After Israel releases prisoners, they say they're outraged by the welcome they got and then conclude - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;43407225]Israel hasn't been surrounded by enemies since 1967, and you want to take a guess why it was surrounded by enemies? For the majority of their wars, they were offensive. They started their wars with unjustified and unannounced first strikes. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War[/url] The 1967 war. War that was started because Israeli struck and attacked all of its surrounding neighbors.[/quote] Umm, no, Israel attacked because Egypt was moving military forces into Sinai which was a de-militarized zone, Israel only attacked as a pre-emptive strike. Egypt was also conspiring with Syria prior to this and that is why Syria joined in, and a few days after the war started Egypt convinced Jordan to join too. [quote]You want to know something funny? They have multiple fucking Warsaw ghetto level containment area for the fucking Palestinians. The Jews arent the ones being threatened unless they're the ones illegally settling along Palestine land. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Gaza_Strip_barrier[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt%E2%80%93Gaza_barrier[/url][/quote] I believe sluggo wrote pretty much exactly my opinion on the issue (including the settlements and Netanyahu's idea). [quote] The facts are that the modern state of Israel was founded by mercenary groups and terrorist paramilitary organizations and an actual Israel state didn't exist until after the 1948 war. The 1948 war was started by these Mercenary and Paramilitary groups occupying and doing almost similarly to Nazi, village sweeps, ethnic cleansing, and causing a fucking exodus that displaced [b]700,000[/b] fucking people. Here were the fighters of the 1948 war, (note the lack of Israel since the state didn't exist till after the land was taken from the UN, Oops.) [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haganah[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmach[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(group)[/url] Lehi and Irgun were both particularly confusing to me since they somehow supported the Nazi's in World war 2. Seeing the Nazi's as the proper way for them to gain control of Jerusalem and the surrounding lands. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus_from_Lydda_and_Ramle[/url] [b]Also known as the Lydda death march[/b][/quote] The Lehi and Irgun were very small groups when compared to the "Haganah", which literally means "Defense", and this was its main policy, defending the "Yishuv", the Jewish community in the British mandate of Palestine. I agree these two groups were criminals and terrorists, and the Haganah acted against them several times. For example during the 1947-8 war, a ship full of weapons and ammunition arrived at the port of Haifa, and those were bound for the Lehi I believe (maybe Irgun, doesn't matter), the Haganah didn't agree to this and decided to blow the ship up rather then having those terrorists have weapons. That Haganah later became the IDF, so now you understand how focused it is on defense and not on offense. Most of the 700,000 Arabs weren't expelled from Israel. Yes, some were, a very small part of them, but most of them fled on their own, after the military forces of Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon ad Syria told them to "stay away from the fighting, we will drive the Jews back to the sea and then you can have all of Palestine back for yourselves", yet they failed completely and the fleeing Arabs could no longer go back to their homes. And the expulsions that did happen, were instigated by the Irgun and Lehi and other very small terrorist groups, not the Haganah which comprised about 80% of the Jewish fighting forces in the 47-8 war. "On May 28, 1948, less than two weeks after the creation of the state of Israel on May 15, the provisional government created the Israeli Defense Forces, which would succeed the Haganah. [B]It also outlawed maintenance of any other armed force[/B]." From wikipedia, the bolded part is to emphasize the rivalry between these groups and their difference in ideology. [quote]Let's take a step back. And just imagine the view of this for hundreds of miles. [b]Thumbnailed with extreme prejudice. The wall route in all of it's fine, fine super high resolution glory. Recommend opening a new tab. [/b] [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Barrier_route_July_2011.png[/t] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3d/Israel-Palestinian_Wall_Ich_Bin_Eine_Berliner.jpg[/img] It's a bit funny to me, since this is way more hardcore than the Berlin wall ever was. It crosses around too, so some parts and districts are completely under siege. [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/Jerusalem-barrier_June_2007-OCHAoPt.jpeg[/t] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/AbuDisWall.jpg[/img] [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/West_Bank_Barrier_Palestine_side.JPG[/t] Love the graffiti. I just love the image below for some reason. [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Palestinian_children_and_Israeli_wall.jpg[/t] [b]Modern day apartheid at its finest.[/b][/quote] I don't know where you got this map, but it's completely wrong. This is a much more realistic version of the map: [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/EastJerusalemMap.svg[/IMG] The walls don't go all snakey like that, and they separate the west bank from Jerusalem. You can see what each color means here: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EastJerusalemMap.svg[/url] As you can see, there are much more green blobs (Palestinian) than blue blobs (Jewish) in the West bank area nearby Jerusalem, and plenty of teal in east Jerusalem. I myself have served near the settlement of Geva Binyamin for about 4 months, there are no more than 5,000 people living there, while in nearby Ar-Ram there are near 80,000 Palestinians. And those stone walls you see are only in the Jerusalem area, due to its high density. The rest of the west bank has only fences surrounding it, and I see no prob,em with it (as long as it goes along the 1967 border), just like the US has a protected border from Mexico with a fence and everything, Israel deserves to maintain a fence with the west bank (and I don't remember the last time a Mexican decided to blow himself up in a US bus).

[QUOTE=BurnEmDown;43412746] Umm, no, Israel attacked because Egypt was moving military forces into Sinai which was a de-militarized zone, Israel only attacked as a pre-emptive strike. Egypt was also conspiring with Syria prior to this and that is why Syria joined in, and a few days after the war started Egypt convinced Jordan to join too.[/quote] It was Israel's intent to capture Judea and Samira all along. This intent, as laid out by Israel's founder was asserted in 1936, before Israel was even a state. "[B]The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan[/B];[B] one does not demand from anybody to give up his vision[/B]. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed to-day,[B] but the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concerns of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them[/B]” [I]David Ben-Gurian [founder of Israel], in 1936, quoted in Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle"[/I] Egypt positioned defensive troops in the Sinai amid Soviet reports of a pending Israeli invasion from there. The insignificantly small number of military forces that Egypt positioned into the Sinai posed zero threat to Israel. This was a fact expressed by Israel's internal intelligence as well as Israel's chief of staff (and future Prime Minister) "[B]I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to the The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it[/B]" - Yitzhak Rabin, Israel’s Chief of Staff, in Le Monde 2/28/68 Israel's own internal intelligence reports are far more reliable than whatever propaganda Israel publicly professes to the world when justifying their pre-planned land capture in Transjordan, which was also consistent with their Zionist-biblical vision prior to Israel's inception. Also something to keep in mind, when Israel launched the 1967 war they lied and said the Arab nations bombed Israel, and that Israel merely responded before Israel finally conceded that they launched the first strike. If Israel was truly acting in self-defense when they carried out the surprise attack then they wouldn't attempt to deceive the United States and the world into saying "We got hit first" [QUOTE=BurnEmDown;43412746] The Lehi and Irgun were very small groups when compared to the "Haganah", which literally means "Defense", and this was its main policy, defending the "Yishuv", the Jewish community in the British mandate of Palestine. I agree these two groups were criminals and terrorists, and the Haganah acted against them several times. For example during the 1947-8 war, a ship full of weapons and ammunition arrived at the port of Haifa, and those were bound for the Lehi I believe (maybe Irgun, doesn't matter), the Haganah didn't agree to this and decided to blow the ship up rather then having those terrorists have weapons. That Haganah later became the IDF, so now you understand how focused it is on defense and not on offense.[/quote] No matter how small you purport Lehi and Irgun to be, his point was that the leader of those terrorist organizations are the leaders of Israel today. You like to mention the rare occasion where the IDF acted against Igrun and Lehi as if it somehow disassociates Israel from their activities but conveniently leave out that merely one year later, amnesty was granted to the terrorists. In 1980 Israel instituted the "Lehi military" decoration and in 1983 their leader became the Prime Minister of Israel [QUOTE=BurnEmDown;43412746] [B]Most of the 700,000 Arabs weren't expelled from Israel. Yes, some were, a very small part of them, but most of them fled on their own, after the military forces of Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, Lebanon ad Syria told them to "stay away from the fighting, we will drive the Jews back to the sea and then you can have all of Palestine back for yourselves", yet they failed completely and the fleeing Arabs could no longer go back to their homes[/B]. And the expulsions that did happen, were instigated by the Irgun and Lehi and other very small terrorist groups, not the Haganah which comprised about 80% of the Jewish fighting forces in the 47-8 war. "On May 28, 1948, less than two weeks after the creation of the state of Israel on May 15, the provisional government created the Israeli Defense Forces, which would succeed the Haganah[B]. It[/B] also outlawed maintenance of any other armed force."[/quote] This is just pure Zionist propaganda-revisionism that doesn't seem to die, which is understandable because revising history to being "Antisemitically, the Arab armies called for the Palestinians to leave their homes so the Arab army can wipe out the jews but failed miserably and that's why most Palestinians were displaced." as opposed to the truth of Israel actually ethnic cleansing the Palestinians exonerates Israel of responsibility. When the fact of the matter is no record by both from the CIA or BBC indicated anything that resembled a call for Palestinians to leave their home. In fact, quite the opposite. Not only did Arab ratio stations demand that Palestinian inhabitants not leave but the Zionist radio stations urged the population to flee by fabricating complete and lies regarding the war. This is obvious as it's in Israel's interest that all Palestinians are expelled so they can maintain their Jewish ethnic purity in Israel. [quote]Erskine Childers checked transcripts of all Arab radio services monitored by the BBC and CIA in 1948, and discovered, "[T]here was not a single order, or appeal, or suggestion about evacuation from Palestine from any Arab radio station, inside or outside Palestine, in 1948," and that to the contrary broadcasts gave flat orders to civilians to stay put.[30] His point is taken by Glazer (1980, p. 101), who writes that [B]not only did Arab radio stations appeal to the inhabitants not to leave, but also Zionist radio stations urged the population to flee, by exaggerating the course of battle, and, in some cases, fabricating complete lies.[/B][/quote] In addition to the pleas that they remain in their homes, Syria and Lebanon further enforced this by denying residency permits to Palestinians above the age of 18. No legitimate academic source accepts the Israeli narrative or attempt at self-exoneration who purported that the Arab armies called for the evacuation of Palestinians. Zionist author Benny Morris also admits that the only order existed was the recommendation that children, elderly and women leave for their safety. He also points out that the IDF were given clear operation orders "that stated explicitly that they were to uproot the villagers, expel them and destroy the villages themselves." as consistent with "Operation Broom" As a result, Morris concluded that the Arab calls for elderly women and children to leave only accounted for [B]5%[/B] of total evacuation. Further reading: [quote] "Another stock quotation down the years has been that, supposedly, of the Greek-Catholic Archbishop of Galilee. For example, Israel's Abba Eban told the U.N. Special Political Committee in 1957 that the Archbishop had "fully confirmed" that the Arabs were urged to flee by their own leaders. I wrote to His Grace, asking for his evidence of such orders. I hold signed letters from him, with permission to publish, [URL="http://www.users.cloud9.net/%7Erecross/israel-watch/ErskinChilders.html"]i[B]n which he has categorically denied ever alleging Arab evacuation orders; he states that no such orders were ever given. He says that his name has been abused for years; and that the Arabs fled through panic and forcible eviction by Jewish troops."[/B][/URL][/quote] So amid all that, it is recognized that there is no solid proof that Arab leaders told Palestinians to evacuate. Not even after examining CIA and BBC records that monitored the radio stations during that time indicated anything remotely comparable to the Israeli narrative. But of course, the truth that Israel expelled Arabs makes Israel actually look bad and as if their state's foundation was illegitimate, so they deny it. Instead, you have people's names being abused to spread false pro-Israel reports of Arabs telling the Palestinians to leave as opposed to Israel actually evicting and expelling the Palestinian inhabitants. There was a transfer committee led by the first Israeli Prime Minister Ben Gurion, who consciously or unconsciously, assigned Hebrew names tantamount to ethnic cleansing for their military operations: matateh (broom), tihur (cleansing), biur (a Passover expression meaning “to cleanse the leaven”) and niku (a Hebrew word for cleaning up). Joseph Weitz− head of the National Jewish Fund in the 1940s− outlined the plan in his diary “Not one village must be left, not one tribe. The transfer must be directed at Iraq, Syria, and even Transjordan.” So while Israel's proponents espouses unbacked claims of Arabs telling Palestinian to leave, documents and Israeli committees that exhibits Israel's intent to ethnically cleanse Palestine all along. [QUOTE=BurnEmDown;43412746] I don't know where you got this map, but it's completely wrong. This is a much more realistic version of the map: The rest of the west bank has only fences surrounding it, and I see no prob,em with it (as long as it goes along the 1967 border), just like the US has a protected border from Mexico with a fence and everything, Israel deserves to maintain a fence with the west bank (and I don't remember the last time a Mexican decided to blow himself up in a US bus).[/quote] One, it's not a fence it's a huge separation barrier. Two, the border between Mexico and United States is vastly different between the borders between the West Bank and Israel. And third, the West Bank barrier doesn't go along the 1967 borders. It was primarily a scheme to acquire more land (as evident with the further 10% annexed Palestinian land as a result of the barrier). During the barrier's construction, [URL="http://www.btselem.org/publications/summaries/200512_under_the_guise_of_security"]in the instances where Israel's security conflicted with land expansion, Israel opted to expand at the expense of compromised security.[/URL] So you have a lot of Israel's proponents saying the barrier was necessary etc. for security but that was of secondary importance. Land expansion was the primary as linked above.

[QUOTE=Eudoxia;43408315]Lebanon can't do shit and Syria is effectively disabled from doing shit. Ever played this game, Conflict: Middle East Political Simulator? Try it one day.[/QUOTE] What about the 2006 war in Lebanon? Israel was utterly inept in their handling of that conflict and Hezbollah came out of it laughing at Israel.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;43414179]What about the 2006 war in Lebanon? Israel was utterly inept in their handling of that conflict and Hezbollah came out of it laughing at Israel.[/QUOTE] There's differences between Israel's failure to meet their military objectives vs. threat posed by Lebanon to Israel. Israel has one of the best airforces in the world, likely 3rd or 4th. Lebanon has no air-force or effective anti-AA weaponry. Israel was sloppy because they were primarily focused on raising their deterrence capacity and they did by executing stupid stunts like bombing civilian infrastructure as well as the Lebanese airport (Israel likes to[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasser_Arafat_International_Airport"] bomb civilian airports[/URL] for no apparent reason) and many Israelis attribute the failure to Olmert's handling. If Lebanon poses an existential threat to Israel, they will be decimated. But it wasn't a war on existentialism but instead ones with specific military objectives. There are numerous advantages Israel has such as knowledge of Hezbollah bases and weapons cache which are synergistic with air superiority. Advanced military gear and American-made weaponry are examples why Lebanon can easily be fought against. This really has nothing to do with Israel's treatment of the Palestinans but a faux scare-tactic commonly brought up to imply Israel can be destroyed at moment's notice. No. Gaza, Lebanon and Syria can be destroyed at moment's notice.

[quote]It was Israel's intent to capture Judea and Samira all along. This intent, as laid out by Israel's founder was asserted in 1936, before Israel was even a state. "The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan; one does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed to-day, but the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concerns of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them” David Ben-Gurian [founder of Israel], in 1936, quoted in Noam Chomsky, "The Fateful Triangle" Egypt positioned defensive troops in the Sinai amid Soviet reports of a pending Israeli invasion from there. The insignificantly small number of military forces that Egypt positioned into the Sinai posed zero threat to Israel. This was a fact expressed by Israel's internal intelligence as well as Israel's chief of staff (and future Prime Minister) "I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to the The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it" - Yitzhak Rabin, Israel’s Chief of Staff, in Le Monde 2/28/68 Israel's own internal intelligence reports are far more reliable than whatever propaganda Israel publicly professes to the world when justifying their pre-planned land capture in Transjordan, which was also consistent with their Zionist-biblical vision prior to Israel's inception. Also something to keep in mind, when Israel launched the 1967 war they lied and said the Arab nations bombed Israel, and that Israel merely responded before Israel finally conceded that they launched the first strike. If Israel was truly acting in self-defense when they carried out the surprise attack then they wouldn't attempt to deceive the United States and the world into saying "We got hit first" [/quote] The six day war started because of Israel tenuous security position from both the east and the west. Egypt moving troops into the Sinai was a provocation, not a defense. Egypt wanted a conflict, just like how they had fought the previous wars. They publicly lied, even when aware that the Soviet reports were false, and used this as an excuse to justify their own efforts along the border, which were illegal anyway. They closed off Israeli shipping, despite being warned not to do so. Syria, Jordan, and Egypt all were massing troops along the Jordan border as well. It was all Egyptian aggression until the war started. On the other side you had Syria, which was largely behind a wave of terrorist attacks, and if I recall correctly spent quite a while[B] launching artillery strikes into civilian areas along the border[/B]. When Israel launched the war, it was certainly not without provocation. Israel was outnumbered 4 to one and surrounded. I would be scared to.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;43398387]The notion of "Israel being surrounded by nations who want to destroy it" is an outdated and tireless fearmongering phrase that belongs in the 20th century. No nation poses a threat to victim-Israel. Jordan is Israel's ally and so was Egypt under Western-backed dictator Mubarak and yet the contrived myth was still perpetuated as if it has some explanation to with Israel maintaining their religious goal in acquiring "Judea and Samira" aka West Bank occupation which was outlined before Israel was even a state. The contrived phrase is meaningless for what Israel does to Palestinians in 2014.[/QUOTE] You are so deluded it's not even funny. You're just looking for an excuse to justify your Israel-hatred. Israel is, in fact, surrounded by countries that despise them. Now I'm not saying this justifies some of the shit they've pulled, but you can't blindly condemn everything they do without you yourself ever having been in their position. Yes, Israel is somewhat paranoid, but they've lost just as many innocents in this conflict as anyone else.

The only reason why people feel bad for the Palestinians because they are darker than the Israelis and people think of the Israelis as the "white people" and the Palestinians as the "black people." Shits getting old. Its like white guilt except for the Palestinians. Technically Jews aren't white anyway, they're caucasian with mixed white ancestry and the Palestinians mostly originate from Saudi Arabia. I bet if the Palestinians got their way, their country would be a shithole. Corrupt as hell just like all the other Arab countries. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Actually, turns out it was worse." - Megafan))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=RichyZ;43419672]yeah thats literally the only reason why the palestinians garner sympathy fucking sand niggers[/QUOTE] I honestly don't give a shit about them, most of them anyway because all they do is react with violence. If you're angry you don't have to react with violence. I don't have sympathy for people who support violence against people and blow themselves up thinking its normal. Arabs have more testosterone than Israelis, so that's why they do it. If you don't believe me then look at their faces. They all look more masculine including the women. Of course people will accuse me of racism but there are biological differences amongst different races/ethnic groups. Plus a lot of them inbreed which lowers their intelligence.

[QUOTE=Intel Inside;43419683]I honestly don't give a shit about them, most of them anyway because all they do is react with violence. If you're angry you don't have to react with violence. I don't have sympathy for people who support violence against people and blow themselves up thinking its normal. Arabs have more testosterone than Israelis, so that's why they do it. If you don't believe me then look at their faces. They all look more masculine including the women. Of course people will accuse me of racism but there are biological differences amongst different races/ethnic groups. Plus a lot of them inbreed which lowers their intelligence.[/QUOTE] Okay... umm... I was on your side on this, but that took it WAY to far. That is just racist.

Yeah okay. Every race is exactly the same. 99% of people are nieve as hell because they think all races/ethnic groups are mentally the same. Of course there are mental differences. Why wouldn't there be? Each race/ethnic group shares different genes and DNA. We know there are certain genes which make people violent or selfish for example. Its been proven that genes not culture determines most of our personalities. In fact cultures come from our genes. Melanin makes people more violent and sexual. Jews were always lighter skinned even in ancient times. Jews are actually caaninites and the caaninite ancestors came from the sinai desert where it was extremely hard to survive, especially with lighter skinned so of course this required higher intelligence. The environment determined our intelligence and how far we traveled out of Africa. I'm not a white supremacist but I do believe that certain races/ethnic groups are smarter than others. It's been proven that Ashenazi Jews have higher IQs than other races. Jews are essentially more evolved Arabs. In general as humans evolved their skin got lighter. Every single race/ethnic group started out black including Europeans. Then the humans evolved into different races.

[QUOTE=Intel Inside;43420001]Yeah okay. Every race is exactly the same. 99% of people are nieve as hell because they think all races/ethnic groups are mentally the same. Of course there are mental differences. Why wouldn't there be? Each race/ethnic group shares different genes and DNA. We know there are certain genes which make people violent or selfish for example. Its been proven that genes not culture determines most of our personalities. In fact cultures come from our genes. Melanin makes people more violent and sexual. Jews were always lighter skinned even in ancient times. Jews are actually caaninites and the caaninite ancestors came from the sinai desert where it was extremely hard to survive, especially with lighter skinned so of course this required higher intelligence. The environment determined our intelligence and how far we traveled out of Africa. I'm not a white supremacist but I do believe that certain races/ethnic groups are smarter than others. It's been proven that Ashenazi Jews have higher IQs than other races. Jews are essentially more evolved Arabs. In general as humans evolved their skin got lighter. Every single race/ethnic group started out black including Europeans. Then the humans evolved into different races.[/QUOTE] So your claiming that "white people are more evolved" I understand you are saying there are differences involved but that is taking it way to far.

[QUOTE='[sluggo];43420089']So your claiming that "white people are more evolved" I understand you are saying there are differences involved but that is taking it way to far.[/QUOTE] Not just white people, but Jews and Asians. If you want proof I could bomb 99 percent of any blacks or arabs on an intelligence test and just about other people in my ethnic group could do the same. Of course there are rarities in every race so there still will be dumb asians and smart blacks/arabs. Dumber races/ ethnic groups always exacerbate their own faults too. If you want an example or examples blacks already have high blood pressure and high cholesterol and they eat a lot of fried foods and fast food. If they were smarter they would change their ways. Lower testosterone fathers have been proven to be better fathers because they are more caring and blacks have a very high rate of leaving the wives. And I'm not saying all are like this but the vast majority are. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Racism/Biotruths" - Megafan))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Intel Inside;43420096]Not just white people, but Jews and Asians. If you want proof I could bomb 99 percent of any blacks or arabs on an intelligence test and just about other people in my ethnic group could do the same. Of course there are rarities in every race so there still will be dumb asians and smart blacks/arabs. Dumber races/ ethnic groups always exacerbate their own faults too. If you want an example or examples blacks already have high blood pressure and high cholesterol and they eat a lot of fried foods and fast food. If they were smarter they would change their ways. Lower testosterone fathers have been proven to be better fathers because they are more caring and blacks have a very high rate of leaving the wives.[/QUOTE] And what ethnic group is that?

[QUOTE='[sluggo];43420128']And what ethnic group is that?[/QUOTE] Lower testosterone= Whites, Asians, Jews. Higher testosterone=Blacks, Arabs. Again this is the vast majority of them not all. As humans evolved their testosterone level went down so they could cooperate with one another and invent new things.

[QUOTE=Intel Inside;43420001]Yeah okay. Every race is exactly the same. 99% of people are nieve as hell because they think all races/ethnic groups are mentally the same. Of course there are mental differences. Why wouldn't there be? Each race/ethnic group shares different genes and DNA. We know there are certain genes which make people violent or selfish for example. Its been proven that genes not culture determines most of our personalities. In fact cultures come from our genes. Melanin makes people more violent and sexual. Jews were always lighter skinned even in ancient times. Jews are actually caaninites and the caaninite ancestors came from the sinai desert where it was extremely hard to survive, especially with lighter skinned so of course this required higher intelligence. The environment determined our intelligence and how far we traveled out of Africa. I'm not a white supremacist but I do believe that certain races/ethnic groups are smarter than others. It's been proven that Ashenazi Jews have higher IQs than other races. Jews are essentially more evolved Arabs. In general as humans evolved their skin got lighter. Every single race/ethnic group started out black including Europeans. Then the humans evolved into different races.[/QUOTE] lol i can't believe anyone thinks this non-sarcastically

[QUOTE=Intel Inside;43420096]Not just white people, but Jews and Asians. If you want proof I could bomb 99 percent of any blacks or arabs on an intelligence test and just about other people in my ethnic group could do the same. Of course there are rarities in every race so there still will be dumb asians and smart blacks/arabs. Dumber races/ ethnic groups always exacerbate their own faults too. If you want an example or examples blacks already have high blood pressure and high cholesterol and they eat a lot of fried foods and fast food. If they were smarter they would change their ways. Lower testosterone fathers have been proven to be better fathers because they are more caring and blacks have a very high rate of leaving the wives. And I'm not saying all are like this but the vast majority are.[/QUOTE] oh my god are you for real

[QUOTE='[sluggo];43415245']The six day war started because of Israel tenuous security position from both the east and the west. Egypt moving troops into the Sinai was a provocation, not a defense. Egypt wanted a conflict, just like how they had fought the previous wars.[/QUOTE] Why do you say this when Starpluck just quoted their Chief of Staff from the time saying that Israel didn't believe that? [quote]"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to the The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it" - Yitzhak Rabin, Israel’s Chief of Staff, in Le Monde 2/28/68[/quote] Doesn't sound like they were thinking 'war', sounds like they were thinking 'this will make us look strong'. That alone is not something that is reasonable to respond to with war.

[QUOTE=Megafan;43420839]Why do you say this when Starpluck just quoted their Chief of Staff from the time saying that Israel didn't believe that? Doesn't sound like they were thinking 'war', sounds like they were thinking 'this will make us look strong'. That alone is not something that is reasonable to respond to with war.[/QUOTE] What that quote is referring to is the buildup before the war, not really actual beginnings. The timeline goes: -Egypt had a defense agreement with Syria -Syria is allowing Palestinian terrorists into Israel over the border and having a border dispute over agricultural land Israel wants. This culminates in them shelling civilian Israeli villages in the area. -Israel threatens military action against Syria, but without really meaning it. -Egypt receives false soviet reports of Israel plotting to attack Syria, and calling back to the defensive pact, send troops into the Sinai peninsula. This is illegal (the united nations confirmed this at the time), and used as provocation. -Egypt learned the Soviet Intel was wrong, but instead of pulling out, for unknown reasons, sends more troops to the Sinai. This buildup grows to equal far more than the two divisions the quote refers to. -Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian troops mass along the borders of Jordan and Syria. In total we have more than 300,000 soldiers along the Israeli border, surrounding them, and outnumbering their entire military. All still for "ambiguous reasons". -Israel declares war and strikes first. What this quote refers to is long before the actual breakout of the war, but Nasser's original intentions with stationing troops in the Sinai.

[QUOTE='[sluggo];43421076']What that quote is referring to is the buildup before the war, not really actual beginnings. The timeline goes: -Egypt had a defense agreement with Syria -Syria is allowing Palestinian terrorists into Israel over the border and having a border dispute over agricultural land Israel wants. This culminates in them shelling civilian Israeli villages in the area. -Israel threatens military action against Syria, but without really meaning it. -Egypt receives false soviet reports of Israel plotting to attack Syria, and calling back to the defensive pact, send troops into the Sinai peninsula. This is illegal (the united nations confirmed this at the time), and used as provocation. -Egypt learned the Soviet Intel was wrong, but instead of pulling out, for unknown reasons, sends more troops to the Sinai. This buildup grows to equal far more than the two divisions the quote refers to. -Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian troops mass along the borders of Jordan and Syria. In total we have more than 300,000 soldiers along the Israeli border, surrounding them, and outnumbering their entire military. All still for "ambiguous reasons". -Israel declares war and strikes first. What this quote refers to is long before the actual breakout of the war, but Nasser's original intentions with stationing troops in the Sinai.[/QUOTE] It's condescending you have the audacity to construct a timeline to "explain to us" what it means when it's your actually reading that was short-sighted. [quote]"[I]I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to the The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it[/I]" - Yitzhak Rabin, Israel’s Chief of Staff, in Le Monde [B]2/28/68[/B][/quote] Do you see the last bit I bolded? That says 1968, one year after the war. It wasn't some 'too-early' assessment made by Rabin as you insinuate but rather an analysis made after the war. It's not just him too, Israel's foreign minister during the war said that Nasser's assertion that he did not want were actually credible. He didn't say this "before," he said it much after. Cited from his own autobiography: [quote]“[I]Nasser's assurance that he did not plan an armed attack were convincing." later adding that "Nasser's did not want war, he wanted [political] victory without war.[/I]" Ben-Ami, Shlomo, 2005, "Scars of War; Wounds of Peace - the Israeli-Arab tragedy", Weidenfeld & Nicholson, p. 103[/quote] Again, those two individuals weren't alone in their country. Both the United States and Israeli intelligence concluded on their own that Nasser wasn't trying trying to start a war and the deployments were defensive. From the book of the Israeli ambassador to the US during the six-day war: [quote][B]U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara[/B] told Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban that the U.S. intelligence assessment was that "[B]the Egyptian deployments were defensive in character and anticipatory of a possible Israeli attack[/B]". Memorandum of Conversation, Washington, May 26, 1967, 10:30 a.m.; [B]The Israeli ambassador to the U.S. Michael B. Oren has acknowledged that "By all reports Israel received from the Americans, and according to its own intelligence, Nasser had no interest in bloodshed..." Israel's assessment was that "Nasser would have to be deranged to take on an Israel backed by France and the U.S. Sixth Fleet. War, according to the Israelis, could only come about if Nasser felt he had complete military superiority over the IDF, if Israel were caught up in a domestic crisis, and, most crucially, was isolated internationally—a most unlikely confluence." [/B]Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East, Oren 2002, pp. 59–60).[/quote] [editline]4th January 2014[/editline] Israel's later prime minister Begin who reminded the Knesset [quote]"The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. (...) We decided to attack him" Menachem Begin, the first Likud Prime Minister of Israel, also said: "In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him." "Israel's First Fifty Years", by Robert Owen Freedman, page 80; for another quote, see Cooley, Green March, Black September, p. 162.[/quote] Also Israel's own archived foreign ministry website that has the exact same speech to the Knesset: [url]www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign+Relations/Israels+Foreign+Relations+since+1947/1982-1984/55+Address+by+Prime+Minister+Begin+at+the+National.htm?DisplayMode=print[/url]

Typical internet conspiracy theorist: Everything is because of Israel and the Jews!!!

[QUOTE=coldroll5;43421987]Typical internet conspiracy theorist: Everything is because of Israel and the Jews!!![/QUOTE] But what if it IS all because of Israel and the Jews?? ~plot twist~

[QUOTE=Starpluck;43421911]It's condescending you have the audacity to construct a timeline to "explain to us" what it means when it's your actually reading that was short-sighted. Do you see the last bit I bolded? That says 1968, one year after the war. It wasn't some 'too-early' assessment made by Rabin as you insinuate but rather an analysis made after the war. It's not just him too, Israel's foreign minister during the war said that Nasser's assertion that he did not want were actually credible. He didn't say this "before," he said it much after. Cited from his own autobiography: Again, those two individuals weren't alone in their country. Both the United States and Israeli intelligence concluded on their own that Nasser wasn't trying trying to start a war and the deployments were defensive. From the book of the Israeli ambassador to the US during the six-day war: [editline]4th January 2014[/editline] Israel's later prime minister Begin who reminded the Knesset Also Israel's own archived foreign ministry website that has the exact same speech to the Knesset: [url]www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign+Relations/Israels+Foreign+Relations+since+1947/1982-1984/55+Address+by+Prime+Minister+Begin+at+the+National.htm?DisplayMode=print[/url][/QUOTE] Well, the problem with this is: 1. He is referring to "two devisions", at the time war was declared, a whole that more than that were deployed, from more than just Egypt, and along more than one border. 2. Even after the soviet reports were known to be false, he continued movement and deployment. Why? If not to provoke and ready for war. This analasys seems wrong to me.

[QUOTE='[sluggo];43422032']Well, the problem with this is: 1. He is referring to "two devisions", at the time war was declared, a whole that more than that were deployed, from more than just Egypt, and along more than one border.[/QUOTE] Israel declared war on Egypt and only Egypt. Israel didn't declare war on any of the other nations; they were naturally drawn in. If as you're now claiming to be that "it wasn't just Egypt, it was other borders that were amassed, that's why Israel struck" then Israel wouldn't have declared war on Egypt but on the other nations instead. The Israelis purport that they didn't want the other nations drawn in. [quote]2. Even after the soviet reports were known to be false, he continued movement and deployment. Why? If not to provoke and ready for war. This analasys seems wrong to me.[/quote] As stated, they remained their as an anticipatory force. Even though the Soviet report was wrong they still received intelligence that Israel readying to attack Syria so they kept their extremely low-sized and insignificant force there in case that happened. This was a fact outlined from Israel's ambassador to the US at the time who regurgitated the Israeli intelligence reports, not myself. if your best defense against the intelligence-conclusions made by Israeli chief of staff, Israeli foreign minister, later Israeli prime minister and Israeli intelligence in addition to the intelligence of the United States was that it "just seems wrong" to you then I can no go further. In debates, people cite valid primary evidence like how I did to back claims, you're actually dismissing this all based on your 1967-uneducated "gut-intuition" and there's nothing I can do at this point. It's your gut vs intelligence reports and [I]admissions[/I] made by Israel themselves. You're now saying that you think Israel is lying which makes zero sense. You're so pro-Israel that you're dismissing Israel when they actually concede! The only people I know who can do that are religious Jewish/Christian Zionists who are devoid of reason.

[QUOTE=Shreddinger;43406304]Why did you quote murderers?, are you suggesting that they didn't actually murder anyone? These people killed or attempted to kill Israeli citizens, think about what the families of the people that they murdered , being released like that for "peace" think, this happened to much and it continues to happen and there's still no sign "peace" from the opposing side. I agree with you that the settlements are wrong and need to be stopped, but it's not that they're only willing to negotiate with releasing prisoners, it's that the opposing side doesn't give a shit about the settlements, nor does it give a shit about "peace", all they want is for more prisoners to be released. Honestly, you lack the empathy to properly understand the Israeli side. you're like the ultimate Israel renegade, do you get a kick out of this? Also, Israel is still surrounded by enemies, including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Libya, Egypt, Algeria, Yemen, Morocco, Mauritania, Tunisia, Oman, Sudan, Somalia, Djibouti, Qatar, Kuwait, and Bahrain. You obviously have something against Israel which is not only characterized by it's political actions. It's something personal. Even after all this, the settlements still look ridiculous. [IMG]http://ddclaywriter.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/israel-islam-world-map-crop1.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE] This picture is really stupid. It highlights lots of countries as "enemy" although they are actually really close allies. One of them is my country, Azerbaijan. We always supported Israel's independence, security and we gave them lots of Intel on Iran and some terrorist organizations, although we knew that as a consequences we will receive shit loads of negative feedback from Iran.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;43422118]Israel declared war on Egypt and only Egypt. Israel didn't declare war on any of the other nations; they were naturally drawn in. If as you're now claiming to be that "it wasn't just Egypt, it was other borders that were amassed, that's why Israel struck" then Israel wouldn't have declared war on Egypt but on the other nations instead. The Israelis purport that they didn't want the other nations drawn in. As stated, they remained their as an anticipatory force. Even though the Soviet report was wrong they still received intelligence that Israel readying to attack Syria so they kept their extremely low-sized and insignificant force there in case that happened. This was a fact outlined from Israel's ambassador to the US at the time who regurgitated the Israeli intelligence reports, not myself. if your best defense against the intelligence-conclusions made by Israeli chief of staff, Israeli foreign minister, later Israeli prime minister and Israeli intelligence in addition to the intelligence of the United States was that it "just seems wrong" to you then I can no go further. In debates, people cite valid primary evidence like how I did to back claims, you're actually dismissing this all based on your 1967-uneducated "gut-intuition" and there's nothing I can do at this point. It's your gut vs intelligence reports and [I]admissions[/I] made by Israel themselves. You're now saying that you think Israel is lying which makes zero sense. You're so pro-Israel that you're dismissing Israel when they actually concede! The only people I know who can do that are religious Jewish/Christian Zionists who are devoid of reason.[/QUOTE] No, I am not going based off intuition. I am just looking at how the numbers matched up. It is a fact that the quote you are referencing is referring to "2 divisions", at the time of the war there was far more than that deployed: [quote]On the eve of the war, Egypt massed approximately 100,000 of its 160,000 troops in the Sinai, including all of its seven divisions (four infantry, two armoured and one mechanized), four independent infantry brigades and four independent armoured brigades. No fewer than a third of them were veterans of Egypt's continuing intervention into the Yemen Civil War and another third were reservists. These forces had 950 tanks, 1,100 APCs, and more than 1,000 artillery pieces.[/quote] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War[/url] It is also a fact that there was a large contingent, defensive or not, of troops aligned along the Jordanian border. This force composed of Jordan's military, Egyptians, Lebanese, and Iraqis. War was declared against Egypt as it was the ringleader of this group. The Israelis even captured plans from weeks before the beginning of the war for Syria and Jordan to strike first. By the time war actually broke out, it was pretty clear what was going on. My personal opinion is that initially, no, the Egyptians didn't want war. As it was drawing on though, the surrounding nations saw what they thought of as opportunity, perhaps not for all out war, to certainly to take small areas and pressure Israel into concessions.

There's also the fact that you can't attack from across the Sinai. It's a logistical nightmare and the Israelis took advantage of that.

[QUOTE=O Cheerios O;43422017]But what if it IS all because of Israel and the Jews?? ~plot twist~[/QUOTE] Right, because a small group of Jews making dumb decisions = Every Jew in the world supports it.

[QUOTE=ExplosiveCheese;43427316]Right, because a small group of Jews making dumb decisions = Every Jew in the world supports it.[/QUOTE] Good job at missing a obvious joke. Hope you're proud of yourself.

[QUOTE=O Cheerios O;43427405]Good job at missing a obvious joke. Hope you're proud of yourself.[/QUOTE] Sorry, I mean, a guy just got banned for racism, hard for me to tell what looks like a joke when I'm just reading text. :v:

[QUOTE=Intel Inside;43420096]Not just white people, but Jews and Asians. [B]If you want proof I could bomb 99 percent of any blacks or arabs on an intelligence test[/B] and just about other people in my ethnic group could do the same. Of course there are rarities in every race so there still will be dumb asians and smart blacks/arabs. Dumber races/ ethnic groups always exacerbate their own faults too. If you want an example or examples blacks already have high blood pressure and high cholesterol and they eat a lot of fried foods and fast food. If they were smarter they would change their ways. Lower testosterone fathers have been proven to be better fathers because they are more caring and blacks have a very high rate of leaving the wives. And I'm not saying all are like this but the vast majority are. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Racism/Biotruths" - Megafan))[/highlight][/QUOTE] Yes, I do believe you've clearly displayed your intelligence for the rest of us. It's very obvious that you'd 'bomb' the test. [sp] Psst. That means fail, fyi [/sp] [editline]5th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Intel Inside;43420139]Lower testosterone= Whites, Asians, Jews. Higher testosterone=Blacks, Arabs. Again this is the vast majority of them not all. As humans evolved their testosterone level went down so they could cooperate with one another and invent new things.[/QUOTE] Ah, I get it. Penis inferiority complex. Poor guy.