality is that every middle eastern nation loves war. There has not been a period of any real length in the last 500 years that there was not a war of some kind in that region. Palestinians and Israelis want to kill each other and it is that simple, we may as well let them to be honest.


The only real threat for Israel I can see is from Iran. And no, it's not that simple.


What can Iran possible do to Israel they would be stupid to launch any attack. Israel will just flatten that country. Iran is no threat to anyone they have never launched any wars on any country the media just tells us they are a threat because somehow Israel is able to convince America that Israels enemies is ours as well.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
114
Offline
Posted 7/30/09 , edited 7/30/09

SeraphAlford wrote:


YeiThe root of the problem is the treatment of the Palestinians received in 1948. Then they get screwed over again and again from 1967 on. And then Israel responds to their terrorism with even worse terrorism? To me it's not a very complicated situation, and it's very clear what the problem is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SbjAanvUqs


Well, they weren’t Palestinians in 1948. They were Arabs. Their treatment was terrible, but it was also a inexorable response to the Arab League’s attempted genocide against the Jews. You get together a bunch of desperate holocaust survivors and try to kill them, you can bet your arse they’re going to go overboard in retaliation.

Also, neither Gaza nor the Westbank were under the control of the Palestinians when they were captured by Israel. The Palestinian populations in these regions were actually minute at that time, but they grew due to hyper immigration and rapid birth rates. Which leads me to the question: if life in these regions is so terrible, why do the Palestinians keep coming here and why do they keep having so many children?

Westbank was part of Jordan and Gaza was part of Egypt. When these two nations attacked Israel, Israel captured the territory from THEM. Not the Palestinians. In addition, while Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian Arabs was terrible it was comparatively more moderate than the treatment of the Palestinian Arabs by Arab states. So, if that was the root of the problem then why isn’t Lebanon getting hit by terrorists? They were massacring refugee camps full of Palestinians up until very, very recently. Well, the answer is because they’re not Jews.


lol who cares what they were in 1948 and what they are now.

Those Arab countries are bad, no one said they weren't. But I don't understand this mentality of saying 'they were bad too, so that somehow justifies Israel's actions.' Lebanon didn't steal their country, no Arab country stole their land and homes, Israel did. And the problems in Lebanon with the Christians vs the Muslims/Palestinians is another issue.
Scientist Moderator
digs 
36005 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 7/30/09
I think funding to Israel should stop or decrease. They aren't working on getting out of the West Bank and they seem to have a power struggle with us. They are a crucial ally, but if we truly want to help them w should change their actions in the West Bank via funding and lack thereof. I support Israel, but I agree with Seraph, the funding should stop until they get serious and meet obligations.
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 7/30/09 , edited 7/30/09

Yei
lol who cares what they were in 1948 and what they are now.

Those Arab countries are bad, no one said they weren't. But I don't understand this mentality of saying 'they were bad too, so that somehow justifies Israel's actions.' Lebanon didn't steal their country, no Arab country stole their land and homes, Israel did. And the problems in Lebanon with the Christians vs the Muslims/Palestinians is another issue.


It’s relevant to the topic at hand because the Arabs in that region weren’t identifying themselves as members of a unique Palestinian people yet. They were still considering themselves members of their respective Arab nations. Then Israel went to war with these Arab nations. Now, what they did was wrong. I’m not denying that. But again, in that half of the century this kind of behavior was common. The US, the UK, and Canada all rounded up Japanese citizens of their own countries and imprisoned them when we went to war with Japan.

Israel did the same thing, chasing the people identifying themselves with enemy nations out of their country for security purposes. I don’t agree with it and don’t defend it, but at the same time to say that their actions came first is false. They react violently to the Arabs in response to an Arab campaign against the Jews.

During the 1948 war Westbank was taken over by Trans-Jordan which changed its name to Jordan in 1949. Israel then captured Westbank from Jordan in 1967. Hit it up on wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank


The 1948 Arab-Israeli War saw the establishment of Israel in parts of the former Mandate, while the territory known as the "West Bank" area was captured by Trans-Jordan. Since it then controlled the territory on both sides of the Jordan river, Trans-Jordan renamed itself Jordan in 1949.


Third sent second para.

Egypt also took control of Gaza in 1948 and kept it until Israel took it in 1967.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip


Egypt governed the Gaza Strip from 1948–67,


First sent of para 2.

Again, Israel didn’t take these territories to subject the Palestinians. They took them because they were being used to launch terror attacks on west Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. They did not take them from the Palestinians. When they took them the Palestinian presence was negligible. Now it's grown from hyper immigration and high birth rates. Why if life is so bad in Westbank and Gaza are so many Palestinians rushing in? Why are so many families being so fruitful? The answer is simple: Israel is nicer to the Palestinians than any of the Arabs in the region.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
114
Offline
Posted 7/30/09

SeraphAlford wrote:


Yei
lol who cares what they were in 1948 and what they are now.

Those Arab countries are bad, no one said they weren't. But I don't understand this mentality of saying 'they were bad too, so that somehow justifies Israel's actions.' Lebanon didn't steal their country, no Arab country stole their land and homes, Israel did. And the problems in Lebanon with the Christians vs the Muslims/Palestinians is another issue.


It’s relevant to the topic at hand because the Arabs in that region weren’t identifying themselves as members of a unique Palestinian people yet. They were still considering themselves members of their respective Arab nations. Then Israel went to war with these Arab nations. Now, what they did was wrong. I’m not denying that. But again, in that half of the century this kind of behavior was common. The US, the UK, and Canada all rounded up Japanese citizens of their own countries and imprisoned them when we went to war with Japan.

Israel did the same thing, chasing the people identifying themselves with enemy nations out of their country for security purposes. I don’t agree with it and don’t defend it, but at the same time to say that their actions came first is false. They react violently to the Arabs in response to an Arab campaign against the Jews.

During the 1948 war Westbank was taken over by Trans-Jordan which changed its name to Jordan in 1949. Israel then captured Westbank from Jordan in 1967. Hit it up on wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank


The 1948 Arab-Israeli War saw the establishment of Israel in parts of the former Mandate, while the territory known as the "West Bank" area was captured by Trans-Jordan. Since it then controlled the territory on both sides of the Jordan river, Trans-Jordan renamed itself Jordan in 1949.


Third sent second para.

Egypt also took control of Gaza in 1948 and kept it until Israel took it in 1967.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip


Egypt governed the Gaza Strip from 1948–67,


First sent of para 2.

Again, Israel didn’t take these territories to subject the Palestinians. They took them because they were being used to launch terror attacks on west Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. They did not take them from the Palestinians. When they took them the Palestinian presence was negligible. Now it's grown from hyper immigration and high birth rates. Why if life is so bad in Westbank and Gaza are so many Palestinians rushing in? Why are so many families being so fruitful? The answer is simple: Israel is nicer to the Palestinians than any of the Arabs in the region.


The ethnic cleansing was not a reaction, it was completely unnecessary, the whole point of it was to get the Palestinians to leave. The Arabs starting a war was inevitable, the Jews were trying to steal Palestine.

Explain this thing about Palestinians "rushing in." Arabs just traditionally have lots of kids, even the ones in the refugee camps (600000 -> 4.5 million).
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 7/30/09

Yei
The ethnic cleansing was not a reaction, it was completely unnecessary, the whole point of it was to get the Palestinians to leave. The Arabs starting a war was inevitable, the Jews were trying to steal Palestine.


Wait, who was trying to steal what? The Arab League had no claim to Palestine. It had belonged to the British since 1918 and before that it was under the control of the Ottoman Empire. The Turks had owned it since 1517. Arabs have only had control of Israel twice--from 634 until the Crusader invasion in June 1099, and from 1292 until the year 1517 when they were dispelled by the Turks in their conquest.

Eighty percent of the British Mandate was given to the Arabs. They then controlled 99.9% of the Middle East. Twenty percent of the British Mandate, .1% of the Middle East, was granted to the Jews. Again, this twenty percent was given to the Jews comprised the vast majority of its population. In addition, the Jews had already purchased much this land with the Arabs on an individual level. When the Jews came most of the territory was either desert or swamp. They worked the land and made deserts bloom and emptied swaps to make room for thriving settlements. Prior to that the Arab’s had no interest in it and gladly sold it to the Jews. Then the Jews gave it a polish and suddenly the Arabs wanted it back. So to me it seems they were the ones trying to rob the Jews and not the other way around.

In addition, the Arab League acknowledged the plan as fair and logical but refused to compromise. They did not want Jews on the Muslim Holy Land, even if it was also the Jewish Holy Land. So, again: Israel was privately owned by Jews, Israel was populated by Jews, Israel was made livable by Jews, and Israel was given to the Jews by its previous owners meaning they owned it nationally as well. So, what claim did the Arabs have to it? Absolutely none, but they wanted to steal the Jews land, they wanted to kill the Jews, and they didn’t care what the UN had to say about it. The Jews responded by chasing the Arabs out, though most left of their own volition.

So, the Arab League's reaction was not only avoidable it ws also wrong, illegal, irrational/unfair (by their own admitance), and a bit absurd.


Explain this thing about Palestinians "rushing in." Arabs just traditionally have lots of kids, even the ones in the refugee camps (600000 -> 4.5 million).


Well, if they’re hardly able to fend for themselves why are they bringing more children into the world? And you still have not explained the immigrants moving in.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
114
Offline
Posted 7/30/09

SeraphAlford wrote:


Yei
The ethnic cleansing was not a reaction, it was completely unnecessary, the whole point of it was to get the Palestinians to leave. The Arabs starting a war was inevitable, the Jews were trying to steal Palestine.


Wait, who was trying to steal what? The Arab League had no claim to Palestine. It had belonged to the British since 1918 and before that it was under the control of the Ottoman Empire. The Turks had owned it since 1517. Arabs have only had control of Israel twice--from 634 until the Crusader invasion in June 1099, and from 1292 until the year 1517 when they were dispelled by the Turks in their conquest.


Eighty percent of the British Mandate was given to the Arabs. They then controlled 99.9% of the Middle East. Twenty percent of the British Mandate, .1% of the Middle East, was granted to the Jews. Again, this twenty percent was given to the Jews comprised the vast majority of its population. In addition, the Jews had already purchased much this land with the Arabs on an individual level. When the Jews came most of the territory was either desert or swamp. They worked the land and made deserts bloom and emptied swaps to make room for thriving settlements. Prior to that the Arab’s had no interest in it and gladly sold it to the Jews. Then the Jews gave it a polish and suddenly the Arabs wanted it back. So to me it seems they were the ones trying to rob the Jews and not the other way around.

In addition, the Arab League acknowledged the plan as fair and logical but refused to compromise. They did not want Jews on the Muslim Holy Land, even if it was also the Jewish Holy Land. So, again: Israel was privately owned by Jews, Israel was populated by Jews, Israel was made livable by Jews, and Israel was given to the Jews by its previous owners meaning they owned it nationally as well. So, what claim did the Arabs have to it? Absolutely none, but they wanted to steal the Jews land, they wanted to kill the Jews, and they didn’t care what the UN had to say about it. The Jews responded by chasing the Arabs out, though most left of their own volition.

So, the Arab League's reaction was not only avoidable it ws also wrong, illegal, irrational/unfair (by their own admitance), and a bit absurd.


80% of the British mandate was given to Arabs? I thought the British just left everything for the UN to decide, who made this decision to give 80% to the Arabs and 20% to the Jews, I've never heard that before. After Britain gave up on Palestine because of the Jewish terrorism, the UN came up with the Partition Plan. The Arabs and Palestinians decided they didn't want to have to give up any part of the country, and that allowed the Zionists to begin the planning of the ethnic cleansing. The ethnic cleansing was not a result of anything, it was started before the war. The war started when the Arabs saw the Jews carrying out this ethnic cleansing and taking over all the land.

The Zionists stole most of the land and homes of the 600000 Palestinians driven out, they didn't leave everything they had willingly, and like I said before, many still have the deeds to their land and homes. The ethnic cleansing and Zionists taking over all the villages is what caused the Arabs to react and started the war.



Well, if they’re hardly able to fend for themselves why are they bringing more children into the world? And you still have not explained the immigrants moving in.


Why do Africans keep having kids if they don't have enough food and are all starving? Why o any people in poverty have kids? I don't know, but it is very common for Arabs to have many kids, like Catholics.

And I asked you to explain the immigrants moving in because I've never heard about that either.
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 7/30/09 , edited 7/30/09

Yei

80% of the British mandate was given to Arabs? I thought the British just left everything for the UN to decide, who made this decision to give 80% to the Arabs and 20% to the Jews, I've never heard that before. After Britain gave up on Palestine because of the Jewish terrorism, the UN came up with the Partition Plan. The Arabs and Palestinians decided they didn't want to have to give up any part of the country, and that allowed the Zionists to begin the planning of the ethnic cleansing. The ethnic cleansing was not a result of anything, it was started before the war. The war started when the Arabs saw the Jews carrying out this ethnic cleansing and taking over all the land.


The ethnic cleansing did not start before the war, it started after the war. Yes, some scholars have argued the opposite but MOST find it an unlikely hypothesis with no real evidence. The Arabs were not reacting to Jewish terrorism. The Zionist gangs did terrorize the Arabs but only after Arab aggression towards the Israelites. Yes, 80% of the British Mandate was given to the Arabs. Yes, Palestinians still immigrate all over Israel. Do some research because I’m afraid your historical knowledge is simply confuse. I can recommend some sources if you like, but since that involves purchasing book I’m not sure you’d be willing. Palestine was not part of the Arab's country. Again, they've only had controll twice and the most recent was prior to the Turk takeover in 1517.


The Zionists stole most of the land and homes of the 600000 Palestinians driven out, they didn't leave everything they had willingly, and like I said before, many still have the deeds to their land and homes. The ethnic cleansing and Zionists taking over all the villages is what caused the Arabs to react and started the war.


Not true, most of the Arabs who fled Palestine did so of their own volition, look it up.



Why do Africans keep having kids if they don't have enough food and are all starving? Why o any people in poverty have kids? I don't know, but it is very common for Arabs to have many kids, like Catholics.


The African population reproduces at a normal rate. The palestinian population is absolutely sky rocketing.

Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
114
Offline
Posted 7/30/09 , edited 7/30/09

SeraphAlford wrote:

The ethnic cleansing did not start before the war, it started after the war. Yes, some scholars have argued the opposite but MOST find it an unlikely hypothesis with no real evidence. The Arabs were not reacting to Jewish terrorism. The Zionist gangs did terrorize the Arabs but only after Arab aggression towards the Israelites. Yes, 80% of the British Mandate was given to the Arabs. Yes, Palestinians still immigrate all over Israel. Do some research because I’m afraid your historical knowledge is simply confuse. I can recommend some sources if you like, but since that involves purchasing book I’m not sure you’d be willing. Palestine was not part of the Arab's country. Again, they've only had controll twice and the most recent was prior to the Turk takeover in 1517.


The Arabs were reacting to the Zionists taking over, they didn't react just at the presence of the Jews, what scared them was when they started getting control. And I'm talking about after Britain gave up Palestine, not way before Israel's creation. Britain left control to the UN, I doubt the UN decided to give 80% of it to the Arabs, they developed the Partition Plan afterward.

"Palestine was not part of the Arab's country." You mean Palestine was never owned by the many Arabs who lived it in? But they owned land and lived their all their lives. When all that was taken from them it was a problem.

"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves ... politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves... The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country."
-- David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.



Not true, most of the Arabs who fled Palestine did so of their own volition, look it up.


Most of the Arabs who fled did so because of the ethnic cleansing. I don't think they willingly abandoned their land and homes and went to refugee camps. The ethnic cleansing was a success, so I don't see how you can say they left on their own.



The African population reproduces at a normal rate. The palestinian population is absolutely sky rocketing.


It's probably a traditional thing. But I don't see what your point is. They're having so many kids because they're so happy with their situation?
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 7/30/09

Quote from another threat...........

Any claimed land and territories by human's race is all non-sense. There's no one who supposed to claim this land is owned by them and draw the line or borders to prevent another human entering their territories.

This world was made by God for human, all entire human, regardless gender, belief, races or age.
The borders are just nuisance to peace. Mostly happened to USSR(Soviet), past Germany (Berlin Wall) and North-South Korea.

Screw Holy Book that said, That's their Promised Land. If that true, that caused to war by ideology which always lead to extremist in both sides. 'The Land' is only been pursued because the human's greed, that's all. Ignoring another human's race live in their neighbor always caused jealously and hatred toward the Wall.

If they, Israel and Palestine, only discussed the war solution because of land, property and resources. That's greed and will lead to another demands for both side. Thus, it'll be never ending war.

For the sake's of humanity and peace, I suggest just nuke both country that always cause harm, suffering and hatred to the world. After that, whether Iran or Israel's supporter mad, vanish them as well. They're just bunch of extremist that always caused damage to people whom not stands for them.

What we need is a NEUTRAL forces to do this. Without stands in both sides. Sadly, that's impossible for now, referring to UN which is being controlled or couldn't do anything if America involves like in Afghanistan for "biological weapon"

If people in the world do not always values their own life and ignoring others life, the war would not happen. We need humanity that always aims for the sake's of all human in the world, for the sake's of the world, for the eternal peace.

20924 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Singapore
Offline
Posted 7/31/09
Why should US give more aid to Israel if they cant even help themselves? Agree more? Millions of Americans are homeless due to the crisis.
20924 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Singapore
Offline
Posted 7/31/09

Ryutai-Desk wrote:


Quote from another threat...........

Any claimed land and territories by human's race is all non-sense. There's no one who supposed to claim this land is owned by them and draw the line or borders to prevent another human entering their territories.

This world was made by God for human, all entire human, regardless gender, belief, races or age.
The borders are just nuisance to peace. Mostly happened to USSR(Soviet), past Germany (Berlin Wall) and North-South Korea.

Screw Holy Book that said, That's their Promised Land. If that true, that caused to war by ideology which always lead to extremist in both sides. 'The Land' is only been pursued because the human's greed, that's all. Ignoring another human's race live in their neighbor always caused jealously and hatred toward the Wall.

If they, Israel and Palestine, only discussed the war solution because of land, property and resources. That's greed and will lead to another demands for both side. Thus, it'll be never ending war.

For the sake's of humanity and peace, I suggest just nuke both country that always cause harm, suffering and hatred to the world. After that, whether Iran or Israel's supporter mad, vanish them as well. They're just bunch of extremist that always caused damage to people whom not stands for them.

What we need is a NEUTRAL forces to do this. Without stands in both sides. Sadly, that's impossible for now, referring to UN which is being controlled or couldn't do anything if America involves like in Afghanistan for "biological weapon"

If people in the world do not always values their own life and ignoring others life, the war would not happen. We need humanity that always aims for the sake's of all human in the world, for the sake's of the world, for the eternal peace.



Its "thread" not threat LOL
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 8/1/09

azera wrote:


Ryutai-Desk wrote:


Quote from another threat...........



Its "thread" not threat LOL


That's good to know...... lol
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.