Pages: 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 … 19

 

2009-10-14 05:50:59
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:

Maybe you could explain why the focus of Europe was on Jews?
It wasn't, although history was re-written and 'anti-semiticism' invented so you'd believe that.
The various nations, religions and ethnic groups have been squabbling and trying to wipe each other out forever.
Serbs, Croats, Catholics, Moslems etc etc.

Hitler set out to exterminate many groups besides the jews.
Maybe if there'd been more Romany gypsies and fewer jews in the first place then the gypsies would have been given a homeland by the UN.
Fuck Israel
2009-10-14 06:05:05
ruisleipa
Member
+149|6507|teh FIN-land

Varegg wrote:

It's pretty much how we came to be enlightened in the first place ...
can you explain what you mean a bit more as that is an extraordinary statement to make.

Varegg wrote:

and while Europe, US and Asia is more or less finished with their enlightened period it's now time for Africa and the ME to sort out their business and be done with it ...
finished with our enlightened period? In what sense? The fact we still use torture, is that part of our 'enlightenment'? Or the amazing way fundamentalist religion holds such sway over so many people? Or invading other countries to serve our own selfish needs, is that 'enlightened'? I think not. We should never think we have no more left to learn.

Varegg wrote:

those parts of the world will never evolve without conflicts being settled, and nothing settles a conflict like a good ol war ...
I disagree with this statement, but it's slightly hypocritical (no offense intended) given it is our governments who are FUELLING the war, not least by buying and selling billions of dollars worth of arms from and to Israel every year. No-one could consider us to have 'left them to get on with it' in any sense whatsoever.
2009-10-14 06:07:17
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7095|Nårvei

ruisleipa wrote:

Varegg wrote:

It's pretty much how we came to be enlightened in the first place ...
can you explain what you mean a bit more as that is an extraordinary statement to make.

Varegg wrote:

and while Europe, US and Asia is more or less finished with their enlightened period it's now time for Africa and the ME to sort out their business and be done with it ...
finished with our enlightened period? In what sense? The fact we still use torture, is that part of our 'enlightenment'? Or the amazing way fundamentalist religion holds such sway over so many people? Or invading other countries to serve our own selfish needs, is that 'enlightened'? I think not. We should never think we have no more left to learn.

Varegg wrote:

those parts of the world will never evolve without conflicts being settled, and nothing settles a conflict like a good ol war ...
I disagree with this statement, but it's slightly hypocritical (no offense intended) given it is our governments who are FUELLING the war, not least by buying and selling billions of dollars worth of arms from and to Israel every year. No-one could consider us to have 'left them to get on with it' in any sense whatsoever.
Oops ... seems I forgot the sarcasm tags at home ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2009-10-14 06:15:01
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6827|Texas - Bigger than France
I just want to thank everyone for proving at least the peace talks are difficult and a two sided affair, and shouldn't be an exercise in finger pointing...which is why "Israelis don't want peace" isn't exactly correct.
2009-10-14 06:21:51
ruisleipa
Member
+149|6507|teh FIN-land

Varegg wrote:

[sarcasm]It's pretty much how we came to be enlightened in the first place ... and while Europe, US and Asia is more or less finished with their enlightened period it's now time for Africa and the ME to sort out their business and be done with it ... those parts of the world will never evolve without conflicts being settled, and nothing settles a conflict like a good ol war ...[/sarcasm]
Fix'd?
2009-10-14 12:35:41
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6730|The Land of Scott Walker
Those darned Israelis, not wanting peace with the peace loving rocket launching folks.
2009-10-14 12:41:41
rammunition
Fully Loaded
+143|6146

ruisleipa wrote:

I think rammunition might be trying to point out that a country founded through the destruction of another people's homeland, said people being forced to live in squalor and poverty for the next several decades or so, will never be peaceful. The most basic, uncomplicated fact is that if Israel was serious about peace as opposed to land-grabbing and shitting on the Palestinians, they would stop the illegal building of settlements, withdraw to previously agreed boundaries, stop building and dismantle the 'apartheid wall' and give Israeli Arabs equivalent rights to Israeli Jews, with a view to providing (or at least not preventing) the Palestinians with the possibility of actually living there as well.

All this talk of 'whoshot first' is obscuring the fundamental issues, which suits the Israeli authorities very nicely thanks.

Pretty much sums it up I reckon.
just what i was going to say


M.O.A.B wrote:

Except you have to take into account whether the Pals would adhere to any kind of peace and not just use it as an oppurtunity to get into Israel and set off a few bombs.

UN gave the Jewish people with nowhere else to go their own state, on the land they originated from. The Arabs didn't like that, so they launch attacks and several wars, and got their asses kicked and lost territory in the process. Their fault. It would also stem from that the current situation. Israel is (and rightfully so) very serious about its security. It is surrounded by potential enemies, bordering many of them. Israel is a prime example of a country which has to constantly live on edge and be hard to enforce security. When so many of your neighbours vowed to wipe you out over the years, you're going to take a hardline against anyone who might do.
It wasn't given to them on a plate, they bombed BRITISH targets and jewish terrorists destroyed towns killing many.

ok tell me this, muslims rules spain/portugal what 600 years ago. Would you support muslims going back their, raping the women, destroying towns, killing people just to take back land they once ruled?
The Jews are not innocent, no one in the M.E likes them because they are cowards and bullies. The jews are bad news.


Also i would like to point, 56 years ago on this day the jews commanded by the pig ariel sharon attacked the village of Qibya on the West Bank, destroying 45 buildings, killing 42 villagers, and wounding 15.

NEVER FORGET!!!!!

Last edited by rammunition (2009-10-14 12:42:40)

2009-10-14 13:21:10
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6507|Escea

rammunition wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

I think rammunition might be trying to point out that a country founded through the destruction of another people's homeland, said people being forced to live in squalor and poverty for the next several decades or so, will never be peaceful. The most basic, uncomplicated fact is that if Israel was serious about peace as opposed to land-grabbing and shitting on the Palestinians, they would stop the illegal building of settlements, withdraw to previously agreed boundaries, stop building and dismantle the 'apartheid wall' and give Israeli Arabs equivalent rights to Israeli Jews, with a view to providing (or at least not preventing) the Palestinians with the possibility of actually living there as well.

All this talk of 'whoshot first' is obscuring the fundamental issues, which suits the Israeli authorities very nicely thanks.

Pretty much sums it up I reckon.
just what i was going to say


M.O.A.B wrote:

Except you have to take into account whether the Pals would adhere to any kind of peace and not just use it as an oppurtunity to get into Israel and set off a few bombs.

UN gave the Jewish people with nowhere else to go their own state, on the land they originated from. The Arabs didn't like that, so they launch attacks and several wars, and got their asses kicked and lost territory in the process. Their fault. It would also stem from that the current situation. Israel is (and rightfully so) very serious about its security. It is surrounded by potential enemies, bordering many of them. Israel is a prime example of a country which has to constantly live on edge and be hard to enforce security. When so many of your neighbours vowed to wipe you out over the years, you're going to take a hardline against anyone who might do.
It wasn't given to them on a plate, they bombed BRITISH targets and jewish terrorists destroyed towns killing many.

ok tell me this, muslims rules spain/portugal what 600 years ago. Would you support muslims going back their, raping the women, destroying towns, killing people just to take back land they once ruled?
The Jews are not innocent, no one in the M.E likes them because they are cowards and bullies. The jews are bad news.


Also i would like to point, 56 years ago on this day the jews commanded by the pig ariel sharon attacked the village of Qibya on the West Bank, destroying 45 buildings, killing 42 villagers, and wounding 15.

NEVER FORGET!!!!!
Are we allowed to remember the Hebron and Safed Massacres as well? Or don't they count cos they weren't orchestrated by evil Jews?
2009-10-14 13:46:31
ruisleipa
Member
+149|6507|teh FIN-land

M.O.A.B wrote:

Are we allowed to remember the Hebron and Safed Massacres as well? Or don't they count cos they weren't orchestrated by evil Jews?
Well one of them was: The Hebron massacre can refer to The Cave of the Patriarchs attack on February 25, 1994, in which 29 Muslim worshippers were murdered and 125 injured by the Jewish Baruch Goldstein. Another 35 lives were lost from both sides in the riots that followed.

OR

The murder of 12 Israeli soldiers and security forces and wounding of 16 civilians, after Palestinians opened fire with rifles and grenades on a group of Jews (accompanied by an armed escort) returning from Sabbath prayers at the Tomb of the Patriarchs, then ambushed soldiers, ambulances, and rescue workers who arrived at the scene in response to the attack on November 15, 2002.

OR a massacre in 1929 where 69 Jews were killed

Or we could mention dozens of other killings on both sides. I hesitate to say massacre because how many people do you need to kill to have one of those? Were the deaths of two nurses in a medical clinic in 2003, shot by an IDF helicopter gunship, sufficient to call that a massacre? Perhaps the 5 members of one family killed in a demolition of their home in 2002 by the IDF counts. Let's not forget the 8 dead from the Mercaz HaRav shooting. All of which add up to a small percentage of the suffering in that blighted area for centuries, but particularly since 1946.

Of course we should remember that no sides are completely innocent: Goldstein was not most Jews, most Palestinians are not murderers. But there are as many maniac fundamentalist Jews as there are Muslims as there are Christians, Fascists, Communists, or whatever damn -ists or -ians you can think of, and the major obstacles to peace are, in my opinion, primarily on the Israeli side today, as listed in part above in my earlier post.
2009-10-14 14:29:04
rammunition
Fully Loaded
+143|6146

M.O.A.B wrote:

rammunition wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

I think rammunition might be trying to point out that a country founded through the destruction of another people's homeland, said people being forced to live in squalor and poverty for the next several decades or so, will never be peaceful. The most basic, uncomplicated fact is that if Israel was serious about peace as opposed to land-grabbing and shitting on the Palestinians, they would stop the illegal building of settlements, withdraw to previously agreed boundaries, stop building and dismantle the 'apartheid wall' and give Israeli Arabs equivalent rights to Israeli Jews, with a view to providing (or at least not preventing) the Palestinians with the possibility of actually living there as well.

All this talk of 'whoshot first' is obscuring the fundamental issues, which suits the Israeli authorities very nicely thanks.

Pretty much sums it up I reckon.
just what i was going to say


M.O.A.B wrote:

Except you have to take into account whether the Pals would adhere to any kind of peace and not just use it as an oppurtunity to get into Israel and set off a few bombs.

UN gave the Jewish people with nowhere else to go their own state, on the land they originated from. The Arabs didn't like that, so they launch attacks and several wars, and got their asses kicked and lost territory in the process. Their fault. It would also stem from that the current situation. Israel is (and rightfully so) very serious about its security. It is surrounded by potential enemies, bordering many of them. Israel is a prime example of a country which has to constantly live on edge and be hard to enforce security. When so many of your neighbours vowed to wipe you out over the years, you're going to take a hardline against anyone who might do.
It wasn't given to them on a plate, they bombed BRITISH targets and jewish terrorists destroyed towns killing many.

ok tell me this, muslims rules spain/portugal what 600 years ago. Would you support muslims going back their, raping the women, destroying towns, killing people just to take back land they once ruled?
The Jews are not innocent, no one in the M.E likes them because they are cowards and bullies. The jews are bad news.


Also i would like to point, 56 years ago on this day the jews commanded by the pig ariel sharon attacked the village of Qibya on the West Bank, destroying 45 buildings, killing 42 villagers, and wounding 15.

NEVER FORGET!!!!!
Are we allowed to remember the Hebron and Safed Massacres as well? Or don't they count cos they weren't orchestrated by evil Jews?
answer my point on muslims returning to spain/portugal, would you support such a movement?
2009-10-14 14:51:22
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6507|Escea

rammunition wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

rammunition wrote:

ruisleipa wrote:

I think rammunition might be trying to point out that a country founded through the destruction of another people's homeland, said people being forced to live in squalor and poverty for the next several decades or so, will never be peaceful. The most basic, uncomplicated fact is that if Israel was serious about peace as opposed to land-grabbing and shitting on the Palestinians, they would stop the illegal building of settlements, withdraw to previously agreed boundaries, stop building and dismantle the 'apartheid wall' and give Israeli Arabs equivalent rights to Israeli Jews, with a view to providing (or at least not preventing) the Palestinians with the possibility of actually living there as well.

All this talk of 'whoshot first' is obscuring the fundamental issues, which suits the Israeli authorities very nicely thanks.

Pretty much sums it up I reckon.
just what i was going to say



It wasn't given to them on a plate, they bombed BRITISH targets and jewish terrorists destroyed towns killing many.

ok tell me this, muslims rules spain/portugal what 600 years ago. Would you support muslims going back their, raping the women, destroying towns, killing people just to take back land they once ruled?
The Jews are not innocent, no one in the M.E likes them because they are cowards and bullies. The jews are bad news.


Also i would like to point, 56 years ago on this day the jews commanded by the pig ariel sharon attacked the village of Qibya on the West Bank, destroying 45 buildings, killing 42 villagers, and wounding 15.

NEVER FORGET!!!!!
Are we allowed to remember the Hebron and Safed Massacres as well? Or don't they count cos they weren't orchestrated by evil Jews?
answer my point on muslims returning to spain/portugal, would you support such a movement?
No, because whereas the land that is Israel historically belonged to the Jews, Spain historically belonged to the Iberians and was then taken over by several others, well before the Arab invasion that established Muslim rule. So if you wanted to give it back to someone, there are several groups who should come before Muslims. Palestine belonged to a Jewish population well before it was conquered by Islamic forces.
2009-10-14 14:54:05
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX
Give Israel back to the Caananites then.
Fuck Israel
2009-10-14 15:16:31
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6507|Escea

Dilbert_X wrote:

Give Israel back to the Caananites then.
I'm not saying anything should be given back to anyone, since that would throw off just about every country in history. I'm simply pointing out that if you were going to give Spain back to someone, it wouldn't be the Muslims.
2009-10-14 18:31:21
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6695|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Maybe you could explain why the focus of Europe was on Jews?
It wasn't, although history was re-written and 'anti-semiticism' invented so you'd believe that.
The various nations, religions and ethnic groups have been squabbling and trying to wipe each other out forever.
Serbs, Croats, Catholics, Moslems etc etc.

Hitler set out to exterminate many groups besides the jews.
Maybe if there'd been more Romany gypsies and fewer jews in the first place then the gypsies would have been given a homeland by the UN.
That's a convenient excuse given by those for whom the truth is uncomfortable.

Hitler's main effort (supported by many other European countries prior to WW2) was the Jews. The others were simply convenient.
“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
2009-10-15 02:33:30
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX

M.O.A.B wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Give Israel back to the Caananites then.
I'm not saying anything should be given back to anyone, since that would throw off just about every country in history. I'm simply pointing out that if you were going to give Spain back to someone, it wouldn't be the Muslims.
And if Israel were to be given back to anyone it wouldn't be the Jews.
Fuck Israel
2009-10-15 02:35:10
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX
Hitler's main effort (supported by many other European countries prior to WW2) was the Jews. The others were simply convenient.
Not sure any other European countries supported Hitler, any more than the Americans did wrt the Jews.
No-one wanted to take them in, America included.
Fuck Israel
2009-10-15 03:27:22
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6695|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

Hitler's main effort (supported by many other European countries prior to WW2) was the Jews. The others were simply convenient.
Not sure any other European countries supported Hitler, any more than the Americans did wrt the Jews.
No-one wanted to take them in, America included.
No one wanted to take them in and no one wanted them in their European countries, thus they supported Hitler's initiative to rid Europe of Jewry...at least his non-homicidal initiatives.
“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
2009-10-15 04:10:58
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:

No one wanted to take them in and no one wanted them in their European countries, thus they supported Hitler's initiative to rid Europe of Jewry...at least his non-homicidal initiatives.
Same for America, not sure what point you're making.
America took a few, same as they took a few Nazis after the war.
Fuck Israel
2009-10-15 04:16:21
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6695|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

No one wanted to take them in and no one wanted them in their European countries, thus they supported Hitler's initiative to rid Europe of Jewry...at least his non-homicidal initiatives.
Same for America, not sure what point you're making.
America took a few, same as they took a few Nazis after the war.
The point being those who scream the loudest about the Israeli situation are the very ones who enabled it.

So shut it.
“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
2009-10-15 04:26:45
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:

The point being those who scream the loudest about the Israeli situation are the very ones who enabled it.
Incorrect, you're critcising Europe for doing the exact things America did.

eg Wiki
During his first term Roosevelt condemned Hitler's persecution of German Jews. As the Jewish exodus from Germany increased after 1937, Roosevelt was asked by American Jewish organizations and Congressmen to allow these refugees to settle in the U.S. At first he suggested that the Jewish refugees should be "resettled" elsewhere, and suggested Venezuela, Ethiopia or West Africa — anywhere but the U.S. Morgenthau, Ickes and Eleanor pressed him to adopt a more generous policy but he was afraid of provoking the men such as Charles Lindbergh who exploited anti-Semitism as a means of attacking Roosevelt's policies.

In practice very few Jewish refugees came to the U.S. — only 22,000 German refugees were admitted in 1940, not all of them Jewish. The State Department official in charge of refugee issues, Breckinridge Long, insisted on following the highly restrictive immigration laws to the letter. As one example, in 1939, the State Department under Roosevelt did not allow a boat of Jews fleeing from the Nazis into the United States. When the passenger ship St. Louis approached the coast of Florida with nearly a thousand German Jews fleeing persecution by Hitler, Roosevelt did not respond to telegrams from passengers requesting asylum, and the State Department refused entry to the ship. Forced to return to Antwerp, many of the passengers eventually died in concentration camps.

After 1942, when Roosevelt was made aware of the Nazi extermination of the Jews by Rabbi Stephen Wise, the Polish envoy Jan Karski and others, he told them that the best solution was to destroy Nazi Germany. At Casablanca in 1943 Roosevelt announced there would be no compromise whatever with Hitler. In May 1943 he wrote to Cordell Hull (whose wife was Jewish): "I do not think we can do other than strictly comply with the present immigration laws." In January 1944, however, Morgenthau succeeded in persuading Roosevelt to allow the creation of a War Refugee Board in the Treasury Department. This allowed an increasing number of Jews to enter the U.S. in 1944 and 1945. It also financed Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg's work in Budapest, where he and others helped to save 100,000+ Jews from deportation to death camps. By this time, however, the European Jewish communities had already been largely destroyed in Hitler's Holocaust.

In any case, after 1945 the focus of Jewish aspirations shifted from migration to the U.S. to settlement in British mandate of Palestine, where the Zionist movement hoped to create a Jewish state. Roosevelt was also opposed to this idea. When he met King Ibn Saud of Saudi Arabia in February 1945, he assured him he did not support a Jewish state in British mandate of Palestine.
Seems like the US was fairly 'anti-semitic' also.

Europe didn't enable Israel, they were against it, as was the US.

So get off your high horse.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-10-15 04:28:11)

Fuck Israel
2009-10-15 04:31:04
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6695|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

The point being those who scream the loudest about the Israeli situation are the very ones who enabled it.
Incorrect, you're critcising Europe for doing the exact things America did.

eg Wiki
During his first term Roosevelt condemned Hitler's persecution of German Jews. As the Jewish exodus from Germany increased after 1937, Roosevelt was asked by American Jewish organizations and Congressmen to allow these refugees to settle in the U.S. At first he suggested that the Jewish refugees should be "resettled" elsewhere, and suggested Venezuela, Ethiopia or West Africa — anywhere but the U.S. Morgenthau, Ickes and Eleanor pressed him to adopt a more generous policy but he was afraid of provoking the men such as Charles Lindbergh who exploited anti-Semitism as a means of attacking Roosevelt's policies.

In practice very few Jewish refugees came to the U.S. — only 22,000 German refugees were admitted in 1940, not all of them Jewish. The State Department official in charge of refugee issues, Breckinridge Long, insisted on following the highly restrictive immigration laws to the letter. As one example, in 1939, the State Department under Roosevelt did not allow a boat of Jews fleeing from the Nazis into the United States. When the passenger ship St. Louis approached the coast of Florida with nearly a thousand German Jews fleeing persecution by Hitler, Roosevelt did not respond to telegrams from passengers requesting asylum, and the State Department refused entry to the ship. Forced to return to Antwerp, many of the passengers eventually died in concentration camps.
After 1942, when Roosevelt was made aware of the Nazi extermination of the Jews by Rabbi Stephen Wise, the Polish envoy Jan Karski and others, he told them that the best solution was to destroy Nazi Germany. At Casablanca in 1943 Roosevelt announced there would be no compromise whatever with Hitler. In May 1943 he wrote to Cordell Hull (whose wife was Jewish): "I do not think we can do other than strictly comply with the present immigration laws." In January 1944, however, Morgenthau succeeded in persuading Roosevelt to allow the creation of a War Refugee Board in the Treasury Department. This allowed an increasing number of Jews to enter the U.S. in 1944 and 1945. It also financed Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg's work in Budapest, where he and others helped to save 100,000+ Jews from deportation to death camps. By this time, however, the European Jewish communities had already been largely destroyed in Hitler's Holocaust.

In any case, after 1945 the focus of Jewish aspirations shifted from migration to the U.S. to settlement in British mandate of Palestine, where the Zionist movement hoped to create a Jewish state. Roosevelt was also opposed to this idea. When he met King Ibn Saud of Saudi Arabia in February 1945, he assured him he did not support a Jewish state in British mandate of Palestine.
Seems like the US was fairly 'anti-semitic' also.

Europe didn't enable Israel, they were against it, as was the US.
Europe supported a homeland for European Jews outside of Europe, in line with Hitler's desires. America was agnostic about a homeland for European Jews, except that it not be in America. That homeland turned out to be modern-day Israel...so, actually...CORRECT.

In fact, your wiki article supports my position more than your own. Europe wanted the Jews anywhere but there. The US didn't think the Levant was the best place for them (fairly prescient, if I do say so myself). Then Europe enabled the Jewish homeland to be formed there.

And now you bitch about what you enabled.

So again. Shut it.
“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
2009-10-15 04:38:38
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX

FEOS wrote:

Europe supported a homeland for European Jews outside of Europe
This is news.
The Germans didn't.
The British didn't, they supported allowing jews to resettle in Palestine, but no jewish state.
Source plz.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-10-15 04:39:56)

Fuck Israel
2009-10-15 06:14:54
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6507|Escea

Dilbert_X wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Give Israel back to the Caananites then.
I'm not saying anything should be given back to anyone, since that would throw off just about every country in history. I'm simply pointing out that if you were going to give Spain back to someone, it wouldn't be the Muslims.
And if Israel were to be given back to anyone it wouldn't be the Jews.
And yet, I never said that did I?
2009-10-15 06:28:08
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,816|6390|eXtreme to the maX
Except you did

MOAB wrote:

No, because whereas the land that is Israel historically belonged to the Jews, Spain historically belonged to the Iberians and was then taken over by several others, well before the Arab invasion that established Muslim rule. So if you wanted to give it back to someone, there are several groups who should come before Muslims. Palestine belonged to a Jewish population well before it was conquered by Islamic forces.
Palestine does not 'belong' to the jews particularly, the Natufians maybe.
Fuck Israel
2009-10-15 06:32:51
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6507|Escea

No, what I said was that it belonged to a Jewish population before it belonged to an Islamic one. I never said they were the originals.

 

Pages: 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 … 19

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard