Israel and Palestine

2011-11-02 12:00:08

#1326

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6412|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:
Thats odd, you support Israel's unilateral declaration of statehood, and recognition by the UN, in the face of opposition from the people they should have negotiated with back then.

Why can't the Palestinians do the same?

Israel doesn't recognise Palestine's right to exist.
China doesn't recognise Taiwan's right to exist
Ireland doesn't recognise Northern Ireland's right to exist
America doesn't recognise Cuba's right to exist

and so on.

Why pick on the Palestinians and deny them UN and UNESCO membership?

Israel DOES recognize Palestine's right to exist. Already covered.

China recognizes Taiwan...just differently than most others do.

Ireland? Who cares?

America most certainly does recognize Cuba's right to exist.

Troll harder.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-11-02 15:32:46

#1327

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6154|what

Why is Palestine becoming a UN member such a threat to Israel?

2011-11-02 15:42:12

#1328

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5587

FEOS wrote:
America most certainly does recognize Cuba's right to exist.

Laughable to claim otherwise. Really dumb too.

2011-11-02 15:44:17

#1329

Beduin: Compensation of Reactive Power in the grid; +510|5752|شمال

Why is Palestine becoming a member of unesco such a threat to Israel?

الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic

2011-11-02 17:14:19

#1330

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6412|'Murka

AussieReaper wrote:
Why is Palestine becoming a UN member such a threat to Israel?

Nobody said it was. It does, however, undermine the peace process if it doesn't happen within the two-state solution framework.

Beduin wrote:
Why is Palestine becoming a member of unesco such a threat to Israel?

De facto UN recognition of Palestine outside of the two-state solution.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-11-02 17:25:58

#1331

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6154|what

FEOS wrote:
AussieReaper wrote:
Why is Palestine becoming a UN member such a threat to Israel?
Nobody said it was. It does, however, undermine the peace process if it doesn't happen within the two-state solution framework.

Beduin wrote:
Why is Palestine becoming a member of unesco such a threat to Israel?
De facto UN recognition of Palestine outside of the two-state solution.

The two-state solution has been stalled, blocked and derailed for decades.

2011-11-03 01:52:20

#1332

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6107|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:
De facto UN recognition of Palestine outside of the two-state solution.

It does, however, undermine the peace process if it doesn't happen within the two-state solution framework.

And why is that a problem?

You're happy with majority UN resolutions rammed down the throats of Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea etc, why not Israel?

Israel was created by UN diktat, why should the Palestinians have to 'negotiate' with their invaders and oppressors?

Its entirely pointless when Israel is made it crystal clear it will not be negotiating on any item of substance, simply expecting the Palestinians to accept every one of their demands and sign a one-sided deal - all the while stealing yet more land which is itself supposedly the subject of 'negotiation'.

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2011-11-03 02:51:45

#1333

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6412|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
De facto UN recognition of Palestine outside of the two-state solution.
It does, however, undermine the peace process if it doesn't happen within the two-state solution framework.
And why is that a problem?

You're happy with majority UN resolutions rammed down the throats of Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea etc, why not Israel?

You're all about multi-lateral solutions...except when teh dirtee joos are involved, apparently.

Dilbert_X wrote:
Israel was created by UN diktat, why should the Palestinians have to 'negotiate' with their invaders and oppressors?

And that has worked so well, hasn't it?

Dilbert_X wrote:
Its entirely pointless when Israel is made it crystal clear it will not be negotiating on any item of substance, simply expecting the Palestinians to accept every one of their demands and sign a one-sided deal - all the while stealing yet more land which is itself supposedly the subject of 'negotiation'.

Israel has made it crystal clear that they are willing to negotiate on nearly every item...except a return to the original 1967 borders. They are willing to alter existing borders and look at other options...but they feel that--based on how closely they came to losing everything when they were attacked from all sides in 1967--a return to that position is a non-starter. That is completely understandable. Why, if the first role of a nation is defense of its people, would you put your people in an undefendable position?

There are many options between the current state and the original 1967 borders. Neither the former nor the latter are acceptable to either party. Hence negotiations.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-11-03 03:17:34

#1334

Beduin: Compensation of Reactive Power in the grid; +510|5752|شمال

FEOS wrote:
Beduin wrote:
Why is Palestine becoming a member of unesco such a threat to Israel?
De facto UN recognition of Palestine outside of the two-state solution.

i dont understand?

الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic

2011-11-03 04:41:39

#1335

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6107|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:
Israel has made it crystal clear that they are willing to negotiate on nearly every item...except a return to the original 1967 borders. They are willing to alter existing borders and look at other options...but they feel that--based on how closely they came to losing everything when they were attacked from all sides in 1967--a return to that position is a non-starter.

A) No they haven't, there are no issues they are prepared to negotiate on, not borders, not right of return, not compensation, not 'recognising Israel as a jewish state' whatever that means.

B) Why are the 1967 borders not defensible? How does having the border run around Jerusalem instead of through the middle make the slightest difference?
The next war will most likely be fought with long range air strikes, missiles and WMDs, not tank battles. Refusing to negotiate on borders is just another pretext for not negotiating.

FEOS wrote:
You're all about multi-lateral solutions...except when teh dirtee joos are involved, apparently.

The UN solution is a multi-lateral solution, the whole world, apart from Israel and the US, are in agreement.

Now explain why you're happy for the UN to impose political solutions and military intervention on every nation except Israel.

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2011-11-03 16:59:13

#1336

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6412|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Israel has made it crystal clear that they are willing to negotiate on nearly every item...except a return to the original 1967 borders. They are willing to alter existing borders and look at other options...but they feel that--based on how closely they came to losing everything when they were attacked from all sides in 1967--a return to that position is a non-starter.
A) No they haven't, there are no issues they are prepared to negotiate on, not borders, not right of return, not compensation, not 'recognising Israel as a jewish state' whatever that means.

B) Why are the 1967 borders not defensible? How does having the border run around Jerusalem instead of through the middle make the slightest difference?
The next war will most likely be fought with long range air strikes, missiles and WMDs, not tank battles. Refusing to negotiate on borders is just another pretext for not negotiating.

Just like the last three major conflicts have been...right? As my Army/Marine brothers are so apt to say: you don't hold ground from the air.

And the 1967 borders are about more than just Jerusalem.

Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
You're all about multi-lateral solutions...except when teh dirtee joos are involved, apparently.
The UN solution is a multi-lateral solution, the whole world, apart from Israel and the US, are in agreement.

Now explain why you're happy for the UN to impose political solutions and military intervention on every nation except Israel.

There is no "UN solution" except "return to the 1967 borders".

And I've never been happy for UN imposition of anything. Ever. I just throw it in your face when the UN justifies things because you seem to think it's so damn important.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-11-04 00:14:23

#1337

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6107|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:
And I've never been happy for UN imposition of anything. Ever. I just throw it in your face when the UN justifies things because you seem to think it's so damn important.

You've been pretty happy to try to use the UN for justification of the Iraq invasion, harassment of Iran, Libya etc. Why so reticent when it comes to Israel?

There is no "UN solution" except "return to the 1967 borders".

Because thats the lawful solution. Anything else requires a negotiated agreement.

If the Israelis think they can get a better one they might want to get on and negotiate.

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2011-11-04 03:43:02

#1338

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6412|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
And I've never been happy for UN imposition of anything. Ever. I just throw it in your face when the UN justifies things because you seem to think it's so damn important.
You've been pretty happy to try to use the UN for justification of the Iraq invasion, harassment of Iran, Libya etc. Why so reticent when it comes to Israel?

only when morons try to say they were "illegal". Then I use UN resolutions to show them that they weren't. I've stated multiple times that I don't think the UN should ever overpower one's own national interests.

Dilbert_X wrote:
There is no "UN solution" except "return to the 1967 borders".
Because thats the lawful solution. Anything else requires a negotiated agreement.

If the Israelis think they can get a better one they might want to get on and negotiate.

Which the Israelis have attempted. And the Palestinians keep walking away from. Rinse and repeat.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-11-04 04:56:59

#1339

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6107|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:
Which the Israelis have attempted. And the Palestinians keep walking away from.

No they haven't, the Israelis have attempted to ram through completely unworkable and unreasonable deals which there was never any prospect would be accepted.

They are good at spin though.

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2011-11-04 05:02:48

#1340

Spearhead: Gulf coast redneck hippy; +731|6691|Tampa Bay Florida

Why is it anyones business? I am against ALL religious fundamentalism. That means both Zionism and Islamic extremism. Fuck this desert shithole.

2011-11-04 05:09:26

#1341

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6107|eXtreme to the maX

The Palestinians weren't particularly Islamic before.

Don't you think the world should deal with oppression and slaughter?

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2011-11-04 05:17:58

#1342

Spearhead: Gulf coast redneck hippy; +731|6691|Tampa Bay Florida

Dilbert_X wrote:
The Palestinians weren't particularly Islamic before.

Don't you think the world should deal with oppression and slaughter?

Depends

2011-11-04 08:46:53

#1343

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6412|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Which the Israelis have attempted. And the Palestinians keep walking away from.
No they haven't, the Israelis have attempted to ram through completely unworkable and unreasonable deals which there was never any prospect would be accepted.

They are good at spin though.

The Israelis have offered alternatives to every position except the 1967 borders, and for good reason. The Palestinians refuse to negotiate on anything. They offer nothing except their way or the highway. That is not negotiating. That is "attempting to ram completely unworkable and unreasonable deals which there was never any prospect would be accepted". And then they claim Israel is the one that isn't negotiating. And you say Israel is good at spin?

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-11-08 01:37:27

#1344

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6107|eXtreme to the maX

The Palestinians have pulled back from the original mandate of Palestine (note: not the mandate of Israel) to the 1967 borders.

The Israelis refuse to negotiate on borders, right of return, compensation or rights of Palestinian-Israelis.
What will the Israelis negotiate on exactly?

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2011-11-08 02:49:56

#1345

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6412|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:
The Palestinians have pulled back from the original mandate of Palestine (note: not the mandate of Israel) to the 1967 borders.

The Israelis refuse to negotiate on borders, right of return, compensation or rights of Palestinian-Israelis.
What will the Israelis negotiate on exactly?

They are willing to negotiate on borders, just not going back to the original 1967 borders. They have offered compensation to refugees and various other right of return issues/compromises. If Palestine has its own country, what rights will Palestinians need in Israel, except as tourists and visiting aliens? Same with Israelis in Palestine. Moot point.

Bottomline: Israelis have at least offered compromise options during negotiations. Palestinians have offered nothing (inb4theyhavenothingtooffer). Yet you claim it's the Israelis who negotiate in bad faith and have incredible spin doctors. The irony is so thick you could cut it with a knife.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-11-08 03:27:26

#1346

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6718

FEOS wrote:
Dilbert_X wrote:
Thats odd, you support Israel's unilateral declaration of statehood, and recognition by the UN, in the face of opposition from the people they should have negotiated with back then.

Why can't the Palestinians do the same?

Israel doesn't recognise Palestine's right to exist.
China doesn't recognise Taiwan's right to exist
Ireland doesn't recognise Northern Ireland's right to exist
America doesn't recognise Cuba's right to exist

and so on.

Why pick on the Palestinians and deny them UN and UNESCO membership?
Israel DOES recognize Palestine's right to exist. Already covered.

China recognizes Taiwan...just differently than most others do.

Ireland? Who cares?

America most certainly does recognize Cuba's right to exist.

Troll harder.

Taiwan China issue is a bit tricky. Taiwanese government still claims all areas governed by the PRC as well =/ Officially Taiwan hasn't declared independence nor official separations from China. It's still called the Republic of China for a reason.

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2011-11-08 03:47:47

#1347

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6107|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:
They are willing to negotiate on borders, just not going back to the original 1967 borders.

Right so they are prepared to take more land, or exchange valueless desert for people's homes in Jerusalem, and keep all their settlelements in what is to become Palestine.
That doesn't seem like much of a negotiation.

They have offered compensation to refugees and various other right of return issues/compromises.

Such as?

If Palestine has its own country, what rights will Palestinians need in Israel, except as tourists and visiting aliens?

So they're going to remove the rights of the indigeous Palestinians who still live in their homes in Israel? Or more likely turf them out.

Bottomline: Israelis have at least offered compromise options during negotiations. Palestinians have offered nothing (inb4theyhavenothingtooffer). Yet you claim it's the Israelis who negotiate in bad faith and have incredible spin doctors. The irony is so thick you could cut it with a knife.

They haven't offered compromises, they've simply offered to cement what they have and take more - when international law is clearly on the side of the Palestinians.

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2011-11-08 10:09:03

#1348

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6412|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:
FEOS wrote:
They are willing to negotiate on borders, just not going back to the original 1967 borders.
Right so they are prepared to take more land, or exchange valueless desert for people's homes in Jerusalem, and keep all their settlelements in what is to become Palestine.
That doesn't seem like much of a negotiation.

Research moar. They have offered land exchanges--to include relocation of existing settlements in the OT and parts of Jerusalem.

Dilbert wrote:
They have offered compensation to refugees and various other right of return issues/compromises.
Such as?

Such as for someone who claims to be well-versed in this topic...you should know.

Dilbert wrote:
If Palestine has its own country, what rights will Palestinians need in Israel, except as tourists and visiting aliens?
So they're going to remove the rights of the indigeous Palestinians who still live in their homes in Israel? Or more likely turf them out.

Or, alternatively...they've offered essentially the same thing the Pals have offered to Israelis living in what would become Palestine. Seems fair.

Dilbert wrote:
Bottomline: Israelis have at least offered compromise options during negotiations. Palestinians have offered nothing (inb4theyhavenothingtooffer). Yet you claim it's the Israelis who negotiate in bad faith and have incredible spin doctors. The irony is so thick you could cut it with a knife.
They haven't offered compromises, they've simply offered to cement what they have and take more - when international law is clearly on the side of the Palestinians.

Wrong again. Offering to give up much of what you have is pretty much the opposite of "cementing what you have and taking more."

International law? Not so much. International emotion? Maybe.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2011-11-09 10:20:48

#1349

Spearhead: Gulf coast redneck hippy; +731|6691|Tampa Bay Florida

reuters wrote:
"I cannot bear Netanyahu, he's a liar," Sarkozy told Obama, unaware that the microphones in their meeting room had been switched on, enabling reporters in a separate location to listen in to a simultaneous translation.

"You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you," Obama replied, according to the French interpreter.

lelelel

2011-11-09 10:24:43

#1350

Beduin: Compensation of Reactive Power in the grid; +510|5752|شمال

Spearhead wrote:
reuters wrote:
"I cannot bear Netanyahu, he's a liar," Sarkozy told Obama, unaware that the microphones in their meeting room had been switched on, enabling reporters in a separate location to listen in to a simultaneous translation.

"You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you," Obama replied, according to the French interpreter.
lelelel

hi 5

الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic

BF2S Forums Israel and Palestine

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Beduin wrote:

FEOS wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

Beduin wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Beduin wrote:

FEOS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert wrote:

Dilbert wrote:

Dilbert wrote:

reuters wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

reuters wrote:

Board footer