![]() |
|
Originally Posted by Mus
(Post 9828103)
when you planning to answer f1 question?
|
Tony is going to shout as loud and as long as it takes for people to see his point of view, however that is not going to happen.
From his attitude on this thread this is the bottom line according to him Israel = Good anything muslim = Evil. James you have a discussion with everything Islam/Islamism related however you have been rather quiet on this thread, do you not want to upset your comrade Tony. You dont need to respond to my post as I am disappointed that you share views with such a person :( |
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9827976)
The UN said Saddam had WMD's.
What would you want your Government to do if there was a country next door launching terrorist attacks? Sit back and do nothing? No you would want a blockade. Israeli immigration policy is not your business. I've admitted the settlements are an issue but otoh the Israli state has shown it will use force to removed them. I believe your point was an existential one though not specifically pertaining to settlers because most Israelis are not right-wing setters. Like I said it's hard to say Jews should not be in Israeli when you presumably think it's ok for say Indian or Pakistanis to come to the UK. |
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9827976)
Like I said it's hard to say Jews should not be in Israeli when you presumably think it's ok for say Indian or Pakistanis to come to the UK. Geezer |
Originally Posted by banny sti
(Post 9828314)
Tony is going to shout as loud and as long as it takes for people to see his point of view, however that is not going to happen.
From his attitude on this thread this is the bottom line according to him Israel = Good anything muslim = Evil. James you have a discussion with everything Islam/Islamism related however you have been rather quiet on this thread, do you not want to upset your comrade Tony. You dont need to respond to my post as I am disappointed that you share views with such a person :( |
Originally Posted by JTaylor
(Post 9828400)
You're not qualified to assess when I need to respond to a post and your disappointment affects me not. Perhaps you would garner my respect should you find the courage and the insight to attack the position rather than the person. Try to see the grey Banny, the truth lay there.
|
Banny,
Remember when you were at school and there would always be a bully who would have a group of followers that would hang round with him and obey his every word, Then when the bully would pick on another kid and fight with him his followers would be ready to wade in if it looked like his victim was going to get the better of him all except for one who was alway not brave enough to get involved himself but would take great glee in the downfall of the chosen victim whooping ad hollering and jeering from the sidelines. Remind you of anyone? ;) |
Originally Posted by banny sti
(Post 9828314)
From his attitude on this thread this is the bottom line according to him Israel = Good anything muslim = Evil.
OTOH the anti-Israeli people on this board see fit to paint Israeli as a cartoon bad guy based on youtube videos and demagoguery. |
Originally Posted by Geezer
(Post 9828397)
Someone coming to settle in a country is quite different to having your land forceably taken off you and given to someone else. Indians or Pakistanis live in the UK, it does not become India (though some would say it is going that way ;) ).
Geezer It never replaced, all, or part of a 'Palestinian' state. There was no such thing, just the British Mandate and before that a region which was part of the Ottoman Empire. Many Palestinians then fled when the Arabs attacked and unfortunately never returned. There was a needless war in 1948 started by the Arabs which has caused much of the Palestinian suffering. |
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9828921)
That is a lie. I've acknowledged some Israeli failings and my criticism of the Palestinians and their supporters is based on reason.
OTOH the anti-Israeli people on this board see fit to paint Israeli as a cartoon bad guy based on youtube videos and demagoguery. |
Originally Posted by JTaylor
(Post 9828070)
Well what should one do, drive to the fcuking reference library? :Whatever_
|
Tony is just a demagogue who preys upon people's fears and prejudices!
|
Originally Posted by banny sti
(Post 9828407)
I do not waste my time or words on someone who does not liste, same applies to you from here on in.
I listened and it doesn't make sense. |
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829042)
Listen to what? Your 'narrative'?
I listened and it doesn't make sense. |
Originally Posted by banny sti
(Post 9829031)
Tony is just a demagogue who preys upon people's fears and prejudices!
I'd say you are trying to use demagoguery to attack me instead of my arguments. And that post was an example. |
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829046)
But you just SAY these things and never give examples, or specifics.
I'd say you are trying to use demagoguery to attack me instead of my arguments. And that post was an example. |
Originally Posted by banny sti
(Post 9829045)
That is rich coming from you, how many times have you ignored f1 fan's direct question? So you are not listening to anyone Mr Demagogue.
|
Originally Posted by Mus
(Post 9828966)
very rarely you acknowledge you seem to ignore more, the YouTube video has more truth than the daily mail.
|
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829051)
Ignoring witch-hunts is demagoguery?
You seem to leap on any piece of press that shows Muslims or Pakistanis in a bad light, the question is why is that? |
i don't care what religieon people are i don't belive in god or jesus and i don't mind anyone talking about it, what i do find petty is these so called people saying i killed your family in the name of god, surely if those whom believe he created all life why would he want it destroyed in such horrid ways, we all live and we all die naturally me when i go i go and if my SOUL does go somewhere i'll pop back and tell you all 'OOOPPPPS MY BAD', i just hope there is a race if there is somewhere to go lol
|
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9828939)
That is not what happened though. Jews were immigrating from the start of the 20th century and buying land. Then at some point the British decided to set up a the Jewish state.
It never replaced, all, or part of a 'Palestinian' state. There was no such thing, just the British Mandate and before that a region which was part of the Ottoman Empire. Many Palestinians then fled when the Arabs attacked and unfortunately never returned. There was a needless war in 1948 started by the Arabs which has caused much of the Palestinian suffering. - The British did not _decide_ to set up a Jewish state. In the aftermath of the first world war they favoured a democratic, secular Palestinian state, an idea accepted by the Arabs, but rejected by the Jewish population (at the time less than 10%). After the second world war Britain could not afford to maintain the mandate and couldn't get agreement from the Arabs and Jewish populations (who had been at each other's throats through much of the preceeding 30 years), so handed the problem over to the UN. UNSCOP (UN Special Committee on Palestine) defined the 1948 boundaries. To give you an idea of how much of a land grab this was, at the start of the second world war Jews made up about a third of the population and owned ~15% of the land. The UNSCOP boundaries allocated 56% to the Jewish state! - While the Jews bought up land between the wars, often this was from absentee Arab landlords resulting in Arab peasants being evicted from land their family had farmed for centuries. - Almost immediately the UNSCOP boundaries were set and the date for the end of the British mandate announced fighting broke out between the Zionist and Arab militia within Palestine. This was pretty one sided - about 45,000 well equipped Zionists against 8,000 poorly equipped Arabs. - Even before the end of the mandate (and before any other Arab countries were involved) the Zionists had taken much territory that was earmarked for the Palestinians in the UNSCOP plan. When the Arab countries invaded on 14 May 1948 (the day the British withdrew) it was already clear that the Zionists had no intention of sticking to the UNSCOP boundaries. |
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829051)
Ignoring witch-hunts is demagoguery?
Why not just answer it? I mean what have you got to hide? |
Originally Posted by thesyn
(Post 9829005)
Just not any original thought in evidence here!
|
@ thesyn.
On which side of the house, or both and what would constitute an 'original' position? FWIW the roots of the 'conflict' stem back to around the 2nd millenia BCE. After 10 years of observation I cannot, with clear conscience, find an unequivocal position. Grey, grey and more grey. |
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 9828429)
Banny,
Remember when you were at school and there would always be a bully who would have a group of followers that would hang round with him and obey his every word, Then when the bully would pick on another kid and fight with him his followers would be ready to wade in if it looked like his victim was going to get the better of him all except for one who was alway not brave enough to get involved himself but would take great glee in the downfall of the chosen victim whooping ad hollering and jeering from the sidelines. Remind you of anyone? ;) |
Originally Posted by cster
(Post 9829207)
You? :luvlove:
|
Originally Posted by scud8
(Post 9829089)
Tony, you need to read a bit of history. You paint a picture of the Zionists not treading on any toes and always willing to abide by international law and opinion, but this is so far from the truth it is laughable. Yes, the Arabs have been far from saints in all of this, but neither were the Zionists. Let me give you a bit of a history lesson.
- The British did not _decide_ to set up a Jewish state. In the aftermath of the first world war they favoured a democratic, secular Palestinian state, an idea accepted by the Arabs, but rejected by the Jewish population (at the time less than 10%). After the second world war Britain could not afford to maintain the mandate and couldn't get agreement from the Arabs and Jewish populations (who had been at each other's throats through much of the preceeding 30 years), so handed the problem over to the UN. UNSCOP (UN Special Committee on Palestine) defined the 1948 boundaries. To give you an idea of how much of a land grab this was, at the start of the second world war Jews made up about a third of the population and owned ~15% of the land. The UNSCOP boundaries allocated 56% to the Jewish state! - While the Jews bought up land between the wars, often this was from absentee Arab landlords resulting in Arab peasants being evicted from land their family had farmed for centuries. - Almost immediately the UNSCOP boundaries were set and the date for the end of the British mandate announced fighting broke out between the Zionist and Arab militia within Palestine. This was pretty one sided - about 45,000 well equipped Zionists against 8,000 poorly equipped Arabs. - Even before the end of the mandate (and before any other Arab countries were involved) the Zionists had taken much territory that was earmarked for the Palestinians in the UNSCOP plan. When the Arab countries invaded on 14 May 1948 (the day the British withdrew) it was already clear that the Zionists had no intention of sticking to the UNSCOP boundaries. I can't refute your figures of 15% of land, but otoh what does that mean? Was the other 85% specifically owned by Arabs or was some land owned by the 'state' or was common? I think you would agree that statistic is potentially highly misleading. Blame the Arab landlords for selling the land. Where is your evidence the Zionists had no intention of sticking to the agreed boundaries? If the Jews were 10% how was it 45,000 vs 8,000? In the aftermath of the first world war they favoured a democratic, secular Palestinian state, an idea accepted by the Arabs You have to agree that there was no Palestine as such which was carved up, just a region first run by the Ottomans then British. There was no nation state called Palestine. As Euro powers withdrew from colonies and parts of the Empire a 'carve up' of the land was very common. |
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829227)
There were many pogroms in Islamic countries even before 1948, displacing 10's of thousands of Jews. Israel was a point of no return, it was create Israel and repel the 1948 attack or annihilation.
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829227)
I can't refute your figures of 15% of land, but otoh what does that mean? Was the other 85% specifically owned by Arabs or was some land owned by the 'state' or was common? I think you would agree that statistic is potentially highly misleading.
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829227)
Blame the Arab landlords for selling the land.
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829227)
Where is your evidence the Zionists had no intention of sticking to the agreed boundaries?
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829227)
If the Jews were 10% how was it 45,000 vs 8,000?
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829227)
It's easy to say that but how many even exist today??
Originally Posted by tony de wonderful
(Post 9829227)
You have to agree that there was no Palestine as such which was carved up, just a region first run by the Ottomans then British. There was no nation state called Palestine. As Euro powers withdrew from colonies and parts of the Empire a 'carve up' of the land was very common.
|
Originally Posted by scud8
(Post 9829615)
I'm not disputing that the Jews have had a tough deal over the centuries. However, the settlement of the area of land we are talking about had been stable for centuries under the Ottoman Empire. Up until 1897 when it came within the Zionist's sights.
We have 3rd world immigration to the UK. Are you against that?
Originally Posted by scud8
(Post 9829615)
Much as I hate using Wikipedia as a reference, in this case it has some well-attributed data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandate...Land_ownership). This puts the Jewish land-ownership somewhere between 7 and 8% in 1947, somewhat less than my 15% figure (which came from "The Middle East since 1945" by Stewart Ross since we're into quoting sources - it's a good overview book although not very detailed and obviously wrong in some of its numbers!). The data also shows that in most districts more than 2/3 of the rest of the land was in private Arab ownership, with the big stand-out being Beersheba where 85% of the land was publically owned. Even with Beersheba being a big chunk of the Israeli partition I'm sure a detailed analysis would show that a substantial amount of privately Arab owned land ended up in the Israeli partition and very little Jewish owned land ended up in the Arab partition.
Originally Posted by scud8
(Post 9829615)
I'm just trying to give a more balanced view than the picture you create with your posts of happy Arabs walking away from their land with big fat cheques and no-one suffering.
Originally Posted by scud8
(Post 9829615)
Mainly their actions. They captured vast swathes of Arab territory between UN resolution 181 and the end of the mandate, including territory (Jerusalem) that was supposed to be administered by the UN. During the 1948 war they forcably expelled large numbers of Arabs when there was no security-related reason for doing so. The public statements of such luminaries as Golda Meir and Sharon would certainly support this view as well. (My favorite Golda-ism is ""There is no such thing as a Palestinian people. It is not as if we came and threw them out and took their country. They didn't exist.")
The Zionists captured the land after they were attacked by the Arab armies.
Originally Posted by scud8
(Post 9829615)
Armed militants, not total population. On the Zionist side there were at least 40,000 in Haganah, and the rest came from the Irgun and Stern Gang terrorist groups.
Originally Posted by scud8
(Post 9829615)
Not sure I understand what your point is here. There are plenty of secular democratic states in the world (the UK for example). Is secular the word you are having problems with?
Originally Posted by scud8
(Post 9829615)
I'm not disputing any of this, but it was a region that had been stable under the Ottoman's for hundreds of years before the Zionists took a liking to it. The really irritating thing is that they originally considered a sparsely populated area of Argentina for a Jewish state, and the British government offered an area of East Africa - but because their scripture told them god had promised them Palestine they had to go for an area with an existing settled population. Religion really sucks sometimes (all of them!).
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:25 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands