West should be more "tolerant" of holocaust deniers...

[Blue Max]

I once read in a book, ( can not remember the title now ) a claim that the early Nazi plan to deal with the Jewish people that they had in detention was to ship them to Madagascar. Obviously if this was ever a real plan it did not happen, but I still could not help thinking that subsequently Madagascar would have been turned into paradise, just like the Jews turned the desert into orchards.

 

[GO!!!]

Yeah of course, you guys are right.

No one should critisize Israel, after all, they are so much better than their neighbours, so they must be right.

The fact that the problems in the ME right now are largely the result of western tampering (installing large groups of immigrants armed with nuclear weapons, drawing borders where there were none, lumping ethnic groups who hated each other together, then bringing down ideologically disagreeable governments) seems to be lost on you guys.

Israel is a liability to the west that compromises the possibility of peace between the Arabs and the western world. Our blind support of such a regime is foolhardy and shortsighted. In short, we need the Arabs as allies more than we need the Israelis.

As for me being hypocritical in not "giving the indians their land back", I may not be givin it back, but I am not building walls around their communities and assassinating their leaders with Apaches and Hellfires either. Comparing the NA indian to the palestinians is RTFO.

 

[Jungle]

As for me being hypocritical in not "giving the indians their land back", I may not be givin it back, but I am not building walls around their communities and assassinating their leaders with Apaches and Hellfires either.

If they started to conduct weekly suicide attacks in your community you would...

 

[48Highlander]

If they started to conduct weekly suicide attacks in your community you would...

Yep.  Oka Crisis ring a bell?  We called in the army for a fairly minor conflict.

How about the FLQ crisis?  Martial law?  All over a couple mailbox bombs and an assasination.

Now try to imagine what would happen if American Indians decided to form a coalition and begin to bomb coffee-shops, bus stops, schools, etc.

We might have managed to find a way to live in peace, but it wasn't because WE did the right thing - it was because the Natives were generaly willing to make deals and take what we gave them.  They have a much more valid grievance against us than palestine does against Israel.

 

[GO!!!]

Yep.   Oka Crisis ring a bell?   We called in the army for a fairly minor conflict.

How about the FLQ crisis?   Martial law?   All over a couple mailbox bombs and an assasination.

Now try to imagine what would happen if American Indians decided to form a coalition and begin to bomb coffee-shops, bus stops, schools, etc.

We might have managed to find a way to live in peace, but it wasn't because WE did the right thing - it was because the Natives were generaly willing to make deals and take what we gave them.   They have a much more valid grievance against us than palestine does against Israel.

The FLQ crisis has nothing to do with indians, or israel!

The internal use of the CF and the imposition of martial law also has no relation to the Israeli question.

NA indians will never resort to violence against us as long as we continue to pay them vast sums of money for wrongs committed almost 200 years ago. NA indians do not outnumber us 10 to 1, and we are not killing their leaders every time a native does something dumb. We hold the individual responsible. We do not exclude indians from living in our cities, deny their children citizenship, force them through checkpoints in order to go home or to work etc.

 

[Clément Barbeau Vermet]

All we did here was pick a group of people unable to oppose us, and take a big slice of their land for the Jews to call home. I think this was the most anti-semitic move of all - here you have the west being so tolerant that they were willing to export all of the Jews somewhere else, where, coincidientally, the locals are too weak to fight them off.

All we did here is give back a very small slice of Israel to Jews because this land was THEIRS, it has been been taken away from them by the Arabs. Since these Arabs had COLONISED a BIG part of Israel (Cisjordania, Jerusalem, west of Jordan, parts of Gaza and the very west of Sinai) the ONU decided that the new Israel would be what it is today. The Arabs were not happy=war.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  For the ''poor arabo-palestinians''...when the Israelis arrived in Gaza, most of it was sand, dust and rocks. The Israelis took these lands, and as Blue Max said, have turned them up into orchards. Now, more than 6 million people (almost as much as the pop. of Qc.) live in an area which is about 40 km wide for half of its width.

To the ones that are saying that Jews comming from Europe, America and Russia stole the lands of some arabo-palestinians, the ancestors of these Jews in question were moved from their country by the Arabs. To me it makes cense to give back a country (1/5 the size of the original one) to some people that have been oppressed for more than 2000 years by the rest of the world.

And for Iran, I just do not get that these guys have not wet learned not to attack Israel. Either they are extremely stubburn or immensely stupid. Maby both...

 

[zipperhead_cop]

So after all the finger pointing, what then?  Do we decide that Israel are bad guys and go smooch Arab butt to attempt to make peace?  How long after Israel gets annexed do you think it would take for those Arab states to start looking northward?  To go support their poor put down brothers in Muslim Albanian areas and maybe "make things better" in Turkey and so on.  Anyone who thinks that there is not an undercurrent of Islamic expansion has not been paying attention.  And who would you rather trust?  I think we have seen more than enough examples of middle east trustworthiness in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran and Iraq.  They smile and clasp their hands and say "Plees, my frien, you belief me, I could not lie, on my children life, I tell de trute" and within seconds they are blading you.  Look at the long leash that Saddam Husein had and he wasnt even an Islamist in the good books until after the Americans attacked.  
And dont forget the nature of the religion itself.  It requires its followers to work endlessly to forward the Islamic causes.  There is no end game, just keep smashing on until the planet is all Islamic.  These are the people we should sell the Israelis out to?
At least the Israelis make an effort towards diplomacy.  But what are you supposed to do when EMS workers are picking up toddler body parts in a roadway whose crime was nothing more than going to school?  Sure, they go in hard and obliterate an entire building, but if you see how complicit that whole population is with the terrorism, how can they not all be to blame.  It doesnt take a rocket scientist to know that after an Israeli school bus is blown up, and you and your neighbors are all partying in the street with the picture of the newly dead a$$hat and your next door neighbor is a Hammas leader that your house may be getting a new Hellfire sky light.  Hey stupid, dont be there!!  And all of the Israeli examples of poor behavior I have been seeing lobbed out are all from 20 years ago.  
Who is going to still be with us 20 years from now?  50 years?  My money is on the Israelis, not the fairweather Arab states.  

 

[xFusilier]

To the ones that are saying that Jews comming from Europe, America and Russia stole the lands of some arabo-palestinians, the ancestors of these Jews in question were moved from their country by the Arabs. To me it makes cense to give back a country (1/5 the size of the original one) to some people that have been oppressed for more than 2000 years by the rest of the world.

Actually they were moved by the Romans, by your logic perhaps Israel should have been established in the Vatican.  It is generally believed that the remenants of the Jews that stayed in the Levant converted to Islam during the Arab Crusades.

For the ''poor arabo-palestinians''...when the Israelis arrived in Gaza, most of it was sand, dust and rocks. The Israelis took these lands, and as Blue Max said, have turned them up into orchards. Now, more than 6 million people (almost as much as the pop. of Qc.) live in an area which is about 40 km wide for half of its width.

Agriculture, has alway been occuring in the Gaza Strip as well as the Occupied Territories, the only difference is the Israelis applied the principles of intensive agriculture and irrigation, the fact that they managed to develop large tracts of arable land where there was not, speaks only to Israeli application of technology not to Palestinain sloth.

How long after Israel gets annexed do you think it would take for those Arab states to start looking northward?  To go support their poor put down brothers in Muslim Albanian areas and maybe "make things better" in Turkey and so on

Not much of a worry in Turkey, largely the history of the Turkish state has been the army ensuring that it remains a secular republic, and seeing as the Turks have the largest army in NATO....

"Plees, my frien, you belief me, I could not lie, on my children life, I tell de trute" and within seconds they are blading you.

Wow, that was absolutely brillant, tell me now that you've managed to bring the debate to an all time low, perhaps you could purportrate offensive stereotypes about Israelis in the interest of bringing balance to the debate.

The current intifada came about for a few reasons.

1.  Neither side, Israeli or Palestinian had any intention of implementing the Oslo accords
2.  Election of a Right-wing gov't in Israel, culminated by the election of Ariel Sharon, who was basically the equivalent of the Palestinains electing Adolf Hitler, such is the revulsion the Palestinians hold for the man (see Sabra and Shatilla)
3.  Economic warfare being waged by the Netanyahu gov't through the implementation of closure on the West Bank, and the Israeli goverment warning tourist companies to stay away from the west bank
4.  Expansion of settlements in the West Bank
5.  The withdrawl of the IDF from South Lebanon which translated to a victory for Hezbollah on the Arab Street, and further increased the appeal of armed struggle in the Occupied Territories.

In the words of King Abdullah, sorting out the current situation in the Occupied Territories should be seen as a key stone in the war on terrorism, but in order for this to happen Israel is going to have to realize that it will have to make some real sacrifices in terms of territory, and it is politically unwilling to do this.  The only real solution to the problem will be to have the American gov't tie economic and military aid to Israel (of which they are the largest recipent) to progress at the peace table.

And all of the Israeli examples of poor behavior I have been seeing lobbed out are all from 20 years ago

Look up Sabra and Shatilla, or read Robert Fisk's Pity the Nation,with specific reference to the conduct of the IDF during Operation Grapes of Wrath, specifically with reference to the shelling of refugees sheltering near a FIJIBATT posn.

 

[xFusilier]

You would be correct, I'm talking about modern turkey, ie post revolutionary Turkey. As for asking Emperor Constantine, meet me in Constantinople with a flashlight and a shovel, and we'll ask him together.

 

[Infanteer]

:boring:

I've lost track of the conversation.  Who is the root of all evil now; the Jews, the Palestinians, the Arabs or the Americans?

 

[zipperhead_cop]

"Wow, that was absolutely brillant, tell me now that you've managed to bring the debate to an all time low, perhaps you could purportrate offensive stereotypes about Israelis in the interest of bringing balance to the debate."

a)  I imagine that these debates can get lower if we put our minds to it. ;D
b)  I appologize if my phonetic attempt at an accent was somehow offensive to you (are you put off by all accents or just Arabic ones?).  I havent quite got my Yiddish phonetics down, but rest assured when I do I will try to offend some other members at that point.
c)  My use of the dialect style comes from my personal experience in many situations, and was just an allegory for many global flip flops that we have witnessed over the years.  If you have many personal experiences to the contrary, then how wonderful for you.  If your experience comes from newsprint and in between book hardcovers, try not to get too ramped up.  This sort of stuff does happen, and for the record I acknowledge that it is NOT ALL THE TIME.


" but in order for this to happen Israel is going to have to realize that it will have to make some real sacrifices in terms of territory, and it is politically unwilling to do this"

So we should view Israel's force evacuation of settlers this week as what?  A cleverly disguised false attempt at a solution?  Regardless of the history, the only side that makes any genuine attempt to make things better is Israel.  And just wait.  As soon as the mood on "Arab Street" starts to turn a little more reconcilliatory expect some jagoff suicide bomber to go in, kill some innocents and provoke a military reaction.  And for what?  To keep the jihad nice and hot, and keep the popular support of the people who probably dont have a whole lot of access to unbiased media.  I cant quote them, but I do recall a PLO leader in recent years stating that even if Israel up and left the area all together, they would still hunt them out and try to exterminate them, because it is their holy duty.  How are you supposed to let your guard down and hold out the proverbial "olive branch" to that?  I'd build a big friggin wall too, and say "prove that you have a good reason to be in my country". 
Everyone thus far has expressed some kind of sympathy for the situation for both the Israelis and Palestinians  over there and agrees that a lasting peaceful resolution is the only thing that matters.  How about we start lobbing some suggestions around, and maybe someone who can do something about it might make it happen? 

 

[Clément Barbeau Vermet]

Actually they were moved by the Romans, by your logic perhaps Israel should have been established in the Vatican.

Good idea...N0, not at all. Why re-create a country on an other continent when the original country is in Palestine?                                                                                                                                     

The Romans did not move the Jews from Palestine, they simply occupied it until they were kicked out. It is the Arabs that did it. Not all at once, put over the centuries.

 

[Shec]

Actually they were moved by the Romans, by your logic perhaps Israel should have been established in the Vatican.   It is generally believed that the remenants of the Jews that stayed in the Levant converted to Islam during the Arab Crusades.

Not entirely true.    There has always been an unconverted Jewish presence in Jerusalem and in Safed.   The Moslems more or less tolerated Jewish religious freedom as long they were an unpoliticized and passive minority.    

A couple more observations.    Gaza's essential public utilities (power, telephone)   and infrastructure have been provided by Israel.   Unlike the Berlin Blockade the service has never been severed.

Finally, GO!!! - what's wrong with selective assassination of enemy leaders?   Seems like a legit military tactic to me.   You would prefer carpet bombing perhaps?

 

[Infanteer]

The Romans did not move the Jews from Palestine, they simply occupied it until they were kicked out.

Uhh, then can someone explain to me what the Diaspora is?

 

[Infanteer]

Finally, GO!!! - what's wrong with selective assassination of enemy leaders?   Seems like a legit military tactic to me.

+1 - and from what I understand, it has been effective in really screwing with Hamas organization.

The notion of "assassination" becomes a sticky debating point between "law enforcement" and "military" approaches to dealing with terrorists.   There were multiple occasions where the US had the ability to take out Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan prior to 9/11 but refused to do so due to legal ramifications that the Justice Department pushed in its "G-Man" mentality to taking out terrorists.   After 9/11, I think this preference has faded (thankfully) and despite the fact that the US seems to condemn Israel's "retributive" tactics, there seems to be tacit approval due to the fact that the US has used the same methods to take out Al Qa'ida figures (ie: the Predator Hellfire strike in Yemen).

There was a good editorial in the National Post a few days back by the fellow who Spielburg's new movie Munich is based upon that dealt with the notion of "retributive attacks" - I think it was taken from the reprint of George Jonas' Vengeance.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

We'll see if it works.  I would bet a chunk of cash that the Israelis have made a real dent in their organization and the terrorists are providing the illusion that they are interested in talking so they can regroup and reorganize.  If anything, they should press the attack and wipe them out once and for all.  Not too huggy feely, but decisive.

 

[GO!!!]

We'll see if it works.   I would bet a chunk of cash that the Israelis have made a real dent in their organization and the terrorists are providing the illusion that they are interested in talking so they can regroup and reorganize.   If anything, they should press the attack and wipe them out once and for all.   Not too huggy feely, but decisive.

Using a ceasefire to "regroup and reorganise" just like the Israelis did during the Yom Kippur war in 1973, when the US supplied them with over 22,000 tons of gear using their shiny new C5 Galaxies?

What a dirty trick!  :

 

[R0B]

I can't vouch for the accuracy of your claims, however, I'm going to point out the point at which the relevancy of such arguments falls apart.  There is a HUGE difference between a "second class citizen" status which is the result of individual mindsets, and the systematic type of discrimination which exists in many third-world nations.  Picture Jews attempting to live in any Arab state, and try to tell me that they would not be subject to systemic discrimination at all levels.

An argument similar to yours can be made about mexicans living in the US as well as, say, chinese immigrants in Canada.  Certainly both of our great nations have sweat shops and underground prostitution rings.  In many cases, immigrants spend thousands of dollars to get into the country, only to be subject to poor living conditions and forced labour.  However, Canada, the US, and even Israel, provide the same legal and civil rights to all of their citizens regaurdless of race or religion.

Peace has little to do with the way they treat their citizens.  Israeli Arabs might not all feel they are being treated fairly, however, the vast majority of them are quite aware that they're far better off living in Israel than in any neighbouring state.

Obviously, you've never been to Israel. Israeli Arabs feel as if they're being mistreated, and they are. They might have the civil and legal rights in theory, but these rights are often disregarded in practice. 

As far as the seige mentality and the desire for peace go, Israel has repeatedly demonstrated their desire for peace in the way they have dealt with other nations.  At Camp David in 1978, Israel agreed to return a land area about twice the size of present-day Israel to Egypt in return for peace.  Similar deals were made in the past with Syria and Jordan.  The only current problem is the question of Palestine.  Israel has managed to make peace with every neighouring nation EXCEPT Palestine, and that's largely due to the fact that Palestine does not attack through traditional military means, and doesn't have a government capable of controling the terrorist networks which continue to wage war on Israel.  If Palestine weren't in such a wretched state, they would have doubtless reached an agreement with Israel decades ago.  The current problem isn't the mindset of Israelis, it's the inability of the Palestinian Authority to control matters within it's own borders.

Israel has only demonstrated its disregard for the Arab world. This land you mention it returning was land that it had recently seized by force and placed under military occupation. Israel had no intention of ever keeping it. Israel has been able to make peace with every neighboring state except Palestine because it isn't located in the middle of any other neighboring states.

Sorry GO, you're RTFO on this one.

"We" didn't just one day decide, hey, there's this great spot full of brown people, let's kick them all out and throw the Jews in there.  If you know your history, you'll realize that Jerusalem and the surrounding area have always had a significant Jewish population.  And they've fought over the area for centuries, just as Christians and Muslims have.  If there's one thing the Christians and Muslims have in common, it's that during the Crusades they all had a wonderfull time slaughtering Jews.  So the whole area has been a crap-pit for centuries.

So, along comes the second world war, with it's millions of displaced jews.  Where do we put them?

Well, you can stick them somewhere in Europe....where there's a pretty good chance they'll get slaughtered again.

I suppose China or Japan could have been considered, but we would have had to fight another war just to get them to allow it.

You can try and relocate them to North America, but shipping millions of people over the ocean isn't exactly a quick procedure.

OR, you can stick them in the middle-east.  Where they've had some sort of a claim to the land for a while, and they ALREADY have their own communities set up.


So that's what they did.  Keep in mind that at the time the whole REGION was called Palestine, and was a protectorate of the Brits.  Jordan, Israel, and Palestine didn't exist as individual entities.  When the Brits finaly got sick of Jews and Arabs killing eachother, they turned the problem over to the highly-vaunted UN.  It was the UN which decided to partition the land in order to solve the problem.
  80% of that land went to the arabs.  Actualy, more accurately, 90% went to the arabs.  80% was used to make jordan, 10% to make palestine.  You remember how "we" partitioned Yugoslavia?  UN did the same thing when they created Israel - they took the areas which had the highest Jewish population, and made them into a Jewish state.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. I'm curious as to whether you're a pathological liar, or if you've been lied to all this time, and you actually think you're recounting facts.

Jews have been immigrating to Palestine since the early 1800s. During the late ninetieth century, Zionism became popular, and many more Jews moved to the Palestine area. Theodore Herzl first requested from the Sultan that the Jews be given a state in Palestine but despite his generous offers, he was denied because the Sultan did not want to wrong the Arab Palestinian population. Herzl was later successful in convincing the British to create the British Mandate of Palestine for the Jews after the First World War. I should note, maybe, that the First World War occurred before the Second. Over 100,000 Jews entered Palestine during the 1920s, and anti-Semitic violence exploded as soon as they arrived, culminating in the Great Uprising, which began in 1936. By 1945, there were some 450,000 Jews in Israel. Most had come before the outbreak of major hostilities, and they were not "put" there by Allies. In fact, the British refused to lift restrictions on Jewish immigration to Palestine and accept the bulk of Jewish displaced persons in Europe, despite a formal request from President Truman.

I once read in a book, ( can not remember the title now ) a claim that the early Nazi plan to deal with the Jewish people that they had in detention was to ship them to Madagascar. Obviously if this was ever a real plan it did not happen, but I still could not help thinking that subsequently Madagascar would have been turned into paradise, just like the Jews turned the desert into orchards.

Zionists considered Uganda, Argentina, Madagascar and Palestine as future homes for the Judenstaat. Palestine was ultimately selected because of its historical significance, and because it already had a community of European Jews.
Madagascar would probably have been a great choice. The small native population could have easily been exiled to mainland Africa, and as an island, it would be pretty easy to defend.

To the ones that are saying that Jews comming from Europe, America and Russia stole the lands of some arabo-palestinians, the ancestors of these Jews in question were moved from their country by the Arabs. To me it makes cense to give back a country (1/5 the size of the original one) to some people that have been oppressed for more than 2000 years by the rest of the world.

Why not give back 1/5 of the United States to the Amerindians?

 

[muskrat89]

I'm curious as to whether you're a pathological liar

.. and I'm curious as to whether you've read the Conduct Guidelines. Keep it civil please.


Army.ca Staff

 

[48Highlander]

Ah, yes, R0B.  I was wondering when you'd show up.  Now I get to ignore your gormless diatribes in this thread too.