[QUOTE=GunFox;13272071]Except we also lose an ally. An ally who is a significant military help.
Not only are we allowed virtually unlimited use of their air bases, but we frequently engage in joint research with them. They are a powerhouse of R&D and are currently doing wonderful work with lasers as well as drone technology.
In addition to this, they are an excellent customer. They need a lot of things, and we have a free trade agreement with them. And they produce a lot of military hardware worldwide.
Again. We gain nothing by cutting off their aid. The people they hate, are generally pretty much the same people we hate. Hamas was a democratically elected organization which is recognized as a terrorist organization. We want NOTHING to do with Hamas or the people who elected them.[/QUOTE]
Wow, the typical, "The people who voted are as bad as the terrorists, thus justifying killing civilians".
First, Hamas is actually helping the citizens, unfortunately(unfortunate in the sense that it's Hamas), which is naturally going to cause citizens to vote. Top it off with Israel invading Gaza, with Hamas portraying themselves as the defenders, and you have a good platform for a voter there.
[QUOTE=slogsdon;13272083]How the fuck does that refute anything? [b]Of course[/b] he'd be against Hamas(everyone already is), if they were using force like Israel. If he didn't that would make him a hypocrite. So I don't see how that's an argument at all.[/QUOTE]
Because Israel would still have intent to do the same thing. It's not morally sound to side with one side or the other as they both have questionable ethics which they have displayed in the past.
So he has no moral stance. On the other hand, he presents no economic or political reason for wanting Israel to get hung out to dry.
So he has no motivation? No real presented reason to care. Except he does, he's very fervent about this. About doing something that would ultimately kill more people, just those under a different flag.
If he justified it with even a stupid reason- "I like combat", fuck- I wouldn't care. But it's the lack of any real thought, the barbaric "WHOOHOO FUCK ISRAEL YEAH" that's pissing me off.
[QUOTE=Uber|nooB;13272006]well, those aren't the kind of people you'd want aiming a tank in the first place[/QUOTE]
Conscripted men and women don't tend to always be the right men and women for the job. Very few armies are that discriminate during a time of conflict.
But let's keep running in the face of logic, assume every tank crew is a bunch of seasoned veterans and every shot goes exactly where you want it to. Let's also keep pretending those rockets from Hamas are completely harmless because they don't damage their surroundings too much (even though a frag grenade doesn't either, I suppose those are actually completely harmless as well.)
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;13272142]Because Israel would still have intent to do the same thing. It's not morally sound to side with one side or the other as they both have questionable ethics which they have displayed in the past.
So he has no moral stance. On the other hand, he presents no economic or political reason for wanting Israel to get hung out to dry.
So he has no motivation? No real presented reason to care. Except he does, he's very fervent about this. About doing something that would ultimately kill more people, just those under a different flag.
If he justified it with even a stupid reason- "I like combat", fuck- I wouldn't care. But it's the lack of any real thought, the barbaric "WHOOHOO FUCK ISRAEL YEAH" that's pissing me off.[/QUOTE]
Both sides are fucking stupid, and so is your "What if" argument. We can go over these hypothetical scenarios all day long, but they prove jack shit. All that matters is what is actually happening.
And what is actually happening is that two factions are both doing horrible shit, but with different levels of success.
You're right, wanting to stop them both is silly, we should just stop one and hope the other never takes advantage of the newly created weakness to get back at their old enemy. It's not like that ever happens, right? Hamas would be completely civil, they wouldn't attack anybody with their bottle rockets or anything. They'd just both sing Kumbaya and what the fuck are you thinking if you think only stopping one side makes sense goddamn
[QUOTE=slogsdon;13272114]Wow, the typical, "The people who voted are as bad as the terrorists, thus justifying killing civilians".
[/QUOTE]
Terrorist or not, it doesn't really matter. They voted in a government whose very purpose was to destroy Israel. They fund, they protect, they support their government and they are paying the price for it.
If they would attempt to meld with Israel instead of constantly trying to kill them and "reclaim Palestine" then life would almost undoubtedly be wonderful for them compared to now, and even compared to other middle eastern nations. They chose the path of war. They chose to attack Israel. However pathetic their attack may have been.
I'm sure after the conflict is over tons of aid will flow into the region and they will feebly try yet again to kill Israel. Probably to the same results.
fuck it, xenocidebot is too fucking dense to get anywhere
how do you even logically argue that "maybe Israeli tank gunners are really scared and therefor can't aim good" if you aren't trolling, actually why the fuck would you even argue over trivial bullshit about whether something was shot from a tank or artillery gun when it's blatantly and hilariously obvious from the picture it was an artillery round hitting the SCHOOL (just like the article says)
fuck this shit, waste of time. At least Gunfox knows what he is talking about. Xenocidebot, you are a shill and if you have to stretch your fucking arguments to these levels maybe you shouldn't argue them in the first place
[QUOTE=GunFox;13272258]Terrorist or not, it doesn't really matter. They voted in a government whose very purpose was to destroy Israel. They fund, they protect, they support their government and they are paying the price for it.
If they would attempt to meld with Israel instead of constantly trying to kill them and "reclaim Palestine" then life would almost undoubtedly be wonderful for them compared to now, and even compared to other middle eastern nations. They chose the path of war. They chose to attack Israel. However pathetic their attack may have been.
I'm sure after the conflict is over tons of aid will flow into the region and they will feebly try yet again to kill Israel. Probably to the same results.[/QUOTE]
Melding into Israel would cause all sorts of racial/cultural tension and would ultimately result in segregation (whether State-condoned or not) anyway. The best solution in for Israel to be gracious, drop the blockade, pull settlers out, and destroy the wall. Basically, treat the Palestinians as if they are sovereign, and stop trying to intimidate them. Violence begets violence.
I just hope Israel cuts out the turning away of aid vessels now that the ceasefire is over, there is no reason not to.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;13272223]And what is actually happening is that two factions are both doing horrible shit, but with different levels of success.
You're right, wanting to stop them both is silly, we should just stop one and hope the other never takes advantage of the newly created weakness to get back at their old enemy. It's not like that ever happens, right? Hamas would be completely civil, they wouldn't attack anybody with their bottle rockets or anything. They'd just both sing Kumbaya and what the fuck are you thinking if you think only stopping one side makes sense goddamn[/QUOTE]
hey
hey
guess what
[url]http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/01/200911716558226881.html[/url]
[quote]Olmert 'to announce Gaza ceasefire'
Israel's offensive has killed at least 400 children according to the UN AFP]
[B]Israel is set to announce a unilateral truce in the Gaza Strip, according to Israeli sources.[/B]
Israel's security council began meeting on Saturday at 7.30pm (1730GMT) and is widely expected to decide to halt the 22-day offensive which has left more than 1200 Palestinians dead, more than 400 of them children.
Alan Fisher, Al Jazeera's correspondent on the Gaza-Israel border, said: "We know that Ehud Olmet has asked the national TV station if he can address the nation at 10pm local time [2000GMT].
"All the indications we are getting is that Israel is still going to announce a unilateral declaration halting its operations in Gaza.
"Ehud Barak [the defence minister] has been quoted ... as saying that Israel has achieved almost all its goals.
"So it would seem that Israel is happy now to call it quits to this operation, believing that it has done all it set out to do.
"Israel could almost go it alone now. Because remember the role Egypt play is talking to Hamas. And this deal, as Israel see it, isn't with Hamas. It is something they are doing all on their own.
"They can dictate when they pull their troops back, they don't need Egypt saying this is the table you signed up to, then they can look at opening up the crossings.
"What Israelis are doing by this unilateral declaration is taking all the power into their hands and, almost, they will dictate now what happens and when."
Reduce rocket fire
About 1,230 Gazans have been killed in Gaza since the offensive began, according to UN and Palestinian medical sources.
At least 13 Israelis have died, three of them civilians.
[B]
Israel is said to prefer a ceasefire to entering into an Egyptian-brokered ceasefire with Hamas, which rules the Gaza Strip, unnamed sources said.[/B]
[B]A unilateral truce would allow Israel to avoid agreeing concessions with Hamas, such as easing the 18-month-old blockade of the Gaza Strip, which has prevented medical aid and basic supplies from reaching the Palestinians.[/B]
Egypt has been pushing Israel and the rival Palestinian factions to reach an agreement. A Hamas delegation had returned to Cairo on Friday for a second round of talks.
[B]Responding to speculation of a unilateral ceasefire by Israel, Hamas on Saturday threatened to ignore such a cessation and continue fighting.
[/B]
"Clearly, we have nothing new to propose ... either we hear what we have proposed [is accepted] or we will go back to the battlefield," Osama Hamdan, Hamas's representative in Lebanon, said.
"The [large] number of our martyrs will not push us to surrender, but to insist on resistance."
Hamas defiant
Speaking at a forum in Beirut, Hamdan called on Arab leaders to stand by the Palestinian "resistance", and urged European nations to cut ties with Israel for its "crimes" in Gaza.
An unnamed Israeli official told the AFP news agency that Israeli troops would remain in Gaza in the event of any such ceasefire being called.
"If they [Hamas] decide to open fire, we will not hesitate to respond and continue the offensive," the official was quoted as saying.
Israel's stated aim of the war, which it dubbed Operation Cast Lead, has been to reduce Palestinian rocket attacks on southern Israel.
On the first day of the offensive up to 100 rockets were fired from Gaza into Israel. In the past few days up to 20 have hit Israel daily.
[/quote]
You know why this is a bad ceasefire? Because the IDF will still have troops in Gaza, and as occupiers, they will be targeted by Hamas. This will give Israel an excuse to resume the fighting. It's almost as if you have the "right idea", but you still have terrible arguments.
I want Israel to pull out entirely, uproot their settlers, destroy the walls, lift the embargo-everything. I want Israel to treat the Palestinians as human beings and citizens of a sovereign nation. I want the root of this problem to be solved by having Israel give some serious concessions to Palestine in the name of peace, and I want this bullshit no-journalists-allowed policy in Gaza to end so reporters can report the truth of what happened in Gaza. A watery "ceasefire" that has the IDF remaining in Gaza as an invitation for Hamas to give Israel an excuse to restart the war is not what I want.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Ryan;13272357]Melding into Israel would cause all sorts of racial/cultural tension and would ultimately result in segregation (whether State-condoned or not) anyway. The best solution in for Israel to be gracious, drop the blockade, pull settlers out, and destroy the wall. Basically, treat the Palestinians as if they are sovereign, and stop trying to intimidate them. Violence begets violence.
I just hope Israel cuts out the turning away of aid vessels now that the ceasefire is over, there is no reason not to.[/QUOTE]
I dunno from what I understand Israel has a pretty large Muslim Arabic population still (roughly 20%) and has several as elected officials.
You are totally right however, there would certainly be many [I]many[/I] hurdles, but I feel like it is by far the best thing for the Palestinian people. They will never reclaim Israel via conflict, so they'd be much better off doing so from a political standpoint. It's also a good choice for Israel because if Palestine and Israel become synonymous, then hostilities from nearby nations may decrease or lose support.
Though there is the problem of the strong Islamic fundamentalist movement. They could cause catastrophe in terms of law making and the like, fundamentalist Muslims can be fucking crazy. Hopefully however that would decrease drastically once the supporters as a whole had major improvements to their way of life and no longer felt the need to brainwash children into becoming soldiers.
However, until the Palestinians are legitimately willing to work with the Israelis, they are only a source of conflict and are going to keep dying in large numbers until they learn to stop fighting.
I would certainly like to see Israel drop the blockade in the ocean and allow them to construct ports and pull all their soldiers out, but I don't blame them for the wall. The Palestinians have still sworn to kill the Israelis, and I don't blame Israel for taking precautions to protect its citizens.
I'm not sure on how far Israel can go in terms of treating them as sovereign. I get the distinct feeling that much of their infrastructure and such is still heavily supported by aid from Israel.
[QUOTE=GunFox;13272495]I dunno from what I understand Israel has a pretty large Muslim Arabic population still (roughly 20%) and has several as elected officials.
You are totally right however, there would certainly be many [I]many[/I] hurdles, but I feel like it is by far the best thing for the Palestinian people. They will never reclaim Israel via conflict, so they'd be much better off doing so from a political standpoint. It's also a good choice for Israel because if Palestine and Israel become synonymous, then hostilities from nearby nations may decrease or lose support.
Though there is the problem of the strong Islamic fundamentalist movement. They could cause catastrophe in terms of law making and the like, fundamentalist Muslims can be fucking crazy. Hopefully however that would decrease drastically once the supporters as a whole had major improvements to their way of life and no longer felt the need to brainwash children into becoming soldiers.
However, until the Palestinians are legitimately willing to work with the Israelis, they are only a source of conflict and are going to keep dying in large numbers until they learn to stop fighting.
I would certainly like to see Israel drop the blockade in the ocean and allow them to construct ports and pull all their soldiers out, but I don't blame them for the wall. The Palestinians have still sworn to kill the Israelis, and I don't blame Israel for taking precautions to protect its citizens.
I'm not sure on how far Israel can go in terms of treating them as sovereign. I get the distinct feeling that much of their infrastructure and such is still heavily supported by aid from Israel.[/QUOTE]
Merging the two wouldn't solve the hostility, which is the biggest problem.
It's true that there are a lot of Arabs in Israel, but recently there was a proposal to bar all Arab political parties from running for office. Apparently this happens all the time, but there's a lot of momentum behind the recent proposal. [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7825032.stm[/url]
If you want to bring Islamic fundamentalism into this then why not bring Zionism into it aswell? Zionism is behind a lot of this shit just as much as Islamic fundamentalism.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Ryan;13272538]Merging the two wouldn't solve the hostility, which is the biggest problem.
It's true that there are a lot of Arabs in Israel, but recently there was a proposal to bar all Arab political parties from running for office. Apparently this happens all the time, but there's a lot of momentum behind the recent proposal. [url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7825032.stm[/url]
If you want to bring Islamic fundamentalism into this then why not bring Zionism into it aswell? Zionism is behind a lot of this shit just as much as Islamic fundamentalism.[/QUOTE]
Well I was referring more to the practices of Islamic fundamentalism. They tend to be very old testament style laws.
Zionism for Jewish Israelis is sorta a fancy way of saying they think they have a right to live there. Which is pretty common for most folks residing in their own country. Zionism really only makes sense when you refer to people outside of Israel.
Even then the term is pretty outdated. I support Israel because Israel is a neat country, I couldn't care less that they were Jewish. I don't care about the creation of a Jewish homeland.
[QUOTE=GunFox;13272701]Well I was referring more to the practices of Islamic fundamentalism. They tend to be very old testament style laws.
Zionism for Jewish Israelis is sorta a fancy way of saying they think they have a right to live there. Which is pretty common for most folks residing in their own country. Zionism really only makes sense when you refer to people outside of Israel.
Even then the term is pretty outdated. I support Israel because Israel is a neat country, I couldn't care less that they were Jewish. I don't care about the creation of a Jewish homeland.[/QUOTE]
Don't get me wrong through, I think Israel should exist as a country, only not on the scale it does today. It should have a small chunk that they can claim as theirs, but the rest should rightfully be Palestine. They need to cut this settler shit out; the bulldozer is the symbol of oppression. There can be only two ways to peace: Israel wiping Palestine off the map (this would be abhorrent and unjustifiable to deny self-determination to a nation) or Israel makes gracious concessions to Palestine and recognizes Hamas as a legitimate political element. As long as Israel imposes their will on Palestine, as long as there are walls ghettoizing Palestine, as long as there are blockades denying food and medicine to the Palestinians, there can be no peace. You know that if you grew up in a situation like Gaza you'd harbor an extreme amount of hate towards Israel.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Ryan;13272746]Don't get me wrong through, I think Israel should exist as a country, only not on the scale it does today. It should have a small chunk that they can claim as theirs, but the rest should rightfully be Palestine. They need to cut this settler shit out; the bulldozer is the symbol of oppression. There can be only two ways to peace: Israel wiping Palestine off the map (this would be abhorrent and unjustifiable to deny self-determination to a nation) or Israel makes gracious concessions to Palestine and recognizes Hamas as a legitimate political element. As long as Israel imposes their will on Palestine, as long as there are walls ghettoizing Palestine, as long as there are blockades denying food and medicine to the Palestinians, there can be no peace. You know that if you grew up in a situation like Gaza you'd harbor an extreme amount of hate towards Israel.[/QUOTE]
Realistically speaking I don't think Israel will be willing to give up pretty much any of its lands to what it perceives as a terrorist organization.
I feel like handing over Gaza (and exiting their airspace and removing the naval blockade) and the west bank totally to Palestinian authority is the best plan.
There would need to be a highway of some sort which connects the two pieces of gaza and the west bank. The forces currently occupying the west bank would be more than sufficient to secure against unwanted incursion from this highway.
Though I question if that would just allow Hamas access to better weapons and therefore allow them to actually incur serious loss of life against the Israelis.
[QUOTE=GunFox;13273027]Realistically speaking I don't think Israel will be willing to give up pretty much any of its lands to what it perceives as a terrorist organization.
I feel like handing over Gaza (and exiting their airspace and removing the naval blockade) and the west bank totally to Palestinian authority is the best plan.
There would need to be a highway of some sort which connects the two pieces of gaza and the west bank. The forces currently occupying the west bank would be more than sufficient to secure against unwanted incursion from this highway.
Though I question if that would just allow Hamas access to better weapons and therefore allow them to actually incur serious loss of life against the Israelis.[/QUOTE]
Arguably, if Hamas had a serious arsenal, Israel would be forced to treat them as a legitimate political group and actually negotiate with them, knowing that if they kept up with their hostility they run the risk of suffering massive amounts of casualties. Why would Israel negotiate with them if all Hamas had to fight with was piddly lil' homemade pipebombs-on-a-rocket? Same reason why the United States would invade Iraq willy-nilly for bullshit reasons, but strongly pursue diplomacy with North Korea even though North Korea is objectively the worst country on the face of the earth, if not in world history. North Korea is Orwellian to the literal definition of the word, and yet we negotiate with them because of the threat they pose to South Korea and because of the backlash we would get from China over the massive influx of refugees. North Korea's military is massive, far more of a threat than Iraq's military was in 2003 (but that was a different story back in the early 90's). When you face a threat that rivals your own power, you pursue diplomacy. At least, that's what nations that aren't hell-bent on an agenda do. Would Palestine and Israel manage to set up a long-lasting peace agreement in time? Depends on what Israel is willing to do, because at this point the burden is on them; Israel is the only entity with the power to end this as far as self-determination and human rights are concerned. Hamas can "give up", sure, but why should they? If people want their own nation, who determines whether or not they should have it?
Dropping the blockade, removing settlers, and tearing down the walls are of utmost importance though.
[QUOTE=Pvt. Ryan;13273920]Arguably, if Hamas had a serious arsenal, Israel would be forced to treat them as a legitimate political group and actually negotiate with them, knowing that if they kept up with their hostility they run the risk of suffering massive amounts of casualties. Why would Israel negotiate with them if all Hamas had to fight with was piddly lil' homemade pipebombs-on-a-rocket? Same reason why the United States would invade Iraq willy-nilly for bullshit reasons, but strongly pursue diplomacy with North Korea even though North Korea is objectively the worst country on the face of the earth, if not in world history. North Korea is Orwellian to the literal definition of the word, and yet we negotiate with them because of the threat they pose to South Korea and because of the backlash we would get from China over the massive influx of refugees. North Korea's military is massive, far more of a threat than Iraq's military was in 2003 (but that was a different story back in the early 90's). When you face a threat that rivals your own power, you pursue diplomacy. At least, that's what nations that aren't hell-bent on an agenda do. Would Palestine and Israel manage to set up a long-lasting peace agreement in time? Depends on what Israel is willing to do, because at this point the burden is on them; Israel is the only entity with the power to end this as far as self-determination and human rights are concerned. Hamas can "give up", sure, but why should they? If people want their own nation, who determines whether or not they should have it?
Dropping the blockade, removing settlers, and tearing down the walls are of utmost importance though.[/QUOTE]
Except the fact remains that Hamas is hell bent on the destruction of Israel and Jews. I'm not sure there is a lot of room for negotiation. I feel like chances are Hamas is just going to continue trying to kill Israelis and take more land.
And once Hamas becomes a serious threat to Israel, the United States will step in. Israel is far too valuable and Hamas is too easy of a PR target for us to let it slide. Furthermore Israel is an investment by the United States. They owe us an obscene amount of money.
For a second there I felt we had hit common ground, but actually it just looks like you want Israel to give up and back off so that Hamas can get stronger and take over Israel. Which is, of all the possible outcomes, the least likely. Total genocide of the Palestinian people is far more likely to occur long before they successfully reclaim Israel. And unfortunately preferable to the alternative as Hamas would undoubtedly begin ethnically cleansing Israel/New Palestine, because again their stated goal is the death of all Jews in the region.
[QUOTE=GunFox;13274398]Except the fact remains that Hamas is hell bent on the destruction of Israel and Jews. I'm not sure there is a lot of room for negotiation. I feel like chances are Hamas is just going to continue trying to kill Israelis and take more land.
And once Hamas becomes a serious threat to Israel, the United States will step in. Israel is far to valuable and Hamas is too easy of a PR target for us to let it slide. Furthermore Israel is an investment by the United States. They owe us an obscene amount of money.
For a second there I felt we had hit common ground, but actually it just looks like you want Israel to give up and back off so that Hamas can get stronger and take over Israel. Which will is, of all the possible outcomes, the least likely. Total genocide of the Palestinian people is far more likely to occur long before they successfully reclaim Israel. And unfortunately preferable to the alternative as Hamas would undoubtedly begin ethnically cleansing Israel/New Palestine, because again their stated goal is the death of all Jews in the region.[/QUOTE]
Killing the civilians is vital to the protection of Israel. Just because you have a goal doesn't mean you have the means.
[QUOTE=slogsdon;13274759]Killing the civilians is vital to the protection of Israel. Just because you have a goal doesn't mean you have the means.[/QUOTE]
What?
[QUOTE=slogsdon;13274759]Killing the civilians is vital to the protection of Israel. Just because you have a goal doesn't mean you have the means.[/QUOTE]
HAHAHAHAHhahahah wtf
Ceasefire seems to be over, Hamas fired a few rockets and Israel returned fire.
[quote]09:06 Five Gaza rockets strike Sderot area (Israel Radio)
09:02 Color Red alert sounds in Sderot (Israel Radio)
08:50 Hamas official: Israel didn`t ask to include Shalit in truce agreement (Israel Radio)
08:39 Reports of exchanges of fire near Jabalya refugee camp in northern Gaza (Reuters)
08:34 Home Front Command instructs residents of south to remain in secure areas (Haaretz)
08:25 IDF: Residents of south must still follow Home Front Command orders (Israel Radio)
08:13 Reports of exchanges of fire in Gaza Strip, despite cease-fire (Israel Radio) [/quote]
08:50 Hamas official: Israel didn`t ask to include Shalit in truce agreement (Israel Radio)
Wait a go HAMAS, ruined everything to kill some Jews!
edit:I thought auto merging was still on the forums ;(
[QUOTE=GunFox;13274822]What?[/QUOTE]
First statement was meant to be sarcastic, second was meant to be serious time.
[QUOTE=GunFox;13274398]Except the fact remains that Hamas is hell bent on the destruction of Israel and Jews. I'm not sure there is a lot of room for negotiation. I feel like chances are Hamas is just going to continue trying to kill Israelis and take more land.
And once Hamas becomes a serious threat to Israel, the United States will step in. Israel is far too valuable and Hamas is too easy of a PR target for us to let it slide. Furthermore Israel is an investment by the United States. They owe us an obscene amount of money.
For a second there I felt we had hit common ground, but actually it just looks like you want Israel to give up and back off so that Hamas can get stronger and take over Israel. Which is, of all the possible outcomes, the least likely. Total genocide of the Palestinian people is far more likely to occur long before they successfully reclaim Israel. And unfortunately preferable to the alternative as Hamas would undoubtedly begin ethnically cleansing Israel/New Palestine, because again their stated goal is the death of all Jews in the region.[/QUOTE]
Their goal isn't to "kill all Jews", but to get back their homeland. The removal of Israel, and the removal of Jews, are two entirely different things.
And you're saying the total genocide of Palestinians would be preferable to them getting their homeland back and stop living in subsistence conditions? I see.
[QUOTE=nono345;13271764]pretty good K/D
i'm impressed, but I think america would do better[/QUOTE]
Probably worse. America has better weapons.
Unless they got lazy and just carpet bombed everything.
[QUOTE=Karskin;13268983]I'll bet my account that Palestine will fire rockets again before the year is out.[/QUOTE]
That's like saying I bet it'll rain this year.
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7836205.stm[/url]
I'll bet my account that Israel won't move.
Somebody: "Israel should give the palestinians back some land, maybe return to 1967 borders."
JIDF: "ZOMG ZOMG ANTI-SEMITE!! YOU'RE CLEARLY RACIST AGAINST JEWS BECAUSE GOD PROMISED US THIS LAND! YOU BLATANTLY SUPPORT TERRORISM!!"
[QUOTE=Thom12255;13275189]08:50 Hamas official: Israel didn`t ask to include Shalit in truce agreement (Israel Radio)
Wait a go HAMAS, ruined everything to kill some Jews!
edit:I thought auto merging was still on the forums ;([/QUOTE]
It's not really fair to Hamas that the IDF stayed in Gaza during the ceasefire. Israel is just going to use this as an excuse to keep bombing Gaza. We'll see if Hamas actually goes along with the ceasefire.
[QUOTE=Anonim;13277251]Their goal isn't to "kill all Jews", but to get back their homeland. The removal of Israel, and the removal of Jews, are two entirely different things.
And you're saying the total genocide of Palestinians would be preferable to them getting their homeland back and stop living in subsistence conditions? I see.[/QUOTE]
No I'm saying total genocide of Palestinians is preferable to the total genocide of Jewish Israelis. Jewish Israelis are contributing members of the world, the Palestinians would undoubtedly wind up like their allies, Iran.
What do you think would happen if Hamas successfully gained control over Israel?
[QUOTE=GunFox;13284144]No I'm saying total genocide of Palestinians is preferable to the total genocide of Jewish Israelis. Jewish Israelis are contributing members of the world, the Palestinians would undoubtedly wind up like their allies, Iran.
What do you think would happen if Hamas successfully gained control over Israel?[/QUOTE]
umm
p sure neither is preferable but ok dude
[QUOTE=GunFox;13284144]No I'm saying total genocide of Palestinians is preferable to the total genocide of Jewish Israelis. Jewish Israelis are contributing members of the world, the Palestinians would undoubtedly wind up like their allies, Iran.[/QUOTE]
[img]http://sa.tweek.us/emots/images/emot-goonsay.gif[/img]
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Reply with only an emote" - GunFox))[/highlight]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.