Originally posted by Robtard
Morals are irrelevant, Israel is in no way without fault in these battles, they have done wrong themselves; I never claimed they were saints.In this particular fight, they were attacked first yet again and it's been told and re-told that they have made efforts to have peace with the Palestinians while Hamas simply wants them gone/dead and yet another Islamic state put in place.
Edit: If you do want to bring in morals in the Israel/Palestine conflict, Israel could wipe them off the map in a matter of days; they haven't and they won't, despite ongoing rocket and suicide bomb attacks. Hamas and others have said they intend to wipe Israel off the map and they would if they so had the means. You can judge which side is more "moral"?
Originally posted by backdoorman
I wasn't talking about the latest 'battle', I was talking about the bigger picture, the way the state of Israel came to exist. That's what the Palestinians are fighting about. What the Palestinians are doing with their suicide bombers and rocket launches is protesting and resisting what was done to them by the Zionists and their supporters in the 20th century, whether the methods they (or Israel) employ to this are ethical or not is a different question.
so, in your opinion, the greatest motivator of Palestinian violence is the existence of the Israeli state and their betrayal by the British, and not say, rampant poverty, corrupt government, lack of any upward mobility, a population of unemployed men largely between 18-30, etc?
Originally posted by backdoorman
I wasn't talking about the latest 'battle', I was talking about the bigger picture, the way the state of Israel came to exist. That's what the Palestinians are fighting about. What the Palestinians are doing with their suicide bombers and rocket launches is protesting and resisting what was done to them by the Zionists and their supporters in the 20th century, whether the methods they (or Israel) employ to this are ethical or not is a different question.
Land was given to the Jews in the same fashion that land was given to the Arabs, as both Jews and Muslims were currently living on those lands before 1947. The [now] Palestinians sided with Syria and a few other Arab nations when the UN partition was made and they went to war against Israel because they wanted it all as a Islamic state instead, ie they didn't want a recognised Jewish state next to them; they ****ing lost and that's the reason Israel initially grew larger than the original UN plan.
So in that regards, I say "too ****ing bad, you shouldn't have started a war and lost".
But as I said before, Israel is no saint, but they're also victims of attacks, not just instigators. land takers and oppressors as you love to imply. I do think that Hamas needs to go, as they'll never be a peace and the Palestinians will never prosper while they control the Government.
Originally posted by inimalist
so, in your opinion, the greatest motivator of Palestinian violence is the existence of the Israeli state and their betrayal by the British, and not say, rampant poverty, corrupt government, lack of any upward mobility, a population of unemployed men largely between 18-30, etc?
Land was given to the Jews in the same fashion that land was given to the Arabs, as both Jews and Muslims were currently living on those lands before 1947. The [now] Palestinians sided with Syria and a few other Arab nations when the UN partition was made and they went to war against Israel because they wanted it all as a Islamic state instead, ie they didn't want a recognised Jewish state next to them; they ****ing lost and that's the reason Israel initially grew larger than the original UN plan.
But as I said before, Israel is no saint, but they're also victims of attacks, not just instigators. land takers and oppressors as you love to imply. I do think that Hamas needs to go, as they'll never be a peace and the Palestinians will never prosper while they control the Government.
One last thing, lately you hear quite often on the news the Israeli government say, in defense of its decision to send troops into Gaza, that no country would tolerate its neighbor to fire rockets against its civilian population, which I think is true. But isn't it also true that no country would tolerate to be for decades under foreign rule and later have an army composed of a minority group and foreigners demand to take over half the land in the country and install their own autonomous government?
Originally posted by Robtard
I'm sorry, have you given Israel any merit here? I must have missed something. A "bigot" I did not call you though.
Originally posted by backdoorman
Because the things I admire about the Israeli government have nothing to do with the topic of this thread. There are many things I like about the Israeli government, likely there are more things I like about it than there are that I like of other Muslim governments but when discussing the Israeli - Palestinian conflict, I don't see the need for me to put a little disclaimer after each post.
I said you implied that Israel is nothing more than an instigator, oppressor and land taker in regards to Palestine; these are things you have said. You claimed I called you a "bigot", which I didn't.
So what's the ****ing problem, now?