Israel will never withdraw from Golan Heights - Netanyahu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

What makes you think I'm a Zionist or a Jew? The voices in your head again?

---

Perhaps it's because you defend the indefensible and resort, in the absence of solid arguments, to diversionary fluff and also project imaginary things that are not real.

---

Tell me clearly what this "indefensible" is that you think I'm defending?

---

Pseudolus mentioned one thing.
There are many others. To me, the biggest one is the settlements. They just exacerbate the situation and are undoubtedly a tactic to eventually say "We can't evict these poor thousands of Russian immigrants that we encouraged and helped to colonise land that is not Israeli land".
Tell me, what defense is available for continued settlement expansion?

---

Pseudo did nothing other than hurl insults and false accusations.

Now what is it you think that I'm trying to defend?

Read my posts clearly and you'll find that I've consistently stated that the Palestine issue is as a result of two seemingly contradictory promises made by Britain to both the Arabs and the Zionists over the allocation of ex-Ottoman Empire territory.

I've given references to all the main points involved, and laid the blame for the Palestinian conflict on neither Arab/Muslim nor Jew, but on Britain.

The resulting conflicts and wars there since are a horrifying British game of divide and rule made worse as other nations got involved as the stakes got higher.

Is that not clear enough for you?

---

Where did you pull this load of nonsense from? You've been watching that history of Israel Zionist edition again?

:chitown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

I hope Israel keeps the West Bank too.

The Arabs got 75% of the Palestinian territory that Britain held the mandate for after WW1.

They wanted the lot, still do and they want Europe now.

They can get lost, weep rivers of blood and just carry on bumping themselves off as they do until they're all nothing more than a bad dream, the inbred bunch of grafting, grabbing, greedy no-hopers.

---

See - nothing has changed. A regular son of zion, spouting the zionist diatribes of death and murder, and all the while you believe that a buunch of european faux Jews are some how justified in being given another people's land by a bunch of british faux jews in London.

Oh... and Piwi is supporting you - you therefore know you are wrong.

^ :dnftt:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

^ https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2016/04/1257.jpg

---

OK ok ok man of Zion - we get ya!

This is quality entertainment.

Now then lads, Queensberry rules, no kicking, biting, gouging or scratching, no hitting below the belt.....

Ah no, fuck it, below the belt is just fine.

Carry on.

:popcornpop:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

What makes you think I'm a Zionist or a Jew? The voices in your head again?

---

Perhaps it's because you defend the indefensible and resort, in the absence of solid arguments, to diversionary fluff and also project imaginary things that are not real.

---

Tell me clearly what this "indefensible" is that you think I'm defending?

---

Pseudolus mentioned one thing.
There are many others. To me, the biggest one is the settlements. They just exacerbate the situation and are undoubtedly a tactic to eventually say "We can't evict these poor thousands of Russian immigrants that we encouraged and helped to colonise land that is not Israeli land".
Tell me, what defense is available for continued settlement expansion?

---

Pseudo did nothing other than hurl insults and false accusations.

Now what is it you think that I'm trying to defend?

Read my posts clearly and you'll find that I've consistently stated that the Palestine issue is as a result of two seemingly contradictory promises made by Britain to both the Arabs and the Zionists over the allocation of ex-Ottoman Empire territory.

I've given references to all the main points involved, and laid the blame for the Palestinian conflict on neither Arab/Muslim nor Jew, but on Britain.

The resulting conflicts and wars there since are a horrifying British game of divide and rule made worse as other nations got involved as the stakes got higher.

Is that not clear enough for you?

---

No, Pseudo mentioned white phosphorous, which is a nasty, indiscriminate, illegal chemical weapon that has burned many children and innocent civilians.

I don't disagree with you regarding British culpability. Utter bastards. But it's the now that needs addressing. How can Israel's settlement building be defended? What would you do if your lands were taken from you?
Israel is deliberately trying to enlarge it's land-holding, and in doing so, stealing the land from the Palestinians. It's an international crime that has been going on for decades. Yet Israel is defended by the US and zionist sympathisers the world over.

Don't let this spoil your day but the UNSC has made a judgement.

"Reviewing Israel claim to the disputed territory, the UN Security Council members “expressed deep concern” over Netanyahu’s stand and “stressed that the status of the Golan remains unchanged.”

Speaking to reporters following the UNSC meeting, its rotating president and China’s UN envoy, Liu Jieyi, stressed that Tel Aviv’s move to impose its laws in the Golan is against Council resolution 497, and are “null and void and without international legal effect.”


Following UNSC comment on the issue, Israel’s Ambassador Danny Danon rejected the complaint, accusing the 15-member body of “unfair criticism of Israel.”

https://www.rt.com/news/341043-golan...s-israel-unsc/

“Holding a meeting on this topic completely ignores the reality in the Middle East,” he said. “While thousands of people are being massacred in Syria, and millions of citizens have become refugees, the Security Council has chosen to focus on Israel, the only true democracy in the Middle East.”


Maybe the now Israeli leaders "exceptionalism", which has now been shown to be be an illusion, will be trodden on with greater frequency. The fuckers have got away with too much brute force for too long.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrG

I'm sure you will feel the same when some Middle Eastern horde take over your little patch of Europe like European Zionists took over Palestine.

---

If Europeans start blowing each other up and the only priority is some stupid religious doctrine, I would say go ahead.

But maybe you forgot just one thing. The Middle Eastern horde called muslims have already arrived in Europe and are doing the same as in Israel. Israel is a scapegoat for all muslim problems in this world.


Example of Hordes from the ME.

https://teakdoor.com/world-news/16507...-arrested.html


P.S. You can never negotiate with a muslim, because they can not be trusted. Erdogan is fine example.

---

I didn't forget anything.

I'm afraid you miss the point. Not surprising, since your defense of Israeli takeover of Palestinian land which prompted it seems to fade when the position is turned against your own homeland.

1) If Israel is actively seeking to exterminate civilians then that is a crime. I am not authorizing the commission of crimes. (Of course Assad wouldn't get reprimanded.)
2) Do all Hamas and Hezbollah wear the uniforms / outfits of a military / combat force ?
3) Do these groups launch strikes from civilian areas ?
4) Do they store armaments in civilian zones ?
5) 1967 territory taken by Israel during the war surely made "negotiations" tougher for the losers 49 years ago.
6) What was it called in America...ah yes , 'Manifest Destiny.'
7) The UN is a farce.
8) War is hell. Once it's unleashed innocent people die along with soldiers and sadly peace moves further into the sunset.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Perhaps it's because you defend the indefensible and resort, in the absence of solid arguments, to diversionary fluff and also project imaginary things that are not real.

---

Tell me clearly what this "indefensible" is that you think I'm defending?

---

Pseudolus mentioned one thing.
There are many others. To me, the biggest one is the settlements. They just exacerbate the situation and are undoubtedly a tactic to eventually say "We can't evict these poor thousands of Russian immigrants that we encouraged and helped to colonise land that is not Israeli land".
Tell me, what defense is available for continued settlement expansion?

---

Pseudo did nothing other than hurl insults and false accusations.

Now what is it you think that I'm trying to defend?

Read my posts clearly and you'll find that I've consistently stated that the Palestine issue is as a result of two seemingly contradictory promises made by Britain to both the Arabs and the Zionists over the allocation of ex-Ottoman Empire territory.

I've given references to all the main points involved, and laid the blame for the Palestinian conflict on neither Arab/Muslim nor Jew, but on Britain.

The resulting conflicts and wars there since are a horrifying British game of divide and rule made worse as other nations got involved as the stakes got higher.

Is that not clear enough for you?

---

No, Pseudo mentioned white phosphorous, which is a nasty, indiscriminate, illegal chemical weapon that has burned many children and innocent civilians.

I don't disagree with you regarding British culpability. Utter bastards. But it's the now that needs addressing. How can Israel's settlement building be defended? What would you do if your lands were taken from you?
Israel is deliberately trying to enlarge it's land-holding, and in doing so, stealing the land from the Palestinians. It's an international crime that has been going on for decades. Yet Israel is defended by the US and zionist sympathisers the world over.

---

I take your point.
In my opinion, all warfare except as necessary in self-defence is immoral. That then begs the question, "What is necessary self-defence?"

Clearly the use of chemical weapons (or any weaponry) used against non-combatants is immoral and by world consensus illegal.
The use of white phosphorous at all is unnecessary, immoral and illegal.

Since Israel's necessary acquisition of both the West Bank and the Golan in self-defence against invading neighbouring armies in 1967, there have been no further extension of its borders or claims to more land.

Without establishing practically defendable borders between Israel and Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, Israel would be continually vulnerable to attack from its Arab neighbours, who as predominantly Muslim states have an avowed and openly declared intent of completely annihilating Israel and all Jews.

The West Bank was invaded and annexed by Jordan in 1950, cutting off the Jordan river and its waters from Israel, and allowing Jordan access to the weakest point on Israel's border, at a point only 8.5 miles across Israel to the Mediterranean Sea, 3 hours marching time across mainly even agricultural land, with unopposed armoured columns reaching the sea in probably 10 minutes.

The Golan situation is also a defence against both Syrian and Jordanian intentions to divert water from Israel, so those head-water sources for the Jordan valley need to be continually defended against any further curtailment by Arab neighbours.

Further, the Golan is a militarily strategic high ground, used pre-1967 By Syria to bombard civilian peoples and settlements in the Galeel.

All's fair in love and war, it's been said.

I beg to differ, as both situations are insanities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

The West Bank was invaded and annexed by Jordan in 1950, cutting off the Jordan river and its waters from Israel, and allowing Jordan access to the weakest point on Israel's border, at a point only 8.5 miles across Israel to the Mediterranean Sea, 3 hours marching time across mainly even agricultural land, with unopposed armoured columns reaching the sea in probably 10 minutes. The Golan situation is also a defence against both Syrian and Jordanian intentions to divert water from Israel, so those head-water sources for the Jordan valley need to be continually defended against any further curtailment by Arab neighbours. Further, the Golan is a militarily strategic high ground,

---

Many countries have to share water resources and usually do it through negotiations rather than brute force. Many countries have borders with other countries that maybe are not the most strategic.

Are these reasons to invade and purge/exterminate one race from it's recognised homeland? Is the aggressor nation now to be given carte blance to employ a programme last used by NAZIs?

Or are you blind to the similarities?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhOh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

The West Bank was invaded and annexed by Jordan in 1950, cutting off the Jordan river and its waters from Israel, and allowing Jordan access to the weakest point on Israel's border, at a point only 8.5 miles across Israel to the Mediterranean Sea, 3 hours marching time across mainly even agricultural land, with unopposed armoured columns reaching the sea in probably 10 minutes. The Golan situation is also a defence against both Syrian and Jordanian intentions to divert water from Israel, so those head-water sources for the Jordan valley need to be continually defended against any further curtailment by Arab neighbours. Further, the Golan is a militarily strategic high ground,

---

Many countries have to share water resources and usually do it through negotiations rather than brute force. Many countries have borders with other countries that maybe are not the most strategic.

Are these reasons to invade and purge/exterminate one race from it's recognised homeland? Is the aggressor nation now to be given carte blance to employ a programme last used by NAZIs?

Or are you blind to the similarities?

---

Exterminate, Purge ? what did you think Egypt ,Syria and Jordan have in mind when they made a 3 pronged attack on Israel in 1967 ,to sell them Double glazing units ?:smileylaughing:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neverna

Who is the mod in Speakers Corner? He/she has gone AWOL. Has Looper been de-modded?

:confused:

---

Whining Bitch :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Tell me clearly what this "indefensible" is that you think I'm defending?

---

Pseudolus mentioned one thing.
There are many others. To me, the biggest one is the settlements. They just exacerbate the situation and are undoubtedly a tactic to eventually say "We can't evict these poor thousands of Russian immigrants that we encouraged and helped to colonise land that is not Israeli land".
Tell me, what defense is available for continued settlement expansion?

---

Pseudo did nothing other than hurl insults and false accusations.

Now what is it you think that I'm trying to defend?

Read my posts clearly and you'll find that I've consistently stated that the Palestine issue is as a result of two seemingly contradictory promises made by Britain to both the Arabs and the Zionists over the allocation of ex-Ottoman Empire territory.

I've given references to all the main points involved, and laid the blame for the Palestinian conflict on neither Arab/Muslim nor Jew, but on Britain.

The resulting conflicts and wars there since are a horrifying British game of divide and rule made worse as other nations got involved as the stakes got higher.

Is that not clear enough for you?

---

No, Pseudo mentioned white phosphorous, which is a nasty, indiscriminate, illegal chemical weapon that has burned many children and innocent civilians.

I don't disagree with you regarding British culpability. Utter bastards. But it's the now that needs addressing. How can Israel's settlement building be defended? What would you do if your lands were taken from you?
Israel is deliberately trying to enlarge it's land-holding, and in doing so, stealing the land from the Palestinians. It's an international crime that has been going on for decades. Yet Israel is defended by the US and zionist sympathisers the world over.

---

I take your point.
In my opinion, all warfare except as necessary in self-defence is immoral. That then begs the question, "What is necessary self-defence?"

Clearly the use of chemical weapons (or any weaponry) used against non-combatants is immoral and by world consensus illegal.
The use of white phosphorous at all is unnecessary, immoral and illegal.

Since Israel's necessary acquisition of both the West Bank and the Golan in self-defence against invading neighbouring armies in 1967, there have been no further extension of its borders or claims to more land.

Without establishing practically defendable borders between Israel and Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, Israel would be continually vulnerable to attack from its Arab neighbours, who as predominantly Muslim states have an avowed and openly declared intent of completely annihilating Israel and all Jews.

The West Bank was invaded and annexed by Jordan in 1950, cutting off the Jordan river and its waters from Israel, and allowing Jordan access to the weakest point on Israel's border, at a point only 8.5 miles across Israel to the Mediterranean Sea, 3 hours marching time across mainly even agricultural land, with unopposed armoured columns reaching the sea in probably 10 minutes.

The Golan situation is also a defence against both Syrian and Jordanian intentions to divert water from Israel, so those head-water sources for the Jordan valley need to be continually defended against any further curtailment by Arab neighbours.

Further, the Golan is a militarily strategic high ground, used pre-1967 By Syria to bombard civilian peoples and settlements in the Galeel.

All's fair in love and war, it's been said.

I beg to differ, as both situations are insanities.

---

Thanks for your considered response.

What is necessary self-defence, you ask.
Well, the Palestinians throw stones at occupying military and are condemned and/or shot for it, while Israel forcibly takes over swathes of land, chasing out the non-Jew inhabitants and is condoned for it.

You ignore that Israel has stable treaties with both Jordan and Egypt.
You also ignore that, although self-defence is warranted, it is not warranted when it is pre-emptive and at the expense of a third party.....That's like saying you would agree that I should come over to your house, punch you in the nose and steal your gun, and move the fence posts back into your yard, all because I believed that you might one day attack me.
You're saying that, as my next door neighbour, if your kids stood on your upper story balcony and threw stones on my roof, instead of throwing stones back at them, I should take over your balcony and claim it as mine. You'd accept that on the grounds of my argument that the kids might go onto the balcony again and throw stones again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhOh

Don't let this spoil your day but the UNSC has made a judgement.

"Reviewing Israel claim to the disputed territory, the UN Security Council members “expressed deep concern” over Netanyahu’s stand and “stressed that the status of the Golan remains unchanged.”

Speaking to reporters following the UNSC meeting, its rotating president and China’s UN envoy, Liu Jieyi, stressed that Tel Aviv’s move to impose its laws in the Golan is against Council resolution 497, and are “null and void and without international legal effect.”

Following UNSC comment on the issue, Israel’s Ambassador Danny Danon rejected the complaint, accusing the 15-member body of “unfair criticism of Israel.”

https://www.rt.com/news/341043-golan...s-israel-unsc/

“Holding a meeting on this topic completely ignores the reality in the Middle East,” he said. “While thousands of people are being massacred in Syria, and millions of citizens have become refugees, the Security Council has chosen to focus on Israel, the only true democracy in the Middle East.”

Maybe the now Israeli leaders "exceptionalism", which has now been shown to be be an illusion, will be trodden on with greater frequency. The fuckers have got away with too much brute force for too long.

---

China's comments are a screaming joke! So are yours. Brute force? WTF?

Look at China's record of brute force murders, land acquisition and human rights abuses throughout China, Xinxiang Tibet and the South China Seas, glaring examples of Chinese hypocricy and fraud, while Russia's annexing of the Crimea shows up their hypocrisy. US and Britain have have no moral high ground to stand on after their rapes of Iraq and Libya

Meanwhile, Arab attacks on Israeli civilians and soldiers are an almost daily event, with suicidal youngsters wanting to go to lalaland through murder and Gaza schoolkids perform plays enacting murders of Jews.

The toothless, inept UN Security Council's made up of ;

China, an imperialist land grabber, France and UK, both initiated the Palestine carve up, so have no moral right to vote on the issue either, Russia and the United States bombing the hell out of Syria and want the Golan oil.

All the above are major arms dealers and have power of veto, so control the UN;

While;
Angola =USA and China dependent
Egypt =Muslim
Japan = USA toady
Malaysia = Muslim
New Zealand = PC
Senegal = Muslim
Spain = anti Israel, Jew basher
Ukraine = bi-valent EU wannabee
Uruguay = pro Israel
Venezuela = pro-Arab

A nicely balanced non-partisan bunch elected to rule on global peace and security eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

Pseudolus mentioned one thing.
There are many others. To me, the biggest one is the settlements. They just exacerbate the situation and are undoubtedly a tactic to eventually say "We can't evict these poor thousands of Russian immigrants that we encouraged and helped to colonise land that is not Israeli land".
Tell me, what defense is available for continued settlement expansion?

---

Pseudo did nothing other than hurl insults and false accusations.

Now what is it you think that I'm trying to defend?

Read my posts clearly and you'll find that I've consistently stated that the Palestine issue is as a result of two seemingly contradictory promises made by Britain to both the Arabs and the Zionists over the allocation of ex-Ottoman Empire territory.

I've given references to all the main points involved, and laid the blame for the Palestinian conflict on neither Arab/Muslim nor Jew, but on Britain.

The resulting conflicts and wars there since are a horrifying British game of divide and rule made worse as other nations got involved as the stakes got higher.

Is that not clear enough for you?

---

No, Pseudo mentioned white phosphorous, which is a nasty, indiscriminate, illegal chemical weapon that has burned many children and innocent civilians.

I don't disagree with you regarding British culpability. Utter bastards. But it's the now that needs addressing. How can Israel's settlement building be defended? What would you do if your lands were taken from you?
Israel is deliberately trying to enlarge it's land-holding, and in doing so, stealing the land from the Palestinians. It's an international crime that has been going on for decades. Yet Israel is defended by the US and zionist sympathisers the world over.

---

I take your point.
In my opinion, all warfare except as necessary in self-defence is immoral. That then begs the question, "What is necessary self-defence?"

Clearly the use of chemical weapons (or any weaponry) used against non-combatants is immoral and by world consensus illegal.
The use of white phosphorous at all is unnecessary, immoral and illegal.

Since Israel's necessary acquisition of both the West Bank and the Golan in self-defence against invading neighbouring armies in 1967, there have been no further extension of its borders or claims to more land.

Without establishing practically defendable borders between Israel and Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, Israel would be continually vulnerable to attack from its Arab neighbours, who as predominantly Muslim states have an avowed and openly declared intent of completely annihilating Israel and all Jews.

The West Bank was invaded and annexed by Jordan in 1950, cutting off the Jordan river and its waters from Israel, and allowing Jordan access to the weakest point on Israel's border, at a point only 8.5 miles across Israel to the Mediterranean Sea, 3 hours marching time across mainly even agricultural land, with unopposed armoured columns reaching the sea in probably 10 minutes.

The Golan situation is also a defence against both Syrian and Jordanian intentions to divert water from Israel, so those head-water sources for the Jordan valley need to be continually defended against any further curtailment by Arab neighbours.

Further, the Golan is a militarily strategic high ground, used pre-1967 By Syria to bombard civilian peoples and settlements in the Galeel.

All's fair in love and war, it's been said.

I beg to differ, as both situations are insanities.

---

Thanks for your considered response.

What is necessary self-defence, you ask.
Well, the Palestinians throw stones at occupying military and are condemned and/or shot for it, while Israel forcibly takes over swathes of land, chasing out the non-Jew inhabitants and is condoned for it.

You ignore that Israel has stable treaties with both Jordan and Egypt.
You also ignore that, although self-defence is warranted, it is not warranted when it is pre-emptive and at the expense of a third party.....That's like saying you would agree that I should come over to your house, punch you in the nose and steal your gun, and move the fence posts back into your yard, all because I believed that you might one day attack me.
You're saying that, as my next door neighbour, if your kids stood on your upper story balcony and threw stones on my roof, instead of throwing stones back at them, I should take over your balcony and claim it as mine. You'd accept that on the grounds of my argument that the kids might go onto the balcony again and throw stones again.

---

Egypt and Jordan signed the peace deal with Israel long after they had their arses kicked :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maanaam

.

---

Thanks for your considered response.

What is necessary self-defence, you ask.
(a)Well, the Palestinians throw stones at occupying military and are condemned and/or shot for it, while(b) Israel forcibly takes over swathes of land, chasing out the non-Jew inhabitants and is condoned for it.

(c)You ignore that Israel has stable treaties with both Jordan and Egypt.

(d)You also ignore that, although self-defence is warranted, it is not warranted when it is pre-emptive and at the expense of a third party.....That's like saying you would agree that I should come over to your house, punch you in the nose and steal your gun, and move the fence posts back into your yard, all because I believed that you might one day attack me.

(e)You're saying that, as my next door neighbour, if your kids stood on your upper story balcony and threw stones on my roof, instead of throwing stones back at them, I should take over your balcony and claim it as mine. You'd accept that on the grounds of my argument that the kids might go onto the balcony again and throw stones again.[/QUOTE]


-----

a) What kind of parent sends their kids out into the street to play in the traffic, or in this case to throw stones at and provoke authorities? Meanwhile adults (not kids) join in too, and rocks can kill, thrown at soldiers, civilians or vehicles.
So how are those attacks to be curbed? By asking the Arabs nicely to cease and desist? That's been tried over and again through meetings with local Arab leaders, but to no avail.

The 'shoot the stone throwers' directive is aimed at anyone engaging in stone throwing, Arab and Israeli.


https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gif

These aren't "kids" throwing stones, they're thugs.

b)Israel's land acquisition laws make 93% of Israeli held land state owned, the remainder is privately owned, mainly by various religious groups.

c)I didn't mention the Jordanian and Egyptian pacts with Israel as they have proven to be the least troublesome Arab neighbours in recent times,with no real current conflicts to comment on.

d)No, I didn't say that, nor is your analogy close to my meaning. An example of a pre-emptive strike by Israel was Israel's bombing of Egypt in 1967, as Egypt poised to invade Israel. It was fully justified in light of the ensuing war.

In the Golan situation, Syria had already attacked Israel from the Golan, so removing Syria's strike capability by pushing them further back out of range of Israeli civilian settlements was fully justified, as the UN and the rest of the world did nothing to stop Syria's intended murder of Israeli men, women and children.

e) The same argument as in (d),...justifiable self-defence.

What person in their right mind would take on a fully trained and armed IDF soldier with a couple of rocks? , or indeed take on a soldier with an automatic weapon with a knife? ,its a lose lose situation , but Hamas encourages them to do so cos it's great PR if a Pali gets shot, a Martyr for the cause? , more like grist to the mill , life means SFA to them thats why they use Human shields and in the past have used suicide bombers , there would have been peace some time ago if it was up to PAL president Mahmoud Abbas, thats why the Hamas say Abbas is a traitor , don't believe me? Why not Google up "Hamas say PAL President Mahmoud Abbas is a traitor" there's quite a few articles to go at :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhOh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

The West Bank was invaded and annexed by Jordan in 1950, cutting off the Jordan river and its waters from Israel, and allowing Jordan access to the weakest point on Israel's border, at a point only 8.5 miles across Israel to the Mediterranean Sea, 3 hours marching time across mainly even agricultural land, with unopposed armoured columns reaching the sea in probably 10 minutes. The Golan situation is also a defence against both Syrian and Jordanian intentions to divert water from Israel, so those head-water sources for the Jordan valley need to be continually defended against any further curtailment by Arab neighbours. Further, the Golan is a militarily strategic high ground,

---

Many countries have to share water resources and usually do it through negotiations rather than brute force. Many countries have borders with other countries that maybe are not the most strategic.

Are these reasons to invade and purge/exterminate one race from it's recognised homeland? Is the aggressor nation now to be given carte blance to employ a programme last used by NAZIs?

Or are you blind to the similarities?

---

Are you blind to the fact that the Golan was used by Syria to exterminate Israelis in the Galeel?
Have you also forgotten that the Arabs supported Nazi Germany in their push to exterminate all Jews?

So who are the Nazis? Obviously the Islamofascist bloc are, having driven out nearly all Jews and Xtians out of their homelands in Arab states in the last generation.

Nazi style persecution of all non-Muslims is a corner-stone of Islamic jihad, not only in Muslim lands, but in any land at all, and the sooner that pogrom is halted, by any means, the better.

Israel's never had a policy of extermination against any race, as you so claim, in fact the opposite as Israel is home to many Palestinian Arabs, and gives both material and medical aid to Arabs from Gaza, Jordan, Syria, Egypt and other Muslim dominated countries.

Israel's securing of the Golan after Syria's continuous campaign of shelling civilians in the Galee,l and Syria and Jordan's joint efforts in diverting the headwaters of the Jordan away from Israel, came after failed negotiations to halt that program.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhOh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

The West Bank was invaded and annexed by Jordan in 1950, cutting off the Jordan river and its waters from Israel, and allowing Jordan access to the weakest point on Israel's border, at a point only 8.5 miles across Israel to the Mediterranean Sea, 3 hours marching time across mainly even agricultural land, with unopposed armoured columns reaching the sea in probably 10 minutes. The Golan situation is also a defence against both Syrian and Jordanian intentions to divert water from Israel, so those head-water sources for the Jordan valley need to be continually defended against any further curtailment by Arab neighbours. Further, the Golan is a militarily strategic high ground,

---

Many countries have to share water resources and usually do it through negotiations rather than brute force. Many countries have borders with other countries that maybe are not the most strategic.

Are these reasons to invade and purge/exterminate one race from it's recognised homeland? Is the aggressor nation now to be given carte blance to employ a programme last used by NAZIs?

Or are you blind to the similarities?

---

Are you blind to the fact that the Golan was used by Syria to exterminate Israelis in the Galeel?
Have you also forgotten that the Arabs supported Nazi Germany in their push to exterminate all Jews?

So who are the Nazis? Obviously the Islamofascist bloc are, having driven out nearly all Jews and Xtians out of their homelands in Arab states in the last generation.

Nazi style persecution of all non-Muslims is a corner-stone of Islamic jihad, not only in Muslim lands, but in any land at all, and the sooner that pogrom is halted, by any means, the better.

Israel's never had a policy of extermination against any race, as you so claim, in fact the opposite as Israel is home to many Palestinian Arabs, and gives both material and medical aid to Arabs from Gaza, Jordan, Syria, Egypt and other Muslim dominated countries.

Israel's securing of the Golan after Syria's continuous campaign of shelling civilians in the Galee,l and Syria and Jordan's joint efforts in diverting the headwaters of the Jordan away from Israel, came after failed negotiations to halt that program.

---

Just to substantiate your claim that Israel gives asylum and medical assistance to Palestinians fleeing Gaza, here is the Video which of course will not be watched by certain members who appear to have all the answers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BoH19b1TrZo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by piwanoi

what did you think Egypt ,Syria and Jordan have in mind when they made a 3 pronged attack on Israel in 1967 ,to sell them Double glazing units ?:smileylaughing:

---

Well it sure as shit wasn't encyclopaedias.

:)

I don't think Muslims know about those things. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by piwanoi

what did you think Egypt ,Syria and Jordan have in mind when they made a 3 pronged attack on Israel in 1967 ,to sell them Double glazing units ?:smileylaughing:

---

Well it sure as shit wasn't encyclopaedias.

:)

---

Now why did'nt I think of that one?:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OhOh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

The West Bank was invaded and annexed by Jordan in 1950, cutting off the Jordan river and its waters from Israel, and allowing Jordan access to the weakest point on Israel's border, at a point only 8.5 miles across Israel to the Mediterranean Sea, 3 hours marching time across mainly even agricultural land, with unopposed armoured columns reaching the sea in probably 10 minutes. The Golan situation is also a defence against both Syrian and Jordanian intentions to divert water from Israel, so those head-water sources for the Jordan valley need to be continually defended against any further curtailment by Arab neighbours. Further, the Golan is a militarily strategic high ground,

---

Many countries have to share water resources and usually do it through negotiations rather than brute force. Many countries have borders with other countries that maybe are not the most strategic.

Are these reasons to invade and purge/exterminate one race from it's recognised homeland? Is the aggressor nation now to be given carte blance to employ a programme last used by NAZIs?

Or are you blind to the similarities?

---

Are you blind to the fact that the Golan was used by Syria to exterminate Israelis in the Galeel?
Have you also forgotten that the Arabs supported Nazi Germany in their push to exterminate all Jews?

So who are the Nazis? Obviously the Islamofascist bloc are, having driven out nearly all Jews and Xtians out of their homelands in Arab states in the last generation.

Nazi style persecution of all non-Muslims is a corner-stone of Islamic jihad, not only in Muslim lands, but in any land at all, and the sooner that pogrom is halted, by any means, the better.

Israel's never had a policy of extermination against any race, as you so claim, in fact the opposite as Israel is home to many Palestinian Arabs, and gives both material and medical aid to Arabs from Gaza, Jordan, Syria, Egypt and other Muslim dominated countries.

Israel's securing of the Golan after Syria's continuous campaign of shelling civilians in the Galee,l and Syria and Jordan's joint efforts in diverting the headwaters of the Jordan away from Israel, came after failed negotiations to halt that program.

---

Just to add credence to your post saying that the Islamic Arab leader the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem met up with Hitler to discuss the "Jewish problem" or "final solution "The Truth About the Grand Mufti, Hitler and the Holocaust | Jewish & Israel News Algemeiner.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ENT

UN

---

Yes - the UN are toothless. So you agree that every one of the 60+ resolutions passed by the UN against israel should be enforced? Cut them off, regime change? Ony country in the world that can ignore so many UN resolutions and get away with it. Seems like the UN approves of their ethnic cleansing?

What ethnic cleansing?

Israel's 8.5 million population includes 20% Arab and 5% other ethnic groups.(aprox)