# Should Jerusalem be made an international city?



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 14, 2013)

Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 14, 2013)

No.


----------



## MHunterB (Jun 14, 2013)

Considering the track record of two of those religions' adherents regarding access afforded to 'others' - absolutely not.

The *control of* various holy sites within Jerusalem is already parceled out among various different religious groups.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 14, 2013)

Nope.

The Israelis won it back fair-and-square in 1967.

The Jews had it taken from them in 70 A.D. and waited a long time to get it back... some 1,900 years...

Time to share and play nice with others... let the Jews have it for a few centuries... it's their turn anyway.

And, given that they took it back by force-of-arms, as part of an overall defensive war, against rather alarming odds, after their enemies had massed troops to attack them simultaneously on all sides...

Vae victus.


----------



## Hossfly (Jun 14, 2013)

Jerusalem is the undivided City Of David. No question about it.


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 14, 2013)

Yes.  

We all believe that besides some Jewish people and some American Christians. Other than that, most of the world would support it as an international city.


----------



## pbel (Jun 14, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Nope.
> 
> The Israelis won it back fair-and-square in 1967.
> 
> ...



Israel's pre-emptive strike was a land grab because she had more than all the Arab Armies soldiers on all fronts...Even PM Begin admitted thus.

Sure, she may have it for a while...but 400 million Arabs will eventually get it back by war or demographics...only a peace deal accepted by the UN, the Arabs and Israel can avert the inevitable.


----------



## hjmick (Jun 14, 2013)

No.


----------



## toastman (Jun 14, 2013)

pbel said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Nope.
> ...



And how will these 400 million Arabs attain their goal of capturing Jerusalem ??


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 14, 2013)

pbel said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Nope.
> ...



Then there's the argument that, if it were an international city, it could make a long-term peace agreement easier.


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 14, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Yes it could, especially since Israel won't agree to an east Jerusalem as a Palestinain capital, an international city under international regulation could prove to open gates to big aspect of a peace agreement. An international factor gives hope for some hopeless people on both sides. Even some Israelis support such a condition.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 14, 2013)

pbel said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Nope.
> ...



humm, I have to ask for some verification of the bolded section please. 


and as the the afore mentioned segment- a) of course they knew they would win (???), b) preemptive as in say closing the straits of Tiran? c) ever heard of the Egyptian war plan called "The Dawn"...and how that wound up?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 14, 2013)

*Direct Muslim control* over East Jerusalem in the period 1948-1967 did absolutely *nothing* to facilitate a lasting Peace Agreement; consequently...

There is *no* logical reason to assume that simply shifting control from the Israelis to an international force would have the desired effect.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 14, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?



absolutely not.


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 14, 2013)

Trajan said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?
> ...



Really? Explain, hotshot.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 14, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



no problem hotsnot......

first why again?


peace? as if.... 

tell you what, keep the rest, ask the muslims  to give up the dome of the rock, its sitting on the temple, let the jews rebuild the temple,  hey just because they got the land, doesn't mean they have a right to it...right?


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 14, 2013)

Trajan said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



Nice diversion, pussy. You claimed the three major Abrahamic religions don't claim holy sites in Jerusalem. Or am I wrong? .....


----------



## pbel (Jun 14, 2013)

toastman said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



If there is anything certain is that in a war of attrition or Arab Resistance will eventually wear out an occupier like they have with the Christian Crusades, the Turks, the Brits, IsraelTime is their ally and the vastly numerical advantage assures victoryLook at US or Russian Invasions: Vietnam, Iraq, AfghanistanTechnological weapons are no match for boots on the groundTiny Israel can only stretch manpower so far

History has shown this to be true.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jun 14, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?



Should the inside of your skull be declared a disaster area?



Can you give me a list of other international cities?
What the fuck is an international city?
Where did you learn to count?


----------



## Hossfly (Jun 14, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...


I wonder if this cleric can be set straight by someone who is an Arab Muslim.

'Jews never had a temple in Jerusalem' - Israel Today | Israel News


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 14, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



Go back to your corner, Charlie. 

There are millions of clerics in this world.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 14, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...



where did I say that? meds off? up your drip. 


and diversion infers I am making an argument as 'aside from' or creating another issue. whats the issue? Oh yea , turning Jerusalem into an intl. city,, I said absolutely  not , so aside from a lack of reading comprehension what else you got?


----------



## Trajan (Jun 14, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?
> ...



hes free versing a history book from god knows where, and becauseIdon'tknow cannot read...greatest thread, best evah!!!!!


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 14, 2013)

Trajan said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



Well maybe it's a misunderstanding, it seemed like you were denying three major religions claim holy sites in Jerusalem as that was what you quoted. 

Give us a few reasons why we shouldn't, considering it as a part of long term peace deal. And if not, what's your alternative, what should be be done with Jerusalem? 

Since Palestinians do have a claim to East Jerusalem.

And no, Jews don't have complete ownership of Jerusalem, as many Palestinians have land there and live there while Israel is approving settlement expansion to isolate Palestinians even further and to bring Jews into their lands.


----------



## MHunterB (Jun 14, 2013)

BIK, did Palestinians ever assert their claim to East Jerusalem (from which Jordan ethnically cleansed the Jews, see 'LIFE Magaxzine article') against the Jordanians?

Come to think of it, did thy assert their clam to the WB against Jordan, or Gaza against Egypt?   

NO, this is not a 'flippant' question.


----------



## MJB12741 (Jun 14, 2013)

Right you are.  East Jerusalem under Muslim control.  Been there, done that.  And it failed.  




Kondor3 said:


> *Direct Muslim control* over East Jerusalem in the period 1948-1967 did absolutely *nothing* to facilitate a lasting Peace Agreement; consequently...
> 
> There is *no* logical reason to assume that simply shifting control from the Israelis to an international force would have the desired effect.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 15, 2013)

Jewish claim: Built the city; Site of the Temples; capital of Jewish world before exile; referenced dozens of times in Tanach

Christian claim: Site of major events in New Testament

Muslim claim: Not mentioned at all in Koran; Built mosques on Jewish holy sites after conquering territory 

Why are we even having this discussion?


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 15, 2013)

Jewish Claim= After conquering territory built temples there. 

Corrected that for you.


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

BIK, do you think it would be a viable option to give control of East Jerusalem - which contains many Jewish holy sites - to the Palestinians. Please answer honestly


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...



Its the Capital of Israel....and so it should be, right of conquest. 


next?


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> BIK, do you think it would be a viable option to give control of East Jerusalem - which contains many Jewish holy sites - to the Palestinians. Please answer honestly



Yeah, because its been that way for decades before an Israel was even created. If Israel wants international monitors, or some presence in some areas, swaps, that should be negotiated.


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 15, 2013)

Trajan said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



You seem to only support the Jewish 'right of conquest', which means your giving a two faced answer. Put aside your Jewish aspirations for a second, and think of the more important topic of concern. If you can't do that then you just fell into the ballpark of the Likud government, and their views hardly fall in with anyone else's views besides conservatives in Israel. So it will just lead to more isolation of Israel. But I don't expect you to understand that. So I'd rather discuss it with someone else who foresees a good future for both people's, even if they think they can guarantee Jews only a good future for decades, you need to look many years ahead.

And btw, *NO* country in the world recognizes Jerusalem as Israel's capital, so that's very misleading to say.


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > BIK, do you think it would be a viable option to give control of East Jerusalem - which contains many Jewish holy sites - to the Palestinians. Please answer honestly
> ...



As much as I understand your and the Palestinians desire to have control over E. Jersualem, I don't see how it could work out of the Palestinians controlling it.
International monitors are useless.


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



And I don't see how the fact that Jerusalem was under Muslim control for decades has anything to do with this tbh.


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...



So ? Israel recognizes Jerusalem as their capital, that's what matters most.


----------



## pbel (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


You hit the nail on the head Toast! What Israel wants today, is what she gets because of an awesome military power she is thanks to American armaments...In defying US peace demands, she may wakeup the AIPAC control of our Congress to the Public which demands a permanent peace.

We will wakeup someday to the danger of Oligarchy ruling us over money bought Politicians, who perpetuate this war we cannot win&#8230;The result will be more scrutiny and a demand for campaign finance reform and give government back to the people!


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...



Well that's nice and all , but what does this have to do with Jerusalem being the Capital of Israel ???


----------



## numan (Jun 15, 2013)

'
Fuck the religious sites! -- yes, Jerusalem should be made an international city; the whole of Palestine should be internationalized -- with an impartial, international peace-keeping force patrolling the entire country, spanking naughty people on both sides!

There should be an international court charged with adjudicating land claims from all the inhabitants of Palestine.

Also, pigs should fly.
.


----------



## numan (Jun 15, 2013)

'
But I have an even better plan for solving the problems of the Middle East !!

Now, now --- don't everyone start offering me the Nobel Prize all at once; 'twarn't nuthin' !

My program for solving the problems of the Mideast is, as usual, blindingly simple, clear and effective. The United States should, in that spirit of true generosity which it incessantly praises itself for possessing in great abundance, give the southern half of Florida to the state of Israel as New Israel, in exchange for removing itself from the Middle East! 

Surely, in common decency, considering the great evil which the US has inflicted on the Middle East for more than half-a-century, it is the least it can do  to repair the damage it has caused. Jews obviously like Florida -- there are so many there already -- therefore the transition should be easy. After being cooped-up in that dangerous, god-forsaken, postage-stamp-sized desert where they are now, New Israel should make them happy as clams. They will come to see New Israel as the *TRUE Land of Milk and Honey* which was foretold in their scriptures.

Perhaps the New Temple can be built at Disneyland, where, every day, hundreds of cattle, sheep and goats can be slaughtered and burned to delight the Nostrils of the Lord and the hearts of the pious!

It will be a win-win situation for everybody. The New Israelites will have a safe, clean, prosperous land to develop. They will finally be able to earn their own keep. The United States will no longer need to spend countless billions of dollars of its treasure in the vain attempt to prop up a doomed country in a hostile region. The Arabs will be over-joyed to take possession of the desert wasteland they covet so much. This sense of victory will give a much-needed boost to their sense of self-confidence after having defeated themselves in so many wars. I am sure that in exchange for this settlement of outstanding grievances they would gladly allow those few Jewish religious conservatives who did not want to emigrate to the fleshpots of New Israel to end their days in contentment, happily and peacefully beating their heads against the Wailing Wall.

Also, after a few years, when tempers have had time to cool down, the Arabs will probably be begging New Israelite technicians and scientists to return to the Middle East, in order to help them develop their economies and educational institutions. _[That was the way Zionism was originally supposed to work -- remember?]_

It is true that there will be a few losers in the otherwise astounding perfection of this scheme. There will be a few fundamentalist Christians who will be deeply saddened that, due to the absence of a Jewish government in Jerusalem, the End of the World will have to be postponed. I would console them with the reflection that it is the Will of the Almighty that life be a vale of tears for the Elect of God.

Lastly---and this is the clincher---the consideration which will make the American people, nay, the people of the entire world, embrace this proposal with fervor: once this brilliant plan is implemented something finally will be done about global warming! The citizens of New Israel will move heaven and earth to prevent so much valuable real estate from being swallowed up by rising sea-levels!

I am in awe of the wondrous radiance of my beautiful mind!
I _am_ a true American! 
.


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Why not? Have you seen the developments with the PA security forces in the past years? They can cooperate and what I was saying several places could be split up in control, but generally the area should be considered their capital because it makes sense. I know they may be useless in some cases, but maybe Arabic nations can play a role in too to make sure everything goes right.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...


Muslims have a right to conquest, and invade lands, loot, plunder and rape and force Islam down people's throats, which is how most of these Muslim countries came to be, but Jews don't have a right to recapture the homeland of their ancestors and a city that has been holy to them for thousands of years and central to their faith?  

Here's a quick quiz: how many times has Jerusalem been mentioned in the Koran?  ZERO. in fact the Koran gives Israel to the Jews to live there eternally. Would you like me to quote?  

Whereas Jerusalem had been mentioned 900 times in the OT. 

So let's see Muslims zero, Jews 900.  Who should be given the keys to Jerusalem?  Decisions decisions. After all, Muslims have such a great track record of tolerating other faiths. Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 15, 2013)

numan said:


> '
> But I have an even better plan for solving the problems of the Middle East !!
> 
> Now, now --- don't everyone start offering me the Nobel Prize all at once; 'twarn't nuthin' !
> ...


I hope you didn't give up your daytime job to be a comedy writer.


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 15, 2013)

Roudy said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



LOL, here we go again with your 'quizzes' again. Lets leave your foolishness aside. 

But you openly admit Jews came to immigrate to Palestine to 'recapture' it as you'd like to call it. 

Which means they came to terrorize the native population in order to reclaim the land. Which is true. It is what they did. 

And I don't think any Israel is embarrassed anymore to say that. They all know its true. 

And it isn't the land of their ancestors, as European Jews may very well be Khazars and the land was inhabited by many people's well before any Jews showed up there. 

So this absolutely means the Palestinians rightfully can resist the occupation. 

As you've openly stated, along with Lipush, that you came to take the land by force. 

So give us all a break with your crocodile tears, Palestinians have every right in the world to resist the occupier.


----------



## pbel (Jun 15, 2013)

Roudy said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


This conflict is not about Religion but about conquest and land expropriation. Both sides have expropriated each others lands and property.

The question is for me, why should heavily AIPAC influenced America be arming both sides, with a very heavy preference for Israel which brought us into the War on Terror and thousands of American deaths? It only increases our chance of receiving Terrorism like Boston?

A permanent peace is America's strategic interests today...Why not share sovereignty and end the hostilities?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> "._The question is for me, why should heavily AIPAC influenced America be arming both sides, with a very heavy preference for *Israel which brought us into the War on Terror and thousands of American deaths?* It only increases our chance of receiving Terrorism like Boston?_..."


Oh, dearie-me...

Even if American support for Israel was the primary cause for the attacks (9-11, etc.) - and it was not...

We will *not* allow foreign scum to dictate to us whom we may choose as friends and allies and whom we may not...

Oh, vile, dishonorable surrender...

If for no other reason than to reinforce our autonomy and unconquerable spirit in this context, I vote that we continue to support Israel to the maximum extent practicable...

"_Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute._"

The backbone has not yet been bred out of America.

Most (albeit not all) of the Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys live on another continent.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 15, 2013)

numan said:


> "_But I have an even better plan for solving the problems of the Middle East !!...The United States should... give the southern half of Florida to the state of Israel as New Israel, in exchange for removing itself from the Middle East!_..."


Unacceptable.

The Cubans already have a prior claim.

Anyway...

The Brits got us into this mess in the first place (Balfour, Mandate, Abandonment, etc.), so...

It should be BRITISH territory that gets ceded...

And it should be the losers in the Palestinian Conflict that get moved, not the winners...

The Brits must cede the Falkland Islands to the Palestinians, in return for the Palestinians removing to those islands...

The Palestinians love to brawl...

Let 'em brawl with the Argentinians for a dozen or so generations...

I'm sure they'll come to hate the Argentinians as much as they hate the Israelis...

They're very good at that...

More 'Alternative History' fun from the blogosphere...


----------



## Roudy (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...


I never said that. The land is Jewish land, the Jews maintained a presence throughout the millennia. There were many invasions by Romans, Arabs, Turks, Crusaders, etc. but the land was always Jewish land. The Arabs that are there who call themselves Palestinians are people who have invaded the region in the last two hundred years. The concept of an Arab Palestinian people is a hoax.


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 15, 2013)

No, it became Jewish land after the Jewish invasion. And no longer was Jewish land after another invasion followed by another and another....and you get the story. Anyways, go listen to some Oum Koulthoum and have a good evening.


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> No, it became Jewish land after the Jewish invasion. And no longer was Jewish land after another invasion followed by another and another....and you get the story. Anyways, go listen to some Oum Koulthoum and have a good evening.



Invasion ?? The battle for Jerusalem was part of the 1947-1948 civil war in Mandatory Palestine (which the Arabs started by attacking Jewish communities). During this war, Israel manged to gain control of Jerusalem, even though they were outnumbered and outgunned. Israel gained territory and the Palestinians lost territory.


----------



## pbel (Jun 15, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > "._The question is for me, why should heavily AIPAC influenced America be arming both sides, with a very heavy preference for *Israel which brought us into the War on Terror and thousands of American deaths?* It only increases our chance of receiving Terrorism like Boston?_..."
> ...


Oh Bullshit...America should not looking for friendship, but for our strategic interests...

This saying by a Jesuit priest says it all to paraphrase: "Everybody who says Israel is our only friend in the Middle East, I remember a time before Israel when we had No Enemies in the Middle East."

The difference: AIPAC friendly Political Action Committees who get our store bought Politicians to support Israel or face a well funded opponent at re-election...Extortion Par Excellent!


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > No, it became Jewish land after the Jewish invasion. And no longer was Jewish land after another invasion followed by another and another....and you get the story. Anyways, go listen to some Oum Koulthoum and have a good evening.
> ...



So, since Israel indisputably won the war, it is them who dictate the terms of any peace agreement.


----------



## Lipush (Jun 15, 2013)

No.


----------



## CMike (Jun 15, 2013)

You do realize it's the capital of Israel, and Israel isn't going to give away it's capital?


----------



## pbel (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...


Israel started the 67 war Pre-emptively...That's why No one on Planet Earth recognizes Israeli Annexations including the USA which has its Embassy in Tel-Avi and not in Occupied Jerusalem.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...



first-



> You seem to only support the Jewish 'right of conquest', which means your giving a two faced answer.



you seme to be incapable of reading simple English and comprehending it, please direct me to the post where in claimed that jewish right of conquest was superior/legal or more viable etc. than Arab/Persian, anyones for that matter.

you concern means squat to me, its mush, don't lecture me on whats good or why I don't see the best for  yada yada yada, dopey feelgoodnick moral relativists with pie in the sky emotionally invested gobbledygook come and go.......you don't know a thing as to what I think on the whole ME issue, Plai/ Israel et al...., and you've already decided your outlook is superior or more balanced,  turn down your drip, you're experiencing delusional feelings of euphoria. 





> And btw, *NO* country in the world recognizes Jerusalem as Israel's capital, so that's very misleading to say.



_Its the Capital of Israel....and so it should be, right of conquest. _

can you not read? I mean seriously?


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...




are you going to answer my questions(s) from post 12?


http://www.usmessageboard.com/7381440-post12.html


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Nope.
> ...




"....but 400 million Arabs will eventually get it back by war or demographics..."

Doubt it.


1.	Hania Zlotnik, director of the population division at the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, said *In most of the Islamic world its amazing, the decline in fertility that has happened, * From 1975 to 1980, women in Iran were giving birth to nearly 7 children per family, according to the latest U.N. population report; from 2005 to 2010 that number is expected to be less than 2. U.N. Sees Falling Middle East Fertility Rates - NYTimes.com


2. *The Jewish birth rate was rising steadily, and the Arab birthrate was falling. ..*.the fertility rate of Jews and Arabs had nearly converged by 2009, to 0.7 births per woman from six more per Arab woman.

a. Most remarkable is that today's "secular" *Israeli women show a rate of 2.6, far and away the highest in the industrial world. *Their own mothers had a rate of 2.1!

b. Between 1994 and 2009, Arab births in Israel remained steady at 39,000, while Jewish births rose from 80,000 to 120,000. The ultr-religious Jews (8% of the population) have a fertility rate of 8.5, which brings Israeli fertility to 2.9 per woman.

c. At this rate, Israel will have a larger population than Poland by 2085.
"How Civilizations Die," David Goldman


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Jewish Claim= After conquering territory built temples there.
> 
> Corrected that for you.



Solomon predates Mohammad, even in Islam.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...



If the Palestinians manage a conquest of Jerusalem at some point in the future let me know and we can discuss their right to control it at that point. Since it has never happened in the past, you really don't have a point. Unless, that is, you want to give control of Jerusalem to the Holy Roman Empire.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jun 15, 2013)

numan said:


> '
> But I have an even better plan for solving the problems of the Middle East !!
> 
> Now, now --- don't everyone start offering me the Nobel Prize all at once; 'twarn't nuthin' !
> ...



You have been watching too much TV.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJgi-Lou1NA]Big Bang Theory - Sheldon's plan to win the Nobel Peace Prize - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (Jun 15, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?



No.  Jerusalem is the capitol of Israel.  It belongs to Israel and should be fully under the control of the Israeli government.  Not the UN and it's international-whatevers........

* Israel is over 4000 yrs old.  The Jews were there first.  There was no such thing as Christianity or Islam when Jerusalem was established.  That settles it.  It belongs to the Jews.  Oh and I'd like to thank them for being such gracious hosts inviting us to visit their land, etc.  But I have no desire to STEAL it from them in the name of my faith.  

-Jeri


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (Jun 15, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> Jerusalem is the undivided City Of David. No question about it.






Now and Forever.....


----------



## pbel (Jun 15, 2013)

Trajan said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...


*Yes internationalize all of Jerusalem, that's what the UN suggested in 1948...*


----------



## numan (Jun 15, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> numan said:
> 
> 
> > But I have an even better plan for solving the problems of the Middle East !!
> ...


I don't watch TV.

That is why, even though I am American, I still retain some fragments of my mentality.
.


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Pbel, why don't you tell us what are the events that lead up to the pre-emptive strike. Please be detailed.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

Trajan said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...





pbel said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...



what the ?????

how is that an answer to my questions? I posted a link back to the post, #12, hello.....


here,above  I added the original  post  by with my questions/comments, please try again........


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...




I asked him already...still waiting..


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

I love how the pro - Palestinians think tiny little Israel wanted to start a war with 5 armies 20 her size of countries 200 times her size. Palestinian Mentality is great


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> I love how the pro - Palestinians think tiny little Israel wanted to start a war with 5 armies 20 her size of countries 200 times her size. Palestinian Mentality is great



well according to pbel, the arabs were out numbered, I mean you have to be smoking some serious revisionist weed to buy that...we'll see what he says...


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


That's all very nice, I'm sure, but it's also irrelevant, and inoperative in the Real World.

WE say who we befriend, and we do NOT concede that right-of-choice to ANYONE.

Get in our face about one of our friends and we'll hold onto that friend TWICE as hard.

Just to show that it is OUR choice and NOT the choice of al-Qaeda, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Arab League, whatever.

Against all comers.

You know... like a nation that actually has *balls*.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jun 15, 2013)

numan said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > numan said:
> ...



Trust me, the fragment you retain is a lot smaller than you think it is.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> "...Israel started the 67 war Pre-emptively..."


Perhaps the Egyptians and Syrians and Jordanians should not have massed hundreds of thousands of troops along all of Israel's borders without provocation in the weeks leading up to that preemptive strike... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			







> "..._That's why No one on Planet Earth recognizes Israeli Annexations including the USA which has its Embassy in Tel-Avi and not in Occupied Jerusalem._"



Much of the rest of the world continues to hope (on paper, anyway) that Israel will give back the remainder of the land that it bled and died for in preventing an Arab massacre of Jews in 1967, but with the knowledge that much of the rest of the world winks at the situation after 46 years and has no practical expectation that the land will ever be returned.

After all, Israel gave back much of the land that it won in 1967 and 1973, and evacuated Gaza within the past decade - three different Land-for-Peace Deals that 'the rest of the world' encouraged them to try.

Well, they tried it, three times, and it didn't work.

Three strikes and you're out.

I don't blame the Israelis in the slightest for hanging onto the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem.

In their shoes, I'd do exactly the same thing, and tell the rest of the world to go fuck itself.

Much of the rest of the world respects that - and winks at it when the Arabs aren't looking.

And then there are a few - like us - who don't give a $hit if the Arabs _are_ looking when we wink at it.

The Arabs brought this down on their own heads by massing troops along all of Israel's borders in preparation to attack Israel and annihilate it...

They lost...

Vae victus.


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > "...Israel started the 67 war Pre-emptively..."
> ...



You also forgot to mention that Israel offered the Golan Heights back to Syria for peace almost right after the 6 day war. But low and behold, they refused (folowing the Khartoum resolution) !


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> "..._You also forgot to mention that Israel offered the Golan Heights back to Syria for peace almost right after the 6 day war. But low and behold, they refused (folowing the Khartoum resolution) !_"


Hell, I'd forgotten about the Khartoum Resolution altogether, never mind the Arabs missing the boat (again) in negotiating the return of a piece of the lost lands.

I had to refresh my memory on the Khartoum Resolution...

"..._It is famous for containing (in the third paragraph) what became known as the 'Three No's': 'no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it._'"

Khartoum Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More Arab stupidity.

You can't make up $hit this stupid.


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > "..._You also forgot to mention that Israel offered the Golan Heights back to Syria for peace almost right after the 6 day war. But low and behold, they refused (folowing the Khartoum resolution) !_"
> ...



Yup. The intention of the Khartoum resolution was as clear as day ....

So now that we've presented Pbel with what the Israelis have offered for peace, maybe he can tell us what the Palestinians and Arab states have offered for peace ????


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Jewish Claim= After conquering territory built temples there.
> 
> Corrected that for you.



The Caananites appreciate your support.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)




----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 15, 2013)

Trajan said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



Talk about being off your meds, Trojan. 

We all know that Quantum Witless is incapable of anything other than being a troll, but you put together a cogent argument. Okay, rarely, but at least often enough to convince me that it's not a fluke. 

So forget about your divine pronouncements and defend your decision. That is, if you're not afraid to.


----------



## pbel (Jun 15, 2013)

Trajan said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...


six day war - Yahoo! Search Results

*On the eve of the war, Egypt massed approximately 100,000 *of its 160,000 troops in the Sinai, including all of its seven divisions (four infantry, two armored and one mechanized), four independent infantry brigades and four independent armored brigades. No fewer than a third of them were veterans of Egypt's intervention into the Yemen Civil War and another third were reservists. These forces had 950 tanks, 1,100 APCs and more than 1,000 artillery pieces.[78]


*The Israeli army had a total strength, including reservists, of 264,000, *


Controversies relating to the Six-Day War - Ask.com Encyclopedia

On the other hand, the Arab view was that it was an unjustified attack.[14] After the war, Israeli officials admitted that Israel wasn't expecting to be attacked when it initiated hostilities against Egypt.[15][16] Mordechai Bentov, an Israeli cabinet minister who attended the June 4th Cabinet meeting, called into question the idea that there was a "danger of extermination" saying that it was "invented of whole cloth and exaggerated after the fact to justify the annexation of new Arab territories."[17][18] Menachem Begin said that "The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. (...) We decided to attack him".[19][20] Israel received reports from the United States to the effect that Egyptian deployments were defensive and anticipatory of a possible Israeli attack,[21] and the US assessed that if anything, it was Israel that was pressing to begin hostilities.[18] *Abba Eban, Israel's foreign minister during the war, later wrote in his autobiography that Nasser's assurances he wasn't planning to attack Israel were credible*: "Nasser did not want war. He wanted victory without war." [22] Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld has written that while the exact origins of the war may never be known, Israel's forces were "spoiling for a fight and willing to go to considerable lengths to provoke one".[23] Israel's attack isn't seen as fulfilling the criteria of the Caroline test for anticipatory self-defence.[24]


----------



## pbel (Jun 15, 2013)

Trajan said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


six day war - Yahoo! Search Results

*On the eve of the war, Egypt massed approximately 100,000 *of its 160,000 troops in the Sinai, including all of its seven divisions (four infantry, two armored and one mechanized), four independent infantry brigades and four independent armored brigades. No fewer than a third of them were veterans of Egypt's intervention into the Yemen Civil War and another third were reservists. These forces had 950 tanks, 1,100 APCs and more than 1,000 artillery pieces.[78]


*The Israeli army had a total strength, including reservists, of 264,000, *


Controversies relating to the Six-Day War - Ask.com Encyclopedia

On the other hand, the Arab view was that it was an unjustified attack.[14] After the war, Israeli officials admitted that Israel wasn't expecting to be attacked when it initiated hostilities against Egypt.[15][16] Mordechai Bentov, an Israeli cabinet minister who attended the June 4th Cabinet meeting, called into question the idea that there was a "danger of extermination" saying that it was "invented of whole cloth and exaggerated after the fact to justify the annexation of new Arab territories."[17][18] Menachem Begin said that "The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. (...) We decided to attack him".[19][20] Israel received reports from the United States to the effect that Egyptian deployments were defensive and anticipatory of a possible Israeli attack,[21] and the US assessed that if anything, it was Israel that was pressing to begin hostilities.[18] *Abba Eban, Israel's foreign minister during the war, later wrote in his autobiography that Nasser's assurances he wasn't planning to attack Israel were credible*: "Nasser did not want war. He wanted victory without war." [22] Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld has written that while the exact origins of the war may never be known, Israel's forces were "spoiling for a fight and willing to go to considerable lengths to provoke one".[23] Israel's attack isn't seen as fulfilling the criteria of the Caroline test for anticipatory self-defence.[24]


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > No, it became Jewish land after the Jewish invasion. And no longer was Jewish land after another invasion followed by another and another....and you get the story. Anyways, go listen to some Oum Koulthoum and have a good evening.
> ...



We weren't speaking of modern day Israel.


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 15, 2013)

Trajan said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



That was funny yapper, moving on, the world doesn't recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital since its occupied territory. 

Can you read? 

Simply put, only you jews believe so. There's a reason why capitals are recognized around the world, and there's a reason why Jerusalem isn't recognized as Israel's capital. 

Next.


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...



Since when does the world dictate to Israel what their capital is ?????


----------



## pbel (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


Thats why a world-wide boycott has begun, Sanctions are next, and Israel's boom will become a bust.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> "..._Thats why a world-wide boycott has begun, Sanctions are next, and Israel's boom will become a bust._"


That's not that same BDS POS that has been around since 2005 and that has had all the impact of a sand-flea so far, right?

I'm sure the Israelis are just a-shakin' in their booties...

Your optimism regarding prospects for success is charming...


----------



## BecauseIKnow (Jun 15, 2013)

toastman said:


> BecauseIKnow said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



They don't necessarily dictate it, although they have done so with many nations in the past. But they realize its wrongfully claimed as Israel's capital and Israel's uses that excuse to expand their Jewish towns in occupied territory. But, they should have a say in it so it should oblige by international law.


----------



## pbel (Jun 15, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > "..._Thats why a world-wide boycott has begun, Sanctions are next, and Israel's boom will become a bust._"
> ...


With the worlds leading intellectuals like Hawkins, Chomsky and many others, I have no doubt that it will snowball into a mountain!


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 15, 2013)

Chomsky's a leading intellectual?  Yeah... he's right up there with the Kardashians.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> _With the worlds leading intellectuals like Hawkins, Chomsky and many others, I have no doubt that it will snowball into a mountain!_


Of course. Because it's made such a dent so far in the 8 years that its already been on its feet. As I said... charming.


----------



## toastman (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...



Well of course they should have a say in it, but I don't see how making demands will help them... 

For me however, whenever I hear about renewed peace talks, I already know they're going to fail because they have failed every single time in the past. 
It's kind of depressing actually .....


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...



that 264,00 were their total forces, Egypt was not the only arab belligerent for Christs sake....

I am not going to argue wiki entrys, that are totally devoid of context and other machinations that took place at the time, like,  operation Dawn I mentioned that Begin et al were fully aware of, and so to the US , as Nasser called the operation off at that point Israel was of 2 minds, yet the straits were till closed, they could not afford to keep their reservists in the field on alert forever, there was no UN buffer,  Israel knew that the ussr was feeding the nasser false information regards an attack by Israel into Syria etc.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > Quantum Windbag said:
> ...



wow, gee thx dad......


theres not a thing wrong with QW's questions, maybe you can take a shot at them. 

and exactly what decision do you think I have to defend?


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...



The UN also has a problem finding Israel on their own maps chuckles.....and aside from lowering flags for none heads of state how pass,  who gives a crap about 'the world'....

I am roman catholic you twit, but the 'you jews' remark is exactly what I expected from you.....thx for not disappointing me.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

pbel said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



you posted that idiocy twice, does that makes it true in your universe...?


----------



## MHunterB (Jun 15, 2013)

6 Day War: Six Day War Military Strength

Israel:
50,000 troops
214,000 reserves
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks  
Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed




 Egypt: 240,000
Syria, Jordan, and Iraq: 307,000
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks 
Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed


----------



## Trajan (Jun 15, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > BecauseIKnow said:
> ...



"they don't necessarily dictate it"......."although they have done so many times"...priceless....


name 3 alike capitals please...

and who's "they"?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 15, 2013)

MHunterB said:


> 6 Day War: Six Day War Military Strength ...


*Game... Set... Match*


----------



## Jroc (Jun 16, 2013)

BecauseIKnow said:


> Yes.
> 
> We all believe that besides some Jewish people and some American Christians. Other than that, most of the world would support it as an international city.



Bullshit Jerusalem under the Muslims was a rat hole, neglected it's not holy for muslims its a Jewish city, always has been. the muslims restricted Jews, they destroyed our cemeteries they'll never have it back.. *Ever* get it boy?


----------



## Jroc (Jun 16, 2013)

Where it belongs

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gE4O6g0Eig8]In Jewish Hands...again - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Roudy (Jun 16, 2013)

Jroc said:


> Where it belongs
> 
> In Jewish Hands...again - YouTube


[ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=HQlRrrReua0&feature=related]SHEMA ISRAEL ELOHAY - SARIT HADAD - Rigui - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://youtube.com/watch?v=dV4iz_WC9vs&feature=related"]http://youtube.com/watch?v=dV4iz_WC9vs&feature=related[/ame]


----------



## Lipush (Jun 16, 2013)

My uncle was one of the Parachutes that took part in freeing Jerusalem. Every time I see those pictures it gives me a warm feeling inside


----------



## Saigon (Jun 16, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?



If you mean the Old City then probably so, yes. (Western or New Jerusalem is obviously Israeli). Certainly many Israeli's would accept that as part of a long-term settlement. 

It's not an ideal soluton by any means, but it is probably the only viable compromise for both sides. 

Although I see there are a couple of pages of hysterical shrieking about the term "international city", there are several different precedents for such a concept - such as the Vatican, for one. Also, the UN zone at Quneitra or even the DMZ's in Korea and Viet Nam.

I can imagine the Old City being under UN mandate, with equal access to it from both east (Damascus Gate) and west (King David's Gate). It would require a major UN presence at the Wailing Wall, but there are already dozens of Israeli soldiers there now.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 16, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Jewish claim: Built the city; Site of the Temples; capital of Jewish world before exile; referenced dozens of times in Tanach
> 
> Christian claim: Site of major events in New Testament
> 
> ...



Because international borders are not based upon religious texts.

Neither Canada, Germany nor Italy are mentioned in the bible either - do they not exist?

Set all of the silly squabbling aside and what we are left with are two peoples who can both claim residence of the Old City dating back around 3,000 years.

Trying to invalidate either claim is pointless and dishonest - and usually made by people who do not understand the local geography to understand where the New City ends and the Old City begins.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 16, 2013)

Given that they've had possession of ALL of Jerusalem for nearly a half-century... 46 years... since 1967... and that they've tried Land-for-Peace deals several times in the past, and always been burned, somehow, I don't think that the Jews (Israelis) are going to give up Jerusalem again - ever. We could probably time-warp ahead 200 years and still be having this same conversation, although, by then, the few scraps of Palestinian-controlled land will have long-since been annexed to Israel, the Arabs on that land expelled from the country and living elsewhere for several generations already, and so-called 'Palestine' will be little more than a footnote in archaic historical narratives - forgotten by a world much-relieved to see those all-but-insane and combative folk dispersed and neutralized; scattered to the four winds and off everyone's scopes.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 16, 2013)

Kondor - 

Israel would never be asked to "give up Jerusalem". The issue only involves the Old City, and even then it would be shared under UN supverision. 



> - forgotten by a world much-relieved to see those all-but-insane and combative folk dispersed and neutralized;



At times in history people said the same about Jews; not to mention Kurds, Sikhs, Hmong or East Timorese. Of those peoples - which ones have disappeared and been forgotten?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 16, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Kondor -
> 
> Israel would never be asked to "give up Jerusalem". The issue only involves the Old City, and even then it would be shared under UN supverision.



Understood, Saigon. I simply do not foresee circumstances under which Israel would cede any aspect of control, sovereignty, oversight, whatever, which they now possess, in connection with Jerusalem - East, West, Old, New, whatever.

Whomever controls Jerusalem (Jews, Christians, Muslims... Byzantines, Franks, Arabs, Turks, British, Israelis, whatever) is considered (by tradition) to have a sacred trust to make the Holy Places accessible to all and to provide safe passage to-and-from same.

The Jews (Israelis) are every bit as capable of fulfilling that role as anyone else.

Given UN intransigence and ambivalence towards Israel at best, and UN General Assembly animosity and bias against Israel at worst, and given the failure of UN peace initiatives and land-for-peace deals over time, the Israelis have little reason to trust the UN.

Given that the Jews waited 1900 years to reclaim the Holy City and finally achieved that as a result of the 1967 Six-Day War, and given their poisoned relationship with the UN, my own 'take' on this is that UN control of Jerusalem - any part of it - is a nonstarter.



> > - forgotten by a world much-relieved to see those all-but-insane and combative folk dispersed and neutralized;
> 
> 
> 
> _At times in history people said the same about Jews; not to mention Kurds, Sikhs, Hmong or East Timorese. Of those peoples - which ones have disappeared and been forgotten_?


None of the examples that you provided had disappeared.

The Jews held-out because they had a unique and advanced (for ancient times) monotheistic religious belief-system which allowed them to weather a two-millennia -long Diaspora.

The rest because they always had at least some land on which to dwell as an organized people.

The so-called 'Palestinian People' are - organizationally speaking - an artificial construct which has only surfaced to distinguish them from their otherwise entirely indistinguishable regional ethnic brethren in recent decades - insufficient history and depth and traction to endure a Disaspora of 200 years, never mind 2000.

Many 'Losing-Side' populations and population-fragments end-up assimilating into the surrounding countryside and quickly disappear as a separately distinguishable 'People'; including many not mentioned in your earlier examples, such as Canaanites, Philistines, Carthaginians, Assyrians, Samaritans, Scythians, Parthians, Sumerians, Akkadians, etc..

Genetically, they're still 'there', so-to-speak - embedded within the present-day populations of their former regions - _but they no longer exist as a functional (or even nominal) polity_, from an organizational standpoint.

Such is likely to be the fate of this Johnny-Come-Lately artificial construct known as the so-called 'Palestinian'. They will still 'be there', so-to-speak, genetically embedded in the surrounding countryside populations. It's just that they will have disappeared off the scope as a functional (or even nominal) polity. Insufficient history, depth and traction.

Of course, I could be entirely wrong... full of $hit clean up to my ears... over this, but, stepping-back for the 5000-foot view, and looking at the multi-generational, multi-century long-haul, my money is on me being more right than wrong, on this one.

Our descendants will know whether there was any merit to such speculation, but we won't live long enough to learn the answers.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 16, 2013)

Kondor - 

You make some very good points there. 



> Many 'Losing-Side' populations and population-fragments end-up assimilating into the surrounding countryside and quickly disappear as a separately distinguishable 'People'; including many ot mentioned in your earlier examples, such as Cananites, Phillistines, Assyrians, Samaritans, Scythians, Parthians, Sumerians, Akkadians, etc..



This is true, and had modern events in the Levant taken place 1,000 years earlier, perhaps Palestinians would have gone the way of the Samaritans, but as with the Sikhs, Hmong and Kurds, today there is too much global interaction to make it easy for peoples to disappear - only in Africa are the eyes of the world closed to the conflicts. 

Thus, Palestinianism will still be with us 100 years from now, which is why Israel must ignore the 'might is right' lobby on this board and forge a solution which amounts to more than punting the issue down to the grandkids. 

If Israel is to be at peace in 2100, it needs to begin to find solutions in 2013.


----------



## Jroc (Jun 16, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?
> ...



Keep imagining that's as far as it's going to get


----------



## pbel (Jun 16, 2013)

Trajan said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


Sounds like you play the Israel Victim Card like the usual cry babies....Israel's army not only matched and exceeded all the Arab forces but the US technological weapons made the six day war an easy victory...You don't like Wikipedia... it is a legitimate source used by many on this board and the world...If you have better info on the numbers post them...


Six-Day War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Arab preparations

On the eve of the war, Egypt massed approximately* 100,000 *of its 160,000 troops in the Sinai, including all of its seven divisions (four infantry, two armored and one mechanized), four independent infantry brigades and four independent armored brigades. No fewer than a third of them were veterans of Egypt's intervention into the Yemen Civil War and another third were reservists. These forces had 950 tanks, 1,100 APCs and more than 1,000 artillery pieces.[78]

At the same time some Egyptian troops (15,00020,000) were still fighting in Yemen.[79][80][81] Nasser's ambivalence about his goals and objectives was reflected in his orders to the military. The general staff changed the operational plan four times in May 1967, each change requiring the redeployment of troops, with the inevitable toll on both men and vehicles.[82]

Towards the end of May, Nasser finally forbade the general staff from proceeding with the Qahir ("Victory") plan, which called for a light infantry screen in the forward fortifications with the bulk of the forces held back to conduct a massive counterattack against the main Israeli advance when identified, and ordered a forward defense of the Sinai.[82] In the meantime, he continued to take actions intended to increase the level of mobilization of Egypt, Syria and Jordan, in order to bring pressure on Israel.

Syria's army had a total strength of 75,000 and amassed them along the Syrian border.[83] Jordan's army had 55,000 troops[84] and 300 tanks along the Jordanian border, 250 of which were U.S. M48 Patton, sizable amounts of M113 APCs, a new battalion of mechanized infantry, and a paratrooper battalion trained in the new U.S.-built school. They also had 12 battalions of artillery and six batteries of 81 mm and 120 mm mortars.[85]

Documents captured by the Israelis from various Jordanian command posts record orders from the end of May for the Hashemite Brigade to capture Ramot Burj Bir Mai'in in a night raid, codenamed "Operation Khaled". The aim was to establish a bridgehead together with positions in Latrun for an armored capture of Lod and Ramle. The "go" codeword was Sa'ek and end was Nasser. The Jordanians planned for the capture of Motza and Sha'alvim in the strategic Jerusalem Corridor. Motza was tasked to Infantry Brigade 27 camped near Ma'ale Adummim: "The reserve brigade will commence a nighttime infiltration onto Motza, will destroy it to the foundation, and won't leave a remnant or refugee from among its 800 residents".[85]

100 Iraqi tanks and an infantry division were readied near the Jordanian border. Two squadrons of fighter-aircraft, Hawker Hunters and MiG 21, were rebased adjacent to the Jordanian border.[85]

On June 2, Jordan called up all reserve officers, and the West Bank commander met with community leaders in Ramallah to request assistance and cooperation for his troops during the war, assuring them that "in three days we'll be in Tel-Aviv".[85]

The Arab air forces were aided by volunteer pilots from the Pakistan Air Force acting in independent capacity, and by some aircraft from Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia to make up for the massive losses suffered on the first day of the war. The PAF Pilots shot down several Israeli planes.[2]

Israeli preparations


----------



## Roudy (Jun 16, 2013)

pbel said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


There are some that expected Israel sit there and do nothing when all these Arab countries committed an act of war by amassing their troops at Israel's borders, with their leaders declaring "we will drive the Jews into the sea".  That's not how it works.


----------



## Jroc (Jun 16, 2013)

Roudy said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


There was a time when Jews sat and waited to be slaughtered..that time has passed....Some long for that time to return and some of those on this board


----------



## pbel (Jun 16, 2013)

Roudy said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


*The truth lives on no matter how many lies are posted on these boards...*

AOL Search

In the same Israeli newspaper on the same day, General Ezer Weizmann, Chief of Operations during the war and a nephew of Chaim Weizmann, was quoted as saying: &#8220;There was never any danger of annihilation. This hypothesis has never been considered in any serious meeting.&#8221;

In the spring of 1972, General Matetiyahu Peled, Chief of Logistical Command during the war and one of 12 members of Israel&#8217;s General Staff, addressed a political literary club in Tel Aviv. He said: &#8220;The thesis according to which the danger of genocide hung over us in June 1967, and according to which Israel was fighting for her very physical survival, was nothing but a bluff which was born and bred after the war.&#8221;

In a radio debate Peled also said: &#8220;Israel was never in real danger and there was no evidence that Egypt had any intention of attacking Israel.&#8221; He added that &#8220;Israeli intelligence knew that Egypt was not prepared for war.&#8221;

In the same programme General Chaim Herzog (former Director of Military Intelligence, future Israeli Ambassador to the UN and President of his state) said: &#8220;There was no danger of annihilation. Neither Israeli headquarters nor the Pentagon &#8211; as the memoirs of President Johnson proved &#8211; believed in this danger.&#8221;


----------



## Trajan (Jun 16, 2013)

pbel said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...



you are challenged when it comes to reading comprehension as well, I will take one more shot at this- there is no victim mentality pointing out facts, the fact is your numbers are wrong, you are bucketing Israels forces all on one front, they had more than one front to fight on...hello, Jordanians, Syrians to the east etc., taken in the whole they were heavily out numbered in every facet...... look at Bhunters post.  this is fact, I am sorry if thats inconvenient for you. 

I never said wiki wasn't Wikipedia... " a legitimate source" wiki is a poster board of snippets, unless you have actually read BOOKs and deep dive into the personalties involved etc. 2-3 sentences does not lend context to the whole, I can pick a few sentences out of almost anything to make it appear the one and only view fact and utterance to make a specific point viable,  its a too convenient way for folks like you, whom I call "Google Rangers" to pretend to be informed after running out to perform a 2-3 minute search to find a link that they may be able to pull some nugget tpo make it appear as if they have a handle on the background. 

if wiki is your back stop, fine here ya go-

israel
50,000 troops
214,000 reserves
300 combat aircraft
800 tanks[3]

Total troops: 264,000
100,000 deployed



Egypt: 240,000
Syria, Jordan, and Iraq: 307,000
957 combat aircraft
2,504 tanks[3]

Total troops: 547,000
240,000 deployed

thats from bhunters post and its from wiki......so what now?


----------



## Roudy (Jun 16, 2013)

pbel said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


"There was no evidence that an attack was imminent." Yeah right!  Only 5 Arab countries had moved their troops at Israel's borders and led by the Egyptian leader, the Arab world was in a frenzy over the possible destruction of Israel.

Seriously, an aol search?  You gotta be kidding me.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 16, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?
> ...



I think Israel has done an admirable job providing access considering all the angst involved on both sides and mistrust,  they have had their issues no doubt, so has the 'others'. The UN is a very fickle org., they run when the heat goes up, and I don't see them helping at all except to porvdie another propaganda victory.  

And, my last point on that, I don't think the UN has demonstrated the trust required to administer that type of situation, most especially when it involves Israel without bias.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 16, 2013)

Roudy said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



he using alan hart net. or some such other sites, fodder for the simple who like their views reinforced or fed to them in bytes.....the thesis being that the whole war was a set up by DC with the collusion of iraq syria and jordan...yea...

Peled is lets say engaged in some revisionist history, he was a stanch advocate of attacking first to remove the air superiority threat as he felt at the time that was their greatest battlefield threat and he did believe the Egyptians would attack, once they could be certain ( and they never were and we were to see later the Syrians are very devious and double dealers) that Syria would fulfill their part and attack when they did.  

Later on he became what I term as the Howard Zinn of Israel. Hes also been refuted several times by the very same folks he comments on, and has been accused of making, to put it lightly contradictory statements and mixing up his f'acts''. I have no issue with his stance as in hes certainly entitled to it,  like Zinn, I think he became disappointed in where Israel went there after on a policy basis, hes earned his right to his view but I would take his comments with a huge grain of salt  especially as he became a political figure and helped form the PLP. his comments and advocacy for direct negotiations ( and with whom he met)  the PLO only 2 years after the Munich massacre tell you all you need to know about his motivations and mindset. 
 His comments for example on the Yom Kippur war are, well, not exactly based in the reality of the situation at the time. 

Of course everything I have just said here is a total surprise to pbel et al......thats why I really don't like wiki btw.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 16, 2013)

Trajan said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


Yup. Now if they would have been successful in 1967, I doubt they would be singing the same tune as they are now.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 16, 2013)

Trajan said:


> I think Israel has done an admirable job providing access considering all the angst involved on both sides and mistrust,  they have had their issues no doubt, so has the 'others'. The UN is a very fickle org., they run when the heat goes up, and I don't see them helping at all except to porvdie another propaganda victory.
> 
> And, my last point on that, I don't think the UN has demonstrated the trust required to administer that type of situation, most especially when it involves Israel without bias.



By and large, yes they have done a decent job, but there are reasons why the home team does not provide the referees for the Stanley Cup finals, and the same rules apply here.

The UN has an excellent record in both Southern Lebanon and Golan, and are the only party suited to do the job. I have no idea what you mean here by "fickle"; their role in peacekeeping in the region dates back decades and has largely been on a very high standard.


----------



## pbel (Jun 16, 2013)

Trajan said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


The song and dance goes on...Israel was in no danger of being invaded, its the same ME posturing of today...Israel's Pre-Emptive strike was a war of aggression planned to conquor the West Bank and Sinai...It was a War Of aggression and not your Victim Hood bullshit stories you pass for truth.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 16, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Kondor -
> 
> You make some very good points there.
> 
> ...



are these solutions only to be searched for by Israel?


----------



## Saigon (Jun 16, 2013)

Trajan said:


> are these solutions only to be searched for by Israel?



Obviously not, but Israel is the dominant party here. Israel controls the situation both on the ground and around the hallways of the UN, US and EU governments. 

Israel has to play the lead role in determining the shape of the outcome, because at the moment no one in Palestine has the mandate, the power nor in some cases the will to do so.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 16, 2013)

> The UN has an excellent record...


  Ha ha ha!  

I must have accidentally come across the comedy and humor section of the board.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 16, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Saigon said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor -
> ...


Plus you missed the part that he deceptively tried to make today's Arabs that call themselves Palestinians an ancient people that go back over 3000 years in the land of Israel. That is more outlandish than science fiction.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 16, 2013)

Trajan said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



You first. "Where did YOU learn to count?"


----------



## Trajan (Jun 16, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > are these solutions only to be searched for by Israel?
> ...



I have to say thats the first time I have heard that Israel controls anything at the UN, aside from us as a proxy  veto, they get hammered routinely. 


as to the second part, I am not sure what they can at this point do. if there is little taste for compromise or even some general conciliatory attitude, its like sitting at the table by yourself.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 16, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



I have no idea what that post is supposed to mean......


----------



## Trajan (Jun 16, 2013)

pbel said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...




 why yes of course, they told nasser to chase the UN out, move his troops right to the edge, close the straits of tiran where in they import 75% of their fuel, told jordan and iraq to mobilize forces to assist syria, create then call off operation dawn only after it the secret was blown etc etc etc .

you're obviously delusional..and willfully so it appears. 


Oh and did you take out a calculator btw and do the math on the troops counts etc.?


----------



## toastman (Jun 16, 2013)

pbel said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...



Pbel, this is one of the most ridiculous, out-of-reality statements I've seen here. It's up there with some of Sherri's comments. 
What's the matter with you ? Only feeble minded people believe in this kind of Arab propaganda bullshit that attempts to re-write history.


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jun 16, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



I count 4 separate religions under the banner of Islam alone.


Ahmadiyya
Shi'a
Sufism
Sunni
It seems to me that you don't think people that kill each other over religious disagreements are part of a different religion, which is absurd. That leads to the inevitable question, where did you learn to count?


----------



## Roudy (Jun 16, 2013)

Trajan said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


These guys who lie like this forget that there are recordings of Nasser and other Arab leaders going on national TV and radio declaring that they will be "driving the Jews into the sea, blah blah blah. "  but then again if they had any shame they wouldn't be making these kinds of claims in the first place.


----------



## MHunterB (Jun 16, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > are these solutions only to be searched for by Israel?
> ...



Thanks for the laugh, Saigon.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 16, 2013)

Trajan said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



Nor do I have any idea what QW's post is supposed to mean, but you quoted it. Maybe you should ask the troll; he already knows I have him on ignore and yet remains very preoccupied with me.


----------



## MHunterB (Jun 16, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



That is a new definition of 'troll' with which I was previously unfamiliar.  Seems to me that the one calling 'troll' was admiring his own reflection and got confused.......


----------



## Indofred (Jun 16, 2013)

What an interesting idea.
A city run for all and anyone by people of all three major religions.
A city where all can respect each other.

Never work - too many bloody idiots around.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 16, 2013)

Trajan said:


> I have to say thats the first time I have heard that Israel controls anything at the UN, aside from us as a proxy  veto, they get hammered routinely.



At the UN they do, because they are outnumbered by the Arab lobby, but only on issues on which the EU countries abstain or vote against Israel.

Should Israel present a viable peace plan at UN level for some reason, it would automatically have the support of the 28 EU nations, plus those of most of the rest of the western world. 

Although the EU is sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, the EU also hasa strong Jewish lobby, and will always support Israel's existance. 

Palestine simply does not have the networks, lobbyists or influence that Israel has in London, Paris, Berlin or Rome - let alone Washington.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 16, 2013)

Roudy said:


> > The UN has an excellent record...
> 
> 
> Ha ha ha!
> ...




Both UNIFIL and the UN operation in Golan(Qunietra) have been extremely succesful for decades.

I have visited both operations personally and spoken to local people about the operations. In both cases people were full of praise for the work the soldiers have done in bridge building. 

Any problem you have with the operations is likely not with the UN, but with the limited mandate they have from the member states - meaning they can not, for instance, round up terrorists.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 17, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > > The UN has an excellent record...
> ...


Yeah right, last I checked the UN was considered to be a joke.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 17, 2013)

Roudy - 



> Yeah right, last I checked the UN was considered to be a joke.



I can not imagine who you checked with who would reduce the activities of an organisation involved in everything from election monitoring and promoting democracy, to vaccines to fresh water to promoting womens' rights to peacekeeping and from mosquito control to safeguarding cultural treasures as "a joke".

No one is going to consider UNICEF, WHO, UNIMOG and UNOSOM in the same breath, when they are involved in entirely different areas and in different parts of the world. They have virtually nothing in common. 

Within UN Peacekeeping alone there have been more than 70 missions. There have been 15 - 20 missions in the Middle East alone. One or two of those have been failures, but a good fifty of them have been very significant successes, and I would count UNIFIL and UNDOF amongst them. 

If you would not, by all means explain why not.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 17, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Roudy -
> 
> 
> 
> ...


UN does good humanitarian work, although even in that there is so much waste, corruption and cronyism it would make a third world dictator blush. 

Preventing wars and genocides and promoting peace, their record is dismal and in many cases they have made things worse.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 17, 2013)

Roudy - 

In actual fact, there is very little waste these days in organisations such as the WHO, UNICEF or UNESCO. Some, perhaps, but in general it is not a major issue. And I based that on discussions with people who work for organisations both within and outside the UN, such as CARE and STC. 



> Preventing wars and genocides and promoting peace, their record is dismal and in many cases they have made things worse.



I mentioned earlier that the UN has run 70 missions based on peacekeeping, and in that list I see 2 or 3 that I would consider failures for one reason or another. 

I see about 50 I would consider successes and UNIFIL is one of them. 

How has UNIFIL made things worse? How about UNDOF?

Are you actually familiar with their work, or do you simply oppose them because they are run by the UN?


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 17, 2013)

The UN is a joke.  African and Asian countries can engage in clear acts of genocide, but if Israel approves an apartment building on a barren parcel of land claimed by the "Palestinians," that goes to the top of its agenda.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 17, 2013)

MHunterB said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



Some people here are hellbent on getting every thread an "enemy" posts in moved to the rubber room. Don't get sucked into this cult. A few rep points are simply not worth it.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jun 17, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?



No.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 17, 2013)

Not only do I disagree with the premise of the titular question, I disagree with its wording.  As phrased, it suggests that the status of Jerusalem is an issue to be imposed from the outside upon Israel.  Its not.  Jerusalem - undivided - is part of sovereign Israel.  This is true regardless of the opinions or protests of any other nation.  

Israel need not explain, persuade, coerce, or apologize to anyone for its stance on Jerusalem.  It is, was, and will be the capital of Israel.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 17, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



whatever, and you asked me to defend a decision, what decision is that?


----------



## Quantum Windbag (Jun 17, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Roudy -
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He probably checked with the women and children the UN "Peacekeepers" raped. I am sure you read a book about how wonderful they are though, which absolutely trumps anything anyone else has to say.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 17, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > I have to say thats the first time I have heard that Israel controls anything at the UN, aside from us as a proxy  veto, they get hammered routinely.
> ...




sppting Israels existence is a no brainer, I hardly think they require credit for that frankly, especially since France and Britain at al are responsible to a large extent for the borders etc. and a lot of the mess there after sykes-picot etc. 

and if I recall the UN voted for Non-Member Observer State status for the Palestinians assistant vehement US objections,  a move I to thought short sighted, France et al would not back off, so theres that.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 17, 2013)

Although the UN does much good work with respect to Relief and Education and Health and Advocacy, it is a Toothless Old Woman when it comes to military matters, and everybody knows it. Let's not kid ourselves.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 17, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Roudy -
> 
> In actual fact, there is very little waste these days in organisations such as the WHO, UNICEF or UNESCO. Some, perhaps, but in general it is not a major issue. And I based that on discussions with people who work for organisations both within and outside the UN, such as CARE and STC.
> 
> ...


So what you're saying is that the UN has done good work keeping the peace and preventing wars?  Lets see, brief recap of the UN's handiwork in the last 30 years: Iranian hostage crisis, Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Iran / Iraq War, Lebanon civil war, Afghanistan civil war, Pakistan India crisis', N. Korea crisis', Syria / Hezbollah takeover of Lebanon and assassination of Lebanese leader, US invasion of Iraq, US invasion of Afghanistan, Syrian civil war, Rwanda, Somalia, Darfur, etc.  

Wow Saigon, dude, the UN has done such a great job of preventing these conflicts, and MILLIONS of innocent people dying unnecessarily, hasn't it?  

Just tell me what you're smoking, 'cause I really want sum of dat!  Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 17, 2013)

Trajan said:


> Saigon said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


Yes, and don't forget most of these countries and entities that claim to believe in Israel's right to exist on the one hand, on the other expect Israel to agree to terms and conditions that will effectively bring about its destruction. All in the name of "peace", why of course.


----------



## freedombecki (Jun 17, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Not only do I disagree with the premise of the titular question, I disagree with its wording. As phrased, it suggests that the status of Jerusalem is an issue to be imposed from the outside upon Israel. Its not. Jerusalem - undivided - is part of sovereign Israel. This is true regardless of the opinions or protests of any other nation.
> 
> Israel need not explain, persuade, coerce, or apologize to anyone for its stance on Jerusalem. It is, was, and will be the capital of Israel.


 [ame=http://youtu.be/wEPZ1ef2g_A]Ernest Gold: "Exodus" (1960) - Original Main Theme - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 18, 2013)

freedombecki said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Not only do I disagree with the premise of the titular question, I disagree with its wording. As phrased, it suggests that the status of Jerusalem is an issue to be imposed from the outside upon Israel. Its not. Jerusalem - undivided - is part of sovereign Israel. This is true regardless of the opinions or protests of any other nation.
> ...



From Exodus: This land is mine, G-d gave this land to me, this brave and ancient land to me.
From Joseph, by Andrew Lloyd Webber:  Children of Israel are never alone, because G-d has promised us a land of our own.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 18, 2013)

Quantum Windbag said:


> Saigon said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy -
> ...


Lets not forget the "wisdom" of the UN when they recently elected countries like LIBYA, SYRIA, and Saudi Arabia, to the HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL!  Ha ha ha.  That's like electing a KKK leader like David Duke to lead an anti racism committee.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jun 18, 2013)

Roudy said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Saigon said:
> ...



Or electing a Democrat to fix the economy.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 18, 2013)

Trajan said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



You can start by explaining how you decided the "right of conquest" applies when Israel had Jerusalem handed to it in '48...


----------



## MHunterB (Jun 18, 2013)

Probably '67 - when the Israelis took back the portion the Jordanians had invaded and over-run  -*and then ethnically cleansed of its original Jewish inhabitants.*


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 18, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



What are you talking about?  The Partition Plan called for Jerusalem to become an international city.  The Arabs rejected this, and decided that Jerusalem's fate would be decided by military action.  As a result, Isreal captured "West Jerusalem" in 1948, and "East Jerusalem" in 1967.

When and how did Israel have Jerusalem "handed to it"?


----------



## toastman (Jun 18, 2013)

Roudy said:


> Quantum Windbag said:
> 
> 
> > Saigon said:
> ...



Did you know that the Jew hating scumbag SS Major David Duke actually considered running for president once haha :

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88AsArwYsTc]David Duke for President? -- It's up to You! - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 18, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...



And that's such a horrible idea today because.....? 

Please, no discussion of "God" or a "promised land" in your answer. Appealing to religion is an excuse to throw any long-term peace plan out the window.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 18, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



I'm guessing that you're someone's little brother.

Why?

Because when little brothers lose, they cry "do over!"

Unfortunately, the "do over" concept does not apply here.  If the Arabs had accepted the Partition Plan, Jerusalem would be an international city today.  Instead, they rejected the plan and attempted to take everything for themselves.  They lost.  You don't get a "do over" under those circumstances.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 18, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



When Mecca and Vatican City become internationalized, then we'll talk.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 18, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > HistoryBefore67 said:
> ...



Considering all the pre-partition BS that Britain fed to the Arabs regarding who would get what, it's understandable that they were pissed off at the time. Do you consider that a justification for prolonging the conflict?


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 18, 2013)

Israel didn't prolong the conflict.  They agreed to end it and accept the Partition Plan, notwithstanding that it was less than ideal.

The Arabs chose to prolong the conflict, and continue to do so to this day.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 18, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Israel didn't prolong the conflict.  They agreed to end it and accept the Partition Plan, notwithstanding that it was less than ideal.
> 
> The Arabs chose to prolong the conflict, and continue to do so to this day.



And if they were offered a treaty that returned Jerusalem to international status, would they accept it? Maybe not, but it makes no sense to take it off the table without testing it.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 18, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Israel didn't prolong the conflict.  They agreed to end it and accept the Partition Plan, notwithstanding that it was less than ideal.
> ...



First of all, you can't "return" Jerusalem to international status, as its never had that status.

Second, how would this "international city" even work?  Who would be in charge of it?  Who would determine and control access (both for residents of Israel and the hypothetical Palestinian state, and for citizens of other countries?  How would the preservation of antiquities be assured?  What sanctions would be imposed upon those who interfere with the access of others, and who would impose those sanctions?  How would the needs of residents be addressed?  Who could move to the city, and under what circumstances?

You make it sound so simple... but simple solutions sometimes involve slicing a live baby in half so each "mother" can have a piece.


----------



## skye (Jun 18, 2013)

Should Jerusalem be made an international city?



Of course not!

Jerusalem  should remain the capital of israel, splitting it could be a disaster and should not even be considered. Just imagine the hypothetical  case of any Arab control, in typical Muslim fashion they could quickly see to it that other religions would be expelled or diminished.

Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and will remain in that status forever.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 18, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > HistoryBefore67 said:
> ...



It sounds to me from these questions that you're not interested in any kind of long term peace solution. If I'm wrong, why don't you list the concessions that both sides should make?


----------



## Trajan (Jun 18, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



because this is not 48 or 67, and frankly I don't think this intl. city deal would have ever worked. As soon as the arabs felt strong enough they would have applied the pressure and the guarantors of the city would have fled, like they did in other areas several times...no UN force wants to die to keep the jews and arabs from each others throats.....


I think that after Munich all bets were off, there was a faction that Israel felt deep down they could never treat with in good faith, the only reason why Begin sat down and did what he did with Sadat was, Sadat had achieved what he needed to, he redeemed Egyptian honor on the battlefield while also realizing that peace was far better than a day to day war, and he was a unique individual in that respect and Begin recognized the war had changed them both. 

Is there an arab leader of such stuff today and yes a fair question is, is there such a jewish leader out there today? 

I think those questions answer themselves.


----------



## Trajan (Jun 18, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



now you're getting closer. one antagonist was lied to another took what it given and could.....if you're a jew in 1946 after the war and the holocaust news is out and you're offered status and a state, you take it, if you're not ( and you have no real nat. or intl identity) , and you have the European powers drawing boundaries willy nilly over the decades, you get pissed, I don't blame them, they got fucked, no doubt of it....frankly they are mad at the wrong people, pragmatically they should understand Israels angst,  so why get mad at someone who took what was given them and they built for the very same premise you wish to employ now?


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 18, 2013)

WonkyPundit said:
			
		

> It sounds to me from these questions that you're not interested in any kind of long term peace solution. If I'm wrong, why don't you list the concessions that both sides should make?



Sure, no problem.

The "Palestinians," in the interest of securing a homeland for their people where they can prosper, should cease insisting upon Jerusalem as their capital.  Jerusalem is Israel's capital, and that's not going to change.  

Israel has provided access to Islamic holy sites since 1967, and will continue to do so.  It might be appropriate to turn the duties of the Waqf over to a new Palestinian state, rather than keeping it with Jordan.  

Israel will make other concessions.  Jerusalem is not a bargaining chip.

That's my solution.  The "Palestinians" might not like it.  Too bad.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 18, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



You asked specifically about Jerusalem, and concessions don't include that city.  You just don't know what Jerusalem means to a Jew.  It's enough that Palestinians have taken over every major Biblical city--Hebron, Bethlehem, Shechem, Jericho, Shiloh, etc.  HistoryBefore67 brought up the Solomon analogy.  If we give up half of Jerusalem, we're admitting that we're not the real "mothers" of Israel, and we don't belong there at all.  I guess Jerusalem can best be exemplified by someone I know there personally. His name is Mordecai Machlis and he's my former Bar-Mitzvah teacher.  Every Friday night he opens his house to about one hundred different guests--whoever is hungry physically and spiritually for a Sabbath meal.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Jun 19, 2013)

Jerusalem is not mentioned even once in the Quran.  It means nothing to the Muslims.

The site of the destroyed holy temple for the Jews is now desecrated with Muslim kids playing soccer there.  

The Muslims pray facing Mecca, with their backs to the 'Dome of the Rock.'

Jews are even taken into Police custody for _'daring_' to bow or silently mouth prayers, as actually happened today and on most days, such is the topsy-turvey world of the Israelis being scared of raising the ire of the Muslims.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 19, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > HistoryBefore67 said:
> ...



Since you replied without answering the previous question, I feel I have to ask it again: 

What do you think is a fair set of concessions on both sides for a long-term peace?


----------



## toastman (Jun 19, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...




No more concessions from Israel. We've made too many without and peace. If it was me, the first concession would be the COMPLETE cessation of ALL rocket attacks on Israel for one year. Then we can talk


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Jun 19, 2013)

toastman said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



And a building freeze in the 'West Bank' is in force.  When will Israel realize that pandering to the Pals is futile.  Next they will ask Israel to release the terrorists in the jails.


----------



## toastman (Jun 19, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



They did ask that, just a few weeks ago ! Abbas said any peace talks must include the release of all Palestinian Prisoners !


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Jun 19, 2013)

toastman said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



As if!!!  

If Israel has to talk with the Pals, then certainly no more terrorists should be released.  Releasing the hundreds in exchange for Shalit was wrong, but that is my personal opinion, and I know others wouldn't agree with me.  Certainly no terrorist releases.  It is bad enough Israel has capitulated to a building freeze with the dreadful shortage of homes.  The last of the citizens from the Gazan disengagement eight years ago are still not permanently rehoused.


----------



## Lipush (Jun 19, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



What is peace without Jerusalem?


----------



## Lipush (Jun 19, 2013)

toastman said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



When they bring me a purple unicorn, I will bring them their prisoners.

How's that for a good deal, eh?


----------



## syrenn (Jun 19, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?



 


the jews have no problem with Jerusalem being the Israeli capitol or in jewish control. 
the christians have no problem with Jerusalem being the Israeli capitol or in jewish control.

I would say the muslims are out voted 2 to 1

fuck um if they dont like it.... they can go to mecca, THE muslim holy site and pray there


----------



## toastman (Jun 19, 2013)

Israel will NEVER give up control of Jerusalem
Israel will never allow right of return

These are all just Jihadi dreams ha ha ha


----------



## syrenn (Jun 19, 2013)

toastman said:


> Israel will NEVER give up control of Jerusalem
> Israel will never allow right of return
> 
> These are all just Jihadi dreams ha ha ha


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 19, 2013)

Do you ever get the idea that some day a Muslim cleric will announce that London, Tokyo and Washington are, in fact, built on Islamic holy sites?


----------



## syrenn (Jun 19, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Do you ever get the idea that some day a Muslim cleric will announce that London, Tokyo and Washington are, in fact, built on Islamic holy sites?




give them time..... give them time.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Jun 19, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Do you ever get the idea that some day a Muslim cleric will announce that London, Tokyo and Washington are, in fact, built on Islamic holy sites?



I wouldn't put that idea past them.  Some raving lunatic will state that.  I will keep my eyes open on MEMRI TV and PALESTINIAN MEDIA WATCH.  

I do know that many Islamic clerics state that London, Tokyo and Washington (and even Vatican City) will become Islamic strongholds.  That is their dream - to take over the world and make it Islamic.  There are plenty of Islamists stating that very dream of theirs.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 19, 2013)

toastman said:


> Israel will NEVER give up control of Jerusalem
> Israel will never allow right of return
> 
> These are all just Jihadi dreams ha ha ha



The whole "right of return" business is ridiculous, I'll give you that.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 20, 2013)

toastman said:


> Israel will NEVER give up control of Jerusalem
> Israel will never allow right of return
> 
> These are all just Jihadi dreams ha ha ha



Israel may never allow either of those things, but that does not make the thousands of Palestinians who want them any more Jihadi than you or I are. 

The fact that the Palestinian cause has been picked up by some fairly vile groups around the world in no way weakens the original cause. It is just that in some cases it makes it harder for objective people to support.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 20, 2013)

syrenn said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Considering that three major religions claim holy sites there?
> ...



Racial hatred is not the basis for any peace settlement. 

And actually many, many Christians DO have a problem with the methods used to ensure allof Jerusalem remains in Jewish hands - collective punishment, detention without trial and the use of torture have been criticised by everyone from the Pope to the Greek Orthodox church.


----------



## Jroc (Jun 20, 2013)

Saigon said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



You're full of shit boy



> In the case of a final peace agreement that established a Palestinian state, more Arab residents of east Jerusalem would prefer to be Israeli than Palestinian, according to a study released Wednesday by Pechter Middle East Polls.
> 
> The poll surveyed over 1,000 Arab residents of east Jerusalem, focusing on questions about quality of life and personal identity choices in the case of a two-state peace agreement.



'E. J'lem Arabs would prefer Israel over Palestinian state' | JPost | Israel News


----------



## Saigon (Jun 21, 2013)

Jroc - 

I can't see any connection between what I posted and your response. 

Of course many Palestinians Arabs would prefer to live in Israel, because they imagine the standard of living will be higher in Israel; and because they may have family roots dating back a thousand years in towns within Israel, such as Akko and Nazareth.


----------



## syrenn (Jun 21, 2013)

Saigon said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



i agree, and the muslims hate anything and everything not muslim.


----------



## Jroc (Jun 21, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Jroc -
> 
> I can't see any connection between what I posted and your response.
> 
> Of course many Palestinians Arabs would prefer to live in Israel, because they imagine the standard of living will be higher in Israel; and because they may have family roots dating back a thousand years in towns within Israel, such as Akko and Nazareth.



Bull the same towns under Arab control, they'd rather live in Israel, a free country not some muslim ran shit hole...Get it?


----------



## Saigon (Jun 21, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> And a building freeze in the 'West Bank' is in force.  When will Israel realize that pandering to the Pals is futile.  Next they will ask Israel to release the terrorists in the jails.



Firstly, new buildings are being erected as recently as May 2013. 

Secondly, many of the "terrorists" in jails have never been tried, let alone convicted. If you believe in innocent until proven guilty, then you want them released as well. 

This is not about "pandering" to anyone - it is about accepting that a stable peace settlement can not be based upon the use of force alone.


----------



## Jroc (Jun 21, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > And a building freeze in the 'West Bank' is in force.  When will Israel realize that pandering to the Pals is futile.  Next they will ask Israel to release the terrorists in the jails.
> ...



You just don't fucking get it do you?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PwbkXLJ-eQ&]"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PwbkXLJ-eQ&][/ame]


----------



## Saigon (Jun 21, 2013)

syrenn said:


> i agree, and the muslims hate anything and everything not muslim.



Some do, yes. 

So is their hatred different from your own?


----------



## Saigon (Jun 21, 2013)

Jroc- 

I do not believe that many Muslims would rather not live in a Muslim country simply because it is Muslim. 

Immigration trends and common sense show that most people prefer to live in an area where they are surrounded by people much like themselves. 

If Muslims could return to Israel, most would move to towns like Nazareth and Akko, less so to Qiryat Shemonah or Tzfat.


----------



## Jroc (Jun 21, 2013)

Saigon said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> > i agree, and the muslims hate anything and everything not muslim.
> ...



 I have no hatred, I'm a realist...you apparently are an Idealist, there Is difference.. Deal with it.. the Jews have


----------



## syrenn (Jun 21, 2013)

Saigon said:


> syrenn said:
> 
> 
> > i agree, and the muslims hate anything and everything not muslim.
> ...



yep, i dont have a faction out trying to kill everything and anything not me all over the world. I dont follow something that calls for the deaths of anything not me.  I dont have terrorist training camps, I dont raise children to kill, i dont blow up innocent people or use children as human shields. I dont have leaders making out death fatwas. 

I also dont support anyone who does. 

I would call that a huge difference.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 21, 2013)

Jroc - 

I base my views on the reality of living in Israel.


----------



## Jroc (Jun 21, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Jroc -
> 
> I base my views on the reality of living in Israel.



I could give a shit.... I base mine on being a Jew, one of only 13 to 14 million left in the world after all the slaughter ..You feel me?


----------



## Saigon (Jun 21, 2013)

syrenn said:


> Saigon said:
> 
> 
> > syrenn said:
> ...



I wouldn't call that a difference at all. 

The difference between blind racial hatred and violence is paper thin. Blind racial hatred is the driving force behind most terrorism, after all.

The fact is that you would, and do, support violence against innocent people based on their religion and ethnicity. Most people who support terrorism do so because they consider it justified. They may seek to avoid the word 'terror' and instead call it 'revenge' or 'a police action' or any other term that makes violence against civilians sound civilised. They consider the other side deserve it. 

In this, your hatred and that of some Palestinians are exactly the same. Their words are your words. I've heard Palestinians make comments so many times that it becomes hard to tell the statements apart.

Anyone who supports violence against innocent people supports terrorism. 

Anyone who abandons the concepts of innocent until proven guilty, the right to a fair trial, the concept of inidivial responsibility (as opposed to collective punishment) because it is more conveniant to hate an entire people will support terror. They may just call it another name. 

The single most important factor for anyone wanting to find real peace for Israel is to block out the voices of people, be they Jewish, Muslim or American, who are motivated by hatred.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 21, 2013)

Jroc said:


> Saigon said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc -
> ...



Yes, but I also "feel" how vital it is that no single group on this earth dictate terms to others. 

I see no contradiction in unilaterally defending the right of Jews to live in peace in Israel, and the right of Palestinian Arabs to do the same.


----------



## syrenn (Jun 21, 2013)

then you will be blocking out all of the muslims form the peace process. 

simple as that.


----------



## Saigon (Jun 21, 2013)

There can be no peace treaty, and thus no peace, without representation from Palestinians.

I am constantly amazed how some Americans seem to have swallowed the line that Palestinians are a bunch of fire-breathing lunatics, and not a normal, everyday population more concerned about jobs and schools and crime than they are about blowing anyone up. The overwhelming majority of Palestinians are no threat to anyone. They are, however, fairly pissed off by living in appalling conditions. 

That is the reality on the ground - albeit a little less sexy than the garbage sprayed around on crypto-fascist blogs.


----------



## Jroc (Jun 21, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > Saigon said:
> ...



We're dealing with the Arab muslims as a whole, not just certain Arabs here or certain Arabs there. Like I said your opinion is not based on any reality. Jews shouldn't leave their fate in the hands of unrealistic ideologues like yourself...Sorry your intentions may be pure, but it doesn't really mean much in the big scheme of things


----------



## Saigon (Jun 21, 2013)

Jroc - 



> Like I said your opinion is not based on any reality.



Right - so living in Israel is not an introduction into the reality of the ME, but living in the US is?

My thinking here is ideological - but only to the extent that Israel needs to reach back to the ideology upon which the state is founded in order to find its future. Israel has lost itself, spiritually and emotionally. It has become self-satisfied and arrogant - largely by being fed welfare cash from the US for too long.


----------



## Jroc (Jun 21, 2013)

Saigon said:


> Jroc -
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Of course it is. our ancestral homeland Israel was reestablished as a place were Jews no longer haft to rely on others for our survival, we are strong there thank G-d....Your ideological opinion not withstanding


----------



## pbel (Jun 21, 2013)

Jroc said:


> Saigon said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...



Jroc&#8230;its not the Jews that the Muslims hate, it&#8217;s the invader to their lands that they hate. After all, Israel was created by Western Colonial Powers at the UN. Ironically, Jews have had greater luck living with Muslims than Christian Lands.

I too understand the bitterness of World persecution of Jews. That&#8217;s why Israel exists&#8230;Israel needs Legitimacy in the eyes of her neighbors. A peace deal sanctioned by the Arab League and UN would go a long way.


----------



## Hossfly (Jun 21, 2013)

pbel said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > Saigon said:
> ...


Legitimacy? Makes no difference. Israel is still following the instructions given to Moses. Those instructions have never been rescinded or modified. Some people just don't get it.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 21, 2013)

pbel said:


> Jroc said:
> 
> 
> > Saigon said:
> ...



It's not landS...it's one land, and it's less than 1% of the Middle East.


----------



## pbel (Jun 21, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...


Oh! Horse Shi'ite! Do you really believe that modern Man should believe in Iron Age Myththology to adjudicate International relarions? People are dying every day and you quote the authority of an exiled Egyptian Prince who took the Hebrews with him?

Gawd, save us...


----------



## Hossfly (Jun 21, 2013)

pbel said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


Time changes nothing, Infidel.


----------



## pbel (Jun 21, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Jroc said:
> ...


Look, International Law, through the UN gave Israel legitimacy as a State...Of course the Arabs refused to adopt the Resolution was in essense a Land Taking by the Western Colonial Powers.

All of Israel's conquests since the 48 war have no blessings or legitimacy from anyone on earth. Not even America.

Share Jerusalem and go back to the re-negotiated 67 borders. Create Justice or war. Its Israel's move.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

The "1967 borders" were not borders, they were lines created by military conquest, and they were not recognized by anyone.

Sorry to mess up your "logic" with facts, there, pebbles.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 21, 2013)

pbel said:


> "..._*Share Jerusalem* and go *back to the* re-negotiated *67 borders*...or *war*. Its Israel's move._"


*War*.

And the United States will have Israel's back while it fights that war.

Pumping arms and munitions into Israel to compensate for expenditures.

Providing intelligence and diplomatic cover and logistical support as needed.

And, as a matter of last resort, ready to engage as an active combatant on the Israeli side in the extremely unlikely event that they get into trouble and begin to lose.

We've got their back.

There was some doubt that that might be the case, once upon a time, right up to 9-11.

Since then, in choosing sides between the Israelis and their neighbors, there is no doubt.


----------



## pbel (Jun 21, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> The "1967 borders" were not borders, they were lines created by military conquest, and they were not recognized by anyone.
> 
> Sorry to mess up your "logic" with facts, there, pebbles.


All of Israel's conquests *since the 48 *war have no blessings or legitimacy from anyone on earth. Not even America.


----------



## toastman (Jun 21, 2013)

pbel said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


Not gonna happen !


----------



## pbel (Jun 21, 2013)

toastman said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...


You are probably correct, whoever concedes jurisdiction of Jerusalem would probably be discredited by their-own people, or worse...That's why Jerusalem must be shared sovereignty...

I wish they could share the Mosque and turn half of it into a Jewish Temple. So much hate,  and emotion about Biblical Iron Age Myths tearing people apart.


If Israel refuses to join the UN Resolution granted to the Palestinians an observer state to the 67 borders; expect the present intellectual Boycotts of leading scientists like Prof. Hawkins to lead to Economic and Military Sanctions.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

pbel said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...



Not going to happen, but thanks for your concern.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 21, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > "..._*Share Jerusalem* and go *back to the* re-negotiated *67 borders*...or *war*. Its Israel's move._"
> ...



Thanks for your friendship, Kondor.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

Yes, the Old City should become an Independent City-state like the Vatican.

It should be ruled by a Council made up of equal parts Jews, Muslims, and Christians.

There will be a Chancellor that alternates between a Jewish, Muslim, and Christian person every four years.


----------



## toastman (Jun 21, 2013)

pbel said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...



Also not going to happen.

The '67 borders is just one of those thing that the Palestinians and their supporters need to forget. It's a dream, that will not come true


----------



## toastman (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Yes, the Old City should become an Independent City-state like the Vatican.
> 
> It should be ruled by a Council made up of equal parts Jews, Muslims, and Christians.
> 
> There will be a Chancellor that alternates between a Jewish, Muslim, and Christian person every four years.



No. Just, no ..


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Yes, the Old City should become an Independent City-state like the Vatican.
> 
> It should be ruled by a Council made up of equal parts Jews, Muslims, and Christians.
> 
> There will be a Chancellor that alternates between a Jewish, Muslim, and Christian person every four years.



Never going to happen, nor should it.

Israel has provided access for all faiths, and protected the holy sites of all religions.  

No need to change that.


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Jun 21, 2013)

Jerusalem means *nothing* to the Muslims, but everything to the Jews and Christians.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

toastman said:


> Also not going to happen.
> 
> The '67 borders is just one of those thing that the Palestinians and their supporters need to forget. It's a dream, that will not come true



Even the Arab League has accepted the idea of the 1967 borders with small land swaps.  Most understand that Palestine won't be exactly along the 1967 borders, but it will contain the same amount of land as the 1967 borders.  Israel will trade areas in the Galilee for areas around Jerusalem.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Also not going to happen.
> ...



No, Israel won't. 

I don't know where you get the idea that Israel is required to accept the scraps offered by the Arabs in exchange for a promise to one day in the future maybe possibly sign a peace treaty of some sort.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 21, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> Jerusalem means *nothing* to the Muslims, but everything to the Jews and Christians.



According to Muslim theology, the Dome of the Rock marks the site where Mohammed ascended to heaven. According to the historical data available, it seems unlikely that Mohammed was anywhere near Jerusalem at the time of his death.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> No, Israel won't.
> 
> I don't know where you get the idea that Israel is required to accept the scraps offered by the Arabs in exchange for a promise to one day in the future maybe possibly sign a peace treaty of some sort.



Israel wouldn't agree to 5% land swaps with the West Bank under any circumstances?

what makes you think that?


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Jerusalem means *nothing* to the Muslims, but everything to the Jews and Christians.
> ...



According to Jewish theology, the rock under the Dome of the Rock is where Abraham almost sacrified Isaac but instead sacrificed a calf.

According to historical data available, it seems unlikely that such an event ever occured.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jun 21, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > Jerusalem means *nothing* to the Muslims, but everything to the Jews and Christians.
> ...



*According to Muslim theology, the Dome of the Rock marks the site where Mohammed ascended to heaven.*

That's awesome. So where in the Koran does it say that?


----------



## toastman (Jun 21, 2013)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU9CauJP4Pg]Why Palestinians Want This Video Removed - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## toastman (Jun 21, 2013)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



Did you know that Jerusalem (al-Quds) is not mentioned ONE in the Kuran


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > No, Israel won't.
> ...



I don't know where you are getting 5% from, but the point is, if you think that Israel is going to start with the "1967 lines" and then engage in minor land swaps, you're kidding yourself.  Israel is under no obligation to accept the intellectually dishonest claim that those lines have any legitimacy whatsoever.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...



It was a ram.  
Mohammed lived closer to modern times, and there is more evidence that he lived his whole life in Arabia.  There is no evidence that Abraham departed from Israel, after he moved there (if indeed such a person existed).


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

Throughout the period of Muslim expansion, the religious cites of other faiths were routinely "discovered" to be the location where some previously unknown event in Islamic history occurred.  Mosques were built on the sites of many churches, synagogues and other locations with religous significance.

How can anyone fail to see what this is really about?


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 21, 2013)

toastman said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



Who said anything about the Kuran? 



> According to some Islamic scholars, the rock is the spot[18] from which Muhammad ascended to Heaven accompanied by the angel Gabriel. Further, Muhammad was taken here by Gabriel to pray with Abraham, Moses, and Jesus.[19] After Muhammad's return, he called all who would believe him to join with him and be Muslim.[18]


Source


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> I don't know where you are getting 5% from, but the point is, if you think that Israel is going to start with the "1967 lines" and then engage in minor land swaps, you're kidding yourself.  Israel is under no obligation to accept the intellectually dishonest claim that those lines have any legitimacy whatsoever.



They're not obliged to do anything.

They can continue to rule over millions of Palestinians forever if they like.  

But eventually they will have more people under their control that are not citizens than those who are citizens, and that's called Apartheid.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Throughout the period of Muslim expansion, the religious cites of other faiths were routinely "discovered" to be the location where some previously unknown event in Islamic history occurred.  Mosques were built on the sites of many churches, synagogues and other locations with religous significance.
> 
> How can anyone fail to see what this is really about?



The Christians built a large Church on the Temple Mount.

what's your point?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jun 21, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



If it's not in the Koran, it doesn't count.
There is no Muslim theology besides the Koran.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

Muslims also consider Jerusalem a Holy City because like Jews, Abraham is their Patriarch.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Muslims also consider Jerusalem a Holy City because like Jews, Abraham is their Patriarch.



Nonsense.  Muslims never claim that they want Jerusalem because of their connection to Abraham.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know where you are getting 5% from, but the point is, if you think that Israel is going to start with the "1967 lines" and then engage in minor land swaps, you're kidding yourself.  Israel is under no obligation to accept the intellectually dishonest claim that those lines have any legitimacy whatsoever.
> ...



So the "Palestinians" don't have their own elections and their own government?


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Jun 21, 2013)

One of these days people will come to realize it is not about land but the Pals want the Jews off all the land and want it all for themselves.  The name 'Israel' is already wiped out on their books and maps.  They don't even mention the word.  They chant "From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will be Free."


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 21, 2013)

Jerusalem is only 'sacred' to the Muslims because...

1. somebody way-back in time, smoking *FAR* too much hashish, invented a pretty fairy tale that Muhammed ascended into Heaven from the hill of the ruins of The Temple of Solomon, and the fairy-tale became part of the mythology of Islam over time.

2. the Muslims 'bulldozed' the ruins of The Temple Mount and built a Mosque on top of it; wanting to (a) commemorate the Site of the Ascension and (b) demonstrate in no uncertain terms that Islam (b1) derived from Judaism and (b2) superseded Judaism.

...but this all has one drawback.

The Dome of the Rock and Mosque are built upon the ruins of Solomon's Temple and its sacred environs.

The Muslims destroyed what was left of the Temple Mount and prevented its rebuilding by rudely and arrogantly taking over such a historic and sacred spot for their own selfish purposes.

Take away the fairy-tale of Muhammed's Ascension and the Dome of the Rock, and Jerusalem is nothing to the Muslims; other than the place in which their self-declared Mothership Religion (Judaism) first consolidated and thrived.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Nonsense.  Muslims never claim that they want Jerusalem because of their connection to Abraham.



That is a lie.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Jerusalem is only 'sacred' to the Muslims because...
> 
> 1. somebody way-back in time, smoking *FAR* too much hashish, invented a pretty fairy tale that Muhammed ascended into Heaven from the hill of the ruins of The Temple of Solomon, and the fairy-tale became part of the mythology of Islam over time.
> 
> ...



Nothing of the Jewish Temple remained when the Muslims took control of Temple Mount.  The Christians destroyed it all.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Nonsense.  Muslims never claim that they want Jerusalem because of their connection to Abraham.
> ...



No, its not.  The Arabs don't deny that Abraham is the Patriarch of the Jewish faith, so to base their claim to Jerusalem on Abraham would be to acknowledge the Jew's claim as well.  The Arabs base their claim to Jerusalem on the Koran passage that refers to "the farthest mosque," which they now claim was in Jerusalem.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> No, its not.  The Arabs don't deny that Abraham is the Patriarch of the Jewish faith, so to base their claim to Jerusalem on Abraham would be to acknowledge the Jew's claim as well.  The Arabs base their claim to Jerusalem on the Koran passage that refers to "the farthest mosque," which they now claim was in Jerusalem.



Abraham (Ibrahim in Arabic) is a Patriarch of the Arabs, as he was the father of Ishmael.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > No, its not.  The Arabs don't deny that Abraham is the Patriarch of the Jewish faith, so to base their claim to Jerusalem on Abraham would be to acknowledge the Jew's claim as well.  The Arabs base their claim to Jerusalem on the Koran passage that refers to "the farthest mosque," which they now claim was in Jerusalem.
> ...



Yes, I'm aware of that. 

I didn't say that the Muslims lack a connection to Abraham.  What I said is that their claim to Jerusalem is never articulated as being based upon Abraham.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Yes, I'm aware of that.
> 
> I didn't say that the Muslims lack a connection to Abraham.  What I said is that their claim to Jerusalem is never articulated as being based upon Abraham.



Islamization of Jerusalem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jerusalem in Islam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Clearly, Jerusalem is important to Islam.

Not as important as Mecca or Medina, but still very imporant.

It was the first city that Muslims were ordered to pray towards by Muhammed.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._Nothing of the Jewish Temple remained when the Muslims took control of Temple Mount. The Christians destroyed it all._"


Someone with a more scholarly understanding than I, of the Temple Mount, will have to firm this up or contradict it. I have been operating under the impression that the Romans pulled it down in 70 A.D. and that the Temple Complex (temple, courtyards, etc.) lay in ruins until the Muslims swept it clean prior to beginning their building projects. I am also uncertain as to which Christians you are talking about, in pulling down the Temple structures or ruins.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I'm aware of that.
> ...


Hell, the Christians have Rome, and the Muslims have Mecca and Medinah. The Jews started it all. Let 'em have their original one back. Two (Mecca and Medinah) are enough for one religion. Mustn't be greedy. ;-)


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I'm aware of that.
> ...



Its never mentioned in the Koran.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Hell, the Christians have Rome, and the Muslims have Mecca and Medinah. The Jews started it all. Let 'em have their original one back. Two (Mecca and Hedinah) are enough for one religion. Mustn't be greedy. ;-)



Right, like the capital of the Roman Catholic Church is sacred to ALL Christians.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Hell, the Christians have Rome, and the Muslims have Mecca and Medinah. The Jews started it all. Let 'em have their original one back. Two (Mecca and Hedinah) are enough for one religion. Mustn't be greedy. ;-)
> ...


Nope, but Rome is the wellspring for Christian expansion in Western Europe; it is the Mothership from which all Western Christianity is derived, by varying degrees of separation.

Just as Constantinople was (is), as the wellspring for Christian expansion in parts of Eastern Europe and Asia Minor and the Russias.

And none of this distracts me from the idea that the Muslims already have two (2) Holy Cities... Mecca and Medinah... and that the Jews, as the 'originators' of all of the Faiths of the Book... are entitled to one of their own... again... after all that waiting and suffering.

The Muslims already have two. They shouldn't begrudge the Jews their old one back. Demanding three is just greedy.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Nope, but Rome is the wellspring for Christian expansion in Western Europe; it is the Mothership from which all Western Christianity is derived, by varying degrees of separation.
> 
> Just as Constantinople was (is), as the wellspring for Christian expansion in parts of Eastern Europe and Asia Minor and the Russias.
> 
> ...



Why can't Jews, Muslims, and Christians SHARE a city that is holy to all three faiths?


----------



## Jroc (Jun 21, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> Throughout the period of Muslim expansion, the religious cites of other faiths were routinely "discovered" to be the location where some previously unknown event in Islamic history occurred.  Mosques were built on the sites of many churches, synagogues and other locations with religous significance.
> 
> How can anyone fail to see what this is really about?



[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nkMolLriAkQ]No Mosque at Ground Zero - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## freedombecki (Jun 21, 2013)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


 Yep.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Nope, but Rome is the wellspring for Christian expansion in Western Europe; it is the Mothership from which all Western Christianity is derived, by varying degrees of separation.
> ...


Because the Muslims already have two, and the Christians already have one, and nobody is asking them to give theirs back. Why should the Jews be the only ones to get screwed out of theirs? Unless, of course, we can propose that Rome, Mecca and Medinah all be made International Cities, under control of the UN, in-tandem with such a transition for Jerusalem.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Nope, but Rome is the wellspring for Christian expansion in Western Europe; it is the Mothership from which all Western Christianity is derived, by varying degrees of separation.
> ...



Muslims don't play well with others.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 21, 2013)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Muslims don't play well with others.



Funny, as anti-Semites ask why is that Jews face bigotry in every country they live in.


----------



## toastman (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims don't play well with others.
> ...



Well then, please tell us why ?


----------



## syrenn (Jun 21, 2013)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...




dude.... muslims dont play well with other muslims. You got to be the RIGHT kind of muslim... or you are just as dead meat as none muslims.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jun 21, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims don't play well with others.
> ...



Failures are often jealous of the successful.


----------



## pbel (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Nope, but Rome is the wellspring for Christian expansion in Western Europe; it is the Mothership from which all Western Christianity is derived, by varying degrees of separation.
> ...


Voltaire: &#8220;Religion began, when the First scoundrel met the first Fool.&#8221;  It&#8217;s not that I dislike the idea of religion except that the Fools and Scoundrels are in their midst. After all the Life Force which governs an entire Universe has no religion. Being the source needs no prayers from anything.

The original Hebrew Temple was built upon the very spot of the people&#8217;s Temple they conquered. Sure Israel can tear down the Mosque, but in doing so she will make all of Islam to be her enemy, and she would be vanquished by the Horde.

All religious malarkey is simply to control fools to their service.


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

Oh common Pbel, Israel would never tear down the Mosque


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> Oh common Pbel, Israel would never tear down the Mosque



Israel's Chief Rabbi called on the IDF to destroy the Mosque in 1967.


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Oh common Pbel, Israel would never tear down the Mosque
> ...



Regardless, it would never happen.


----------



## dilloduck (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Because Israel wouldn't allow it ?


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

Correct. Why would they do such a thing ?


----------



## pbel (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> Oh common Pbel, Israel would never tear down the Mosque


Toast, I know you want peace but you support the taking of E. Jerusalem....So why not build a Jewish Temple next to it and share Sovereignty?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

They can always dismantle the Mosque, stone by stone, and pay to have it reassembled in Mecca...


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Oh common Pbel, Israel would never tear down the Mosque
> ...


Don't look now, but East Jerusalem *IS* taken... 1967... that's 46-year-old news...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



The Holocaust was 67 years ago but Jews still sue for justice and compensation, as they should.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._The Holocaust was 67 years ago but Jews still sue for justice and compensation, as they should._"


We were discussing *STATUS*, not justifications and aftereffects.

You asked - why take East Jerusalem? - I merely pointed out that that was a fait accompli - a done deal.

I made no attempt to justify nor rationalize - merely to point-out *WHAT IS*.

Hope that helps.


----------



## pbel (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


Yes, Israel in her War of aggression conquered an unarmed Palestinian People. Like in Serbia, as in Kosovo, but no one on Planet Earth saw this pre-emptive strike of 6 days nothing less than a pre-planned attack to control all of Palestine, as it does today.

Like Serbia the UN has never sanctioned Israel&#8217;s annexations not even AIPAC Controlled USA...


Israel, by defying world-wide sentiments of Justice will be sanctioned with boycotts that have begun. The world is Not going to allow Israel to destroy Palestinian Rights to the land because Israel controls it.

Peaceful resistance by Abbas, is winning the race at the UN and America will soon cave in, AIPAC or no AIPAC, these foreign wars are destroying Americans not only in the field, but at home!


----------



## Sweet_Caroline (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...



Which "war of aggression" are you talking about?


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Muslims don't play well with others.
> ...


Wait, let me guess....it's all the Joooooos fault, no?  Ha ha ha.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> "..._Yes, Israel in her War of aggression_..."


You *must* be (1) a Palestinian or (2) a Muslim Activist or (3) a Palestinian sympathizer; in any event, you're certainly a Palestinian propaganda shill.

You get _my_ nomination for the "_Ten Pounds of Bull$hit Stuffed Into a Five-Pound Bag_" daily award for that one.


----------



## pbel (Jun 22, 2013)

Sweet_Caroline said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...


The lies about the 1967 war are still more powerful than the truth - Alan Hart

In an interview published in Le Monde on 28 February 1968, Israeli Chief of Staff Rabin said this: &#8220;I do not believe that Nasser wanted war. The two divisions which he sent into Sinai on 14 May would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it.&#8221;

On 14 April 1971, a report in the Israeli newspaper Al-Hamishmar contained the following statement by Mordecai Bentov, a member of the wartime national government. &#8220;The entire story of the danger of extermination was invented in every detail and exaggerated a posteriori to justify the annexation of new Arab territory.&#8221;

On 4 April 1972, General Haim Bar-Lev, Rabin&#8217;s predecessor as chief of staff, was quoted in Ma&#8217;ariv as follows: &#8220;We were not threatened with genocide on the eve of the Six Days War, and we had never thought of such a possibility.&#8221;

In the same Israeli newspaper on the same day, General Ezer Weizmann, Chief of Operations during the war and a nephew of Chaim Weizmann, was quoted as saying: &#8220;There was never any danger of annihilation. This hypothesis has never been considered in any serious meeting.&#8221;

In the spring of 1972, General Matetiyahu Peled, Chief of Logistical Command during the war and one of 12 members of Israel&#8217;s General Staff, addressed a political literary club in Tel Aviv. He said: &#8220;The thesis according to which the danger of genocide hung over us in June 1967, and according to which Israel was fighting for her very physical survival, was nothing but a bluff which was born and bred after the war.&#8221;

In a radio debate Peled also said: &#8220;Israel was never in real danger and there was no evidence that Egypt had any intention of attacking Israel.&#8221; He added that &#8220;Israeli intelligence knew that Egypt was not prepared for war.&#8221;

In the same programme General Chaim Herzog (former Director of Military Intelligence, future Israeli Ambassador to the UN and President of his state) said: &#8220;There was no danger of annihilation. Neither Israeli headquarters nor the Pentagon &#8211; as the memoirs of President Johnson proved &#8211; believed in this danger.&#8221;


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> They can always dismantle the Mosque, stone by stone, and pay to have it reassembled in Mecca...


Or they can dismantle it the Muslim way, in one big explosion.  Preceded by screams of "Allah Akbar!"  I say if you're going to be like them, at least do it the right way.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> Sweet_Caroline said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


Alan Hart?  Professional anti Semite and false propagandist. Next?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Roudy said:


> "..._Alan Hart? Professional anti Semite and false propagandist. Next?_"


I have been struggling mightily to avoid casting our colleague "pbel" in the same mold as Sherri and GeorgeP, despite increasing indications to the contrary as this newcomer (me) has been finding his way around this board system.

Post #278 cured me of that particular bit of foolishness.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Roudy said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > They can always dismantle the Mosque, stone by stone, and pay to have it reassembled in Mecca...
> ...


Yeah, I know, it's tempting, but if the Jews show the Muslims more courtesy in caring for their historical structures than the Muslims have shown the Jews with the Temple Mount (_or the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople-Istanbul, for Christians, for that matter_), then they keep the Moral High Ground while simultaneously removing the trespassing structure...


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > "..._Alan Hart? Professional anti Semite and false propagandist. Next?_"
> ...


Some anti Semites like Paeballs do a good job hiding their anti Semetism but when exposed you will find them to be even worse than the openly anti Semitic ones such as Sherri.  

Remember how you were once told be be careful of the quiet ones that show very little emotion?


----------



## pbel (Jun 22, 2013)

Roudy said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Sweet_Caroline said:
> ...


If those quates are wrong, or is this your usual Camel Crap? Alan Hart is a goole search, I'm sure Wiki has the same...


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Oh common Pbel, Israel would never tear down the Mosque
> ...



What do you mean the 'taking of E. Jerusalem' ? I'm confused  

The way you're talking, is as if Muslims are not allowed to pray there, but they are, so I don't see what handing over E. Jerusalem to the Palestinians would really accomplish


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> What do you mean the 'taking of E. Jerusalem' ? I'm confused
> 
> The way you're talking, is as if Muslims are not allowed to pray there, but they are, so I don't see what handing over E. Jerusalem to the Palestinians would really accomplish



Israel's annexation of West Bank land and calling it "Greater Jerusalem" was illegal.  Just as Jordan's annexation of the West Bank was illegal.


----------



## pbel (Jun 22, 2013)

Roudy said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


If Dr. Hawkins is an anti-Semite because he can see the forrest from the trees, I take your accusations of anti-Semistism as a despereate defenses when you cannot attack the logic of what is posted...

To me, the truth matters.


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...



No matter which way you put it, Alan Hart has no credibility. I've read that article before and it's filled with lies, sorry just my opinion. 
To think that Israel was the aggressor in the 1967 war is absurd. Look at a map of Israel compared to Syria, Egypt and Jordan, who also had plenty of support from about 8 other Arab/Muslim States.
There is nothing that says that the belligerent who fired the first shot is the aggressor


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

In 1967, Israel's Arab-Muslim neighbor states each - suddenly and without provocation - amassed hundreds of thousands of troops and a great deal of armor and artillery and airpower on Israel's borders, and Israeli intelligence indicated an imminent attack, so Israel hit them first, to destroy their forces before they had a chance to get rolling and to steamroller the IDF and drown the Jews in the Med. And the Israelis kicked their nasty Arab asses against very long odds and took control of East Jerusalem as part of the process of driving back the enemy on all fronts. The Arabs provoked the Jews. The Jews hit first and hardest The Arabs lost. The Jews won. The Arabs are now dealing with the consequences of their genocidal foolhardiness. Welcome to your consequences. Vae victus.


----------



## Jroc (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



The ignorant haters will be ignorant..it's willing ignorance though..so is the hate


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


There's your Alan Hart, sounds like he makes his living bashing Jews and Israel:

Some have gone further. For example,* Alan Hart*, once a reporter for BBC, alleged in a May 2010 Internet radio interview with Kevin Barrett that Israel and the Mossad were behind the 9/11 attacks.

After pre-emptively trying to dismiss charges of anti-Semitism, Hart asserts:

 I tell you what I honestly believe. I think it started out as an all-Muslim operation, but I think it would have been very quickly penetrated by Mossad agentsMy guess is at an early point they said to the bad guys at the CIA, 'Hey this operation is running. What do we do?" And the Zionists and the neo-cons said, 'Let's use it." 

Hart's interview has appeared on YouTube and other places on the Internet.  His video is just one of thousands online blaming Jews or Israel for 9/11.  These videos have been seen by tens of thousands of people and continue to gain currency among those who wish to demonize Israel and the Jews.

 Hart has also suggested that the United States is in danger of an Israeli nuclear strike with a stolen nuclear weapon to trigger a war with Iran and "finish the ethnic cleansing of Palestine" under cover of war, which Hart claims that Israel is planning to do "as soon as the opportunity presents itself."[5][6] 

In May 2010, Hart stated on various media, including the Kevin Barrett Show, that consultants close to the worlds most prominent construction company assured him that The twin towers were brought down by a controlled ground explosion, not the planes. Hart also speculated that the planes had been fitted with transponders and that Israeli Mossad agents guided them into the towers. Regarding the purpose of the 9/11 attacks, Hart stated that: My guess is that at an early point they said to the bad guys in the CIA  hey this operations running what do we do, and the zionists and the neo-cons said lets use it. Hart also stated that the Israeli operation which became 9/11 was likely aided by certain corrupt American leaders.[9][10]
In another interview, Hart stated that "In my analysis theres enough evidence  visual, technical and scientific, and from eye-witnesses including fire fighters  to invite the conclusion that the Twin Towers, like Building Seven, were pre-wired for controlled demolition with nanothermite, the highest-tech military explosive."[11]
Books[edit]

 He also stated that the "Jews who went to Palestine in answer to Zionisms call had no biological connection to the ancient Hebrews. The incoming Zionist Jews were mainly foreign nationals of many lands... The notion that there are two entire peoples with an equally valid claim to the same land is an historical nonsense.".[3] 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Hart_(writer)


----------



## Jroc (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...



Learn something idiot... You're a joke
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E63AKJpa1Tk]1967 Arab-Israeli War - part 1/6 - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> In 1967, Israel's Arab-Muslim neighbor states each suddenly and without provocation amassed hundreds of thousands of troops and a great deal of armor and artillery and airpower on Israel's borders, and Israeli intelligence indicated an imminent attack, so Israel hit them first, to destroy their forces before they had a chance to get rolling and to steamroller the IDF and drown the Jews in the Med. And the Israelis kicked their nasty Arab asses against very long odds and took control of East Jerusalem as part of the process of driving back the enemy on all fronts. The Arabs provoked the Jews. The Jews hit first and hardest The Arabs lost. The Jews won. The Arabs are now dealing with the consequences of their genocidal foolhardiness. Welcome to your consequences. Vae victus.



VERY Well said !


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > What do you mean the 'taking of E. Jerusalem' ? I'm confused
> ...


 Israel conquered the West Bank after Arabs used it to try to invade and destroy Israel.


----------



## pbel (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Six-Day War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia a tour of the 67 War...It was obvious Political Postering by Nasser...He wanted Public Aprooval for his Arab Leadership asperations , and the 6 day war surely prooves that it was a War of Aggression to Annex Land.

That simple.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Roudy said:


> Israel conquered the West Bank after Arabs used it to try to invade and destroy Israel.



They also conquered the Sinai, which they gave back in exchange for peace.


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

Now imagine for a second that the Arabs had won the war. They would have without doubt expelled every last Jew !
Israel, on the other hand, let the Palestinians remain in the West Bank, even though they expected to get expelled:
Moshe Dayan Lost An Opportunity to Rid Israel of Arabs


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> "..._It was obvious Political Postering by Nasser_..."


I'll bet that was the last time that a$$hole engaged in 'Political Posturing' using his Armed Forces along the borders of Israel... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ubw5N8iVDHI]He chose... poorly - YouTube[/ame]

That simple.


----------



## Surfer (Jun 22, 2013)

Jerusalem belongs to God so whatever he says should be done with it should be done with it and that's that.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Surfer said:


> Jerusalem belongs to God so whatever he says should be done with it should be done with it and that's that.


God called the Israeli Prime Minister last night and told him to hang onto it for a while.

Next slide, please...


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


Nah, Arabs tried over and over to destroy the Jewish state and failed miserably each time. 1967 was just another example.

After concluding that Arab armies can't fight worth shit, Muslims have turned to terrorism in their war against Israel in the last four decades. 

That simple.


----------



## pbel (Jun 22, 2013)

Roudy said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


Sounds like you know all the haters, but they are just trees in a forest. Most Jews and Arab would share Palestine and recognized as a Jewish State by the Arab League.

This is Israel's real opportunity for Legitimacy by the Arabs and the World.


I hope they don&#8217;t miss this Historic Oppurtunity.


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...



Bullshit. Following the 6 day war, Israel offered to return the Golan back to Syria in exchange for peace, but they refused and then signed the Khartoum resolution:
Khartoum Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
*The Khartoum Resolution of September 1, 1967 was issued at the conclusion of 1967 Arab League summit convened in the wake of the Six-Day War, in Khartoum, the capital of Sudan.The summit lasted from August 29 to September 1 and was attended by eight Arab heads of state.[1] The resolution called for: a continued state of belligerency with Israel, ending the Arab oil boycott declared during the Six-Day War, an end to the North Yemen Civil War, and economic assistance for Egypt and Jordan. It is famous for containing (in the third paragraph) what became known as the "Three No's": "no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it."[2]
Contents*

Israel offered to return the West Bank to Jordan following the 6 day war in exchange for peace, but they refused. However in 1994, a peace agreement was reached between the two states

ISrael offered Gaza back to Egypt in exchange for peace, but they also refused. However in 1979, they reached a peace agreement which saw the Sinai returned to Egypt, under the condition that it would remain de - militarized.


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

Then there was the offers made to the Palestinians for a peace treaty in 1993, 2000, and 2008 which they refused


----------



## pbel (Jun 22, 2013)

Surfer said:


> Jerusalem belongs to God so whatever he says should be done with it should be done with it and that's that.


Can you ask him/her to speak up? No-one can hear him but you!


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Israel conquered the West Bank after Arabs used it to try to invade and destroy Israel.
> ...


Yeah, Israel also made peace with the Jordanians. But Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.  It also has to do with the fact that external factors such as Iran and Syria have such great influence that they will never allow the Palestinians to enter into any concrete treaty with Israel.  The survival of many of these regimes and groups depends on the continuation of the Palestinian conflict.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > pbel said:
> ...


You just quoted this "hater", moron. I learned about these haters from anti Semites like you that keep repeating their lies and propaganda as legitimate sources. There's a few more losers like this Hart character.  

Ask Sherri, she knows them all. Ha ha ha.


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> Then there was the offers made to the Palestinians for a peace treaty in 1993, 2000, and 2008 which they refused


They'd be lucky to get a portion of those offers today. That boat left a long time ago. And with the passing of time, it's getting much worse for the Palestinians. As I said the only real option is Israel eventually annexing the West Bank or creation of a mini Palestinian state in the West Bank, that guarantees the safety of the Jews that are already there. There isn't going to be a removal of over 300,000 Jews from the West Bank. As they say, those are the "facts in the ground" that dictate the conditions of any deal. Gaza will not be part of any deal. 

Jerusalem is off the table. 

[ame=http://youtube.com/watch?v=ed3e6t5uEo4]Obama Declares Jerusalem Will Remain Undivided - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Roudy (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...


Bah!  For every Hawking there are a thousand scientists that respect and admire Israel. 

Check out the who's who attendees for Israel's latest science and technology convention, google, Microsoft, apple, Facebook, etc. all the founders and CEO's are there.  Keep dreaming.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Roudy said:


> ...Jerusalem is off the table.



And yet EVERY negotiator from Barak to Olmert, has offered chunks of East Jerusalem to the Palestinians.

You better be prepared for the eventual splitting of Jerusalem.

That's unless you want Jerusalem to eventually become an Arab city due to the Palestinians' very high birthrate.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> Then there was the offers made to the Palestinians for a peace treaty in 1993, 2000, and 2008 which they refused



No final settlement was offered in 1993.

The 2000 offer gave the Palestinians only 75% of the West Bank for the next 25 years.  No Palestinians leader would accept such a deal.

The 2008 offer by Olmert was meaningless as he was about to be indicted for felony charges and was in no position to offer anyone anything, nor to carry out such a deal.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._unless you want Jerusalem to eventually become an Arab city due to the Palestinians' very high birthrate._"


That's fine, right up to the moment when the Israelis begin condemning whole city blocks under eminent domain, paying-off the residents, evicting them from their homes, refusing to sell or rent replacement housing to them inside the City, and setting them on the road to other destinations. There's a much easier workaround to that than you're giving credit for, and the Israelis will not hesitate for one moment to undertake such measures if it becomes clear to them that they are 'losing' Jerusalem in the manner that you describe.


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Then there was the offers made to the Palestinians for a peace treaty in 1993, 2000, and 2008 which they refused
> ...



The 2000 proposal (Camp David summit) would have given the Palestinians 92% of the West Bank . They would get 75% right away and the rest over the next decade.

Olmerts deal was incredibly generous, and if you or any other pro - Palestinian think a better offer will be proposed, you will be sorely dissapointed.
The '67 border will never happen
Right of return will never happen. 
The sooner people can accept this, the sooner we can move on !


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> The 2000 proposal (Camp David summit) would have given the Palestinians 92% of the West Bank . They would get 75% right away and the rest over the next decade.
> 
> Olmerts deal was incredibly generous, and if you or any other pro - Palestinian think a better offer will be proposed, you will be sorely dissapointed.
> The '67 border will never happen
> ...



The 2000 offer would have given the Palestinians 75% of the West Bank for the following 25 years.

Then maybe, possibly, the Israelis would withdraw from a further 17% of the West Bank.

Sorry, but that was totally unacceptable.

Olmert's deal was lovely, but he had no power nor authority to implement it.

Had the Palestinians accepted it, the Israelis would have clearly rejected its legitimacy due to Olmert's scandal and upcoming indictments.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._Sorry, but that was totally unacceptable_..."


Don't look now, but what the Palestinians consider 'acceptable' or 'unacceptable' is quickly becoming a moot point, as they continue to be squeezed off of the few scraps of land still remaining to them, and stacked higher on top of each other, or shunted off to Lebanon or Jordan. The days of Attractive Deals have passed, and the same is now almost true even for Bad Deals. They should have cut a Good Deal years ago, while they still could. Too late now.

The Ironic and funny part about that is, the world at-large is beginning not to care any longer; having watched the Palestinians make stupid decisions and to act stupidly for decades on end, and to shift increasingly towards Radical Militant Islam, which is a Mortal Enemy to much of Mankind.

The sooner this is over, the sooner the world can go back to sleep, and forget all about the flyspeck Palestinians, and devote its energies to far more important things.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > "..._Sorry, but that was totally unacceptable_..."
> ...



Are you implying they should be put out of their misery?


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> ...The days of Attractive Deals have passed, and the same is now almost true even for Bad Deals. They should have cut a Good Deal years ago, while they still could. Too late now. and the Ironic and funny part about that is, the world at-large is beginning not to care any longer; being bone-weary of this $hit and just wanting it to be over.



Yep, the days of the good deal may be gone.

The Palestinians might as well abandon an independent state and just call for one nation between the river and the sea.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Are you implying they should be put out of their misery?


I am _saying_ that they are stacked 50-deep on top of a few dozen postage-stamp -sized pieces of remaining land and that it is only a matter of a couple of decades before the last scraps of the West bank will be annexed and assimilated and its former residents expelled from Israel for Lebanon or Jordan or wherever else they would like to live as a consolation prize. That's been underway for decades already, the pace is accelerating, they're in the end-stages already, and a map will tell you that we're getting close to Project Completion Day.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> _The Palestinians might as well abandon an independent state and just call for one nation between the river and the sea._


It will be a short, vicious, bloody war if it comes, and it will not end the way you hope. Far better to accept a pay-off from the Israeli government, pack up, move someplace else, build a new life for their families, and to re-learn the meaning of happiness, elsewhere.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> I am _saying_ that they are stacked 50-deep on top of a few dozen postage-stamp -sized pieces of remaining land and that it is only a matter of a couple of decades before the last scraps of the West bank will be annexed and assimilated *and its former residents expelled from Israel for Lebanon or Jordan or wherever else they would like to live as a consolation prize*. That's been underway for decades already, the pace is accelerating, they're in the end-stages already, and a map will tell you that we're getting close to Project Completion Day.



Israel wouldn't DARE expel the Palestinians to another state.

They would reap the wrath of the international community if they did.

They would lose ALL tourism, ALL trade, and ALL diplomatic support.

And then they would whine about how unfairly persecuted and hated they are.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> It will be a short, vicious, bloody war if it comes, and it will not end the way you hope. Far better to accept a pay-off from the Israeli government, pack up, move someplace else, build a new life for their families, and to re-learn the meaning of happiness, elsewhere.



There would be no war if the Palestinians dissolve the Palestine Authority and call for Israel to annex the West Bank.

Isn't that the Israelis dream?  To annex the entire West Bank?  Well, that dream may be their only option in a few years.

And no, unlike the Jewish refugees from the Muslim world and Germany, the Palestinians cannot be bought. Their pride and dignity has no price tag.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._Israel wouldn't DARE expel the Palestinians to another state. They would reap the wrath of the international community if they did. They would lose ALL tourism, ALL trade, and ALL diplomatic support. And then they would whine about how unfairly persecuted and hated they are._








*Yer a funny guy..*.

The sad (for you) truth of the matter is, that the world would forget all about it at the speed of light, and breath a sigh of relief that we don't have to listen to their $hit year-in-year-out any longer, once they've been permanently dispersed...


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > The 2000 proposal (Camp David summit) would have given the Palestinians 92% of the West Bank . They would get 75% right away and the rest over the next decade.
> ...



10 years, not 25

Either way, to the victor go the spoils. In other words, Israel will dictate the terms of a peace treaty, not the Palestinians


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> 10 years, not 25
> 
> Either way, to the victor go the spoils. In other words, Israel will dictate the terms of a peace treaty, not the Palestinians



It was 10 to 25 years, so lets split it halfway and call it 17 years.

75% of the West Bank for 17 years?  That was a crap offer and Arafat was right to refuse it.

Look, Israel can either offer the Palestinians a good deal with at least 95% of the West Bank and a chunck of EJ, or they can annex the West Bank and make the Palestinians fellow citizens.

Those are the choices.


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > 10 years, not 25
> ...



NO, it was 10 years.


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

Whoops, you're right, it was 10-25 years ..my bad


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._There would be no war if the Palestinians dissolve the Palestine Authority and call for Israel to annex the West Bank_..."


That will only make the task of ejecting them from the country that much easier.



> "..._Isn't that the Israelis dream? To annex the entire West Bank? Well, that dream may be their only option in a few years_..."



I'm sure that will be fine with them, as soon as they've ejected the old residents and moved-in their own people as the new residents.



> "..._And no, unlike the Jewish refugees from the Muslim world and Germany, the Palestinians cannot be bought_..."



Well, they can always reject the offer of money, on the way out the door. Up to them. Somehow, I think most of 'em will take the money. It's better than an empty wallet, when setting up in a new country, to make a new life.



> "..._Their pride and dignity has no price tag._"



A fine sentiment, I'm sure.

Still, it would be interesting to see who took the money, rather than arriving in a new country with empty pockets, and at a disadvantage from Day One of their new lives.

The Palestinians are not known for intelligent decision-making... even by their few friends... so, I would not be surprised at sizable numbers of Declines or Rejections... but I don't think it will be an overwhelming percentage, when show-time comes.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> That will only make the task of ejecting them from the country that much easier....
> 
> ...Well, they can always reject the offer of money, on the way out the door....



If the Israelis gave the Palestinians of the West Bank an offer of money to leave the West Bank, not one single person would accept that offer.

NO ONE.

And if the Israelis then went ahead and attempted to force the Palestinians of the West Bank to leave, Israel would be destroyed.

Why?  Because the Arab world would simply not tolerate such an action.  Nuclear weapons or not, the Arab world would step up and defend their brothers in the West Bank.

And Russia, the EU, the United States, NATO, the UN, would simply not allow Israel to engage in such an action.

Even planning such an action would bring international condemnation.

Such an act or even planning such an act, would be truly suicidal for Israel.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > That will only make the task of ejecting them from the country that much easier....
> ...


Then, under such a scenario, they would arrive at their new homes that much the poorer.

As I've said, the Palestinians are not reknowned for intelligent decision-making.



> "..._And if the Israelis then went ahead and attempted to force the Palestinians of the West Bank to leave, Israel would be destroyed_..."



Doubtful.



> "..._Why? Because the Arab world would simply not tolerate such an action. Nuclear weapons or not, the Arab world would step up and defend their brothers in the West Bank_..."



Sure.

Because the Arab World has done *SUCH* a good job of defending their brothers in the West Bank over the course of the last 65 years, haven't they?

1948... 1967... 1973... bahhhhh, humbug.

You're threatening the Israelis with a toothless paper tiger.



> "..._And Russia, the EU, the United States, NATO, the UN, would simply not allow Israel to engage in such an action_..."



Much of the rest of the world would be salivating at the prospect of an end to this decades-old standoff and would not lift a finger to stop the Israelis from kicking the West Bank folk out of the country altogether, so long as they don't kill 'em, and especially if the Israelis pay for transport for the displaced Palestinians and pay for new homes and wargeld and do it piecemeal but at a fairly rapid pace nevertheless.

As to boycotts, etc. - once The Change becomes a fait accompli, there will not be much point in sustaining a boycott for long.

Business is business, and business will continue, or resume after a brief intermission, have no doubt of that.



> "..._Even planning such an action would bring international condemnation_..."



The so-called 'international community' has been one-sidedly condemning Israel for this and that and the other thing since 1948.

The Israelis would probably use the Official Notices of International Condemnation to supplement their existing supply of toilet paper.



> "..._Such an act or even planning such an act, would be truly suicidal for Israel._"



Sure.

How-in-the-hell do you think that map of_ Palestinian Land Losse_s got to where it's at now? Where was your vaunted Arab Brotherhood while all that was unfolding?

Where was your vaunted International Community and the US and Russia and the EU and NATO and the like while all that was going on?

It's a pretty tale, of course, but it bears very little resemblance to the reality of what is already happening towards that goal; an especially ironic state of affairs now, given how close we are to realizing such an annexation and pushing-away of the Palestinian population.

When you've tried talking for years and the other side does nothing but lob rockets at you and suicide-bomb your people, you stop caring about such nicities as International Opinion.

All of this, too, is mere speculation, but it is the logical outcome of what has been unfolding before us for years - a state of affairs that pro-Palestinian sympathizers delude themselves into believing is unlikely to materialize.


----------



## MaryL (Jun 22, 2013)

I would support such a thing if we had a working example of such a city now. How about we internationalize MECCA because, I don't know, it's a nice thing to do and would show solidarity with other religions and would fit nicely into popular idealism? No? That won't work. In all fairness, why not ask that Mecca and Medina become open cities TOO?


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Suggesting that the Israelis force the Palestinians into Jordan, Syria, or Saudi Arabia is suggesting Israel commit suicide.

If they were somehow able to conduct such an action, they would face total and overwhelming diplomatic and economic sanctions from the world community.

Israel would finally become the pariah and isolated state that they make believe exists today.

And they would of course whine about how they are being unfairly persecuted.


----------



## pbel (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Suggesting that the Israelis force the Palestinians into Jordan, Syria, or Saudi Arabia is suggesting Israel commit suicide.
> 
> If they were somehow able to conduct such an action, they would face total and overwhelming diplomatic and economic sanctions from the world community.
> 
> ...


I have read studies that show that if all 29 members of the Arab League attacked at once, Israel would be over-run in a conventional war...similarly Israel can-not stop the nuclear aspirations of the ME...even Kaddafi had Nuclear material, and I bet they all do.

Its suicide, for Israel to keep this conflict and animosity going.


----------



## toastman (Jun 22, 2013)

pbel said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > Suggesting that the Israelis force the Palestinians into Jordan, Syria, or Saudi Arabia is suggesting Israel commit suicide.
> ...



Actually, it would be suicide for those states to attack Israel at once.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

toastman said:


> _Actually, it would be suicide for those states to attack Israel at once._


Separately or together, makes no difference; the General Staff of most of those national armies would piss their pants if ordered to attack Israel. They aren't going to do diddly-squat.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> _Actually, it would be suicide for those states to attack Israel at once._
> Separately or together, makes no difference; the General Staff of most of those national armies would piss their pants if ordered to attack Israel. They aren't going to do diddly-squat.



Go ahead, try to deport the Palestinians.

watch the blood flow through the streets of Israel.  

watch all diplomatic, economic, and defense relations vanish.

yeah, that's really looking out for Israel's interests.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._Go ahead, try to deport the Palestinians_..."


Hold your horses... look at the map... it's-a-comin'...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Hold your horses... look at the map... it's-a-comin'...



No, its not coming.

Israelis aren't that stupid, suicidal, and masochistic.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._No, its not coming_..."


Tick... tick... tick...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Tick... tick... tick...



Sounds like the ticking time bomb of the growing population of the Palestinians.

Eventually they will outnumber the Jews.

Tick...tick...tick...


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Tick... tick... tick...
> ...


Oh, there's no doubt that they'll eventually outnumber the Jews...

It's just that - by the time they do - they'll be scattered between Lebanon and Jordan and Syria and the like, and no longer living within Israeli borders - disputed or otherwise.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 22, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> It's just that - by the time they do - they'll be scattered between Lebanon and Jordan and Syria and the like, and no longer living within Israeli borders - disputed or otherwise.



And how's that gonna happen?

They gonna load millions of Palestinians onto stuffed cattle cars and ship them "to the East"?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 22, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > It's just that - by the time they do - they'll be scattered between Lebanon and Jordan and Syria and the like, and no longer living within Israeli borders - disputed or otherwise.
> ...


You haven't been paying attention... eminent domain... condemning property... paying-off the residents... escorting them across the border... that worked for England and Spain when they expelled the Jews... it'll work again here, I'm sure. Then again, the Israelis don't need me to tell them how to complete their decades-long goal of capturing the rest of the land that is to comprise Eretz Yisrael...


----------



## pbel (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...


Eminent Domain is used to take land not people...Keep saying Heil, and the world will flock to their aid!


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

pbel said:


> "..._Eminent Domain is used to take land not people_..."


Yeppers... take the land, then, suddenly, the people on it need to be relocated; consequently, the payoffs and shuttles to the border.



> "..._Keep saying Heil, and the world will flock to their aid!_"



Given that they have been suicide-bombing and mass-rocketing civilians for decades, as well as lashing-out at outsiders, I don't think there's going to be a stampede to rush to their aid.

As to that Godwinian nonsense, well... tell that to the ethnic Germans in East Prussia or the Sudetenland after WWII, under Allied control, or tell that to the Indians and Pakistanis as they shifted populations at the end British rule, or scores of other population shifts, both voluntary and involuntary, that have occurred throughout history and within living memory, many of which occurred without connection to Nazi-like behaviors or labeling...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_transfer

...or, for that matter, tell that to the Jews expelled systematically and en masse and by increments, in various Muslim-Arab countries within living memory...

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

The difference in a case like this being Compensation (Wergeld) for the Losers rather than just a swift kick in the ass on the way out the door...

Frankly, if juggling 3 or 4 million troublesome Palestinians will stop this incessant West Bank and Gaza bull$hit, the world-at-large will probably wink at it rather than actually doing anything about it...

Carve-off Southern Lebanon and call it New Palestine, and give it to those displaced Palestinians. Lebanon is a failed state and a conduit for Syrian interests so the Southern Section won't be missed much. The Muslims have done a good job of driving-off the Lebanese Christians (_thus, guilty of the same thing_) and have parked plenty of Palestinians (including Hezbollah) there in recent times, so they have all this newly-cleared space in which to park the Palestinian newcomers. It will also give the Palestinians enough contiguous land-mass and access to water and the sea, in order to actually make a go of it, and try to create and sustain a viable state, rather than the hopeless task of trying to piece-together a crazy-quilt patchwork of postage-stamp -sized scraps of disconnected land.

Hell, inside of a couple of generations after any such population shift, the Palestinians and Jews might even learn how to coexist peacefully; there being no further active points of contention, sufficient to draw blood.

It's a win-win for everybody... but it'll never happen... the Palestinians (_collectively, as a body politic_) aren't smart enough to team-up with Israel, Lebanon, the UN, etc., in order to make that happen, so they'll continue to rot and fester in-place until they implode.


----------



## pbel (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> pbel said:
> 
> 
> > "..._Eminent Domain is used to take land not people_..."
> ...


Your anger in your answer is well noted, lased with more than the same latent hate on both sides, it is what keeps Israel from re-integrating into the Middle East...

Israel needs to re-integrate by accepting the Arab Peace Offer because it would be Recognition by her enemies for a Jewish State, with Embassies and trade.

Recognition and trade the key ingredients to survival, in the long-run.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> You haven't been paying attention... eminent domain... condemning property... paying-off the residents... escorting them across the border... that worked for England and Spain when they expelled the Jews... it'll work again here, I'm sure....



Ethnic cleansing will mean the end of Israel.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

pbel said:


> "...Your anger in your answer is well noted..."


Save your amateur-hour psychoanalysis for someone who's interested in your opinion on the subject.



> ".._.Israel needs to re-integrate by accepting the Arab Peace Offe_r..."



That would be insane, and suicidal on Israel's part.

That would leave Israel with the same sort of Indefensible Borders she had earlier, which encouraged the Arabs to attack in 1948, and which encouraged them to prepare to attack in 1967, until Israel clobbered their massed formations.

That would require the surrender of East Jerusalem.

After all these years, Jerusalem is now off-the-table.

After all these years, the Golan Heights are off-the-table as well.

The Arab Peace Plan is a total non-starter.

The Arabs cannot be trusted in such matters.

Israel has tried Land-for-Peace with the Arab world on multiple occasions and been burned every time.

Fool me once, shame on you.

Fool me twice, shame on me.

The Arab Peace Plan is not even a good _Starting Point_ for serious talks.

Not gonna happen.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > You haven't been paying attention... eminent domain... condemning property... paying-off the residents... escorting them across the border... that worked for England and Spain when they expelled the Jews... it'll work again here, I'm sure....
> ...


Or its salvation.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Or its salvation.



Just as Germany believed that removing the Jews from it's society would be it's salvation.

How ironic.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Or its salvation.
> ...


No. More like India and Pakistan shifting their populations around at the end of British Imperial Rule, so that adherents of each belief system (Hindus, Muslims) had their own contiguous and sustainable land-masses, in order to make a go of it. No phony-baloney Godwinian analogies to Nazi Germany required, but feel free to enjoy those if it comforts you, as the clock winds down towards such a resolution.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Or its salvation.
> ...



No, Germany tried to KILL the Jews.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> No, Germany tried to KILL the Jews.



And no Arabs would die if Israel tried to "ship them to the East"????

thousands would die.  tens of thousands would die fighting for their rights to live in their land.

that's genocide.

its sick that children and grandchildren of the Holocaust are actually talking about cleansing their own land, of an unwanted ethnic/religious population.

very, very sad.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > No, Germany tried to KILL the Jews.
> ...



I agree.  Your twisted logic and intellectual dishonesty is very sad.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> I agree.  Your twisted logic and intellectual dishonesty is very sad.


 
No, what's sad is your racist suggestion that Israel cleanse the land of Arabs.

That's what the Nazis did to us.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> HistoryBefore67 said:
> 
> 
> > I agree.  Your twisted logic and intellectual dishonesty is very sad.
> ...



You're not one of us.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "...its sick that children and grandchildren of the Holocaust are actually talking about cleansing their own land of an unwanted ethnic/religious population..."


In truth, this isn't about religion anywhere near as much as it is security.

Perhaps the Muslims should not have publicly *SWORN* to drown the Jews in the Mediterranean.

Perhaps the Muslims should not have *TRIED* to drown the Jews in the Med on repeated occasions.

Perhaps the Muslims should not have suicide-bombed and rocketed their way out of any snowball's chance at a negotiated settlement.

There comes a time, when Land-for-Peace and Perpetual Negotiation comes to an end.

We've hit that point, quite possible, and, if true, then...

Israel cannot afford to leave the vicious, suicidal, idiotic Palestinian failed-state in its rear.

That means eliminating it.

With as little loss of life as may be possible.

But eliminating it, nonetheless.

It is the Hard Decision which the Arabs have forced upon the Israelis after 65 years.

The Palestinians have no one to blame but themselves, for making themselves such dangerous and despised and hated enemies of the Israelis.

It is what happens when your Charter and your governing and militia organizations have - as their core mission - the merciless expunging of another State, and its people.

The watchword in Israel, post-Holocaust, is: "*Never again*" - and I do believe they mean it - I sure-as-hell would, in their shoes.

Frankly, it speaks well of the Israelis that they are eliminating this threat in a controlled and (relatively) humane fashion rather than lining-up tanks hub-to-hub and rolling over the countryside and killing everything that moves...

Which would be the Arab solution, if the Arabs had the power to carry out their desires...

Recent pronouncements such as those by the recently-retired Iranian President tell the world that Muslim and Arab intentions have not changed one jot since 1948...

When you have a rattlesnake in your back yard, and you've tried your best to nudge it off your property, and it won't take the hint... eventually, you're going to either (a) kill it or (b) pick it up with a hook and force it to leave...

At least with (b), the rattlesnake still gets to live...

Better than the solution that the Arabs have sworn to attain eventually...

But this is all merely speculation and crystal-ball reading and map-interpretation and the like.

The Israelis are the only ones who truly know what they intend, and how they intend to achieve their goals, and the extent to which they remain committed to humanitarianism while acting to protect and preserve their own people and to position them in the best way for the future.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> In truth, this isn't about religion anywhere near as much as it is security.
> 
> Perhaps the Muslims should not have publicly *SWORN* to drown the Jews in the Mediterranean.
> 
> ...



Your solution to the "Arab Question" is not too dissimilar to the solution the Nazis had for the "Jewish Question".


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > In truth, this isn't about religion anywhere near as much as it is security.
> ...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

There's no reason why Jerusalem can't be shared.

The problem is that Jewish and Muslim bigots are getting in the way of such an idea.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._Your solution to the "Arab Question" is not too dissimilar to the solution the Nazis had for the 'Jewish Question'_".


It is not 'my' solution.

I show you the future... or, at least, one very likely possible future.

Oh, and, re: that Godwinian Nazi false-flag business...

Let us know, when the Israelis start gassing and burning Palestinians by the millions, will ya?

Then... and only then... will any such comparison have sufficient merit so as to warrant serious attention.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> I show you the future... or, at least, one very likely possible future.
> 
> Oh, and, re: that Godwinian Nazi false-flag business...
> 
> ...



Oh, so if the Israelis gather tens of thousands of IDF and start marching the Palestinians at gunpoint towards the Jordanian and Syrian border, and shoot ANYONE who refuses to move, they aren't acting pretty much like Nazis?

lolol!!!!!!!      such denial.

its very sad.

The day Israel starts such an endeavor, is the day Israel dies.


----------



## toastman (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > In truth, this isn't about religion anywhere near as much as it is security.
> ...



What a disgusting comment. You should be ashamed of yourself to compare Israel to Nazi Germany. It's pretty clear that you know little to nothing about the Holocaust and Nazi Germany


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

toastman said:


> What a disgusting comment. You should be ashamed of yourself to compare Israel to Nazi Germany. It's pretty clear that you know little to nothing about the Holocaust and Nazi Germany



He wants Israel to FORCE millions of Arabs out of Israel, under penalty of injury or death, and you think my comment is the one that is disgusting?

wow, talk about selective and feigned outrage.


----------



## toastman (Jun 23, 2013)

Extermination for the goal of genocide is not the same as deportation


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

toastman said:


> Extermination for the goal of genocide is not the same as deportation



Forced ethnic cleansing under penalty of death, is a form of genocide.

What will Israel do if 2.1 million Palestinians REFUSE to leave the West Bank?

shoot them all?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > What a disgusting comment. You should be ashamed of yourself to compare Israel to Nazi Germany. It's pretty clear that you know little to nothing about the Holocaust and Nazi Germany
> ...


Whoever said that this is what *I* want?

I show you one possible... make that a likely... future... courtesy of my very own crystal ball, and simple logic.

If the Israelis head down a path to Expulsion or Deportation, they will, in all likelihood, attempt to do so as peaceably as may be practicable.

Governments evict people all the time.

This will be no different, in that respect, other than the scale, and even that will not signify, if undertaken in bite-sized chunks, but at a sustained and fairly rapid pace.

And, quite frankly, who in their right mind wants to die in-place resisting the Expulsion, when generous compensation, logistical support, transport, and a new home, and life and happiness, are waiting for you and your family in New Palestine, just across the border - all pre-arranged and ready for you to just say 'yes'.

The end, when it comes, will be probably be more *Seductive* than it will be Forcible.

And, with the backing of the global Jewish community, there is a very good chance that Israel will have no problem floating the cost of Logistics and Compensation for those being permanently transferred to new lands outside the borders of Israel.

For the minority percentage that does refuse to take the Once-in-A-Lifetime Relocation Offer, they'll be put down by police or military force, as happens all the time with evictions, elsewhere across the world.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._Forced ethnic cleansing under penalty of death, is a form of genocide_..."


Only if the Moved People are not allowed to re-gather and function as a People again.

Otherwise, it's just a Population Transfer.

Ask the Muslims and Christians of the Balkans about that.

Or the Muslims who expelled the Jews from all of their countries in the period 1948-1970.

Or the Muslims and Hindus of India-Pakistan after the British withdrew.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._The day Israel starts such an endeavor, is the day Israel dies._"


The day Israel starts such an endeavor, is the day it eliminates the knife at its throat.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> The day Israel starts such an endeavor, is the day it eliminates the knife at its throat.



Whatever bro.

We all know Israel isn't stupid or suicidal enough to try to force all Arabs out of the West Bank.

Such a Fascist idea isn't Israel's MO, just yet.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > The day Israel starts such an endeavor, is the day it eliminates the knife at its throat.
> ...


Then the Palestinians had better get their heads out of their asses and hurry back to the Negotiating Table, humbly, and with the understanding that they have lost, while there is still time...

To see if there is any scrap-of-a-deal that the Israelis are still willing to extend to them, now that the Palestinians have foolishly waited long enough so that Jerusalem and the Golan and Return are all permanently off the table...

And now that the end-game is already in-sight, with respect to annexation of the modest portion of the West Bank still under Palestinian control...

This will not be a meeting of peers... this will be the Winners (Israel) meeting with the Losers (Palestine)... quite probably the only terms upon which the Israelis would be willing to open-up talks again at this very late hour...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Then the Palestinians had better get their heads out of their asses and hurry back to the Negotiating Table, humbly, and with the understanding that they have lost, while there is still time...
> 
> To see if there is any scrap-of-a-deal that the Israelis are still willing to extend to them, now that the Palestinians have foolishly waited long enough so that Jerusalem and the Golan and Return are all permanently off the table....



The Golan Heights and East Jerusalem are permanently off the table?

In your wildest dreams.


----------



## toastman (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Then the Palestinians had better get their heads out of their asses and hurry back to the Negotiating Table, humbly, and with the understanding that they have lost, while there is still time...
> ...



Israel already offered the Golan to Syria in exchange for peace in 1967 following the 6 day war. They refused
Too little too late.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

toastman said:


> Israel already offered the Golan to Syria in exchange for peace in 1967 following the 6 day war. They refused
> Too little too late.



And yet Israel has offered ALL of the Golan Heights back to Syria a few times after 1967.  They simply couldn't agree on the exact border along the Sea of Galilee, early warning stations, dimilitarization, etc.

But yes, Israel did offer back the entire Golan.

Which means you aren't very familiar with this subject.


----------



## toastman (Jun 23, 2013)

Huh??? Go read up on the Khartoum resolutiom


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._The Golan Heights and East Jerusalem are permanently off the table? In your wildest dreams._"


This will not be a meeting of peers.

This will be a meeting of the Winners (Israel) and the Losers (Palestinians).

The Winners dictate the terms.

The Palestinians must come hat-in-hand, humbly, contritely, sincerely, and understand that the Golan and East Jerusalem are off the table, or they should not come to the meeting at all.

And, if they do not come to the table soon, they will reap the consequences of the inevitable harsher end-game, in which they may be forcibly ejected from the country.

This war is over. It was over in 1948. The results were confirmed in 1967.

It is said that 'the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.' and intransigence on the part of the Palestinians at this very late juncture would be a final demonstration of that old maxim.

There is very little time left. I am guessing that they either come to the table, hat-in-hand, and take whatever scraps the Israelis are still willing to grant them, or lose it all.

And the Palestinians will lose it all if they delay much longer - there can be no objective and practical doubt about that. The _map_ tells _that_ story. Coldly. Dispassionately. Truthfully.

The Palestinians can keep pi$$ing into the wind, or they can shut the phukk up and concede reality, and make the best deal they can under incredibly unfavorable circumstances.

The Palestinians could have cut a much better deal, for many years, but it's too late for all that now - that ship has sailed - those old offers are off the table.

The end-game is almost upon the Palestinians, and, if it comes to annexation and expulsion...

There will be no question that the Palestinians will lose.

The only question will be: will they do a Custer's Last Stand, or will they choose life and happiness and a fresh start, elsewhere.

My money is on the Custers' Last Stand. Collectively, as a body-politic, the Palestinians are not very bright. But, under such draconian circumstances, we can always hope they'll regain their sanity in time to avoid the worst of it.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> ...The only question will be: will they do a Custer's Last Stand, or will they choose life and happiness and a fresh start, elsewhere.
> 
> My money is on the Custers' Last Stand. Collectively, as a body-politic, they're not very bright.



Ah, so the only options are exile or extermination?

Interesting.  Hitler and Stalin would approve of your logic.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._Ah, so the only options are exile or extermination? Interesting. Hitler and Stalin would approve of your logic._"


No, the only options are probably (1) submit to the bad deal that the Israelis are willing to give them at this late juncture or (2) face annexation and expulsion.

If they choose to resist then they will be beaten into submission, but allowed to live, and to go elsewhere, to rebuild their lives.

Wars have winners and losers.

Winners dictate the terms, losers accept the terms.

When they've been sufficiently overwhelmed by military force so as to force that submission.

Much as the Allies did in beating the Axis countries into submission... much as the Union North beat the Confederate South into submission... and on and on and on throughout all of history.

That is the nature of war.

The Palestinians have suicide-bombed and rocket-launched themselves into a corner, and a hardening of their opponents' hearts is a natural outcome of such insanity.

Their consequences are now upon them.

They should have cut a better deal while there was still time.

Fools.


----------



## José (Jun 23, 2013)

> Originally posted by *Kondor*
> This war is over. It was over in 1948. The results were confirmed in 1967.



*Yeah, right.*


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

José;7423601 said:
			
		

> > Originally posted by *Kondor*
> > This war is over. It was over in 1948. The results were confirmed in 1967.
> 
> 
> _Yeah, right...._








 ... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



*Yeah... right.*

( _Oh, and, I did not realize that Palestinians had attacked the US on 9-11. I also did not realize that we were a Party-of-the-First-Part in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Ya learn sumfin' new every day._ )


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > "..._The Golan Heights and East Jerusalem are permanently off the table? In your wildest dreams._"
> ...



The Golan is an issue between the Israelis and Syrians--not between the Israelis and Palestinians.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 23, 2013)

José;7423601 said:
			
		

> > Originally posted by *Kondor*
> > This war is over. It was over in 1948. The results were confirmed in 1967.
> 
> 
> ...



9/11 was about a clash of civilizations, Western vs. Islam.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> "..._The Golan is an issue between the Israelis and Syrians--not between the Israelis and Palestinians._"


Quite true, but even moderate Palestinians are reputed to be willing to accept no less than a return to pre-1967 borders, and, of course, the Golan is a strategic part of that... so, I tossed that one in... and ya caught me at it...


----------



## José (Jun 23, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> José;7423601 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Mohammed Atta, 9/11 ringleader, would beg to differ if he were alive, FY.

All his friends and relatives say his virulent anti-americanism was a direct result of America's support for Israel.


----------



## José (Jun 23, 2013)

Ralph Bodenstein​
Atta's friends in Germany described him as an intelligent man with religious beliefs who grew angry over *the Western policy toward the Middle East*, including the Oslo Accords and the Gulf War.

MSNBC, in its special "The Making of the Death Pilots," interviewed German friend Ralph Bodenstein who traveled, worked and talked a lot with Mohamed Atta. Bodenstein said, "He was most imbued [sic] actually about Israeli politics in the region and about *U.S. protection of these Israeli politics in the region*. And he was to a degree personally suffering from that."

Ralph Bodenstein Interview


----------



## pbel (Jun 23, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> José;7423601 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And the point of friction has been induced US supplied Israel re-created dead center of its old Asian neighborhood in a Sea of Islam...Sometimes I think a Nazi wrote this script...A UN Safe-Haven in the midst of enemies...

Go Figure.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

None of that $hit matters...

The Palestinians have suicide-bombed and rocket-launched themselves into a corner...

The Israelis have hardened their hearts in response and most long-running deals are now off the table...

The Palestinians are never, ever going to get their mitts on Jerusalem again...

And there is no way that Israel will allow Jerusalem to be converted into some kind of hall-a$$ed 'International City'...

Ain't gonna happen...

And if the Palestinians don't come back to the table, soon, conceding the Israeli victory, the Palestinians soon wont' have enough arable land between them to field a grove of olive trees...

Time is running out, and the delusional Palestinians have yet to come to grips with that...

Chances are, there is a wake-up call awaiting the Palestinians, sometime in the not-too-distant future...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> 9/11 was about a clash of civilizations, Western vs. Islam.



Regardless of Neo-Zionist propaganda, the West isn't at war with Islam.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > 9/11 was about a clash of civilizations, Western vs. Islam.
> ...


True.

The West is at war with _Radical_ Islam.

And Radical Islam is at war with the rest of the world.

Regardless of the propaganda of Radical Islamist apologists, sympathizers and fifth-columnists.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> No, the only options are probably (1) submit to the bad deal that the Israelis are willing to give them at this late juncture or (2) *face annexation and expulsion.*
> 
> If they choose to resist then they *will be beaten into submission, but allowed to live, and to go elsewhere*, to rebuild their lives....



Fascism to the extreme.   Sounds like a plan to make Israel "Arabrein".


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> True.
> 
> The West is at war with _Radical_ Islam.
> 
> ...



Wrong again.  Most of the world, including several Muslim nations, are at war with Islamists.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._Fascism to the extreme. Sounds like a plan to make Israel 'Arabrein'._"


War is a nasty business already; doubly so, when your opponents have sworn to drown you-and-yours in the sea. Wars produce winners and losers. Vae victus.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > "..._Fascism to the extreme. Sounds like a plan to make Israel 'Arabrein'._"
> ...



Like I said, Fascism.

Hitler and Stalin would be proud.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "..._Wrong again_..."


You declaring it thus does not render it thus.

Islamists = Radical, Militant Islam. Two different phrases to describe the same lowlife bottom-feeding scum. Synonyms. Labels of convenience. 'Same difference'.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Hyrcanus said:
> ...



*War = Fascism?*


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> No, the only options are probably (1) submit to the bad deal that the Israelis are willing to give them at this late juncture or (2) *face annexation and expulsion.*
> 
> If they choose to resist then *they will be beaten into submission, but allowed to live, and to go elsewhere*, to rebuild their lives....



This is Fascism.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > No, the only options are probably (1) submit to the bad deal that the Israelis are willing to give them at this late juncture or (2) *face annexation and expulsion.*
> ...


No.

That is war.

To win a war, one must beat one's opponent into submission.

Next slide, please.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> No.
> 
> That is war.
> 
> ...



Giving unwanted minorities the option of exile or death, is Fascism.

Ironic that Fascism tried to wipe out the Jewish people.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > No.
> ...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> No, that is Population Transfer, or War in its place; an ultimatum, if the Palestinians push the Israelis that far....



The day Israel attempts to force out millions of Palestinians so as to cleanse their republic of an unwanted minority, is the day Israel becomes a racist and Fascist state, and loses any world support they still have.

Israel will never do such a thing.  NEVER.

They aren't suicidal.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > No, that is Population Transfer, or War in its place; an ultimatum, if the Palestinians push the Israelis that far....
> ...


Yes.

You have already told us that you believe this.



> "..._Israel will never do such a thing. NEVER_..."



You'd better *HOPE* they don't.

But it's coming down to that.

The map isn't political... the map isn't a stakeholder... the map doesn't care who wins or loses... the map doesn't care who lives or dies... the map simply tells the truth... it shows us Reality.

Just what do you think is going to happen when those few specks on the map are reduced in size one or two more times?

And they *will* be shrunk yet again, you know.

Soon.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to read the writing on *that* particular wall.



> "..._They aren't suicidal_."



Yes.

You have told us that you believe this, too.

So do I, for that matter.

We differ, however, in our perspective as to whether or not Israel will be committing suicide if it ever decides to simply expel the Palestinians and annex their few remaining scraps of land, in order to put an end to this business.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> ..We differ, however, in our perspective as to whether or not Israel will be committing suicide if it ever decides to simply expel the Palestinians and annex their few remaining scraps of land, in order to put an end to this business.



You really think the international community, NATO, Russia, the USA, the EU, would just lend a blind eye to Israel committing massive ethinic cleansing?

really???


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

There are two fair options for Jerusalem:

1.  Israel keeps the Jewish Quarter and Armenian Quarter.  The Palestinians get the Muslim and Christian Quarters.  The Jewish areas of East Jerusalem stay with Israel, while the Arabs areas become Palestinian Jerusalem and capital of Palestine.

2.  Eastern Jerusalem gets split as above, but the Old City becomes a seperate city-state, where religious rights for all are respected.  Neither the flag of Israel nor Palestine will fly in this city state.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > ..We differ, however, in our perspective as to whether or not Israel will be committing suicide if it ever decides to simply expel the Palestinians and annex their few remaining scraps of land, in order to put an end to this business.
> ...


Yes. Mostly because the Palestinians have been bombing and rocketing the Israelis for decades and the Israelis can make a viable case for self-defense, regardless of whether or not it's actually true (and it is). But - yes - I've outlined my thoughts on this already, some pages back, earlier in the day, as I recall. Those bullet-points will have to stand or fall upon their own merits and logic. The world will cluck its tongue, wag its finger, breath a sigh of relief, and go back to sleep, forgetting all about the Palestinians at the speed of light.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Yes. Mostly because the Palestinians have been bombing and rocketing the Israelis for decades and the Israelis can make a viable case for self-defense, regardless of whether or not it's actually true (and it is). But - yes - I've outlined my thoughts on this already, some pages back, earlier in the day, as I recall. Those bullet-points will have to stand or fall upon their own merits and logic. The world will cluck its tongue, wag its finger, breath a sigh of relief, and go back to sleep, forgetting all about the Palestinians at the speed of light.



The only way the world would ever even consider maybe accepting a new Nakba, is if the Arab world launches a conventional war against Israel through the West Bank, and the Palestinians flee to Jordan and Syria to escape the fighting.

However, if Israel chooses to simply decide one day that they have had enough of the Palestinian Problem, and tell the millions of Palestinians in the West Bank to move to Jordan within 1 month or be forced out at the barrel of a gun, the world would turn Israel into a true pariah state.

No diplomatic relations.

No trade.

No tourism.

All visas removed.

No defense agreemants.


Israel would then of couse whine and bitch about being unfairly treated and persecuted.  But the world would tell them to piss off, as they are tired of Israel acting like the folks who have always persecuted them throughout the ages.

Don't believe me?  Ask yourself why not one single Israeli political party has "expulsion and exile" as part of their political platform.

Think they would do it anyways?  In your wildest, most Fascist dreams.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> "...Think they would do it anyways?..."


They are already setting the stage. Take another look at the map.



> "..._In your wildest, most Fascist dreams._"



I am not a stakeholder. I am a Devils' Advocate in this context. I show you a likely future.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> I am not a stakeholder. I am a Devils' Advocate in this context. I show you a likely future.



Only if Israel takes a horrible turn towards Fascism.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > I am not a stakeholder. I am a Devils' Advocate in this context. I show you a likely future.
> ...


*Well, if THAT ain't the pot callin' the kettle black..*. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			










 . 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 . 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Talk about *deep* roots in Fascism...!!!


----------



## alpine (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> One fights fire with fire...


,

should not complain about getting burnt, right???

Another proverb, if you living in a glass house...


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

alpine said:


> "..._should not complain about getting burnt, right?_..."


The Palestinians are the ones with the singed tail-feathers, actually, so, not-to-worry...

But this does nothing to illuminate the likely future of Jerusalem, as an International City or otherwise...

And the consensus amongst Realists and Pragmatists around here is that International City status is not in the cards...

It's all part of that Israeli insistence upon Jerusalem being solely in their possession and the capital of their country...

The Jews of Israel will never surrender control of the Holy City, after waiting 1900 years to get it back...

In their shoes, I'd take-up and maintain the very same stance...

I also happen to believe them... "Never again"... and that includes never again letting-go of Jerusalem.

If there *ARE* any future negotiations with the Palestinians, Jerusalem will *NOT* be on the table as a bargaining chip...

The sooner the Palestinians come to grips with this, the sooner we can coax them back towards Reality...

Because they aren't making any progress in that direction of their own accord...


----------



## alpine (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> alpine said:
> 
> 
> > "...should not complain about getting burnt, right?[/I]..."
> ...



In fact, I don't care if you massacare all, or if you are planning to spare woman and children, you can do whatever you like, its not my war. All I am saying, you should not be whining them hitting back while you are doing that...



Kondor3 said:


> ...Mostly because the Palestinians have been bombing and rocketing the Israelis for decades...



If all you can do is to fight fire with fire, at least you can stop whining when your hand gets some of that, no?


----------



## alpine (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> alpine said:
> 
> 
> > "..._should not complain about getting burnt, right?_..."
> ...



Yeah, I believe that, considering the fact that radical Jews has the potential to assassinate anybody who would put Jerusalem on the table to stop the bloodshed, it would be tough to find another Rabin...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> ...If there *ARE* any future negotiations with the Palestinians, Jerusalem will *NOT* be on the table as a bargaining chip....



You appear to believe some interesting things.

1.  Israel will eventually exile all Palestinians with force.

2.  Israel will never again put Jerusalem in peace negotiations.

Whatever, bro.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

alpine said:


> Yeah, I believe that, considering the fact that radical Jews has the potential to assassinate anybody who would put Jerusalem on the table to stop the bloodshed, it would be tough to find another Rabin...



Yes, this is why the 2 state solution may be dead.

A peace plan that gives away the vast majority of the West Bank will likely cause an Israeli civil war.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

alpine said:


> "... _If all you can do is to fight fire with fire, at least you can stop whining when your hand gets some of that, no?_"


I don't hear the Israelis whining; more like telling folks to stay-the-<bleep> outta their face.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> I don't hear the Israelis whining; more like telling folks to stay-the-<bleep> outta their face.



The settlements make up less than 2% of the land area of the West Bank.

Which means its far from too late to give the Palestinians 95% of the West Bank as a future Palestine.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > ...If there *ARE* any future negotiations with the Palestinians, Jerusalem will *NOT* be on the table as a bargaining chip....
> ...


I believe that (1) is one of the more likely outcomes of the present situation.

I believe that (2) is an iron-clad certainty.

Hope that helps.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> I believe that (1) is one of the more likely outcomes of the present situation....



so you think that Israelis are Fascists?

interesting.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't hear the Israelis whining; more like telling folks to stay-the-<bleep> outta their face.
> ...


Frankly, I think the Israelis have lost all interest in that. I think it's too late. It is *CERTAINLY* too late to include *Jerusalem* in any kind of deal.


----------



## alpine (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> alpine said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, I believe that, considering the fact that radical Jews has the potential to assassinate anybody who would put Jerusalem on the table to stop the bloodshed, it would be tough to find another Rabin...
> ...



I don't think so. Israeli youth doesn't give a dam about shitty Jerusalem anyways. 

First, they don't want to die because of all this bullshit. Second, they don't want to waste their youth in shitty army. And third, they want the wealth of the country to be spent on their prosperity, rather than some shitty tanks.

So, at the end, they will say; "take your shitty Jerusalem and shove it up your asses".


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Frankly, I think the Israelis have lost all interest in that. I think it's too late. It is *CERTAINLY* too late to include *Jerusalem* in any kind of deal.



You also think Israelis are Fascists.

Which means your conclusions about what Israel may or may not be, are a bit flawed.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > I believe that (1) is one of the more likely outcomes of the present situation....
> ...


I believe it likely that the Israelis will expel the Palestinians at some point in the not-too-distant future, although they'll compensate the Palestinians with Wergeld on the way out the door.

Now, as to whether that can be labeled 'Fascist', well, that's a purely subjective opinion.

A label that the _Palestinian_ side has been able to claim as its own for many a year.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> I believe it likely that the Israelis will expel the Palestinians at some point in the not-too-distant future, although they'll compensate the Palestinians with Wergeld on the way out the door....



Yes, wich means you believe the Israelis are Fascists who will engage in similiar behavior to that of Hitler, Stalin, Milosevic, and other authoritarian despots.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > I believe it likely that the Israelis will expel the Palestinians at some point in the not-too-distant future, although they'll compensate the Palestinians with Wergeld on the way out the door....
> ...


*Nope*. There are many examples of forcible population shifts in history - several of them actually within living memory or very close to it - which have nothing whatsoever to do with Fascism, in either a Literal nor a Figurative sense. An Israeli expulsion of Palestinians - with compensation and logistics and relocation assistance - would probably not qualify as Fascist in nature, at least not beyond the realm of Palestinian stakeholders and partisans and Palestinian sympathizers (_oh, and, the Arab League, and their fellow travelers_).


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 23, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> No.



You think the Israelis will act like Fascists act.

Extremist Palestinians also believe that the Israelis ultimate goal is to ethnically cleanse Palestine of all Palestinians.

Perhaps they are somewhat right.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 23, 2013)

Did too...  did not...

Were too... were not...

Am too... am not...

Will too... will not...

Are we done with the Automatic Gainsay Dinner Theatre yet?

The wife's got a steak burnin' on the grill...


----------



## 50_RiaL (Jun 23, 2013)

A RESOUNDIN' NO IN ANY LANGUAGE!!!


Abasakur (Papua New Guinea)                Oya
Abenaki (Maine USA, Montreal Canada)       Nda
Abenaki (Maine USA, Montreal Canada)       Ôda
Abun (Indonesia)                           Nde
Acateco (San Miguel Acatlán Guatemala)     K'amaj
Acateco (San Miguel Acatlán Guatemala)     C'am
Achí (Baja Verapaz Guatemala)              N...taj
Achuar (Ecuador)                           Tsaa
Adyghe (NW Caucasus)                       Haw
Adyghe (NW Caucasus)                       Hawaa
Afar (Ethiopia, Eritrea, Djibouti)         Maley
Afrikaans (Southern Africa)                Nee
Agua Caliente (California USA)             Gai
Aguaruna (Peru)                            Atsá
Aguateco (Huehuetenango Guatemala)         Ci
[Akan, see Asante and Fante]
Akha (Thailand)                            Mah nguh
Aklanon (Philippines)                      Indi
Alabamu (Texas USA)                        Ánkobi
Albanian (Albania, Yugoslavia)             Jo
Alsacian (Alsace France)                   Ne
Altai (Russia)                             Jok
Alyawarr (Australia)                       Arangkwa
Alyawarr (Australia)                       -iyanga
Amharic (Ethiopia)                         Yelem
Amharic (Ethiopia)                         Aydelem
Amharic (Ethiopia)                         Aye
Amharic (Ethiopia)                         Ie
Ami (Australia)                            Way
Amis (Taiwan)                              Cuwa
Amuzgo (Oaxaca & Guerrero Mexico)          Ti
Anindilyakwa (Australia)                   Nari
[Anishinaabe, see Ojibwe]
Anglo-Saxon (England)                      Na
Apache (Arizona USA)                       Dah
Apabhramsha (India)                        Ma
Apuchikwar (India)                         Poyeda 
Arabic (Middle East, North Africa)         Lay
Arabic (Middle East, North Africa)         Laa
Arabic (Middle East, North Africa)         La
Arabic (North Africa)                      Lela
[Arawak, see Taino]
Arberesh (Hora e Arbereshevet Italy)       Jo
Arberesh (Sicily Italy)                    Jo 
Ariti (Brazil)                             Maiçá
Armenian (Armenia, Russia, Middle East)    Voch
Armenian [Eastern] (Armenia)               Che
Aromunian (Greece, Balkans)                Nu
Asante (Ghana)                             Daabí
Ashkun (Afghanistan)                       Ma
Assyrian (Iran, Iraq, Syria)               La
Asturian (Spain)                           Non
Asturian (Spain)                           Nun
Atayal (Taiwan)                            Iyat
Ateso (Uganda)                             Mam
Auca (Ecuador)                             Ba
Auca (Ecuador)                             Wín
[Aukan, see Ndjuka]
Awa (Papua New Guinea)                     Ahq áho
Awa (Papua New Guinea)                     Aqa
Awakabal (Australia)                       Keawai
Aymará (Bolivia, Peru, Chile)              Janiwa
Aymará (Bolivia, Peru, Chile)              Janiw
Aymará (Bolivia, Peru, Chile)              Jani
Aymará (Bolivia, Peru, Chile)              Janixay
Aymará (Bolivia, Peru, Chile)              Janixä
Ayticha Yokuts (California USA)            Gatu
Azerbaijani (Azerbaijan, Iran)             Yox
[Azeri, see Azerbaijani]
[Aztec, see Náhuatl]

Bagandji (Australia)                       Gila
Bagesu (Central Africa)                    Sinalubiri
Bagesu (Central Africa)                    Ah ah
Bakitara (Central Africa)                  Nangwa
Balochi (Pakistan)                         Enna
Bambara (Mali)                             Ayi
Bandjalang (Australia)                     Yagam
Bandjalang (Australia)                     Yugam
[Bangla, see Bengali]
Bankalachi (USA)                           Hais
Basabei (Central Africa)                   Katai
Basabei (Central Africa)                   Kutai
[Basa Sunda, see Sundanese]
Bashkir (Russia)                           Yok
Basque (France, Spain)                     Ez
Batak (Indonesia, Sumatra, Philippines)    Daong
[Bavarian, see German (Bavaria)]
Belorussian (Belarus)                      Ne
Belorussian (Belarus)                      Nie
Bemba (Zambia, Congo)                      Awe
Bengali (India, Bangladesh)                Na
Bété (Cameroon)                            Bobo
Bidyara (Australia)                        Gara
Biloxi (Mississippi Valley USA)            Ni
[Bisayan, see Visayan]
Bislama (Vanuatu)                          No
Blackfoot (Alberta Canada, Montana USA)    Saa
Bobangi (Upper Congo West Central Africa)  Te
Boboda (Burkina Faso, Mali)                Ao
[Bobo Fing, see Boboda]
Bojigiab (India)                           Poi-e
Bosnian (Bosnia and Hercegovina)           Ne
Bosnian (Bosnia and Hercegovina)           Hm   
Boyubi (Bolivia)                           Awíje     
Brahui (Afghanistan)                       All-     
Breton (Brittany France)                   Nann
Breton (Brittany France)                   Ket
Brigidian (western Ireland)                Nope
Bru (Thailand)                             Taah
Bugi (Indonesia)                           Mu-
Bugotu (Solomon Islands)                   Teo
Bukusu (Mt. Elgon Kenya)                   Taawe
Bulgarian (Bulgaria)                       Ne
Bulu (Cameroon)                            Momo
Bunaba (Australia)                         Ngai
Burmese (Myanmar)                          Mahou'hpu
Burmese (Myanmar)                          Mahou'pabu
Burarra (Australia)                        Gala
Burushashki (Northern Pakistan)            Bee
Burushashki (Northern Pakistan)            Be
Burushashki (Northern Pakistan) [emphatic] Bee ya
[Byelorussian, see Belorussian]

Cahita (United States) [said by men]       E
Cahita (United States) [said by women]     Ee
Cahita (California United States)          É'e
Cahto [Kato] (California United States)    Doo-yee
Cahuilla (California United States)        Kily
Cahuilla (California United States)        E
Cahuilla (California United States)        Kí'i
Cakchiquel [Kakchiquel] (Guatemala)        Ma...ta
Cakchiquel [Kakchiquel] (Guatemala)        Maan
[Cambodian, see Khmer]
Cantonese [Chinese] (China)                Mhai
Cassubian (Northweast Poland)              Nie'
Catalan (Andorra, France, Spain)           No
[Cebuano, see Visayan]
Cham (Southeast Asia)                      Ô
Chamorro (Guam)                            Ahe'
Charagua (Bolivia)                         Ándi
Chatino (Tataltepec Mexico)                Ná
Chawchila (Chowchilla California USA)      Ohò'm
Chechen (Northern Caucasus)                Haan-haan
Chechen (Northern Caucasus)                Haa-ha'
Chechen (Northern Caucasus)                Dac
Chemehuevi (California USA)                Ka'c
Chemehuevi (California USA)                Ka'cu
Chemehuevi (California USA)                Katcokma
Cherokee (North America)                   Tla
Cherokee (North America)                   V'-tla
Cherokee (North America)                   Tla-hv
Cheyenne (United States)                   Hová'âháne
Chichewa (South Africa, Malawi)            Iyayi
Chichewa (South Africa, Malawi)            Iyaye
[Chinese, see Cantonese, Hakka, Hoi San, Hokkien and Mandarin]
Chinook Jargon (North America)             No
Chinook Jargon (North America)             Halo
Chinook Jargon (North America)             Wake
Chinyanja (Africa)                         Íài
Chinyanja (Africa)                         Iyayi
[Chippewa, see Ojibwe]
Chiriguano (Bolivia)                       Ani
Chitonga (Zambia)                          Pepe
Choctaw (Oklahoma United States)           Keyu
Choctaw (Oklahoma United States)           Ahanh
Choctaw (Oklahoma United States)           Chikimba
Choctaw (Oklahoma United States)           Iksho
Chol (Mexico)                              Mach
Chol (Mexico)                              Ma'
Chol (Mexico)                              Ma'anic

Chontal (Guatemala) [before consonant]     Ma
Chontal (Guatemala) [before vowel]         Mach
Chontal (Guatemala)                        Xá'ñí
Chontal (Guatemala)                        Hañí
Chorti (Guatemala)                         Ma
Choynok (California USA)                   Ohom
Choynimni Yokuts (Kings River Calif. USA)  K'amu
Chuj (Guatemala)                           Ma
Chukaimina Yokuts (California USA)         K'amu
Chukchansi Yokuts (Fresno California USA)  Ohóm
Chumash (Santa Barbara California USA)     Sewilx
Chumash (Santa Barbara California USA)     Amo
Chumash (Santa Barbara California USA)     Se
Chumash (Santa Cruz California USA)        Anictu
Chumash (Santa Cruz Island California USA) Museil
Chumash (Santa Ynez California USA)        Pwo
Chuvash (Russia)                           Chuk
Chunut Yokuts (California USA)             Ohom
Cochimi (Mexico)                           Nyi
Comanche (United States)                   Kai
Comanche (United States)                   Keka
Comanche (United States)                   Ko
Comanche (United States)                   Tocusé
Comori (Comoros)                           La
Congo (Zaire)                              Vê
Congo (Cuba)                               Nani
[Conibo, see Shipibo]
Cora (Mexico)                              Kai
Cora (Mexico)                              Kamu
Cora (Mexico)                              Kepu
Cornish [Kemmyn] (Great Britain)           Nag eus
Cornish [modern] (Great Britain)           Na
Cornish [unified] (Great Britain)          Nag usy
Corsican (Corsica)                         Non
Corsican (Corsica)                         Innò
Costanoan (Monterey California USA)        Kue
Costanoan (San Francisco California USA)   Akwi
Costanoan (San Jose California USA)        Akwe
Costanoan (San Juan Bautista California)   Ekwe
Costanoan (Santa Clara California USA)     Elekic
Costanoan (Santa Cruz California USA)      Eka
Cree (Canada)                              Mwâc
Cree (Canada)                              Namôya
Cree (Canada)                              Mola
Creek [Muskogee] (United States)           Kus
Creek [Muskogee] (United States)           Mónkos
Creek [Muskogee] (United States)           Hekúst
Creole (Haiti)                             Non
[Creole (Seychelles), see Seselwa]
Croatian (Croatia, Bosnia)                 Ne
Crow (United States)                       Sa
Crow (United States)                       Su
Crow (United States)                       Déta
Czech (Czech Republic)                     Ne

Dagaare (Ghana, Burkina Faso)              Ai
Dani (Papua New Guinea)                    Lek
Danish (Denmark, Greenland)                Nej
Dawan (West Timor Indonesia)               Kaha'
Dekelh [Lheidli, Saik'uz] (Canada)         'Andooh 
Dekelh [Nak'albun] (Canada)                'Awundooh 
[Delaware, see Lenape]
Dhangu (Australia)                         Yagu
Dhivehi (Maldives)                         Noon
Diegueno (United States)                   Umaaw
Dinka (Sudan)                              Aliu
Diola (Senegal)                            Hani
Diyari (Australia)                         Wata
Djamindjung (Australia)                    Ngaa
Djamindjung (Australia)                    Ngawu
Djamindjung (Australia)                    Guran
Djapu (Australia)                          Yaga
[Dohema, see Eudeve]
Dumna Yokuts (San Joaquin River Cal. USA)  Ohóm
Dusun (Sabah Malaysia)                     A'ou 
Dutch (Netherlands, Belgium)               Nee
Dutch (Netherlands, Belgium)               Neen
Dyirbal (Queensland Australia)             Yimba

Ekegusii (Kenya)                           Aa
Emakhua (Africa)                           Kha-
Emdimbich (California USA)                 Gadu
Enga (Papua New Guinea)                    Daá
English (Britain, Australia, America)      No
English (America) [informal]               Nope
English (America) [informal]               Uh-uh
English [Strine dialect] (Australia)       Nut
English [Texan] (Texas United States)      Naw
English [Michigan slang] (Michigan USA)    Nah
English [Michigan slang] (Michigan USA)    No way
English [Middle English] (old Britain)     Na
English [old English] (older Britain)      Nese
[Eskimo, see Inuktitut and Inuttut]
Esperanto (international use)              Ne
Esselen [Henshaw] (California USA)         Me'-tea
Esselen [Henshaw] (California USA)         A'na
Esselen [La Perouse] (California USA)      Maal
Estonian (Estonia)                         Ei
Estonian (Saaremaa Estonia)                Ep
Estonian (Saaremaa Estonia)                Es
Estonian (Viru-Nigula Estonia)             Eiba
Estonian (Võrumaa Estonia)                 Eih
Estonian (Võrumaa Estonia)                 Õih
Etruscan (old Europe)                      Ein
Eudeve (Mexico)                            Quéta
Even (Russia)                              Aan
Even (Russia)                              Aach
Evenki (Russia)                            Aachin
Ewondo (Cameroun)                          Koa

Fang (Gabon)                               Koko
Fante (Ghana, Burkina Faso)                Aaha
Faroese (Faroe Islands)                    Nei
Farsi [Persian] (Iran, Afghanistan)        Nah
Farsi (Tajikistan)                         Ne
Fernandino (Southern California USA)       Xai
Fijian (Fiji)                              Sega
[Filipino, see Tagalog and Visayan]
Finnish (Finland)                          Ei
[Flemish, see Dutch (Belgium)]
Fon (Benin, Togo)                          Eo
Fore (Papua New Guinea)                    A'a
French (France, Africa, America)           Non
Frisian [Westerlauwer Frisian] (Germany)   Nee
Friulian (Italy)                           Nò
Fulani [Pular] (West Africa)               Ala
Futuna-Aniwa (Vanuatu)                     Jikai

Gaam (Eastern Sudan)                       Wà
Gabrielino (California United States)      Xai
Gagauz (Moldova)                           Diyl yola
Galician (Spain)                           Non
Gallo (Britany Northern France)            Nenni
Gallo (Britany Northern France)            Nona
Gallo (Britany Northern France)            Nani
Gamilaraay [Kamilaroi] (Australia)         Gamil
Ganda [Luganda] (Uganda)                   Nedda
Ganda [Luganda] (Uganda)                   'Aa
Ganda [Luganda] (Uganda)                   'Aaà
Gascon (France)                            Nani
Gashowu Yokuts (Dry Creek California USA)  K'amu
Gaviao (Brazil)                            Áo
Gaviao (Brazil)                            Óhv
Georgian [Kartuli] (Georgia)               Ah-ra
Georgian [Kartuli] (Georgia)               Ara
German (Central Europe)                    Nein
German (Central Europe) [slang]            Nö
German (Central Europe) [slang]            Nie
German (Vienna Austria) [slang]            Naa
German (Berlin Germany) [spoken language]  Nee
German (Switzerland and Lichtenstein)      Nei
German [Südhessisch] (Germany)               Naa
German (Bavaria) [spoken language]         Na
Giramay (Queensland Australia)             Maya
Gitanemuk (California USA)                 Nau
Greek [Hellenic] (Greece, Cyprus)          Ochi
[Greenlandic, see Inuttut]
Griko (Salento Italy)                      De'ngje
Guaja (Brazil)                             Nã'ã
Guarani (Paraguay, Brazil, Bolivia)        Ahaniri
Guarani (Paraguay, Brazil, Bolivia)        Nahániri
Gujarati (Gujarat State, India)            NahiiN
Gujarati (Gujarat State, India)            Naa
Gujarati (Gujarat State, India)            Ma
Gumatj (Australia)                         Yaka
Gumbaynggir (Australia)                    Biway
Gundungurra (Australia)                    Gurrangung
Guniyandi (Australia)                      Manari
[Gypsy, see Romani]

Haida (United States)                      Aya
Hakka [Chinese] (China)                    Mo
Harari [Adare] (Ethiopia)                  Me
Hausa (West Africa)                        Babu
Hausa (West Africa)                        A'a
Hawaiian (Hawaii)                          'A'ole
Hebrew (Israel)                            Lo
[Hellenic, see Greek]
[Heve, see Eudeve]
Hidatsa (North Dakota USA)                 Desa
Hidatsa (North Dakota USA)                 Nesats
Hindi (India, East Asia)                   Ji nahi
Hindi (India, East Asia)                   Nahin
Hindi (India, East Asia)                   Hye
Hindi (India, East Asia)                   Ji nahin
Hindi (India, East Asia)                   Naheen
Hindustani (India)                         Na
Hmong [Miao] (Laos, Thailand)              Tsis
Hmong (Vietnam)                            Chúi muá
Hñähñu (Mexico)                            Hina
Hoi San (China)                            M hai
Hokkien [Chinese] (Taiwan)                 M si an-ne
Hokkien [Chinese] (Taiwan)                 Msi
Hokkien [Chinese] (Taiwan)                 Bo
Hokkien [Chinese] (Taiwan)                 M tioh
Hokkien [Chinese] (Singapore, Indonesia)   Mmsi
Hometwoli Yokuts (Kern Lake Calif. USA)    Uhun
Hopi (United States)                       Qa'é
Hopi (United States)                       Gae'
Hopi (United States)                       K'ae'
Houailou (New Caledonia)                   Aè
Huambisa (Peru)                            Atsa
Huastec (Mexico)                           Ib
Huave (Mexico)                             Ngwüy
Huave (Mexico)                             Ngome
Huave (Mexico)                             Ngo
Huichol (Mexico)                           Ka-
Hungarian [Magyar] (Hungary)               Nem

Icelandic (Iceland)                        Nei
Icetot (Uganda)                            Ntondo
Ido (international use)                    No
[Ik, see Icetot]
Ilokano [Ilocano] (Philippines)            Saan
Ilokano [Ilocano] (Philippines)            Haan
Indo-European (old Europe)                 Ne
Indonesian (Indonesia, Suriname)           Tidak
Indonesian (Indonesia) [informal]          ndak
Indonesian (Indonesia) [informal]          nggak
Indonesian (Indonesia) [informal]          kagak
Indonesian (Indonesia) [don't]             Jangan
Indonesian (Indonesia) [not yet]           Belum
Indonesian (Indonesia) [for things]        Bukan
Ingush (Russia)                            Aa
Innu (Quebec Canada)                       Maawaach
Interlingua (constructed)                  No
Interlingua (constructed)                  Non
Inuktitut (Canada, Alaska)                 Naaga
Inuktitut (Canada)                         Naamik
Inuktitut (Canada)                         Aagaa
Inuktitut (Baffin Island Canada)           Aakka
Inuktitut (Alaska)                         Naagga
Inuktitut (Alaska)                         Naaka
Inuttut [Greenlandic] (Greenland)          Naamik
Irish (Ireland) [it isn't]                 Ní hea
Ishkashmi (Tajikistan)                     No
Ishkashmi (Tajikistan)                     Ne
Italian (Central Europe, E Africa)         No
Itbayaten (Batanes Philippines)            Engga
Itzá (Mexico)                              Ma'
Ivasayen (Batanes Philippines)             Omba
Ixcatec (Mexico)                           'A
Ixcatec (Mexico)                           Na
Izoceno [Tapii] (Bolivia)                  Ani
Ixil (Guatemala)                           Ye'

Jacaltec (Guatemala)                       Mach
Jacaru [Jaqaru] (South America)            Isha
Japanese (Japan)                           Iie
Japanese [Kumamoto] (Japan)                Nne
Japanese [Kyo Kotoba] (Kyoto Japan)        Iya
Japanese [Sendaiben] (Sendai Japan)        Yanda
Japanese [Tosaben] (Shikoku Japan)         Ingeno
Javanese (Indonesia) [high Javanese]       Mboten
Javanese (Indonesia)                       Ora
Javanese (Indonesia) [for things: not]     Sanes
Jèrriais (Jersey)                          Nannîn
Juaneño (Southern California USA)          Kayon

Kabuverdianu (Cape Verde)                  Nau
Kabyle (Algeria)                           Ak
Kadazan (Sabah Malaysia)                   A'ou
Kaingwa (South America)                    Ahani
Kaipipende (Bolivia)                       Áni
Kala Kawaw Ya (Australia)                  Lawnga
Kalamai (Australia)                        Kuru
Kalasha (India)                            Ne
Kalasha (India)                            Moh
Kaliai-Kove (New Guinea)                   Mao
Kaliai-Kove (New Guinea) [emphatic]        Mako
Kalmyk (Russia)                            Uga
Kamayura (Brazil)                          Anité
[Kamilaroi, see Gamilaraay]
Kamviri (South Asia)                       N'a'i
Kanjobal [Q'anjob'al] (Guatemala)          K'amaq
Kanjobal [Q'anjob'al] (Guatemala)          C'am
Kankanaey (Philippines)                    Baken
Kankanaey (Philippines)                    Adi
Kannada (India)                            Beda
Kannada (India)                            Illa
Kanuri (Nigeria)                           A a
Kapampangan (Philippines)                  Ali
Kapingamarangi (Pacifc Islans)             Deeai
Karaim (Trakai Lithuania)                  Jo
Karawatarenda (Bolivia)                    Áni
Karelian (Finland, Russia)                 Ei
Karen (Burma)                              Mwe é
[Kartuli, see Georgian]
Kashmiri (Pakistan)                        Ne-keh
Kashmiri (Pakistan)                        Ma
Kâte (Papua New Guinea)                    Aricne
Kathlamet (Oregon United States)           Ka'ya
Kaurareg (Australia)                       Lawnga
Kawaiisu (California United States)        Kètô
Kawesqar (Chile)                           Kiép
Kayabi (Brazil)                            -eém
Kazakh (Kazahkstan, Central Asia, China)   Zhoq
Kechayi Yokuts (San Joaquin River Ca. USA) Ohom
Kekchi (Guatemala)                         Ink'a
Kekchi (Guatemala)                         Ma
Kekchi (Cahabon Guatemala)                 Ink'a'
Khakas (Russia)                            Chox
Khakea (Botswana, Namibia)                 Taku
Khakea (Botswana, Namibia)                 ||ka
Khmer [Cambodian] (Cambodia)               Te
Khmer [Cambodian] (Cambodia)               Ot te
Khmu (Laos)                                Pa
Khowar (Central Asia)                      No
Khowar (Central Asia)                      Moh
Kiga (Africa)                              Ingaaha
Kikamba (Tanzania)                         Ayee
Kikongo (Congo Africa)                     Vê
Kikuyu (Kenya)                             Aca
Kikuyu (Kenya)                             Tiguo
Kiluba (Zaire)                             Aa
Kinyarwanda (Rwanda)                       Oya
Kipsigis (Kenya)                           Acha
Kirgiz (Kyrgyzstan)                        Jok
Kirundi [Rundi] (Burundi)                  Oya
Kisanga (Bunkeya Congo-Kinshasa)           Yo
Kiswahili [Swahili] (Africa)               Hapana
Kiswahili [Swahili] (Africa)               A-a
Klallam (Washington United States)         ?awa
Koasati (Alabama & Oklahoma United States) Íniko
Kohistani (Central Asia)                   Ni
Koiari (Papua New Guinea)                  Bebe
Komi-Permyak (Russia)                      Aga
Komi-Zyryan (Russia)                       Abu
Konkani [Konknni] (India)                  Naa
Korean (Korea)                             Aniyo
Korean (Korea)                             Animnida
Koromfe (Burkina Faso)                     Ajo
Koromfe (Burkina Faso)                     Ajej
Kosraean (Micronesia)                      Moh
Krèyol (Haiti)                             Non
Kriol (Northern Australia)                 Nomo
Kukatja (Australia)                        Wiya
Kuna (Panama)                              Suli
Kung-ekoka (Angola)                        |kúa
Kung-ekoka (Angola)                        |kúi
Kurak (northwestern California USA)        Pûuhara
Kurdi [Kurmanji] (Iran, Iraq)              Na
Kurdi [Kurmanji] (Iran, Iraq)              Ne
Kurdi [Kurmanji] (Iran, Iraq)              Neu
Kurdi [Kurmanji] (Iran, Iraq)              No
Kurukh (India)                             Mala
Kutenai (BC Canada, Idaho & Montana USA)   Mats
Kutthung (Australia)                       Gooran
Kwanyama (Angola, Namibia)                 Aaye
Kwanyama (Angola, Namibia) [emphatic]      Ahawe
Kwanyama (Angola, Namibia) [emphatic]      Ahowe
[Kweyol, see Creole]
=/Kh'au//'e (Botwana, Namibia)             |ka 
=/Kh'au//'e (Botwana, Namibia)             |kwa 
=/Kh'au//'e (Botwana, Namibia)             ka:

Ladakhi (India, Pakistan)                  Man
Ladakhi (India, Pakistan)                  Biduk
Ladin (Italy)                              No
Lagunillas (Bolivia)                       Áni
Lahu (Thailand)                            Mah hey
Laiman (North America)                     Ñi
Lakhota (North America)                    Hiya
Lakhota (North America)                    Shnee
Lao (Laos)                                 Bo
[Lappish, see Sami]
Latin (ancient Rome, Vatican)              Non
Latin (ancient Rome, Vatican)              Nullus
Latin (ancient Rome, Vatican)              Minime
Latvian (Latvia)                           Ne
Lenakel (New Hebrides Pacifc Islands)      Kapwa
Lenape [Delaware] (United States)          Ku
Lenape [Delaware] (United States)          Mata
Lenape (Delaware United States)            Kuta
Lenape (Delaware United States)            U mayay
Lenape (Delaware United States)            Ta hashi
Lenape (Delaware United States)            Ta chich
Lenape (Delaware United States)            Mahchikwi
Lenape (Delaware United States)            Alalan
Lenape (Delaware United States)            Ku kesi
Lenape (Delaware United States)            Ku nkesi
Lenape (Delaware United States)            Ku ktakohchi
Lenape (Delaware United States)            Ku ntakohchi
Lenape (Delaware United States)            Okeksene
Leningitij (Australia)                     Ngga'
Lingala (Congo, Angola)                    Té
Lingua Franca (Mediterranean)              No
Lingua Franca (Mediterranean)              Non
Lithuanian (Lithuania)                     Ne
Lithuanian (Lithuania) [very informal]     A'a
Lithuanian (Lithuania) [very informal]     M'm
Livonian (Latvia, Estonia)                 Äb
Livonian (Latvia, Estonia) [you]           Ät
Livonian (Latvia, Estonia) [me/I]          Äb
Loglan (international)                     No
Low Saxon (Eastern Friesland)              Nee
Low Saxon [Northern Low Saxon] (Germany)   Nee
Low Saxon [Westphalian] (Germany)          Ne
[Luganda, see Ganda]
Luiseño (Southern California USA)          Qay
Luiseño (Southern California USA)          Gai
Lunda (Zambia)                             Inehi
Lunyankole (South Uganda)                  Ngaaha
Lunyoro (West Uganda)                      Nangwa
Lunyoro (West Uganda)                      Kwaha
Luo (Sudan, Kenya)                         Ooyo
Lushootseed (Seattle Washington USA)       Xwí?
Luvale (Zambia)                            Kagute
Luxemburgish (Luxemburg)                   Neen
Luxemburgish (Luxemburg)                   Nee

Mabuiag (Australia)                        Lawnga
Macedonian (Macedonia)                     Ne
Mae [Emwae] (New Hebrides Pacifc Islands)  Ikai
Magindano (New Guinea)                     Dele
[Magyar, see Hungarian]
Malagasy (Madagascar)                      Tsia
Malagasy (Madagascar)                      An, an
Malay (Malaysia, Brunei)                   Tidak
Malay (Malaysia, Brunei)                   Bukan
Maltese (Malta)                            Le
Mam (Guatemala)                            Mi
Mam (Guatemala)                            Min
Mampruli (Ghana)                           Ai
Mamu (Queensland Australia)                Yimba
Manchu (China)                             Waka
Manchu (China) [not]                       Aku
Mandarin [Chinese] (China)                 Bu shi zhe yang
Mandarin [Chinese] (China)                 Bu dui
Mandarin [Chinese] (China)                 Meiyou
Mandarin [Chinese] (China)                 Bu shi
Mandinka (Senegal, Gambia)                 Hani
Mang (China, Thailand, Vietnam)            Ham
Mansi [Vogul] (Russia)                     Aat
Maohi (South Pacific)                      Aita
Maori (New Zealand)                        Kao
Maori (Cook Islands)                       Kare
[Mapuche, see Mapudungun]
Mapudungun [Mapuche] (Chile)               Mü
Marathi (Maharashtra India)                Nahi
Mari (Russia)                              Uke
Maridjabin (Australia)                     Ampi
Marimanindji (Australia)                   Mampi
Maringgar (Australia)                      Ampu
Marshallese (Marshall Islands)             Jaab
Masai (Kenya, Tanzania)                    Mme
Mashi (Bukavu Congo-Kinshasa)              Nanga
[Mayan, see Yucatec Maya]
Mayupampa (Bolivia)                        Aepotá?a
Mende (Sierra Leone)                       A-a
Meriam Mir (Australia)                     Nole
[Miao, see Hmong]
Michahay Yokuts (California USA)           Gâmu
Michif [Turtle Mt. Chippewa Cree] (Canada) Noo
Michif [Turtle Mt. Chippewa Cree] (Canada) Pa miyeur
Mien (Laos, Thailand)                      Mv [+ subject]
Mien (Laos, Thailand)                      Maiv [+ subject]
Mien (Vietnam)                             M´i mái
Mikmaq (Canada)                            Moqwa
Mina (Togo)                                Ao
Minangkabau (West Sumatra Indonesia)       Indak
Mingo (North America)                      Hë'ë
Miskito (Nicargua, Honduras)               Apia
Miwok [Amador] (NE Sierra California USA)  Ewutû
Miwok [Bodega] (West Coast California USA) Hama
Miwok [Lake] (N Coast Califorina USA)      Hella
Miwok [Marin] (S Coast Califorina USA)     Huma
Miwok [Mariposa] (S Sierra California USA) Ken
Miwok [N Sierra] (N Sierra California USA) 'Ewyty'
Miwok [N Sierra] (Calif. USA) [informal]   'E'eh
Miwok [Plains] (NW Sierra California USA)  Hela
Miwok [Tuolomne] (Central Sierra Cal. USA) Ewutu
Mixe (Mexico)                              Ka'p
Mixe (Juquila Mexico)                      Kiáp
Mixe (Totontepec Mexico)                   Ka
Mixtec (Santa Catarina Estetla Mexico)     Ña d+u
Mixtec (Xicayan Mexico)                    Koó
Mixtec (Oaxaca Mexico)                     Tú'
Mixtec (Oaxaca Mexico)                     Túu
Mlabri (Laos, Thailand)                    Met
Mobilian (North America)                   Ekshu
Modoc (Northern California)                Q'ay
Möhineyam (California United States)       Nau
Mon (Burma)                                Hùe;'
Mon (Thailand)                             Ha
Monegasque (Monaco)                        Non
Mongolian (Mongolia)                       Ügüi
Mongolian (Mongolia) [not this]            Bish
Mono (Inyo California USA)                 Karu
Mono (North Fork California USA)           Gadu
Mono (North Fork California USA)           Garu
Mòoré (Burkina Faso)                       Ayo
Mopá-maya (Guatemala)                      Ma'
Mordvin (Russia)                           Aras
Mordvin (Russia)                           Aja
Mordvin (Russia)                           A
Mullukmulluk (Australia)                   Akana

Náhuatl [Aztec] (Mexico, El Salvador)      Amo
Nakota (USA, Canada)                       Hiya
Nanai (Russia)                             Edi
Nanai (Russia)                             Ana:
Nandi (Kenya)                              Achicha
Nangikurrunggurr (Australia)               Minta
Nauruan (Nauru Oceania)                    Iòk
Nauruan (Nauru Oceania)                    Deò ei
Navajo (United States)                     Dooda
Navajo (United States)                     Ndaga'
Naxi (Yunnan China)                        Me waq
Ndebele (Southern Africa)                  Hayi
Ndjebbana (Australia)                      Koma
Ndjuka (Suriname)                          Nono
Nenets (Russia)                            Ya'ngo
Nepali (Nepal)                             Ahaa
Nepali (Nepal) [definition]                Hoina
Nepali (Nepal) [location]                  Chaina
Newari (Nepal)                             Makhu
Ngadjonji (Australia)                      Ngarru
Ngadjunma (Australia)                      Jowandjan
Ngbaka (Africa)                            Ùú
Nhirrpi (Australia) [lit. don't]           Warrayi
Nigerian Pidgin (Nigeria)                  No
Norwegian [Nynorsk, Bokmaal] (Norway)      Nei
Norwegian [Sortlandsk] (Sortland Norway)   Næi
Nukuoro (Pacific Islands)                  Deai
Nupe (Africa)                              Áà
Nupe (Africa)                              Àwâ
Nutúnutu Yokuts (Kings River Calif. USA)   Ohò'm
Nyungar (Australia)                        Juat

[Occitan, see Provencal]
[Ocuilteco, see Tlahuica]
Ofo (North America)                        Ni
Ojibwe [Chippewa] (United States)          Gaawesa
Opata (Mexico)                             Kai
Orok (Russia)                              Ana
Osage (North America)                      Hon'-ka-zhi
Osage (North America)                      On'ka-zhi
Ossetian (Caucasus)                        Nö
Ossetian (Caucasus)                        Næ
Ossetian (Caucasus)                        Noun
Otetela (Lodja Congo-Kinshasa)             Mbu
!O!ung (Angola)                            |kwa
!O!ung (Angola)                            |kwi
!O!ung (Angola)                            Kwi  

Paamese (Vanuatu)                          Vuo
Paamese (Vanuatu)                          Vuol
Paamese (Vanuatu)                          Vuel
Pakanh (Australia)                         Ya'a
Palewyami Yokuts (Poso Creek Calif. USA)   K'ami   
[Palpamadramadra, see Nhirrpi]  
Pame (Mexico)                              Mwi
Pame (Mexico)                              Pame
Pangan (Ulu Aring Malaysia)                Ning
Pangan (Kerbat Malaysia)                   Neng
Papago (United States, Mexico)             Pia'a
Pappua (Papua New Guinea)                  Roba
Parana (Bolivia)                           Aní
Parintintin (Brazil)                       Nãhã
Pashto (Afghanistan, Pakistan)             Na
Pashto (Afghanistan, Pakistan)             Nakhayr
Passamaqoddy (Maine USA) [polite]          Kotama
Passamaqoddy (Maine USA) [slang]           Konotiri
Passamaqoddy (Maine USA) [slang]           Ne
Paumarí (Brazil) [answer to question]      Iniani
Paumarí (Brazil) [forbidding]              Hari'a
Pauserna (Bolivia)                         Áni
Paviotso (California United States)        Karu
Pende (Congo-Kinshasa)                     M'khu
[Penobscot, see Abenaki]
[Persian, see Farsi]
Phorhépecha [Purépecha] (Mexico)           Ámbe
Phorhépecha [Purépecha] (Mexico)           Ástarhu 
Phorhépecha [Purépecha] (Mexico)           Ási
[Pidgin English, see Nigerian Pidgin, Pijin and Tok Pisin]
Pijin (Solomon Islands)                    No
Pijin (Solomon Islands)                    Nomoa
[Pikanii, see Blackfoot]
Pima (Mexico)                              Pia'a
Pipil (El Salvador)                        Inte
Pipil (El Salvador)                        Tesu
Pipil (El Salvador)                        Tee
Pitjantjatjara (Australia)                 Wiya
Pikern (Pitcairn Island)                   Eeno
Plattdeutsch (Germany)                     Nau
Plattdeutsch (Germany)                     Nee
[Plautdietsch, see Plattdeutsch]
Pocomam (Guatemala)                        Ma
Pocomam (Guatemala)                        Ntaj
Pocomam (Guatemala)                        Ntax
Pocomam (Guatemala)                        Ta
Pocomchi (Guatemala)                       Maa
Pocomchi (Guatemala)                       Ma...ta
Polish (Poland)                            Nie
Polynesian (Polynesia)                     Si'ai
Polynesian (Polynesia)                     Siei
Pomo (California USA)                      Kui
Popoloca (Mexico)                          Da'
Popoluca (Mexico)                          Caj
Portuguese (Portugal, Brazil)              Não
Potawatomi (North America)                 Co
Provencal [Occitan] (France)               Non
Provencal [Occitan] (France) [formal]      Nani
[Pular, see Fulani]
Punjabi (India)                            Naheen
Punjabi (India)                            Nahi
Pulawat (Micronesia)                       Yaapw
Pulawat (Micronesia)                       Mmm
Pulawat (Micronesia)                       Yeehee
Puoc (Australia)                           Pa

Quechua Ancashino (Ancash Peru)            Manam
Quechua Cochabambino (Cochabamba Bolivia)  Mana
Quechua Cuzqueño (Cuzco Peru)              Manan
Quechua (Andes South America) [forbidding] Ama                 
Quiché [K'iche] (Guatemala)                Ma-
Quiché [K'iche] (Guatemala)                Man...taj
Quichua (Ecuador, Argentina)               Mana

Rapanui (Easter Island)                    Ina
[Rarámuri, see Tarahumara]
Rarotongan (South Pacific)                 Kare
Redondo Tupi-Guarani (South America)       Haeñum´
Resígaro (Peru)                            Nií
Resígaro (Peru)                            Niíkó
Resígaro (Peru)                            Niíkámí
Romani [Vlax] [Gypsy] (Europe)             Na
Romani [Sofia Erli] (Bulgaria)             Na
Romanian (Romania)                         Nu
Romansch (Switzerland)                     Na
Rotuman (Pacific Islands)                  'Igka'i
Rotuman (Pacific Islands)                  'Igke'i
[Runasimi, see Quechua]
[Rundi, see Kirundi]
Russian (Russia)                           Nyet

Saanich (Vancouver Island Canada)          ?ewe
Sacapultec (Guatemala)                     Taj
Saami [Lappish] (Scandinavia, Russia)      Ále
Saami [Davvi Saami] [Lappish](Scandinavia) Ii
Saami [Inari Saami] [Lappish](Scandinavia) Ij
Saami [Skolt Saami] [Lappish](Scandianvia) Ij
Sa'dan Toraja (Indonesia)                  Tae
Sakai (Sungai Raya Malaysia)               Täto to
Sakai (Sungai Raya Malaysia)               Tahatna
Sakao (Espiritu Santo Vanuatu)             Meré
Sakao (Espiritu Santo Vanuatu)             Öhö
Samoan (Samoa)                             Leai
San Juan Capistrano (California USA)       Kai
Sango (Central Africa Republic)            Ipo
Saramaccan (Suriname)                      Nõnö
Saramaccan (Suriname)                      Ná
Sara-Ngambay (Chad)                        Waà
Sardinian (Italy)                          No
Sarnami (Suriname, Holland)                Na
Sasak (Indonesia)                          Nde
Savonian (Ylä-Savo Finland)                Ee
Scots (Scotland)                           Naw
Scots (Scotland)                           Nae
Scots [Ulster Scots] (Northern Ireland)    Na
Sema (India)                               Mo
Sepedi (South Africa)                      Aowa
Serbian (Bosnia, Yugoslavia)               Ne
Seri (Mexico)                              Saate
Serrano (California United States)         Nou
Seselwa [Seychelles Creole] (Seychelles)   Non
Sesotho (Lesotho, South Africa)            Tjhe
Sesotho (Lesotho, South Africa)            Tjhee
Sesotho (Lesotho, South Africa)            Aikona
Setswana (Botswana, South Africa)          Nyaa
Setu (Estonia)                             Õiõ
Sherpa [Helambu] (Nepal, Tibet)            Ahha
Sherpa [Helambu] (Nepal, Tibet)            Mecheye
Sherpa [Solu] (Nepal, Tibet)               Me sheki
Shimasiwa (Comoros)                        Uh uh
Shikaviyam (California United States)      Gè
Shina (India, Central Asia)                Neh
Shipibo (Peru)                             Icáma
Shona (Zimbabwe)                           Aiwa
Shona (Zimbabwe)                           Kwete
Shoshoni (United States)                   Kai
Shuar (Ecuador, Peru)                      Atsa
Sicilian (Sicily Italy)                    Nuddu
Sicilian (Sicily Italy)                    Nessunu
Silozi (Zambia)                            Baatili
Sindhi (Pakistan)                          Na
Sindhi (Pakistan)                          Ma
Sinhalese (Sri Lanka)                      Natha
Sipacapa (Guatemala)                       Qa
Siswati [Swazi] (Swaziland)                Ha
Slovak (Slovakia)                          Nie
Slovenian (Slovenia)                       Ne
Solresol (old; international)              Do
Somali (East Africa)                       Maya
Soninke (Mali, Senegal)                    Ayi
Sorbian (eastern Germany)                  Ne
Spanish (Spain, America)                   No
Spokane (United States)                    Tá
Sranan (Suriname)                          Nono
Sundanese [Basa Sunda] (Indonesia)         Heunteu
Sundanese [Basa Sunda] (Indonesia)         Sanes
Sundanese [Basa Sunda] (Indonesia) [don't] Ulah
Sursilvan (Switzerland)                    Na
Swabian (Central Europe)                   Noe
[Swahili, see Kiswahili]
[Swazi, see Siswati]
Swedish (Sweden, Finland)                  Nej

Tachi Yokuts (Tulare Lake California USA)  Ohom
Tagalog (Philippines) [to elder]           Hindi po
Tagalog (Philippines) [same age/younger]   Hindi
Tahitian (Tahiti)                          Aita
Taino (Caribbean, Florida USA)             U'a
Taino (Caribbean, Florida USA) [emphatic]  Wu'a
Tajik (Tajikstan)                          Ne
Taki-taki (French Guyana)                  Nono
Tamashek (West Africa)                     Kala-kala
Tamil (India, Southeast Asia)              Illai
Tamil (India, Southeast Asia)              Venda
Tapiete (Argentina, Bolivia, Paraguay)     Baety
Tarahumara [Rarámuri] (Mexico)             Ké
Tarahumara [Rarámuri] (Mexico)             Que
Tarahumara [Rarámuri] (Mexico)             Quetasi
Tarahumara [Rarámuri] (Mexico)             Tásirapé
Tarahumara [Rarámuri] (Mexico)             Tasi
Tarahumara [Rarámuri] (Mexico)             Tarapé
[Tarasco, see Phorhepecha]
Tarawan (Oceania)                          Akêa
Tashkorghani (Central Asia)                Nay
Tatar (Russia)                             Yuk
Tay (Vietnam)                              Boomi
Tehuelche (Argentina)                      Gom
Telefol (Papua New Guinea)                 Umbae
Telefol (Papua New Guinea)                 Bae
Telugu (India)                             Kaddu
Telugu (India)                             Ledu
Teop (Papua New Guinea)                    Ahiki
Tepehua (Mexico)                           Maitague
Tetum (East Timor)                         Lae
Tetum (East Timor) [before a verb]         La
[Teuso, see Icetot]
Thai (Thailand)                            Mai
Thai (Thailand)                            Maidai
Thai (Thailand)                            Maichai
Thai (Thailand)                            Maioua
Thangmi [Thami] (Himalayas)                Ma-ja
Tibetan (Tibet, China)                     Yo
Tibetan (Tibet, China)                     Marey
Tibetan (Tibet, China)                     Meyin
Tigre (Ethiopia)                           La'
Tigre (Ethiopia) [emphatic]                Lala'
Tigrinya (Ethiopia)                        Ay-[+verb root]-n
Tjalkadjara (Australia)                    Tailpa
Tlahuica [Ocuilteco] (Mexico)              T'akwha
Tlingit (Canada)                           Klek
Tlingit (Southeastern Alaska)              Tleix
Tojolabal (Chiapas Mexico)                 Miyuc
Tojolabal (Chiapas Mexico)                 Mi
Tok Pisin (Papua New Guinea)               Nogat
Tongan (Tonga Pacific Islands)             'Ikai
Tongva (USA)                               Hí-ekh
[Torres Strait Broken, see Yumpla Tok]
Totonac (Veracruz Mexico)                  Nichuna
Trobes Tokples (Trobriand Papua N. Guinea) Gala
Tsafiqui (Ecuador)                         Te
[Tsalagi, see Cherokee]
Tschiluba (Kasai Occidental Region, Zaire) To
Tseshaht (British Columbia Canada)         Wik
Tübatulabal (California United States)     Haic
Tukang Besi (Indonesia)                    Mbe'ae
Tulamni Yokuts (Buena Vista Lake Cal. USA) Anhan
Tulu (India)                               Ijji
Tulu (India)                               Iddi
Tupi [Nheengatu] (Brazil)                  Mbaa
Tupi [Tembé Tenetéhar] (Amazon Brazil)     Naani
Tupi [Tembé Tenetéhar] (Brazil) [emphatic) Naanikwaw
Tupi [Tembé Tenetéhar] (Brazil) [by women] Naani-mia
Turkish (Turkey, Northern Cyprus)          Hayir
Turkmen (Turkmenistan)                     Yok
Tuvan (Russia)                             Chok
Twi (Ghana)                                Daabí
Tzeltal (Chiapas Mexico)                   Ju'uk
Tzeltal (Chiapas Mexico) [there isn't]     Ma'yuk
Tzotzil (Chiapas Mexico)                   I'i
Tzotzil (Chiapas Mexico)                   Mo'oj
Tzotzil (Chiapas Mexico)[before consonant] Mu
Tzotzil (Chiapas Mexico)[before vowel]     Muc
Tzutujil (Mexico)                          Ma
Tzutujil (Mexico)                          Maan

Udmurt (Russia)                            Övöl
Ukrainian (Ukraine)                        Ni
Ulcha (Russia)                             Ana
Urdu (Pakistan, India, Central Asia)       Nahin
Urdu (Pakistan, India, Central Asia)       NehiiN
Urubu (Brazil)                             Anin
Uspantec (Guatemala)                       Ta'
Ute (Colorado and Utah USA)                Kach
Ute (Colorado and Utah USA)                Ka-
Uyghur (Central Asia)                      Jyok
Uyghur (Central Asia)                      Yaq
Uzbek (Uzbekistan, Afghanistan)            Yuk
Uzbek (Uzbekistan, Afghanistan)            Yöq

Valencian (Spain)                          No
Veps (Russia)                              Ei
Vietnamese (Vietnam)                       Không
Vietnamese (Vietnam)                       Th&#432;a không
Villamontes Tupi-Guarani (Bolivia)         Awigi           
Visayan [Cebuano] (Philippines)            Dili
Visayan [old Cebuano] (Philippines) [old]  Tifale
[Vlaams, see Dutch (Belgium)]
[Vogul, see Mansi]
Votic (Russia)                             Ei
Votic (Russia)                             EB
Votic (Russia)                             Ep

Wagiman (Australia)                        Wihya
Waigali (India)                            Mi
Wakhi (Central Asia)                       Neis
Wali [Wa] (Northern Ghana)                 Aye
Waljen (Australia)                         Wandi
Walpiri (Australia) [literally: 'nothing'] Lawa
Walpiri (Australia) [in negative commands] Walku
Wangaaybuwan-ngiyambaa (Australia)         Wangaay
Wangaaybuwan-ngiyambaa (Australia)         Wayil
Washo (California United States)           Ès
Waura (Brazil)                             A
Waura (Brazil)                             Aitsa
Wayilwan (Australia)                       Wayil
Wechihit Yokuts (Sanger California USA)    Ohòm
Welsh (Wales)                              Na
Welsh (Wales) [no I didn't]                Naddo
Welsh (Wales) [no I didn't]                Nage
Welsh (Wales) [no I don't want]            Nagoes
Welsh (Wales) [no I am not]                Nac ydw
Wik-mungkan (Australia)                    Ya'a
Winnemem Wintu (California United States)  El-eh-oh
Wintu (California United States)           Min
Wintu (California United States)           Mina
Wiradjuri (Australia)                      Wirraay
Wiyot (California United States)           Kia
Wo'lasi Yokuts [Wo'ladji] (Calif. USA)     Ohom
Wolof (West Africa)                        Deedeet
Wükchamni Yokuts (Kaweah River Calif. USA) K'amu

/Xam (South Africa)                        |na
//Xegwi (South Africa)                     K'au
//Xegwi (South Africa)                     K'auki
Xerente (Brazil)                           Anrê
Xetá (Brazil)                              Ñiá
Xhosa (South Africa)                       Hayi

Yamagata (Japan)                           Nne
Yao (Africa)                               Ngava
Yaqui (Mexico, United States)              'É'e
Yawdanchi Yokuts (foothills Californ. USA) K'amu
Yawelmani Yokuts (Kern River Calif. USA)   Ohom
Yeyi (Botswana)                            Iyemwa
Yeyi (Botswana)                            Ee
Yiddish (Europe)                           Nit      
Yiddish (Europe)                           Neyn
Yindjibarndi (Australia)                   Mita
Yokuts [Buena Vista] (foothills Calif.)    Anhan
Yokuts [Poso Creek] (foothills Calif. USA) K'ami
Yokuts [Tule] (foothills California USA)   K'amu
Yokuts [Kings River] (foothills Calif.)    K'amu 
Yokuts (north valley California USA)       Ohom
Yolngu Matha (Australia)                   Yaka
Yoruba (Benin, Nigeria)                    Rara
Yoruba (Benin, Nigeria)                    Oti
Yoruba (Benin, Nigeria)                    Béè kó
Yucatec Maya (Yucatán Mexico)              Ma'
Yucatec Maya (Yucatán Mexico)              Maa
Yugur [Western Yugur] (Gansu China)        Yahq
Yuki (California United States)            Tan
Yuki (California United States)            Mi-tang-keh
Yumpla Tok (Torres Strait Australia)       No
Yupik (Alaska USA)                         Ganga

Zapotec (Oaxaca Mexico)                    Que
Zapotec (Oaxaca Mexico)                    Ka'á
Zapotec (Oaxaca Mexico)                    Ko'
Zapotec (Oaxaca Mexico)                    Akti
Zapotec (Yatzachi Mexico)                  Bi
Zapotec (Yatzachi Mexico)                  Bito
Zapotec (Yatzachi Mexico)                  Cabi
Zapotec (Yatzachi Mexico)                  Abi
Zapotec (Zoogocho Mexico)                  Bi
Zapotec (Zoogocho Mexico)                  Bibi
Zapotec (Zoogocho Mexico)                  Bitw
Zapotec (Zoogocho Mexico)                  Cabi
Zhuang (China)                             Bow
Zhurzhen (China)                           Ejxe
Zoque (Mexico)                             Watkáh
Zoque (Mexico)                             Ja'ne
Zoque (Mexico)                             N@7tti
Zulu (South Africa, Lesotho)               Cha
Zulu (South Africa, Lesotho)               Tsha
Zulu (South Africa, Lesotho)               Haai ngeko
Zuñi (Southwest United States)             'Ella


----------



## alpine (Jun 23, 2013)

50_RiaL said:


> A RESOUNDIN' NO IN ANY LANGUAGE!!!



You don't have the English in the list

English: I have a headache...


----------



## boedicca (Jun 23, 2013)

No.  Israel has enough problems with border disputes to add another one within its existing territory.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 24, 2013)

pbel said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > Suggesting that the Israelis force the Palestinians into Jordan, Syria, or Saudi Arabia is suggesting Israel commit suicide.
> ...



In practice, all 29 members of the Arab League have never agreed on what time it is, much less whom, where, and when to attack. If it weren't for all their infighting, Israel would have been wiped off the map long ago.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 24, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> "..._In practice, all 29 members of the Arab League have never agreed on what time it is, much less whom, where, and when to attack. *If it weren't for all their infighting, Israel would have been wiped off the map long ago*._"


That was almost certainly true in the first decade or two of the life of the State of Israel.

But that ship has sailed now... the Arabs cannot even try to overwhelm the Israelis now without the loss of many millions of their own.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > "..._In practice, all 29 members of the Arab League have never agreed on what time it is, much less whom, where, and when to attack. *If it weren't for all their infighting, Israel would have been wiped off the map long ago*._"
> ...



It would be costly, sure, but in theory it's possible. In practice, of course, a coordinated invasion won't happen because all that infighting is still there. It's been there for many, many centuries and will continue for at least as many more.


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...



And what makes you think the U.S will allow for the Arab states to attempt to invade Israel ? It would never work . Ever. 
No doubt it would backfire in the face of the Arab leaders and the ones who will suffer most are the civilians of the Arab states.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

Wonky Pundit said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Wonky Pundit said:
> ...


Yes, I've believed for many years that the Muslims are their own worst enemy.

In truth, the Israelis would maul and shred any conventional force that the Arabs - acting singly or collectively - can muster in order to assault them.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Yes, I've believed for many years that the Muslims are their own worst enemy.
> 
> In truth, the Israelis would maul and shred any conventional force that the Arabs - acting singly or collectively - can muster in order to assault them.



if it simply came down to hand-to-hand combat, 100,000 Arab soldiers would destroy 100,000 Israeli soldiers.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I've believed for many years that the Muslims are their own worst enemy.
> ...


*History does not support your contention.*


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



He should read about Yad Mordechai, where a group of 130 kibbutzniks held off 2,500 heavily armed Egyptian soldiers for 5 days, allowing the IDF to regroup and prepare for the Egyptian advance to the North.  The kibbutz lost 26 fighters.  Egypt lost between 300-400 soldiers.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

HistoryBefore67 said:


> "..._He should read about_..."


Facts which do not support our colleague's viewpoint are simply ignored... it seems to fit the psych-profile, to ignore history and context and relative-comparison and other little inconveniences like that which get in the way of Dogma and Baseless Pontification.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Facts which do not support our colleague's viewpoint are simply ignored... it seems to fit the psych-profile, to ignore history and context and relative-comparison and other little inconveniences like that which get in the way of Dogma.



Ignoring history?  You mean like how you guys ignore than hundreds of thousands of Arabs were forced out of Israel by the IDF during and even after the 1958 War?

Like how you guys ignore the legal discrimination and double-standard the Palestinians face?

Like how you guys love to talk about the Balfour Declaration and Palestine Mandate, but ignore that it DEMANDS that Gentiles be treated fairly and equally?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Facts which do not support our colleague's viewpoint are simply ignored... it seems to fit the psych-profile, to ignore history and context and relative-comparison and other little inconveniences like that which get in the way of Dogma.
> ...


But we are not talking about those things now.

We are talking about your contention that in hand-to-hand combat, 100,000 Arabs will slaughter 100,000 Israelis.

We can talk about these other issues some other time.

*DO* try to stay focused, yes?

Our colleague brought up a historical point which seems to contradict your contention about the 100,000-man duel.

You are attempting to deflect attention away from your contention, so that you will not be obliged to substantiate it.

That attempt is being called-out for what it is - disingenuous and smacking of intellectual cowardice.

So, getting back on track...

We're all sitting here waiting with bated breath for you to stun and amaze us with your intellectual prowess in decisively substantiating your claim about the 100,000...

You may begin when ready...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> But we are not talking about those things now....



You are right.  This thread is about whether Jerusalem should be an international city.

The answer is:  yes.

The Old City should be shared by Israel and Palestine.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> The Old City should be shared by Israel and Palestine.



...including the part of "Palestine" that is ruled by Hamas, which you acknowledge to be a terrorist organization that should be brought before the Hague.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > But we are not talking about those things now....
> ...



It's too small, and our soldiers' blood that was spilled liberating the Old City will have been in vain.  The fighting was savage, but the Israelis took great care not to damage the holy sites.  That's why so much blood was shed.  Jews pray 3x a day for Jerusalem, and mention her in every Grace-after-Meals.  She's also mentioned at every Passover Seder and after the long Yom Kipper fast, as well as being the reason for the Tisha B'Av fast.  How do you think G-d would react if we gave up Jerusalem?  Is Israel only represented by Tel-Aviv's high-tech businesses?


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> It's too small, and our soldiers' blood that was spilled liberating the Old City will have been in vain.  The fighting was savage, but the Israelis took great care not to damage the holy sites.  That's why so much blood was shed.  Jews pray 3x a day for Jerusalem...



Do they now?

The vast majority of Jews only pray on the High Holidays.

Same with the vast majority of Israelis.


----------



## Wonky Pundit (Jun 25, 2013)

toastman said:


> Wonky Pundit said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...


Whether the U.S. would intervene would depend on dozens, if not hundreds, of factors. My scenario was purely hypothetical and nowhere near that detailed. 

The real point of the argument is that 29 Arab countries will never cooperate to that degree.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > But we are not talking about those things now....
> ...


And one of the myriad sidebars that routinely occur on all threads was just voiced by you - a contention that in any hand-to-hand combat, 100,000 Arabs would slaughter 100,000 Israelis...

It was your contention, not any of ours...

And, as with any contention when disputed, that requires substantiation, in order to have any traction or credibility...

We are merely wrapping-up the sidebar on our way back to the mainstream conversation...

You have been challenged, and subsequently invited to provide the audience with substantiation for your claim...

You have (again) failed to do so...

Shall all of us construe - due to your inability or unwillingness to substantiate your contention - that your contention is not true,after all?

Are you conceding the point by default?

That certainly seems to be the case.

And, in the absence of any substantiation to the contrary, why don't we just wrap-up that little sidebar, so that we can get back to the main course?

You lose - again.

You really are not having a very good day here today.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> ...You really are not having a very good day here today.



I love all this attention you're giving me.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > ...You really are not having a very good day here today.
> ...


Of course you do.

But that has nothing to do with you losing - again.

Which, I assure you, is *FAR* more significant and *FAR* more gratifying.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Let me know when you guys want to get back to the OP.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Let me know when you guys want to get back to the OP.


Anytime you're ready... you've already lost the sidebar you started...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

The Old City should be shared by Israel and Palestine as an open city to all.


----------



## HistoryBefore67 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> The Old City should be shared by Israel and Palestine as an open city to all.


... including Hamas terrorists.

Yeah, that makes sense.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > Let me know when you guys want to get back to the OP.
> ...



respond whenever u like.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

All of Jerusalem should remain under *Israeli* control.

The Israelis should undertake to protect Holy Sites for all faiths and to provide a liberal access to same under circumstances in which such access can be provided without compromising legitimate Israeli security concerns.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> All of Jerusalem should remain under *Israeli* control.
> 
> The Israelis should undertake to protect Holy Sites for all faiths and to provide a liberal access to same under circumstances in which such access can be provided without compromising legitimate Israeli security concerns.



what about East Jerusalem?

should that also remain under Israeli control ad infinitum?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > All of Jerusalem should remain under *Israeli* control.
> ...


"All of Jerusalem" means just that... *ALL* of Jerusalem.



> _ should that also remain under Israeli control ad infinitum?_


*Yes.*


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> *Yes.*



well, that's unacceptable and has no logical reason.

Israel unilaterally annexed West Bank land and called it "Jerusalem".

never in the history if that city, have these new parts EVER been considered part of Jerusalem.

there is no good reason why the Arab parts can't become part of Palestine.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

I have a fabulous idea.

Let the people of Jerusalem decide.

The people of the Old City will decide their fate.

The Arabs in East Jerusalem will be allowed to vote if they want to remain part of Israel...or Palestine.

If the Arabs in East Jerusalem vote to stay part of Israel, well then, that should be their fate.

If they vote to become part of Palestine, that should be their fate.

Leave it to the people who will be most affected by these decisions.

You know, like a true democracy would act.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > *Yes.*
> ...


So you've already said, earlier.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> So you've already said, earlier.



Yes, and I'll say it again when its needed.


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> The Old City should be shared by Israel and Palestine as an open city to all.



What would be the benefits of that ?


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

toastman said:


> What would be the benefits of that ?



Justice.

Freedom.

Equality.

You know, things that Western societies cherish.


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

Haha. SO there's no freedom now ?

Please tell me how having 'Palestine' control part of Jerusalem would bring those three ???


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

Also, can you elaborate how there is no justice, freedom and equality now ?


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

toastman said:


> Haha. SO there's no freedom now ?
> 
> Please tell me how having 'Palestine' control part of Jerusalem would bring those three ???


*ESPECIALLY* in light of the dictatorial regime of Hamas that the Gazans foolishly voted into power and are now enthralled to...


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

All religious sites in Jerusalem are open to the public (only place in the Middle East that allows this), but I guess that's not enough for the pro - Palis.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

toastman said:


> Haha. SO there's no freedom now ?
> 
> Please tell me how having 'Palestine' control part of Jerusalem would bring those three ???



You don't think Muslims have a right to rule over a Muslim holy place?


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Haha. SO there's no freedom now ?
> ...



Nice deflection. Can you please elaborate how there is no freedom , justice or equality now, and how giving the Palestinian control over part of Jerusalem would achieve those three?
Or you can admit your mistake


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

toastman said:


> Nice deflection. Can you please elaborate how there is no freedom , justice or equality now, and how giving the Palestinian control over part of Jerusalem would achieve those three?
> Or you can admit your mistake



Jews control when and how Muslims may enter their holy places.

That is not freedom or justice.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Nice deflection. Can you please elaborate how there is no freedom , justice or equality now, and how giving the Palestinian control over part of Jerusalem would achieve those three?
> ...



I think the Muslims pretty much control the Temple Mount now anyway.  It's called the Wakf or something.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> I think the Muslims pretty much control the Temple Mount now anyway.  It's called the Wakf or something.



They don't have ultimate security control.  That's the Israelis.

Israelis can limit, who, when, and how Muslims visit their holy sites.


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

Justice does not apply to this situation.
Since when does Israel tell them what time they can go to the Al Aqsa mosque?
One thing is for sure, the IDF controlling movement within Jerusalem's holy places is for security reasons. Why else would they do that ? 
The fact of the matter is, there is peace in Jerusalem, and that included no more suicide bombing on buses and cafe's .

Once again, you failed to explain how giving the Palestinians control over E. Jerusalem, which contains some of the holiest sites for Jewish people, would achieve freedom and equality.

Look, I understand the desire of the Palestinians to have control over part of Al - Quds, but I'm telling you now one more time, that it is never going to happen. Like ever. Never ever. Even if somehow the Israeli Prime Minister decided to give control of E. Jerusalem to the Palestinians, you can bet the Jewish citizens (and probably Christian ones as well) would lynch him before the transfer of control would even take place. 
Sorry, but you need to move on


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Nice deflection. Can you please elaborate how there is no freedom , justice or equality now, and how giving the Palestinian control over part of Jerusalem would achieve those three?
> ...


How does that differ from all the centuries during which Muslims controlled when and how Jews and Christians might enter their holy places?

How does that differ from all the centuries (late Roman Empire, Eastern [Byzantine] Empire, Crusades, Mandate) during which Christians controlled when and how Jews and Muslims might enter their holy places?

It's simply the Jews' turn in the barrel again...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

toastman said:


> Justice does not apply to this situation....



of course you would say that.  



> ....Once again, you failed to explain how giving the Palestinians control over E. Jerusalem, which contains some of the holiest sites for Jewish people, would achieve freedom and equality....[/quote
> 
> I NEVER said "all" of EJ.
> 
> ...


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > I think the Muslims pretty much control the Temple Mount now anyway.  It's called the Wakf or something.
> ...



Maybe you can remind us what happened when Ariel Sharon decided to visit the Temple Mount in 2000 ?


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

toastman said:


> Maybe you can remind us what happened when Ariel Sharon decided to visit the Temple Mount in 2000 ?



How would you feel if Adolf Eichmann took a tour of the Wailing Wall?


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Justice does not apply to this situation....
> ...


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Yes, Jerusalem should be shared.

What are they, babies over there?


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe you can remind us what happened when Ariel Sharon decided to visit the Temple Mount in 2000 ?
> ...



The Temple Mount is a Jewish Holy site genius. Again , are you 12 years old ?
These Nazi comparisons that you constantly come up with are so childish and immature, and of course extremely idiotic. How the hell does Adolf Eichmann visiting the Wailing Wall compare to Ariel Sharon visiting the Temple Mount ??


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

toastman said:


> ...How the hell does Adolf Eichmann visiting the Wailing Wall compare to Ariel Sharon visiting the Temple Mount ??



Both men were war criminals.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

toastman said:


> .. Again, are you 12 years old???



Attack the message, not the messenger.


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

I attacked the message. Your Nazi comparisons are immature and have no correlation to what is being discussed. But like I said earlier, it's typical of pro - Palis to make such comparisons, so it's really nothing new for me.


----------



## Hossfly (Jun 25, 2013)

Kondor3 said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


I wonder if Hyrcamus has any problems with the Arabs playing soccer on the Temple Mount when Jews are not allowed to pray there.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

Hossfly said:


> I wonder if Hyrcamus has any problems with the Arabs playing soccer on the Temple Mount when Jews are not allowed to pray there.



You could always ask to play too.


----------



## Hyrcanus (Jun 25, 2013)

toastman said:


> I attacked the message. Your Nazi comparisons are immature and have no correlation to what is being discussed. But like I said earlier, *it's typical of pro - Palis to make such comparisons*, so it's really nothing new for me.



Ah, an ad hominem attack.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> Hossfly said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if Hyrcamus has any problems with the Arabs playing soccer on the Temple Mount when Jews are not allowed to pray there.
> ...



Very cute.  Although the soccer bit destroyed your arguments.


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

Hyrcanus said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > I attacked the message. Your Nazi comparisons are immature and have no correlation to what is being discussed. But like I said earlier, *it's typical of pro - Palis to make such comparisons*, so it's really nothing new for me.
> ...



Actually, I was just stating a fact that you already knew. Feel free to call it what you want however


----------



## toastman (Jun 25, 2013)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Hyrcanus said:
> 
> 
> > Hossfly said:
> ...



That would probably be true, if he had an argument to begin with ...


----------

