1896 Film of Palestine and Jerusalem.

[Lipush]

There were no "Palestinians" before 48, there were the Jews and Arabs of the place called "Palestine" by foreign occupiers.

If you go with the "Palestine existed while Israel didn't" then ALL the residents should have been 'Palestinians'. including the Jews of that time.

Following THAT logic, I am a Palestinian.

But no, thankfully, Im not. We're just Israelis.

And what are you "Israelis" going to do when Palestinians are in the majority. Because they are having more babies than you are and a lot of your folks are going back to Europe.

That's where you're wrong, you see.

Growing education and differences between the Arabs and Jews are actually in favor of the Jews. Most Arabs surrounding us now have about 3-4 kids, when in past days they had around 7.

While Jewish birth rates were around 2-3 children in the past, Israeli birth rates among the Jews is totally on the rise.

If anything, Jews are going to be in majority in the future to come, so, sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[Coyote]

You defined "freedom fighters": [those who] engage in guerilla actions that target those who are actually preventing them from expressing their freedom by selecting military and strategic targets.

But you gave yourself a nice little loophole didn't you? "strategic targets" which could justify civilian targets and the killing of civilians with "strategic" being in the mind of the bomber.

You define terrorists as: [those who] target innocent people just going about their business, and do so BECAUSE they are innocent civilians. I would add to that definition: with the intent of creating terror to force their agenda.

I agree with the definitions but submit it's not always so clear as many "freedom fighters" end up employing terrorist tactics to accomplish their goals. I can't think of any group that has not ended up employing some form of terrorism.

What groups do you consider examples of "freedom fighters"?
What groups do you consider examples of "terrorists"?

I will state - and I have done so many times on this board - that I categorically oppose the deliberate targeting of civilians.

You and your typical Arab double talk.

You claim to oppose terrorism immediately after offering your intentional sophistry by way of attempting to create the impression that innocent people can be considered strategic as long as your murderous friends think they are. Again, you fall back on the point of view ruse to justify terrorism.

.

I have consistently opposed the murder of civilians.
I have never supported terrorism as a tactic.
Innocent people can never be considered a target - that is *your* loophole, not mine.

Unless you can find a link showing I have in any way supported or justified terrorism as a tactic, let's move beyond this attempted deflection of yours.

You did not answer the question.

 

[Lipush]

[

Hamas beheaded people who resisted it without any trial.

Don't you find that kind of hypocritical, when it constantly blames Israel for cutting TV channels, but then goes and kills of palestinian randomly?

I tried to find a link to what you are babbling about and couldn't.

The last forray into Gaza, the Zionists killed 2191 Palestinians. 76% of them were civilians.

Actually, that's also incorrect. among 2100 dead Palestinians, the civilians where not even 800.

How is that 76%, I don't know, but your sources are either not accurate, or lying.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Hamas beheaded people who resisted it without any trial.

Don't you find that kind of hypocritical, when it constantly blames Israel for cutting TV channels, but then goes and kills of palestinian randomly?

I tried to find a link to what you are babbling about and couldn't.

The last forray into Gaza, the Zionists killed 2191 Palestinians. 76% of them were civilians.

Actually, that's also incorrect. among 2100 dead Palestinians, the civilians where not even 800.

How is that 76%, I don't know, but your sources are either not accurate, or lying.

Wow, you actaully believe Bibi's propaganda.

 

[Coyote]

[

You and your typical Arab double talk.

You claim to oppose terrorism immediately after offering your intentional sophistry by way of attempting to create the impression that innocent people can be considered strategic as long as your murderous friends think they are. Again, you fall back on the point of view ruse to justify terrorism.

.

So when we bombed Dresden, Hiroshima, Hanoi, Baghdad and killed a lot of innocent people, was that okay because they were "strategic"?

THere was this great film about the Algerian uprising against France, and they had an Algerian leader, and they asked him why they delivered bombs in women's baskets, and he replied, "You deliver bombs in planes. I'll gladly trade you our baskets for your planes."

Interesting point.

I can see that bombing Dresden and Hiroshima would be considered "stratigic targets" in a war that imo was justifiable. The intent was not to kill civilians, but win the war and those were major centers of industry etc important to the war effort or important in claiming a decisive victory.

That's also an interesting point on Algiers - I hadn't thought of it in that way.

 

[toastman]

[
Right before 1948 it was called Mandatory Palestine. I'm not denying that Palestinian lived there, but it was not a sovereign state and the Palestinian Arabs did not have any sovereignty over the land.
The Jews completed the steps prepatory to self determination and declared independence legally on the land allotted to them in resolution 181.
THE EXACT SAME WAY the Palestinian did so in 1988

What makes a state "sovereign" is that other states recognize it. Since most of the states in the region do not recognize the Zionist Entity, haven't you already delegitamized it by your own standard?

And the moment Israel declared independence, countries started recognizing her. One year later, Israel became a member of the U.N
Oh, and Israel is recognized by Egypt and Jordan as well as the PA. But since when does ISrael need to be recognized by Muslim governments to be legit? If Israel was another Arab Muslim state, do you think

[
Rachel Corrie died because she put herself in front of a bulldozer. Do you have any concern about the armed terrorist who hid in the offices of the group which Rachel Corrie belonged? This armed terrorist went into Mike's Place in Tel Aviv, blowing himself up, and in the process managed to kill people and injure others.

Ooooh, Terrorists...

Frankly, if a bunch of space Aliens occupied America tomorrow, we'd have a lot of "Terrorists', too.

Terrorists don't exist, right Joe ?? They are a made up phenomenon, right?
Or maybe a figment of our imagination?

In Israel's case, terrorist is a propaganda campaign.

You can say that all you want, but it still won't make it true.

Are all those countries who named Hamas a terrorist organization also part of this propaganda campaign??

 

[Coyote]

There were no "Palestinians" before 48, there were the Jews and Arabs of the place called "Palestine" by foreign occupiers.

If you go with the "Palestine existed while Israel didn't" then ALL the residents should have been 'Palestinians'. including the Jews of that time.

Following THAT logic, I am a Palestinian.

But no, thankfully, Im not. We're just Israelis.

And what are you "Israelis" going to do when Palestinians are in the majority. Because they are having more babies than you are and a lot of your folks are going back to Europe.

You can't ethnically cleanse people like that. Everyone seems to be fixated on ethnicly cleansing their opponents. Jews have lived there for generations now. Israel is here to stay and demographics won't substantially change that.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I have consistently opposed the murder of civilians.
I have never supported terrorism as a tactic.
Innocent people can never be considered a target - that is *your* loophole, not mine.

.

and here I thought you had already plumbed the depths of your Arab dishonesty. I did not list any loopholes. That was you who tried doing so.

I simply didn't buy it because of the level of deceitfulness.

 

[toastman]

[

Hamas beheaded people who resisted it without any trial.

Don't you find that kind of hypocritical, when it constantly blames Israel for cutting TV channels, but then goes and kills of palestinian randomly?

I tried to find a link to what you are babbling about and couldn't.

The last forray into Gaza, the Zionists killed 2191 Palestinians. 76% of them were civilians.

Actually, that's also incorrect. among 2100 dead Palestinians, the civilians where not even 800.

How is that 76%, I don't know, but your sources are either not accurate, or lying.

Wow, you actaully believe Bibi's propaganda.

Wow, you actually believe in Palestinian propaganda. Did you know that Hamas choose which media can and cannot come into Gaza? Also, the Palestinian death toll comes from Palestinian sources.

 

[Coyote]

I have consistently opposed the murder of civilians.
I have never supported terrorism as a tactic.
Innocent people can never be considered a target - that is *your* loophole, not mine.

.

and here I thought you had already plumbed the depths of your Arab dishonesty. I did not list any loopholes. That was you who tried doing so.

I simply didn't buy it because of the level of deceitfulness.

You gave yourself a loophole with "strategic". I just wonder how you are going to use it.

So answer the question? What groups do you consider "freedom fighters" and which ones "terrorists"

 

[JoeB131]

[

You can't ethnically cleanse people like that. Everyone seems to be fixated on ethnicly cleansing their opponents. Jews have lived there for generations now. Israel is here to stay and demographics won't substantially change that.

Sadly, we ethnically cleanse people all the time.

At some point, Arabs will be in the majority. Which means one of three things will happen.

1) THey will split Israel and Palestine into two states that will constantly be squabbling over territory.

2) Israel will have to either ethnically cleanse the Palestinians, or reduce them to a Apartheid State like the South Africans tried (and failed) to do with Homelands.

3) The Palestinians will vote Israel out of existence, and a lot of the Europeans will go back to Europe where they belong.

And it never should have gotten this far.

You see, the amazing thing about South Africa was that the blacks didn't seek revenge once they had the upper hand. they even let white folks keep most of their stuff.

I just can't see the Palestinians being so accommedating.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Actually, that's also incorrect. among 2100 dead Palestinians, the civilians where not even 800.

.

and, of course, it was not the civilians (so many of whom share the same agenda) who were the targets. Hamas was.

ANY number coming from Pallywood land is suspect to begin with since the propaganda war is always front and center.

 

[toastman]

There were no "Palestinians" before 48, there were the Jews and Arabs of the place called "Palestine" by foreign occupiers.

If you go with the "Palestine existed while Israel didn't" then ALL the residents should have been 'Palestinians'. including the Jews of that time.

Following THAT logic, I am a Palestinian.

But no, thankfully, Im not. We're just Israelis.

And what are you "Israelis" going to do when Palestinians are in the majority. Because they are having more babies than you are and a lot of your folks are going back to Europe.

Jews make up 75% of Israel. A Palestinian majority in Israel proper is a looooooong time away, IF it ever occurs. And Israelis aren't going back to Europe, as much as you would like them too.
BTW, should Japanese living in America go back to Japan ?
Should Filipino's living in Canada go back to the Philippines ?
Should Germans living in Guatemala go back to Germany ?

 

[toastman]

[

You can't ethnically cleanse people like that. Everyone seems to be fixated on ethnicly cleansing their opponents. Jews have lived there for generations now. Israel is here to stay and demographics won't substantially change that.

Sadly, we ethnically cleanse people all the time.

At some point, Arabs will be in the majority. Which means one of three things will happen.

1) THey will split Israel and Palestine into two states that will constantly be squabbling over territory.

2) Israel will have to either ethnically cleanse the Palestinians, or reduce them to a Apartheid State like the South Africans tried (and failed) to do with Homelands.

3) The Palestinians will vote Israel out of existence, and a lot of the Europeans will go back to Europe where they belong.

And it never should have gotten this far.

You see, the amazing thing about South Africa was that the blacks didn't seek revenge once they had the upper hand. they even let white folks keep most of their stuff.

I just can't see the Palestinians being so accommedating.

Where they belong lol. Israelis belong wherever they want to go to.

 

[JoeB131]

[


I can see that bombing Dresden and Hiroshima would be considered "stratigic targets" in a war that imo was justifiable. The intent was not to kill civilians, but win the war and those were major centers of industry etc important to the war effort or important in claiming a decisive victory.

That's also an interesting point on Algiers - I hadn't thought of it in that way.

I would go so far to argue that Dresden and HIroshima were in fact acts of terrorism. The intent was to intimidate enemies already on the verge of surrender to give up.

Especially Hiroshima, which was spared conventional bombing just so we could see what kind of damage these new nuclear weapons could do.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

You gave yourself a loophole with "strategic". I just wonder how you are going to use it.

So answer the question? What groups do you consider "freedom fighters" and which ones "terrorists"

I did not give myself any loophole at all. The word strategic was used in conjunction with the recognized distinctions between guerilla war and terrorism, in this case strategic referring to the sorts of targets already listed.

If Palestinians targeted a military, governmental or intelligence gathering operation, that would be considered strategic. Targeting civilians and individuals isn't.

 

[docmauser1]

You know, the land that as called "Palestine" before 1948.

Maybe our honorable joeb131 knows who was that shakh, sheikh, emir, sultan, pasha, president, prime-minister of that "palestine"?

Why is that relevent in any way? the point is, there was a nationality of Palestinians, as opposed to "Israelis", who were a cobble of refugees attracted from all over the world with the promise of "Free Stuff">

Well, there have never been a nationality of "palestinians", of course. But major arab settlers and squatters from the hood did swoop in on jewish development opportunities and "free stuff", indeed.

Guy, did anyone teach you "capitalization" in Home Skule?

A Common Core victim, publik skool, that is, solly.

Anyway, there were Palestinians before 1948. ...

[yawn] And they have been jews. Arabs knew that a palestinian meant a jew and preferred to be just arabs, of course.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Jews make up 75% of Israel. A Palestinian majority in Israel proper is a looooooong time away, IF it ever occurs. And Israelis aren't going back to Europe, as much as you would like them too.

Again, you are engaging in selective math.

There are 6 million Jews in Israel proper (pre-1967 borders) and 1 million Arabs within those borders.

There are 1.6 million people in Gaza and 2.5 million on the west bank.

There are another 2 million or so Palestinian refugees living in surrounding countries.

[
BTW, should Japanese living in America go back to Japan ?
Should Filipino's living in Canada go back to the Philippines ?
Should Germans living in Guatemala go back to Germany ?

if they started insisting that they were living in their own countries instead of the ones they were living in, um, yeah, I'd seriously consider it.

 

[toastman]

[

Jews make up 75% of Israel. A Palestinian majority in Israel proper is a looooooong time away, IF it ever occurs. And Israelis aren't going back to Europe, as much as you would like them too.

Again, you are engaging in selective math.

There are 6 million Jews in Israel proper (pre-1967 borders) and 1 million Arabs within those borders.

There are 1.6 million people in Gaza and 2.5 million on the west bank.

There are another 2 million or so Palestinian refugees living in surrounding countries.

[
BTW, should Japanese living in America go back to Japan ?
Should Filipino's living in Canada go back to the Philippines ?
Should Germans living in Guatemala go back to Germany ?

if they started insisting that they were living in their own countries instead of the ones they were living in, um, yeah, I'd seriously consider it.

What countries are they living in then ? I'm talking about those born in Israel

 

[Coyote]

Sadly, we ethnically cleanse people all the time.

We do.

That doesn't mean it should be supported or that we shouldn't fight against it.

At some point, Arabs will be in the majority. Which means one of three things will happen.

1) THey will split Israel and Palestine into two states that will constantly be squabbling over territory.

That is the most likely to happen - 2 states. And who knows - they may come to peace once the Palestinians have a state and something worth preserving and growing. It also means that as a state - they will be held to the same standards as any other state in the International Community.

2) Israel will have to either ethnically cleanse the Palestinians, or reduce them to a Apartheid State like the South Africans tried (and failed) to do with Homelands.

The West Bank and Gaza has upwards of...what...4.5 million or so? You can't move that many people with out huge international and humanitarian repercussions.

3) The Palestinians will vote Israel out of existence, and a lot of the Europeans will go back to Europe where they belong.

Where they "belong"??? They've lived in Israel for generations now. If you view that as a solution, then you have to untangle the non-indiginous Palestinian Arabs who migrated there and send them "back where they belong". You'd have to move something like 5 million people to "Europe". Again. A humanitarian nightmare and an action that would provoke a huge international response.

And it never should have gotten this far.

You see, the amazing thing about South Africa was that the blacks didn't seek revenge once they had the upper hand. they even let white folks keep most of their stuff.

I just can't see the Palestinians being so accommedating.

The amazing thing about South Africa is they had Nelson Mandela. Neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis have a Mandela. And they need one.