Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sheb]

It's not only the Germans: Poles, Hungarians, Czech, Romanians... All across Eastern Europe, countries were moved and people were displaced. Yet we do not think of their descendants as refugees.

[burningpet]

Bullshit. Even if they don't drop their demands, just don't let them in, ti's that simple. You're just grasping at straws to avoid facing the fact that Israel is an exansionist, colonial state and that this is the only real obstacle to peace. It's possible to live with a neighbour that hates you. But it's not possible to live with a neighbour that invade and occupy you.

I think you should look at that part of history where Jordan, the country that actually annexed the west bank, invaded israel, which led to the israeli counter attack and conquering of those parts with the intention of having the jordan and yarmuch rivers to serve as natural borders against Syria and Jordan, and the Suez canal to serve as the natural border against egypt.

Israel have given up the sinai peninsula, a land bigger than israel and filled at the time with profitable oil fields and the suez canal which is a highly profitable revenue source. Israel have given up Gaza where we had 15% of our agriculture exports revenue due to the most advanced agritech in the world.

Its not about letting them in or not, its about them not aspiring to get in and not getting funded because of that aspiration. so long as they have that aspiration, they continue their "struggle" and their funding. simply withdrawing from the West bank would lead to what happened in gaza when israel withdrew so that's out of the question. they were granted a gift, a very profitable gift and threw it to radical islamism.

A fair middle ground would be for the palestinians to officially abandon their right of return which means settling their already settled "refugees" and recognize israel as a jewish state in exchange for israel recognizing the West bank and Gaza as a palestinian state and withdrawing back to the '67 lines. seems like more than a fair exchange. Now go convince Hamas, Fatah, the PA and UNRWA to do that.

And also the biggest obstacle to that plan, the Israeli government.  Do you really think they'd just pull out decades worth of settlers like that, or leave them in a Palestinian state?  The idea that they'd ever agree to '67 borders is frankly ludicrous.

Also you keep putting scare quotes around refugees.  Why?

Sinai. Gaza.

Because the vast majority of them are not refugees by any definition except for the special definition that was tailor made for them, hence, a complete and utter bullshit. if they are refugees, then every american is a refugee, every australian is a refugee, every scandinavian is a refugee and every human being is a refugee. maybe we should also let chiquitanos have an israeli citizenship because their descendants lived in these lands at some point in history?

Because a lot of the Palestinian 'refugees' are people whose great-grandparent have ran away so they could wait safely while their arab muslim brothers attempted a jewish genocide.

Fixed that for ya. 

[LordSlowpoke]

It's not only the Germans: Poles, Hungarians, Czech, Romanians... All across Eastern Europe, countries were moved and people were displaced. Yet we do not think of their descendants as refugees.

all across eastern europe you had this individual commonly known as stalin who is primarily responsible for this displacing and also called many things in the west and very little of them are positive

in addition, when countries were moved and people were displaced, the countries were not, you know

removed from existence or turned into ghettos

where are you going with any of this

[burningpet]

It's not only the Germans: Poles, Hungarians, Czech, Romanians... All across Eastern Europe, countries were moved and people were displaced. Yet we do not think of their descendants as refugees.

all across eastern europe you had this individual commonly known as stalin who is primarily responsible for this displacing and also called many things in the west and very little of them are positive

in addition, when countries were moved and people were displaced, the countries were not, you know

removed from existence or turned into ghettos

where are you going with any of this

Where are you going? which country removed from existence and turned into ghettos?

[LordSlowpoke]

i thought we had already agreed that the gaza strip is a ghetto?

the reasons for this were a contested thing but this much we had covered

[Sheb]

Lol. Israel held the Sinai for a grand total of 6 years, and AFAIK never settled in any number there. It's not so much "gave it back" as "Didn't entirely annex it". It kept the Golan Height though.

And if the Israeli government was interested in peace rather than ethnic cleansing, why would they continue building up the settlements?

LSP: My point was mostly than the existence of Israel is a fact, and that we have to accept Israeli have a right to live in what is now Israel. Gaza and the West Bank are entirely different matters.

[burningpet]

i thought we had already agreed that the gaza strip is a ghetto?

the reasons for this were a contested thing but this much we had covered

Who created that ghetto and why?

Since there was never a palestinian state, so no country was removed from existence.

Lol. Israel held the Sinai for a grand total of 6 years, and AFAIK never settled in any number there. It's not so much "gave it back" as "Didn't entirely annex it". It kept the Golan Height though.

And if the Israeli government was interested in peace rather than ethnic cleansing, why would they continue building up the settlements?

LSP: My point was mostly than the existence of Israel is a fact, and that we have to accept Israeli have a right to live in what is now Israel. Gaza and the West Bank are entirely different matters.

So?

And why did it keep the golan heights? because it knew damn well that giving a fail state like syria a vital strategic point over israel is a bad thing to do. the druze at the golan heights are very thankful for that (Even though they act as if they are assad supporters), so as we israelis when we see how Syria/Daesh is like. (Btw, Sinai is also a proof israel should not give back anything, because it simply turns into terrorist ruled lands that aim to destroy israel sooner or later). the exact same line of thinking was applied to the West bank. until they can't prove they don't want to exterminate us, they should not be given anything. accepting israel as a jewish state is a step in the right direction. banishing all radical hateful messages from their text books and mosques is second.

Depend. Those guys think that there is a Palestinian state:

Can you please educate me, since you seem to have such an encompassing vast grasp of knowledge on this situation , did they recognize palestine in 1948 or 1967? i can't for the life of me remember when.

[Sheb]

Depend. Those guys think that there is a Palestinian state:

[Leafsnail]

The number of settlers in Gaza and Sinai were hilariously trivial compared to the number of settlers in the West Bank today.  We're talking thousands vs hundreds of thousands here.

[burningpet]

The number of settlers in Gaza and Sinai were hilariously trivial compared to the number of settlers in the West Bank today.  We're talking thousands vs hundreds of thousands here.

And? the value of sinai and gaza to the israeli economy was far far greater than the west bank. also, as i said, there was a very generous proposal of lands exchange with the palestinians getting more lands, even without the egyptian bonus.

[Leafsnail]

So... they're gonna be unwilling to displace hundreds of thousands of voters into Israel proper.  That is naturally going to be far more difficult than moving less than ten thousand settlers, often just from one set of illegal settlements to another.  The other two actions you're citing don't even compare.

I mean, during the year of the Gaza disengagement plan the total number of settlers still increased.  I don't think "We will stop illegally building on one not particularly desirable bit of land (you've never provided any evidence that it is somehow "more valuable", by the way) but will intensify our ethnic cleansing efforts elsewhere to make up for it" reflects well on Israel at all.

[burningpet]

That's why the easier and fairer solution of land exchange, leaving the palestines with more lands and a bonus in Sinai.

[Sheb]

Which AFAIK is what everyone agrees on: using the 1967 borders as a baseline with land swaps. Of course, Israel doesn't want it since it can just continue seizing land without serious consequences as long as the West backs it.

[burningpet]

Not exactly. the palestinians doesn't agree to the land swaps and they don't agree to withdrawing their right of return nonsense because they obviously doesn't want peace that goes against the purpose for their existence as a distinct ethnicity in the first place.

[Sheb]

Source for the Palestinians not agreeing to the land swaps?

And again. All of this doesn't matter as long as Israel keep grabbing more and more land in the West Bank. You can't pretend you want peace while grabbing more and more of the other party's land.