How should Israel defend itself?

realweirdo

The best way for anyone to defend themselves is to be on friendly terms with their neighbours and in that respect israel have spectacularly failed. Israeli near-termism and overt racism mean they will never be on good terms with neighbours. Time for rest of the world also to recognise the Palestinian state.

Nodin

seanaway wrote: »

Sorry. This is just ill informed nonsense.

Why hasn't this happened with the west bank then?
Why didn't this happen before the blockade?
...................

This would be the West Bank that's been occupied and continuously colonised for 47 years?

seanaway

Nodin wrote: »

This would be the West Bank that's been occupied and continuously colonised for 47 years?

This would be the west bank that was lost by Jordan and its allies in its attempt to wipe out the state of Israel. They ran off and left it after they couldn't defeat Israel. Then want the world to say ah now lads.. in all fairness 'tis was but a tiff - can we have ot back pretty please?''

Get real. Peace will only happen when Israel is accepted. End of. No matter what the ill informed red readers would like to think.

Learn from the experience of misinformation put out during the cold war.

Nodin

seanaway wrote: »

This would be the west bank that was lost by Jordan and its allies in its attempt to wipe out the state of Israel. They ran off and left it after they couldn't defeat Israel. Then want the world to say ah now lads.. in all fairness 'tis was but a tiff - can we have ot back pretty please?''.

Move of the goal posts there. You scoffed that Israel would occupy an area long term, yet there they are, not only occupying it but colonising it.

For your information, Jordan does not in fact want the West Bank back, and has ceded all negotiating rights to the Palestinian people.

seanaway wrote: »

Get real. Peace will only happen when Israel is accepted. .

This is a rather bizarre narrative, given Israel's aggressive expansionism in the OT.

seanaway

Nodin wrote: »

For your information, Jordan does not in fact want the West Bank back, and has ceded all negotiating rights to the Palestinian people.



This is a rather bizarre narrative, given Israel's aggressive expansionism in the OT.

Jeez you really haven't read history or perhaps just read a version to suit yourself and your own belief system.

A:
Jordan doesn't want it? It doesn't want it because their Arab brothers (in this case the long suffering Palestinian people) were making then look like an impotant state that couldn't get back what it lost through failed military means.

B: The west bank was ceded to the Palestinian people by the then King of Jordan in the hope it might aleviate suffering - and, in a first for the Arab states srrounding Israel, a genuine attempt to help the HUMAN population as opposed to the politically useful population of Palestine. (and as per above with the acceptance that Jordan would have itself a royal (pardon the pun) ass kicking again if it tried the military option)

C: If a territory is already occupied then you really can't have expansionism, can you?

It's a little like saying my tank is full so I'd better fill it a tad more.

You clearly have the heart for discussion on the subject, however, the facts remain facts.

Israel will and has made peace with those who do not threaten its existence.

The people of Palestine are pawns used by the Hamas' of this world to futher their own selfish aims.

AbusesToilets

There are only two ways peace will occur - integration or eradication, both of which are never likely to occur.

Azwaldo55

AbusesToilets wrote: »

There are only two ways peace will occur - integration or eradication, both of which are never likely to occur.

Precisely.

Nodin

seanaway wrote: »

Jeez you really haven't read history or perhaps just read a version to suit yourself and your own belief system.

A:
Jordan doesn't want it? It doesn't want it because their Arab brothers (in this case the long suffering Palestinian people) were making then look like an impotant state that couldn't get back what it lost through failed military means.

B: The west bank was ceded to the Palestinian people by the then King of Jordan in the hope it might aleviate suffering - and, in a first for the Arab states srrounding Israel, a genuine attempt to help the HUMAN population as opposed to the politically useful population of Palestine. (and as per above with the acceptance that Jordan would have itself a royal (pardon the pun) ass kicking again if it tried the military option).

A or b?

seanaway wrote: »

C: If a territory is already occupied then you really can't have expansionism, can you?).

Indeed you can, by moving your civilian population on to it, which is whats happening now.

seanaway wrote: »

Israel will and has made peace with those who do not threaten its existence.

The people of Palestine are pawns used by the Hamas' of this world to futher their own selfish aims.

which again ignores the Fatah ceasefire and the continued expansion into the West Bank and in and around Arab East Jerusalem.

Azwaldo55

Nodin wrote: »

A or b?


Indeed you can, by moving your civilian population on to it, which is whats happening now.



which again ignores the Fatah ceasefire and the continued expansion into the West Bank and in and around Arab East Jerusalem.

How do you propose that Jewish settler expansion in the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem is stopped?

Do you think Fatah should end their ceasefire?

The intifadas have been disastrous for the Palestinians.

Nodin

Azwaldo55 wrote: »

How do you propose that Jewish settler expansion in the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem is stopped?

By a series of international sanctions and program of divestment against the Israeli state, ideally.

Azwaldo55

Nodin wrote: »

By a series of international sanctions and program of divestment against the Israeli state, ideally.

I am interested in what can work realistically.

Nodin

Azwaldo55 wrote: »

I am interested in what can work realistically.

Realistically, it can work, though it will take time. The movement against Apartheid South Africa took many years to build, yet got there in the end.

Azwaldo55

Nodin wrote: »

Realistically, it can work, though it will take time. The movement against Apartheid South Africa took many years to build, yet got there in the end.

It will not get popular sympathy or support when the loudest voice of the Palestinians is Hamas. While Gaza is ruled by Islamic crazies there will be no Israeli movement sanctions or no sanctions.

kikidelvin

Israel has been the eyes and ears of the U.S.in the middle east since it began its statehood.Which is why nothing will ever change until the U.S.decides to stop supporting Israel.

Azwaldo55

kikidelvin wrote: »

Israel has been the eyes and ears of the U.S.in the middle east since it began its statehood.Which is why nothing will ever change until the U.S.decides to stop supporting Israel.

In what universe would the U.S. decide to stop supporting Israel?

kikidelvin

Azwaldo55 wrote: »

In what universe would the U.S. decide to stop supporting Israel?

The same one that turned a lot of U.S. people against the Vietnam war and forced a rethink by the government of the day.:)

Nodin

kikidelvin wrote: »

The same one that turned a lot of U.S. people against the Vietnam war and forced a rethink by the government of the day.:)

The same one that saw the US reverse its position on Apartheid South Africa, stop using its veto to defend it and so on.

Azwaldo55

kikidelvin wrote: »

The same one that turned a lot of U.S. people against the Vietnam war and forced a rethink by the government of the day.:)

The American pull out from Vietnam in 1973 led to the fall of South Vietnam in 1975 and the imposition of a brutal Communist regime which still exists to this day. Millions of Vietnamese were subjected to "re-education." Many were tortured and murdered. Famine ravaged Vietnam in the years that followed the end of the war prompting millions of boat people to take to the seas. Countless drowned.

The American withdrawal and abandonment of the South Vietnamese was an act of extreme cowardice and stupidity.

This was replicated once again in Iraq which following the American pull out similarly has fallen the ISIS who are in the process of creating an extreme Islamist state.

We all know what would be the fate of the Jews in Israel if America decided to withdraw them protection and Israel was to collapse.

Hamas have made no secret of their desire to kill them all.

Nodin

Azwaldo55 wrote: »

The American pull out from Vietnam in 1973 led to the fall of South Vietnam in 1975 and the imposition of a brutal Communist regime which still exists to this day. Millions of Vietnamese were subjected to "re-education." Many were tortured and murdered. Famine ravaged Vietnam in the years that followed the end of the war prompting millions of boat people to take to the seas. Countless drowned.

The American withdrawal and abandonment of the South Vietnamese was an act of extreme cowardice and stupidity.

This was replicated once again in Iraq which following the American pull out similarly has fallen the ISIS who are in the process of creating an extreme Islamist state.

We all know what would be the fate of the Jews in Israel if America decided to withdraw them protection and Israel was to collapse.

Hamas have made no secret of their desire to kill them all.

I'm not seeing how you get from America calling time on Israeli expansionism to Hamas 'killing all the Jews'.

irishpancake

seanaway wrote: »

Jeez you really haven't read history or perhaps just read a version to suit yourself and your own belief system.

A:
Jordan doesn't want it? It doesn't want it because their Arab brothers (in this case the long suffering Palestinian people) were making then look like an impotant state that couldn't get back what it lost through failed military means.

B: The west bank was ceded to the Palestinian people by the then King of Jordan in the hope it might aleviate suffering - and, in a first for the Arab states srrounding Israel, a genuine attempt to help the HUMAN population as opposed to the politically useful population of Palestine. (and as per above with the acceptance that Jordan would have itself a royal (pardon the pun) ass kicking again if it tried the military option)

C: If a territory is already occupied then you really can't have expansionism, can you?

It's a little like saying my tank is full so I'd better fill it a tad more.

You clearly have the heart for discussion on the subject, however, the facts remain facts.

Israel will and has made peace with those who do not threaten its existence.

The people of Palestine are pawns used by the Hamas' of this world to futher their own selfish aims.

I can't make coherent head nor tail of just what it is tou are trying to say in the quoted post.

It is very hard to debate with someone as incoherent and unfocused as you.

Could you please rewrite or edit just what it is you are trying to say, so as to make it in some way understandable to those who use the English Language.

If English is not your first Language, there are a number of on-line translation services, like Google Translate and Bing .

I look forward to your translated input, I'm sure it will be interesting. I do hope the above helps.

irishpancake

Azwaldo55 wrote: »

The American pull out from Vietnam in 1973 led to the fall of South Vietnam in 1975 and the imposition of a brutal Communist regime which still exists to this day. Millions of Vietnamese were subjected to "re-education." Many were tortured and murdered. Famine ravaged Vietnam in the years that followed the end of the war prompting millions of boat people to take to the seas. Countless drowned.

The American withdrawal and abandonment of the South Vietnamese was an act of extreme cowardice and stupidity.

This was replicated once again in Iraq which following the American pull out similarly has fallen the ISIS who are in the process of creating an extreme Islamist state.

We all know what would be the fate of the Jews in Israel if America decided to withdraw them protection and Israel was to collapse.

Hamas have made no secret of their desire to kill them all.

It seems your knowledge of even recent history is blinkered.

You are aware that the Vietnamese struggle for independence was primarily a Nationalist one, whereby Vietnamese Viet Minh fought the French original colonisers of then Indochina, and achieved a stunning military victory over the French in the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954??

US involvement was a part of their disastrous policy of supporting repressive regimes, as South Vietnam, attempting containment of "Communism" by way of the ridiculous "domino theory", if one Country falls to Communism, it creates a so-called domino effect, whereby neighbouring Countries then fall, and so on, and on.

The US pulled out due to a total disenchantment in America towards the War, and the dead soldiers being repatriated, a huge anti-war movement and military defeat at the hands Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army.

Similarly, the US involvement and invasion of Iraq was premised on lies regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) being present in Iraq.

The destruction of Iraq as a society was a complete disaster, which is something the US should be in the dock about.

They, the US, created a situation of sectarian conflict and hatred in Iraq, a partition of the Country on Sectarian lines, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, which has directly resulted in ISIS....

Azwaldo55

irishpancake wrote: »

It seems your knowledge of even recent history is blinkered.

You are aware that the Vietnamese struggle for independence was primarily a Nationalist one, whereby Vietnamese Viet Minh fought the French original colonisers of then Indochina, and achieved a stunning military victory over the French in the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954??

I have read the history Vietnam thank very much.

US involvement was a part of their disastrous policy of supporting repressive regimes, as South Vietnam, attempting containment of "Communism" by way of the ridiculous "domino theory", if one Country falls to Communism, it creates a so-called domino effect, whereby neighbouring Countries then fall, and so on, and on.

There were strong Communist movements in the Philippines and Indonesia and Malaya and other countries in the Asian region which were only defeated after brutal wars. Cambodia fell to the Khmer Rouge following the fall of Vietnam.
If Communism had not been contained in Vietnam the whole of Asia could have fallen.

The US pulled out due to a total disenchantment in America towards the War, and the dead soldiers being repatriated, a huge anti-war movement and military defeat at the hands Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army.

The U.S. military were NOT militarily defeated.
The Tet Offensive led to the total defeat of the Viet Cong.
They were destroyed as a fighting force.
The North Vietnamese Army were smashed repeatedly in battle after battle.
The Americans only lost about 60,000 dead - the U.S. lost thousands of men in single battles in WW2 a quarter century before - while the Communists lost millions of men.
In 1973 they withdrew leaving behind a stable South Vietnamese government. It was a Democrat dominated US Congress and Senate who voted to cut funding to the South Vietnamese military which led to the collapse in 1975.
Saigon was handed to the Communists by defeatist cowards in the U.S.

Similarly, the US involvement and invasion of Iraq was premised on lies regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) being present in Iraq.

The Iraq Survey Group reported that Saddam Hussein had an infrastructure in place to manufacture WMD.

Here is the report:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-DUELFERREPORT/content-detail.html

I suggest you read it.

The destruction of Iraq as a society was a complete disaster, which is something the US should be in the dock about.

Prior to the invasion in 2003 Iraq was ruled by a sadistic psychopathic mass murdering tyrant Saddam Hussein and his psychopathic murdering son Uday and Qasay. A brutal Baathist regime backed up by a savagely repressive military and secret police used arbitrary arrest, imprisonment, torture and murder to cowed the Iraqi people.

Iraq was liberated from Hussein and given a democratic constitution, democratic parliament and local government, a democratic government including a democratically elected Prime Minister and President and independent courts. Millions of Iraq voted for these institutions and their representatives and still do today.

Are you seriously suggesting that Saddam should have been left in power?

Really?

They, the US, created a situation of sectarian conflict and hatred in Iraq, a partition of the Country on Sectarian lines, the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, which has directly resulted in ISIS....

Sunni and Shia Islam have been at war with each other for centuries. The Middle East was divided on sectarian lines before the U.S. was even dreamed of. Islamic fundamentalism has existed since the very beginning of Islam in the 7th century when Arab armies burned cities to the ground and created pyramids of severed heads.

The library is your friend.

For Reals

Israel has no defence for its actions,

sarkozy

How else can Israel defend itself, you ask?

Conciliation can be the best defence strategy. Make genuine peace. Israel might be pleasantly surprised.

Rightwing

Azwaldo55 wrote: »

The American pull out from Vietnam in 1973 led to the fall of South Vietnam in 1975 and the imposition of a brutal Communist regime which still exists to this day. Millions of Vietnamese were subjected to "re-education." Many were tortured and murdered. Famine ravaged Vietnam in the years that followed the end of the war prompting millions of boat people to take to the seas. Countless drowned.

The American withdrawal and abandonment of the South Vietnamese was an act of extreme cowardice and stupidity.

This was replicated once again in Iraq which following the American pull out similarly has fallen the ISIS who are in the process of creating an extreme Islamist state.

We all know what would be the fate of the Jews in Israel if America decided to withdraw them protection and Israel was to collapse.

Hamas have made no secret of their desire to kill them all.

Just like most other things they've done. Time is coming when they won't be able to pay for themselves, let alone Israel.

Azwaldo55

Rightwing wrote: »

Just like most other things they've done. Time is coming when they won't be able to pay for themselves, let alone Israel.

The U.S. is the only force that will protect a fractured militarily weak Europe.

Much of Europe is naked and defenseless from the threat.

Rightwing

Azwaldo55 wrote: »

The U.S. is the only force that will protect a fractured militarily weak Europe.

Much of Europe is naked and defenseless from the threat.

It is, but protect it from who ?

bumper234

Azwaldo55 wrote: »

The U.S. is the only force that will protect a fractured militarily weak Europe.

Much of Europe is naked and defenseless from the threat.

Which threat is this?

sparksfly

Azwaldo55 wrote: »

The U.S. is the only force that will protect a fractured militarily weak Europe.

Much of Europe is naked and defenseless from the threat.

Crikey, the fact that people are still believing this claptrap is incredible.

The US, who have wreaked more havoc and caused so much more instability and turmoil around the globe than any other nation are our saviours from some vague threat?

I wonder what percentage of our population is brainwashed to this extent.

R P McMurphy

Azwaldo55 wrote: »

The U.S. is the only force that will protect a fractured militarily weak Europe.

Much of Europe is naked and defenseless from the threat.

Sounds like something from game of thrones