Apartheid Wall

[NGONGE]

This gets better and better!

So the Mapai of Ben Gurion were Doves? The first and main political party for the Zionists that settled in the land of Palestine were passive doves? The people who created the Haganah (and the Irgun) and went on to slaughter countless Palestinians and British were doves?

 

Sharon says he’ll dismantle the settlement but his history tells us otherwise, sister. The “peaceful†groups you mention are not in power in Israel and have never been. All the previous governments (Labour and Likud) have acted the same way when it came to the Arabs, sister.

 

Peace is indeed a good and noble idea but your foes have to be peaceful people before you decide to make peace with them, they have to show that they’re willing to demonstrate their desire for peace with action not simple words.

 

You seem to have knowledge of the history of this conflict but it’s a very very distorted picture you paint, sister. I wont even advice you to check out Arab and Islamic sources to find out, I wont advice you to check out international and UN sources, I’ll advice you instead to check out Jewish and Israeli sources and see what the Mapai, Labour, Likud and all the various personalities stood for.

 

Let us hope peace does indeed reach that land but it has to be one where the aggressor (which you conveniently ignored) makes all the running.

[OG_Girl]

Sorry, no peace till Zionists leave our Holly Land. I don't buy all these sweet words and diplomatic talk. This is an Arab , Muslim Land , Jew can live there but under Palastinain Islamic Goverment . :cool: .

 

Salam

[Rahima]

^ Here, Here.

[Cawralo]

V:"Are you saying that it's the Palestinians' fault that they are occupied.."

 

I never claimed to support how Israel acts in the occupied areas, offcourse I dont blame the palestinians. I put most of the blame on arab leaders, who drove it's ppl into devasting wars which they all lost.

 

"There is a difference between Jews and Zionism, we respect the former but abhor the latter for its ideology and policies."

 

Abhor to it as much as you like, I doubt that will make it go away.

 

"Didn't the Israelis kill the only leader who was close to bring them the peace you claim they want?"

 

The israelis didn't kill him, a certain extremist did. That's why on the day of his funeral, hundreds of thousands of israelis mourned his murder.

 

"You are under the impression that the Israelis want peace. They haven't wanted peace since day one, if they had chosen peace, they would be unable to annex as much land as they have in the last 50 years."

 

That's the problem with the public opinion, so easy to influence. Which is also my point. All of this useless arab violence in the occupied areas are working to the advantage of the political right. So when Begin and his crew shouted "All of Israel" most ppl thought "fascist". But when the arabs attacked and lost..ppl thought..why not.

 

"How did Hizbollah manage to kick them out of southern Lebanon, through dialogue? NO! It was because most of the Yahuudi boys on the frontline were returning home in body bags."

 

You cant compare southern Lebanon with Gaza or the WB. First off, most of it's inhabitants have fled and re-settled in other Lebanese cities. So for hamas & Co to have a succesful guerilla war in that area, most palestinians would have to leave. Unless you think that a couple of hundred thousand palestinian lives is a price worth paying. But good for them, now instead of being occupied by both Syria and Israel, it's just Syria.

 

 

--------------

Ngonge: "So the Mapai of Ben Gurion were Doves?"

 

I said that where? Ben Gurion was a good leader for _his_ ppl. Too bad the palestinians aren't that lucky.

 

"The first and main political party for the Zionists that settled in the land of Palestine were passive doves?"

 

Offcourse not, if that was the case, Israel wouldn't have been at all. The arabs back then weren't "passive doves" either, the difference is that they were tactically challenged..and yes..loosers of all the wars.

 

"The people who created the Haganah (and the Irgun) and went on to slaughter countless Palestinians and British were doves?"

 

Offcourse they were! They as much as their arab counterparts who murdered and attacked jewish immigrants before 48'.

 

"Sharon says he’ll dismantle the settlement but his history tells us otherwise, sister. The “peaceful†groups you mention are not in power in Israel and have never been. All the previous governments (Labour and Likud) have acted the same way when it came to the Arabs, sister."

 

First of all, I'm not your sister Secondly, you are wrong. As I've already pointed out (which you conviently missed) Mitznas administration could have been a step in right direction.

 

"Peace is indeed a good and noble idea but your foes have to be peaceful people before you decide to make peace with them, they have to show that they’re willing to demonstrate their desire for peace with action not simple words."

 

That sounds a lot like what Sharon and his crew says.

[NGONGE]

Offcourse not, if that was the case, Israel wouldn't have been at all. The arabs back then weren't "passive doves" either, the difference is that they were tactically challenged..and yes..loosers of all the wars.

The Arabs back then had every right to fight back. I’m intrigued as to the measures you’re using to equate the actions of the occupied and the occupiers here!

 

 

Offcourse they were! They as much as their arab counterparts who murdered and attacked jewish immigrants before 48'.

Again, I refer you to my earlier statement.

 

 

First of all, I'm not your sister Secondly, you are wrong. As I've already pointed out (which you conviently missed) Mitznas administration could have been a step in right direction.

I’m wrong? You didn’t prove me wrong (sorry was just about to call you sister again! can’t help it, you see. I call all Somali females sister, you are Somali, right?).

 

You didn’t dispute the fact that the party you claim was a party of peace was the same one that created the state of Israel and the terrorist roots of the IDF, yet in the same breath you’re trying to convince me that they were a peace loving party? What was the peace that they were after? Were they going to withdraw from the Arab lands?

Hang on, let me rephrase that, what is your understanding of a just peace in those circumstances and during that time?

 

 

"Peace is indeed a good and noble idea but your foes have to be peaceful people before you decide to make peace with them, they have to show that they’re willing to demonstrate their desire for peace with action not simple words."

 

That sounds a lot like what Sharon and his crew says.

Of course it sounds like Sharon, but where it differs from Sharon is the fact that it’s voiced by the occupied and oppressed. Your moral compass seems to be long overdue for a service by the sound of things (the Israelis would say it‘s not “mensch“).

 

The way you talk about this situation, anyone reading it would think history started with the Intifada or the first suicide bomber! You blame the Arab leaders for the predicament the Palestinians are in but you completely disregard history, the Zionists or the role of world powers. This argument of yours has more holes than a sponge.

 

I recommend that you go back and read your essay notes or the website you got your information from then come back and fight the Israeli cause with a bit more zest and conviction. I await a meatier and more worthy reply.

[Viking]

All of this useless arab violence in the occupied areas are working to the advantage of the political right.

Cawralo,

So how do you think the Palestinians ought to defend themselves? Since they have no F16's and Abraham tanks, what other weaponry do you suggest they should use? How is this crisis to be solved? Do you think that the refugees should be allowed back to their homes (Israelis won't let them return and this has been the main obstacle to peace in the region)? How much land do you think the Israelis have right to?

[Wiilo]

This is a punch of crab , the U.S. says that they want a peace in the region. But when you are giving Millions of dollars, and all kinds of Weapons to the Isreals to defend against the poor Palastians, how it is possible to have a peace in the region. It is what the Somalis call [Qowda maqashii Waxna Ha u Qaban] Waa been laga gadayo carabta inteeda kale. so, yay inoo sheegin Maraykanka nabad ayaan u raadinaynaa Middle-East. ......I cannot even talk about it really............

 

Wabillaahi Towfiiq:

[Cawralo]

Viking, I dont claim to have the solution to this problem. I'm sure that if there is one, large groups on both sides would definetly end up angry and feel betrayed. For me the main goal is that as many ppl as possible on both sides can live in peace without having to see the blown up remains of their dead children in a Cafè in Tel Aviv on public broadcasting. Or having to ask a 19 year old for permission to get the body of your 13 year old daughter who's been shot twenty times on her way to school. That makes the discussion of the refugee-issue increadbly cynical since these refugees are reduced to pawns in a political game. Lets be honest, Israel will never accept it, it would mean the death of Israel as a jewish state (having a 20 % arab minority already). And also there was about as many sefardic jews who fled to Israel after 48' and the following wars, so it evens it out. 21sqkm is a small area, these refugees could easily re-settle in neighbouring arab countries, who have land and sometimes even wealth - assuming the other arab-countries really care as much as they claim.

 

 

-----------------------------------

Ngonge:

"The Arabs back then had every right to fight back. I’m intrigued as to the measures you’re using to equate the actions of the occupied and the occupiers here!"

 

The arabs back them weren't occupied by the jews. Palestine was under the control of the british, remember?

 

 

"You didn’t dispute the fact that the party you claim was a party of peace was the same one that created the state of Israel and the terrorist roots of the IDF, yet in the same breath you’re trying to convince me that they were a peace loving party?"

 

Mapai a peace loving party? I dare you to point out exactly where I said that.

 

Still searching? I said "the doves of Mapai" which is quite different from saying "Mapai - the doves", dont you think? I'm not naive, I'm aware of the fact that Israel was funded by terrorists. But I'm also aware of the fact that the arabs back then were just as much of terrorists, tactically challenged terrorists, but still.

 

"Of course it sounds like Sharon, but where it differs from Sharon is the fact that it’s voiced by the occupied and oppressed."

 

Occupied, oppressed..and what more? Yes, voiced by those in a helpless and weak position. A group that cant afford to do things that will lead to having ppl like Netanyahu at power.

 

"The way you talk about this situation, anyone reading it would think history started with the Intifada or the first suicide bomber! You blame the Arab leaders for the predicament the Palestinians are in but you completely disregard history, the Zionists or the role of world powers. This argument of yours has more holes than a sponge."

 

As I've already stated, I dont put all the blame on arab leaders. I put most of the blame on them. You seem to share their thinking patterns (that's the only explaination to ur obsession of Arafat, that, or ur his cousin who's hoping for a good position in his parlament). Now I'm not a pacifist, but if I'm about to use violence, I'll use it tactically. Take this latest brilliant move, where some arabs decided to shoot primitive misiles from Gaza. Let me see, since operation DP started about 5 israelis lost their lives..compared to oer 100 palestinians. Now you might think that 95-0 for Israel is a good score, but for me it's unacceptable.

[NGONGE]

Viking, I dont claim to have the solution to this problem. I'm sure that if there is one, large groups on both sides would definetly end up angry and feel betrayed. For me the main goal is that as many ppl as possible on both sides can live in peace without having to see the blown up remains of their dead children in a Cafè in Tel Aviv on public broadcasting. Or having to ask a 19 year old for permission to get the body of your 13 year old daughter who's been shot twenty times on her way to school. That makes the discussion of the refugee-issue increadbly cynical since these refugees are reduced to pawns in a political game. Lets be honest, Israel will never accept it, it would mean the death of Israel as a jewish state (having a 20 % arab minority already). And also there was about as many sefardic jews who fled to Israel after 48' and the following wars, so it evens it out. 21sqkm is a small area, these refugees could easily re-settle in neighbouring arab countries, who have land and sometimes even wealth - assuming the other arab-countries really care as much as they claim.

Why should they re-settle in other Arab lands though? You seem to have sadly fallen for the Israeli propaganda here. Following your (and their) logic, the Somalis living under Ethiopian rule should just forsake their lands and move to Somalia and Djibouti! The Catholics of Northern Ireland should just save themselves all the fuss and shuffle off to Southern Ireland! I ask you; again, what moral measures are you using here to work out right from wrong?

 

The arabs back them weren't occupied by the jews. Palestine was under the control of the british, remember?

They were under British rule indeed. They however, had to fight off the encroaching hordes of Jewish settlers who started to slowly acquire more and more Arab lands, aided and abetted by the British establishment (that’s before we even start to mention good old Belfour’s declaration).

 

Mapai a peace loving party? I dare you to point out exactly where I said that.

 

Still searching? I said "the doves of Mapai" which is quite different from saying "Mapai - the doves", dont you think? I'm not naive, I'm aware of the fact that Israel was funded by terrorists. But I'm also aware of the fact that the arabs back then were just as much of terrorists, tactically challenged terrorists, but still.

As for your first point here, I don’t wish to indulge in a squabble over semantics, suffice it to say, your words painted a picture of cautious and peace loving doves. I’ve already given you a taster of that party’s history. One that shows that this party was anything but peace loving! Your second throwaway point is more intriguing though. In what book, religion, logic or even sentiment does it say that people who resist and fight against their lands being overtaken are terrorists? As I told you in a previous post, your moral compass needs a bit of tweaking, dear. You’re calling everyone who takes up arms a terrorist. I advice you to rethink your words or rephrase them so you don’t come across as a total novice (resist the temptation to just spit out words, dear).

 

Occupied, oppressed..and what more? Yes, voiced by those in a helpless and weak position. A group that cant afford to do things that will lead to having ppl like Netanyahu at power.

Now this is a different argument, isn’t it? So you want them to play a “political game� Isn’t that what they’ve been doing since 1993? Have they not conceded and finally recognised the state of Israel? Did they not negotiate and shake hands with the OCCUPIER? What further concessions do you expect from them?

It really does not matter who is in charge of Israel at the time; the policy is mostly the same! Talk of peace while building more settlements. It has always been thus.

 

 

As I've already stated, I dont put all the blame on arab leaders. I put most of the blame on them. You seem to share their thinking patterns (that's the only explaination to ur obsession of Arafat, that, or ur his cousin who's hoping for a good position in his parlament). Now I'm not a pacifist, but if I'm about to use violence, I'll use it tactically. Take this latest brilliant move, where some arabs decided to shoot primitive misiles from Gaza. Let me see, since operation DP started about 5 israelis lost their lives..compared to oer 100 palestinians. Now you might think that 95-0 for Israel is a good score, but for me it's unacceptable.

You’re starting to waver a little but not enough to make sense. Arafat is not my cousin (though since he’s a Muslim, he’s my brother). Where I differ from you is in the fact that I try to give credit where credit is due. I don’t condemn people just because I’ve heard it on CNN, I condemn them when I’m presented with overwhelming evidence against them. I’ve already given you enough information about the man on another thread for you to make a BALANCED and fair judgment on him or at least use it as a guide to read more on the subject and learn about his history.

 

As for using violence “tacticallyâ€, how would you achieve that? I recall VIKING asking you similar questions, which your only reply to was that you didn’t have a solution to this problem. In all honesty, I doubt if anybody is expecting you to supply them with any solution. I seriously doubt if VICKING expected you to give him a solution to a problem that’s been troubling the world for the past fifty years. What he was asking you though, I suspect, is to explain your offhand comments and outrageous claims.

 

If it’s peace you’re espousing, great. But bear in mind the history of this conflict, the difference between the responsibilities of the occupiers and the occupied, outside pressures, religion and the scarce economic resources (not forgetting WATER). As long as you take all those (and whatever else I’ve missed out) into account when making your analysis, your idea of peace might eventually resemble a genuine and coherent argument.

 

At the moment, and judging by the wayward logic you’re using, the peace you espouse is the peace of cowards. The peace that is forced upon the occupied and follows the old adage of “To The Victor The Spoilsâ€! The Palestinians don’t want such a peace and would rather continue with their “idiotic†violence instead.

 

 

Just in case none of my words manage to make a breakthrough and you insist on carrying on with your obstinate line of argument, let me humbly request that you make your next reply one that gives your whole outlook on this conflict and how you’ve reached these conclusions of yours.

 

Don’t take any of my words to heart. This is a debate and contrary to the popular misconception of “agreeing to disagreeâ€, debates are all about challenging weak arguments or even mocking them if presented with a chance to mock. May your arguments never be weak.

[Viking]

Cawralo,

You have sympathy for the Jews not allowing people back to their homes, but don't understand why the Palestinians are fighting the occupation?

 

For me the main goal is that as many ppl as possible on both sides can live in peace without having to see the blown up remains of their dead children in a Cafè in Tel Aviv on public broadcasting.

Well, almost every decent human being in the world thinks that this could be achieved if the Israelis ceased building settlements and withdrew from Palestinian lands, but you seem to think that the solution lies in the Palestinians not fighting back.

 

21sqkm is a small area, these refugees could easily re-settle in neighbouring arab countries, who have land and sometimes even wealth - assuming the other arab-countries really care as much as they claim.

You must be a Zionist to say something so heartless in defence of Israel.

 

 

The arabs back them weren't occupied by the jews. Palestine was under the control of the british, remember?

Do you know the story of how the British came to give Palestine to the Jews? The Zionists led by Chaim Weizman promised to drag USA in WW1 (after the Germans, Austrians and Ottoman Turks had won and Germany had offered a deal to Britain, which was favourable for the Brits but the Zionists derailed the deal) and they were in return offered Palestine and the Balfour declaration was issued.

 

 

 

As I've already stated, I dont put all the blame on arab leaders. I put most of the blame on them.

Let me ask you an absurd question, do you by any chance feel that the Israelis have done any injustice to the people of Palestine?

[Cawralo]

Ngonge, replying to you is tiring my friend. I hate repeating myself. But you can read all of my answers on: www.zionists.staged.the.latest.somali.election.and.they.are.also.responsible.for.911.the.lies.against.michael.jackson.his.failed.nose.operation.and.much.much.more.com

-------------

 

V:"You have sympathy for the Jews not allowing people back to their homes, but don't understand why the Palestinians are fighting the occupation?"

 

Actually it's the other way around, it's because of my sympathy for the palestinians (and jews) that I think that this whole refugee-issue is unrealistic. I'm all for the right of the occupied, but there are different ways of fighting back. Blowing yourself up, firing at children, deliberately targeting civilians is something that I will never sympathize with.

 

"Well, almost every decent human being in the world thinks that this could be achieved if the Israelis ceased building settlements and withdrew from Palestinian lands, but you seem to think that the solution lies in the Palestinians not fighting back."

 

What if the israelis ceased building settlements, lets say they even went out and said that they would pull back from some of the occupied areas, and some arabs saw that as an opportunity to launch new attacks? If the only answer was for the israelis to be less aggressive, how come then every israeli pullback (IDF) is followed by even more arab violence?

 

"You must be a Zionist to say something so heartless in defence of Israel."

 

Heartless, realistic. Patato, barandho. Being a zionist is in these days. Even a certain Arafat (who's a someone here is smitten by) is a zionist.

 

 

"Do you know the story of how the British came to give Palestine to the Jews? The Zionists led by Chaim Weizman promised to drag USA in WW1 (after the Germans, Austrians and Ottoman Turks had won and Germany had offered a deal to Britain, which was favourable for the Brits but the Zionists derailed the deal) and they were in return offered Palestine and the Balfour declaration was issued."

 

I've heard of it yes. The point being that Israel has its roots in fishy circumstances. And here I thought that palestine was a land without ppl for a superior ppl! Sounds a lot like politics, which seldom is about fairness.

[NGONGE]

Heh. I somehow had an inkling that you will not account for any of your comments. Still, I wouldn't accuse you of being a Zionist. If I was debating with a Zionist and he bombarded me with such feeble arguments and random emotional bursts, I’d at least understand the source of his passion and blinkered views. With you though, I’m truly flabbergasted! Nonetheless, you show great potential; all that’s needed is a way to curb that tourette like tendency to spit out off the cuff statements camouflaged as valid arguments.

 

You bring up (albeit unwittingly) a very good point regarding the Zionists. The Arabs, Muslims and many Western Socialists have a habit of crediting every suspicious event to Zionist Conspiracies. Those sandcastles of doom are often built on hearsay and suppositions. I assure you that I suffer from neither and I’m glad that in this instance your lottery of words had hit the jackpot.

 

While we’re on the subject, should you change your mind and decide to charm me further in this discussion, I’ll be more than happy to study your thoughts and might even (eventually) find myself agreeing with them.

[Viking]

Originally posted by Cawralo:

I'm all for the right of the occupied, but there are different ways of fighting back. Blowing yourself up, firing at children, deliberately targeting civilians is something that I will never sympathize with.

Civilians? There are no civilians in Israel! Why do you think Qaradawi sympathises with the Palestinians means? I asked you how you wanted the Palestinians to fight back, they don't get billions and weaponry from USA every year like the Israelis do.

 

 

What if the israelis ceased building settlements, lets say they even went out and said that they would pull back from some of the occupied areas, and some arabs saw that as an opportunity to launch new attacks? If the only answer was for the israelis to be less aggressive, how come then every israeli pullback (IDF) is followed by even more arab violence?

You must be unfamiliar with this conflict dear. Those places they "withdraw" from are the few settlements they are unable to protect or sustain. They are those surrounded by hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. They are merely a few square kilometres and not even close to the area they ought to give back as granted by international law. Plus, they are expanding the settlements on the Golan Heights, does that sound like a nation that is striving for peace with its neighbours?

 

It is the Israelis tanks that roam the Palestinians streets and not vice versa, how do you expect them to have peace when they (their govt) clearly don't want it? Look at the situation in Iraq, it is the Americans that are the occupiers, but the neo-cons and the american govt think that the insurgence is wrong in fighting back (irresponsible of their means).

 

 

Being a zionist is in these days. Even a certain Arafat (who's a someone here is smitten by) is a zionist.

I thought he was a terrorist :confused:

 

I've heard of it yes. The point being that Israel has its roots in fishy circumstances. And here I thought that palestine was a land without ppl for a superior ppl! Sounds a lot like politics, which seldom is about fairness. [/QB]

Without fairness, we are animals dear. If you don't know where your rights end and mine begin, then conflict becomes inevitable.

 

I see that you support the Jews and think they are justified in their actions. Also, you don't come forward with any solution as to how this conflict can be ended. Surely, is there any point of taking this discussion any further? I see not.

[Cawralo]

"Civilians? There are no civilians in Israel! Why do you think Qaradawi sympathises with the Palestinians means? I asked you how you wanted the Palestinians to fight back, they don't get billions and weaponry from USA every year like the Israelis do."

 

The best way for the palestinians to fight back, is to blow up themselves, target civilians..OK soilders out of duty, kids, old ppl - or retired military if u will. I suspect that it will lead to a hundred and ten times more dead palestinians, small or no damage on israeli infrastructure and it's civil defence..actually they might even benefit from it and become world leading on selling anti-terrorist education to different countries.

 

Wait a minute..isn't that what's going on right now? I dont give a damn what Qardawi thinks, he is obviously as tactically challenged as all other arab leaders involved in the history of Palestine/Israel. Israel spends billions on weaponry :confused: Hmm do you think that could be one of the reasons I'm against these terrorist but most importantly stuBid acts?

 

 

What if the israelis ceased building settlements, lets say they even went out and said that they would pull back from some of the occupied areas, and some arabs saw that as an opportunity to launch new attacks? If the only answer was for the israelis to be less aggressive, how come then every israeli pullback (IDF) is followed by even more arab violence?

You must be unfamiliar with this conflict dear. Those places they "withdraw" from are the few settlements they are unable to protect or sustain. They are those surrounded by hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. They are merely a few square kilometres and not even close to the area they ought to give back as granted by international law. Plus, they are expanding the settlements on the Golan Heights, does that sound like a nation that is striving for peace with its neighbours?

 

It is the Israelis tanks that roam the Palestinians streets and not vice versa, how do you expect them to have peace when they (their govt) clearly don't want it? Look at the situation in Iraq, it is the Americans that are the occupiers, but the neo-cons and the american govt think that the insurgence is wrong in fighting back (irresponsible of their means). And I've already answered your question, if you read any of my posts u'd know that.

 

 

"I thought he was a terrorist"

 

If he was, he'd be barbecued for breakfast. Lets just say that he used to be a terrorist but now, he's a pragmatic zionist and a corrupt arab leader.

 

 

"Also, you don't come forward with any solution as to how this conflict can be ended."

 

Short answer: stop blowing urselves up.

[Viking]

"Also, you don't come forward with any solution as to how this conflict can be ended."

 

--"Short answer: stop blowing urselves up."--

 

So now you think that Palestine is occupied because they resist occupation?

 

When your freedom, integrity, sovereignty, and existence is in peril, one uses, as Malcolm X said..."any means necessary to bring about freedom". You don't like their methods? Give them some F16's and Abraham tanks and some nuclear warheads and you'll see the conventional war you prefer.

 

Ho Chi Minh was a leader who was determined to bring freedom for his people. He fought the French and later the "mighty" Americans. He told the French, "You can kill 10 of my men for every one I kill of yours, yet even at those odds, you will lose and I will win." The Americans who later invaded Vietnam faced the same determination from a people who resisted being occupied and dictated upon by another foreign and aggressive nation.

 

When asked (after the war and America was defeated) about how long he would have resisted the American onslaugh he answered, "Twenty years, maybe 100 years — as long as it took to win, regardless of cost." Three million Vietnamese soldiers and civilians were killed in that war, but they won in the end, because they never gave up. I know this conflict is not of the same nature, but the point is, any determined people can not accept being deprived of their freedom.