Is Israel the Same as South Africa?

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

So what? This is called contingency planning. All competent military forces (with a strategic reach) do this.

georgephillip, et al,

I have many bones to pick with American Foreign Policy, but your point is too diluted (even for me).

Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911.
That answer distills to one word: three.

(COMMENT)

What does this have to do with the issue?


(COMMENT)

What US "terror?" Let's be specific. Name one!


(COMMENT)

I don't recall the Germans or the Floridians assisting any extremist in the planning or execution of 911. Please identify them.


(COMMENT)

There were several reasons that American Oil interests supported the war. But that doesn't mean that was a primary reason for the war.

Hope that helps you understand why partisan pablum isn't a message worth getting.

(COMMENT)

The message isn't getting across for a number of reasons. The first of which is that there are a number of Americans that were opposed to the conflict and did not get their way. So they will cling to any conspiratorial plot that makes the Iraq pursuit immoral. It doesn't mean it is valid or sound.

Most Respectfully,
R

A majority of the human beings on this planet didn't get their way when the US invaded Iraq in 2003, maiming, murdering, and displacing millions of innocent civilians. Just as a majority of human beings did not get their way in '91 when US terror destroyed the electrical grid in Baghdad. You may recall a few of the 15 Saudi nationals who managed to topple three steel framed skyscrapers with two magical airplanes in New York spent a good deal of their time in Germany, Florida, and San Diego prior to giving the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet a taste of its own medicine on 911. By conflating "American oil interests" with the interests of the petrodollar you validate the immorality of the US wars of aggression against Iraq (and Libya, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Somalia, and Iran)

"'As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.'" [147]"

Wesley Clark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(COMMENT)

Yes, and so. I cannot name a single insurgency that did not last a decade (give or take a year or so). There is no way that the US could tackle seven countries in five years. Like I said before, you can read the words, but don't understand their meaning.

The US military is a very big, very damaging, broadsword. It can kill anything. But it cannot be everyplace at once. And, with it limited leadership abilities, it cannot be expected to reassemble what it broke.

As far as the "electrical grid in Baghdad!!!" Wow, it wasn't much of a grid to start with. Never the less, it was a strategic infrastructure target. Wars are like that.

And don't hand out that conspiratorial nonsense about "magical planes" and the 911 junkie theories. The US is not perfect, yes we know. But it is not generally suicidal. If an enemy of the state attempts to strike the US, it is not going to be a case of --- "taste of its own medicine" --- we do not bow to the threat of non-state actors no matter what the nature of the source or point or origin. I think it is abundantly clear to every nation on Earth --- don't poke the bear.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[georgephillip]

The prime example of conspiratorial nonsense in this country today is the suicidal confidence in the moral superiority of the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet, which, I gather, you've proudly served for your entire adult life. Not only do "we not bow" to threats, we murder, maim, displace and incarcerate millions of innocent human beings thousands of miles from our homeland FOR MONEY and MARKET SHARE. As far as 911 is concerned, you have laid out in great detail the ability of the US to monitor communications world-wide, yet on 9/11/2001 the epicenter of that global electronic dragnet was struck by a civilian aircraft; maybe the 19 suicidal Saudis should have targeted the DC electrical grid? Whether or not the US could tackle seven countries in five years, two have been balkanized, two more are on the block, and the Persians are threatening to sell their oil in gold. Your broadsword is even more damaging when its swung by suicidal psychopaths with Rs or Ds behind their names.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

The prime example of conspiratorial nonsense in this country today is the suicidal confidence in the moral superiority of the greatest purveyor of violence on this planet, which, I gather, you've proudly served for your entire adult life. Not only do "we not bow" to threats, we murder, maim, displace and incarcerate millions of innocent human beings thousands of miles from our homeland FOR MONEY and MARKET SHARE. As far as 911 is concerned, you have laid out in great detail the ability of the US to monitor communications world-wide, yet on 9/11/2001 the epicenter of that global electronic dragnet was struck by a civilian aircraft; maybe the 19 suicidal Saudis should have targeted the DC electrical grid? Whether or not the US could tackle seven countries in five years, two have been balkanized, two more are on the block, and the Persians are threatening to sell their oil in gold. Your broadsword is even more damaging when its swung by suicidal psychopaths with Rs or Ds behind their names.

And the internal chaos and fighting among Arabs cannot be blamed on the Arabs themselves, in any way. To say that Arabs can't be held responsible for their own actions is painting them as sub-human.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.

Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?

 

[Hossfly]

The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.

Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?

Immigration ISSUE Tinmore. Pay attention.

 

[toastman]

Their homes are not there anymore, Tinmore. Get over it. There will never be right of return. Let the Arab countries absorb the refugees instead of letting them live like animals, like it Jordan, where they refuse to give them citizenship.
The Israeli government will not allow tiny Israel to be flooded with tens of thousands of Palestinians, many of whom are likely very hostile towards Israel. IT will also cause demographic issues.
Get over it, it ain't happening, and you know it.

 

[Hossfly]

The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.

Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?

Millions and millions of people were displaced because of World War II; and as a result, they settled in many different countries. Does Tinnie think that they or their descendents can waltz right into the European countries they left and demand citizenship? Each country can make their own immigration rules. By the way, Tinnie, how's it going among those "Palestinians" whose roots are in Egypt with regard to heeding the Egyptian's official's call for them to come back to Egypt? Maybe if there wasn't such turmoil in Egypt, some of them would be heading back. No doubt they still have relatives living in Egypt who can help them get going there.

 

[Kondor3]

Any Palestinian with an ounce of brains and two shekels to rub together moved away long ago.

 

[Kondor3]

The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.

Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?

You keep looking for Legal Substantiation when it is patently and glaringly obvious that none will be forthcoming, and that because Victory on the Battlefield settles old Legal Arguments.

Ownership of those lands and structures has changed, long, long ago; the Israelis now hold Deed and Title to the land; conveyed upon them by Mars, the God of War.

Vae victus.

It is no longer your home.

Some of you abandoned your homes.

Some of you were evicted from your homes.

In any event, it is no longer your home.

Don't like that outcome?

Then you must try to take it back.

But you will be doing it from Lebanon and Jordan and Egypt, soon enough.

Tick... tick... tick.

 

[toastman]

The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.

Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?

You keep looking for Legal Substantiation when it is patently and glaringly obvious that none will be forthcoming, and that because Victory on the Battlefield settles old Legal Arguments.

Ownership of those lands and structures has changed, long, long ago; the Israelis now hold Deed and Title to the land; conveyed upon them by Mars, the God of War.

Vae victus.

It is no longer your home.

Some of you abandoned your homes.

Some of you were evicted from your homes.

In any event, it is no longer your home.

Don't like that outcome?

Then you must try to take it back.

But you will be doing it from Lebanon and Jordan and Egypt, soon enough.

Tick... tick... tick.

This is what I've been saying for a while now. If the Palestinians want any of the land, the only way they can get it is through conventional warfare.
But I'm sure we all know how that would turn out

 

[P F Tinmore]

Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?

You keep looking for Legal Substantiation when it is patently and glaringly obvious that none will be forthcoming, and that because Victory on the Battlefield settles old Legal Arguments.

Ownership of those lands and structures has changed, long, long ago; the Israelis now hold Deed and Title to the land; conveyed upon them by Mars, the God of War.

Vae victus.

It is no longer your home.

Some of you abandoned your homes.

Some of you were evicted from your homes.

In any event, it is no longer your home.

Don't like that outcome?

Then you must try to take it back.

But you will be doing it from Lebanon and Jordan and Egypt, soon enough.

Tick... tick... tick.

This is what I've been saying for a while now. If the Palestinians want any of the land, the only way they can get it is through conventional warfare.
But I'm sure we all know how that would turn out

Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w56AP_cjDYw]Rafeef, Ben and Mbuyiseni on Israeli Apartheid Week - 22.2.12 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, there are a couple things wrong with your question.

The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.

Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?

(COMMENT)

One is, I did not use the word "home" once. So, it is fair to say, that your question is a bit out of context.

Second, I used the phrase "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue" in a broad and sweeping context. One of the three may be applicable, or any combination may be applicable. The term "home" implies a "residency" having been established. So I outlined how residency - "Nationality by Residence in Israel" - can be used and applied.

I did not tie "home" with "immigration" that I can see. I did make links available.

You mentioned "Apartheid Laws."

• Which one of the "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship" laws is in violation of any provision of Apartheid as a Crime?
• Which one of the "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship" laws is not rational?
• Are you implying that a nation (any nation) is "Apartheid" if it establishes a firm set of Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws?

Similarly, South Africa (SA) has a set of Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws. You just cannot walk into SA Border Control and say --- you have to let me in because I once lived over there in that house.

I also understand that even Jordan has recently taken action to remove Jordanian Citizenship from certain Palestinians. Even the Hashemite Kingdom has Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship Laws. Is Jordan also Apartheid?

I understand that Kuwait expelled approximately 250,000 Jordanians of Palestinian during the Operation Desert Storm (1991 Gulf War). Kuwait has Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws. Are you suggesting that Kuwait is also Apartheid?

Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws are not necessarily "apartheid."

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Kondor3]

"...Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening..."

The last, desperate gasps of a failed, dying proto-State that hasn't got enough land remaining in its possession to build a decent-sized parking lot... far too many Palestinian suicide bombings and rocket attacks to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too much history of Palestinian and Arab-Muslim aggression against the Israeli-Jews to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too little, too late.

Tick... tick... tick...

 

[P F Tinmore]

"...Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening..."

The last, desperate gasps of a failed, dying proto-State that hasn't got enough land remaining in its possession to build a decent-sized parking lot... far too many Palestinian suicide bombings and rocket attacks to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too much history of Palestinian and Arab-Muslim aggression against the Israeli-Jews to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too little, too late.

Tick... tick... tick...

Israel may have mooched enough military to remove Palestinians from their homes but they cannot eliminate the Palestinians or their supporters worldwide.

IAW and BDS are shaping public opinion and changing the frame of the debate.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening..."

The last, desperate gasps of a failed, dying proto-State that hasn't got enough land remaining in its possession to build a decent-sized parking lot... far too many Palestinian suicide bombings and rocket attacks to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too much history of Palestinian and Arab-Muslim aggression against the Israeli-Jews to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too little, too late.

Tick... tick... tick...

Israel may have mooched enough military to remove Palestinians from their homes but they cannot eliminate the Palestinians or their supporters worldwide.

IAW and BDS are shaping public opinion and changing the frame of the debate.

By the time they have any impact they'll be sponsoring that debate from Lebanon and Jordan and Syria and Egypt, quite probably...

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, there are a couple things wrong with your question.

The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.

Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?

(COMMENT)

One is, I did not use the word "home" once. So, it is fair to say, that your question is a bit out of context.

Second, I used the phrase "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue" in a broad and sweeping context. One of the three may be applicable, or any combination may be applicable. The term "home" implies a "residency" having been established. So I outlined how residency - "Nationality by Residence in Israel" - can be used and applied.

I did not tie "home" with "immigration" that I can see. I did make links available.

You mentioned "Apartheid Laws."

• Which one of the "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship" laws is in violation of any provision of Apartheid as a Crime?
• Which one of the "Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship" laws is not rational?
• Are you implying that a nation (any nation) is "Apartheid" if it establishes a firm set of Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws?

Similarly, South Africa (SA) has a set of Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws. You just cannot walk into SA Border Control and say --- you have to let me in because I once lived over there in that house.

I also understand that even Jordan has recently taken action to remove Jordanian Citizenship from certain Palestinians. Even the Hashemite Kingdom has Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship Laws. Is Jordan also Apartheid?

I understand that Kuwait expelled approximately 250,000 Jordanians of Palestinian during the Operation Desert Storm (1991 Gulf War). Kuwait has Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws. Are you suggesting that Kuwait is also Apartheid?

Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship laws are not necessarily "apartheid."

Most Respectfully,
R

One is, I did not use the word "home" once. So, it is fair to say, that your question is a bit out of context.

It is Israel's debate and laws that are out of context.

Palestinian homes are where they historically lived. Israel tries to change that with its apartheid laws.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Assuming that the Palestinians find a reason to suspend Peace Talks, I think I have a better appreciation for this non-violent approach.

BTW: I'm hoping something fruitful comes from the talks.

"...Israel would love to keep this conflict in the military realm, but this is not what is happening..."

The last, desperate gasps of a failed, dying proto-State that hasn't got enough land remaining in its possession to build a decent-sized parking lot... far too many Palestinian suicide bombings and rocket attacks to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too much history of Palestinian and Arab-Muslim aggression against the Israeli-Jews to be able to paint the Palestinians as the victims here... far too little, too late.

Tick... tick... tick...

Israel may have mooched enough military to remove Palestinians from their homes but they cannot eliminate the Palestinians or their supporters worldwide.

IAW and BDS are shaping public opinion and changing the frame of the debate.

(COMMENT)

Shaping public opinion is often harder to sustain, when put to the test. How many nations are willing to invest in any active measure against a lone non-Islamic State surrounded by Article 13 Jihadist and Article 9 Armed Feday'een.

But I appreciate the fact that it is not an hostile operation.

I've seen this video before. It is an advertisement for the BDS.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hoffstra]

Israel has one rule for Arabs and another rule for Jews when it comes to building demolitions, building permits, fences, walls, checkpoints, land confiscation, application of old treaties, and lawsuits for lost lands.

Its the Israeli version of Apartheid. Its called "Hafrada".

 

[docmauser1]

IAW and BDS are shaping public opinion and changing the frame of the debate.

Indeed, they're ready to fight Israel to the last palistanian, of course.

 

[Hoffstra]

The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue.

Returning to one's own home is "immigration?" Other than Israel's apartheid laws, can you back that up with anything?

The UN Charter and Geneva Conventions clearly state that when a person flees his country or home due to war, he has the immediate and unalienable right to RETURN to that home once it is safe to do so.