Is Israel a terrorist state?

[Andre]

I'm not going to get into this debate. But I do notice 1 thing though is that whenever 1 criticizes Israel's actions, the anti-semitic card is used quite a lot to try and stifle any sort of criticism or debate.

Now carry on.

We know your type, you're just an anti- anti semantic card player!

[Nameless]

The old "Jewish Fortunes" argument. Wow. You are so misinformed. They were handed the foundation of a perfectly viable state. The only "settlements" that would remain were basically suburbs of Jerusalem. It wasn't perfect, but it was a great start, and the PA and Arafat spit in the face of everyone trying to find a peaceful solution.

But Jews control the money and make passover matzo with the blood of Arab children, right, Mr Farakan?? Yeah, Jewish money has more influence than Arab oil fortunes. For sure.

The Palestinians have gotten the shaft, for sure, but they have been screwed and exploited by their Arab brothers at every opportunity. Fact. Have the Israelis handled every situation perfectly? No. But Arab leadership is just as responsible for their hardship. Fact. Bottom line.

Andre, you are talking the same anti-semitic myths that have been the basis for Jew-hating for 1000 years. Classic.

Israel has never tried to find a peaceful solution to the problem, quite the opposite in fact. No Israeli government is capable of making any kind of good-faith peace offer as the balance of power in Israel is always held by extremist religious parties who have the power to collapse any government at any time. Currently Netanyahu can't even order a freeze on settlement building on Palestinian land because if he does it's the end of his government.

Wrong. Barak and Rabin both tried to find peaceful solutions. Labour governments have be formed without getting in bed with Shas or the other right wing parties. Both of those PMs have supported two state solutions. The other side doesn't believe Israel should exist as a a state at all. Yes, Bibi is dependent on far right to keep his government together, but a signficant reason why Bibi was able to draw together a coalition is that so many Israeli peaceniks jumped ship because it became clear that the other side wasn't interested in peace.

I've lived there. I've broken bread with both ultra-orthodox Jews and ordinary Palestinians. The settlements are not the real issue. It's all about Jerusalem's sovereignty, "the right of return", and both indirectly and directly, the right of Israel to exist at all. I have a good friend who is an Israeli-Arab. Israel could dismantle every settlement, even the ones that are Jerusalem suburbs at this point. Without giving back full sovereignty of the entire old city of Jersusalem and giving "right of return" the Palestinians have no interest in a peaceful solution. The things Israel would have to give the Palestinians at this point would be the first step of the end of Israel.

Yeah, and Rabin got murdered.... by an ultra orthodox member of one of the ultra orthodox circle... ironic indeed and to me, a good prove that, just like Kirklang said, the Ultra Orthodox do not want peace.
Also, we all know that the wall of Lament and Jerusalem thing is THE main issue. HOWEVER, the colonies are a big big deal because the Palestinians feel it is a forced colonization of their land... which is. These colonizations are also, if you look carefully, on every damn peace route sheet that has been traced, the very first step to peace. Not the main core but one of the very very important points indeed. It is also very phony to say that Palestinians do not want peace, most of them want, at some point I recall a cease fire where the Hamas and the Islamist Jyhad totally stopped to fire till... Israel started to murder some of their members again, which did just spiral out violence once more.
These peoples are humans like anybody, they got their land stolen and want it back, if their land wouldn'thave been stolen, violence would never ever spiral out of control like today, it is false to only claim "they don't want peace" without looking to how it did all happen. I can suggest you a few books about the creation of Israel and the Mossad, with things that jewish legends such as David Ben Gourion, Meir Amit or Rafa Eitan said about these things and the murders they did carry for the cause, perhaps then you would not see all pink for Israel.

[Kirkland Laing]

The old "Jewish Fortunes" argument. Wow. You are so misinformed. They were handed the foundation of a perfectly viable state. The only "settlements" that would remain were basically suburbs of Jerusalem. It wasn't perfect, but it was a great start, and the PA and Arafat spit in the face of everyone trying to find a peaceful solution.

But Jews control the money and make passover matzo with the blood of Arab children, right, Mr Farakan?? Yeah, Jewish money has more influence than Arab oil fortunes. For sure.

The Palestinians have gotten the shaft, for sure, but they have been screwed and exploited by their Arab brothers at every opportunity. Fact. Have the Israelis handled every situation perfectly? No. But Arab leadership is just as responsible for their hardship. Fact. Bottom line.

Andre, you are talking the same anti-semitic myths that have been the basis for Jew-hating for 1000 years. Classic.

Israel has never tried to find a peaceful solution to the problem, quite the opposite in fact. No Israeli government is capable of making any kind of good-faith peace offer as the balance of power in Israel is always held by extremist religious parties who have the power to collapse any government at any time. Currently Netanyahu can't even order a freeze on settlement building on Palestinian land because if he does it's the end of his government.

Wrong. Barak and Rabin both tried to find peaceful solutions. Labour governments have be formed without getting in bed with Shas or the other right wing parties. Both of those PMs have supported two state solutions. The other side doesn't believe Israel should exist as a a state at all. Yes, Bibi is dependent on far right to keep his government together, but a signficant reason why Bibi was able to draw together a coalition is that so many Israeli peaceniks jumped ship because it became clear that the other side wasn't interested in peace.

I've lived there. I've broken bread with both ultra-orthodox Jews and ordinary Palestinians. The settlements are not the real issue. It's all about Jerusalem's sovereignty, "the right of return", and both indirectly and directly, the right of Israel to exist at all. I have a good friend who is an Israeli-Arab. Israel could dismantle every settlement, even the ones that are Jerusalem suburbs at this point. Without giving back full sovereignty of the entire old city of Jersusalem and giving "right of return" the Palestinians have no interest in a peaceful solution. The things Israel would have to give the Palestinians at this point would be the first step of the end of Israel.

Barak couldn't even make a public offer at Camp David because his government would have collapsed overnight back in Israel if he had done. After the talks collapsed he claimed he'd made a peace offer but in reality he didn't, and that's according to the Clinton officials who were there at the time. Rabin was shot by a Jewish extremist before he could make any peace offer but any offer would have collapsed his government too. The people who hold the balance of power in Israeli politics are people who believe the whole of the West Bank is Israeli and their holy book gives them the right to take it back and drive the Palestinians into Jordan. Add on guys like Lieberman who are outright fascists and you have a bloc that can veto any kind of peace move. If you honestly beleive the settlemets -- Israel building on the 22% of historic Palestine that they etnically cleansed the Palestinians into -- aren't an obstacle to any settlement then there's nothing I can say. Israel have done everything they can to block any kind of peaceful settlement over the years.

In the long run unless Israel can make a viable good-faith peace offer they're fucked, as some of their politicians are now realising. But because the nutjobs have a veto over any peace plan they're destined to face a South Africa-like situation and eventually be subsumed in a one-state solution which will be majority Palestinian.

[RozzySean]

Israel has never tried to find a peaceful solution to the problem, quite the opposite in fact. No Israeli government is capable of making any kind of good-faith peace offer as the balance of power in Israel is always held by extremist religious parties who have the power to collapse any government at any time. Currently Netanyahu can't even order a freeze on settlement building on Palestinian land because if he does it's the end of his government.

Wrong. Barak and Rabin both tried to find peaceful solutions. Labour governments have be formed without getting in bed with Shas or the other right wing parties. Both of those PMs have supported two state solutions. The other side doesn't believe Israel should exist as a a state at all. Yes, Bibi is dependent on far right to keep his government together, but a signficant reason why Bibi was able to draw together a coalition is that so many Israeli peaceniks jumped ship because it became clear that the other side wasn't interested in peace.

I've lived there. I've broken bread with both ultra-orthodox Jews and ordinary Palestinians. The settlements are not the real issue. It's all about Jerusalem's sovereignty, "the right of return", and both indirectly and directly, the right of Israel to exist at all. I have a good friend who is an Israeli-Arab. Israel could dismantle every settlement, even the ones that are Jerusalem suburbs at this point. Without giving back full sovereignty of the entire old city of Jersusalem and giving "right of return" the Palestinians have no interest in a peaceful solution. The things Israel would have to give the Palestinians at this point would be the first step of the end of Israel.

Barak couldn't even make a public offer at Camp David because his government would have collapsed overnight back in Israel if he had done. After the talks collapsed he claimed he'd made a peace offer but in reality he didn't, and that's according to the Clinton officials who were there at the time. Rabin was shot by a Jewish extremist before he could make any peace offer but any offer would have collapsed his government too. The people who hold the balance of power in Israeli politics are people who believe the whole of the West Bank is Israeli and their holy book gives them the right to take it back and drive the Palestinians into Jordan. Add on guys like Lieberman who are outright fascists and you have a bloc that can veto any kind of peace move. If you honestly beleive the settlemets -- Israel building on the 22% of historic Palestine that they etnically cleansed the Palestinians into -- aren't an obstacle to any settlement then there's nothing I can say. Israel have done everything they can to block any kind of peaceful settlement over the years.

In the long run unless Israel can make a viable good-faith peace offer they're fucked, as some of their politicians are now realising. But because the nutjobs have a veto over any peace plan they're destined to face a South Africa-like situation and eventually be subsumed in a one-state solution which will be majority Palestinian.

No. There will be no peace until we all bow down and say "allah akbar" or we do some things that most westerners can't justify in their soft, progressive minds. Your post is factually incorrect. There is no point going on with this. You have no idea what you are talking about, even more than usual.

[Nameless]

Wrong. Barak and Rabin both tried to find peaceful solutions. Labour governments have be formed without getting in bed with Shas or the other right wing parties. Both of those PMs have supported two state solutions. The other side doesn't believe Israel should exist as a a state at all. Yes, Bibi is dependent on far right to keep his government together, but a signficant reason why Bibi was able to draw together a coalition is that so many Israeli peaceniks jumped ship because it became clear that the other side wasn't interested in peace.

I've lived there. I've broken bread with both ultra-orthodox Jews and ordinary Palestinians. The settlements are not the real issue. It's all about Jerusalem's sovereignty, "the right of return", and both indirectly and directly, the right of Israel to exist at all. I have a good friend who is an Israeli-Arab. Israel could dismantle every settlement, even the ones that are Jerusalem suburbs at this point. Without giving back full sovereignty of the entire old city of Jersusalem and giving "right of return" the Palestinians have no interest in a peaceful solution. The things Israel would have to give the Palestinians at this point would be the first step of the end of Israel.

Barak couldn't even make a public offer at Camp David because his government would have collapsed overnight back in Israel if he had done. After the talks collapsed he claimed he'd made a peace offer but in reality he didn't, and that's according to the Clinton officials who were there at the time. Rabin was shot by a Jewish extremist before he could make any peace offer but any offer would have collapsed his government too. The people who hold the balance of power in Israeli politics are people who believe the whole of the West Bank is Israeli and their holy book gives them the right to take it back and drive the Palestinians into Jordan. Add on guys like Lieberman who are outright fascists and you have a bloc that can veto any kind of peace move. If you honestly beleive the settlemets -- Israel building on the 22% of historic Palestine that they etnically cleansed the Palestinians into -- aren't an obstacle to any settlement then there's nothing I can say. Israel have done everything they can to block any kind of peaceful settlement over the years.

In the long run unless Israel can make a viable good-faith peace offer they're fucked, as some of their politicians are now realising. But because the nutjobs have a veto over any peace plan they're destined to face a South Africa-like situation and eventually be subsumed in a one-state solution which will be majority Palestinian.

No. There will be no peace until we all bow down and say "allah akbar" or we do some things that most westerners can't justify in their soft, progressive minds. Your post is factually incorrect. There is no point going on with this. You have no idea what you are talking about, even more than usual.

Actually, his argumentation is well articulated and deployed. You, on the other hands, play the "I know it all, you don't" without giving a single well articulated fact or argument. I just want to remind you that everybody in Palestine did agree to recognize the State of Israel if they did stop their political murders in the Gaza Stripe, go back to the pre 1967 boundaries and stop the colonies, which every government of Israel failed till this very day. Every government at the knesset is too indirectly controlled by the ultra orthodox and the problem resides precisely here.

[Gandalf]

I happen to think Kirkland and Nameless have made some very good points in this thread. To dismiss their arguments and say they don't know what they are talking about is a tad blinkered. They obviously do know what they are talking about having taken the time to become aquainted with the history of the region. The facts are out there for anybody to see. Though you do have to move beyond the god awful US media before you come to anything halfway impartial.

[El Kabong]

You mean that there is some sort of media "bias"??!?!?!?

[Nameless]

You mean that there is some sort of media "bias"??!?!?!?

One word: FoxNews.

[Gandalf]

You mean that there is some sort of media "bias"??!?!?!?

The US media coverage of the Israel/Palestine conflict is atrocious. I read somewhere that a sizeable portion of the US population think that it is the Palestinians that are occupying Israeli land illegally. Where does that kind of thinking come from? Admittedly the media doesn't quite bring it down to that level, but this kind of thinking doesn't come out of nowhere.

Like it or not, the US media has been manipulated in the most horrible way by pro Israel lobbyists. You just need to take a look at the New York Times to see how truth and factual reporting often go by the wayside. Or else important news is simply not reported at all! Even the BBC has been found to be biased in favour of the Israeli's, but at least they have the gall to investigate the nature of this reporting themselves and admit that even they get it wrong sometimes.

Media Standards Trust | BBC Report on impartiality of BBC coverage of the Israeli Palestinian conflict

The US media has none of this ability to face up to reality nor self correct. They are completely impartial all the way.

With the kind of media you absorb everyday, it is no wonder that you have the kind of perspective that you do on the issue.

[Kirkland Laing]

Wrong. Barak and Rabin both tried to find peaceful solutions. Labour governments have be formed without getting in bed with Shas or the other right wing parties. Both of those PMs have supported two state solutions. The other side doesn't believe Israel should exist as a a state at all. Yes, Bibi is dependent on far right to keep his government together, but a signficant reason why Bibi was able to draw together a coalition is that so many Israeli peaceniks jumped ship because it became clear that the other side wasn't interested in peace.

I've lived there. I've broken bread with both ultra-orthodox Jews and ordinary Palestinians. The settlements are not the real issue. It's all about Jerusalem's sovereignty, "the right of return", and both indirectly and directly, the right of Israel to exist at all. I have a good friend who is an Israeli-Arab. Israel could dismantle every settlement, even the ones that are Jerusalem suburbs at this point. Without giving back full sovereignty of the entire old city of Jersusalem and giving "right of return" the Palestinians have no interest in a peaceful solution. The things Israel would have to give the Palestinians at this point would be the first step of the end of Israel.

Barak couldn't even make a public offer at Camp David because his government would have collapsed overnight back in Israel if he had done. After the talks collapsed he claimed he'd made a peace offer but in reality he didn't, and that's according to the Clinton officials who were there at the time. Rabin was shot by a Jewish extremist before he could make any peace offer but any offer would have collapsed his government too. The people who hold the balance of power in Israeli politics are people who believe the whole of the West Bank is Israeli and their holy book gives them the right to take it back and drive the Palestinians into Jordan. Add on guys like Lieberman who are outright fascists and you have a bloc that can veto any kind of peace move. If you honestly beleive the settlemets -- Israel building on the 22% of historic Palestine that they etnically cleansed the Palestinians into -- aren't an obstacle to any settlement then there's nothing I can say. Israel have done everything they can to block any kind of peaceful settlement over the years.

In the long run unless Israel can make a viable good-faith peace offer they're fucked, as some of their politicians are now realising. But because the nutjobs have a veto over any peace plan they're destined to face a South Africa-like situation and eventually be subsumed in a one-state solution which will be majority Palestinian.

No. There will be no peace until we all bow down and say "allah akbar" or we do some things that most westerners can't justify in their soft, progressive minds. Your post is factually incorrect. There is no point going on with this. You have no idea what you are talking about, even more than usual.

I'm Kirkland Laing, I'm always right about everything. Exactly what is it that I have Written that you think is incorrect, hmmm?

[El Kabong]

Nameless, MSNBC is just the same as FoxNews only it's the other end of the spectrum.

You mean that there is some sort of media "bias"??!?!?!?

The US media coverage of the Israel/Palestine conflict is atrocious. I read somewhere that a sizeable portion of the US population think that it is the Palestinians that are occupying Israeli land illegally. Where does that kind of thinking come from? Admittedly the media doesn't quite bring it down to that level, but this kind of thinking doesn't come out of nowhere.

Like it or not, the US media has been manipulated in the most horrible way by pro Israel lobbyists. You just need to take a look at the New York Times to see how truth and factual reporting often go by the wayside. Or else important news is simply not reported at all! Even the BBC has been found to be biased in favour of the Israeli's, but at least they have the gall to investigate the nature of this reporting themselves and admit that even they get it wrong sometimes.

Media Standards Trust | BBC Report on impartiality of BBC coverage of the Israeli Palestinian conflict

The US media has none of this ability to face up to reality nor self correct. They are completely impartial all the way.

With the kind of media you absorb everyday, it is no wonder that you have the kind of perspective that you do on the issue.

So if we agree that there is some sort of "bias" on the topic of Israel vs Palestine then we can figure that on other issues there are biases about other subjects as well.

[Gandalf]

Nameless, MSNBC is just the same as FoxNews only it's the other end of the spectrum.

You mean that there is some sort of media "bias"??!?!?!?

The US media coverage of the Israel/Palestine conflict is atrocious. I read somewhere that a sizeable portion of the US population think that it is the Palestinians that are occupying Israeli land illegally. Where does that kind of thinking come from? Admittedly the media doesn't quite bring it down to that level, but this kind of thinking doesn't come out of nowhere.

Like it or not, the US media has been manipulated in the most horrible way by pro Israel lobbyists. You just need to take a look at the New York Times to see how truth and factual reporting often go by the wayside. Or else important news is simply not reported at all! Even the BBC has been found to be biased in favour of the Israeli's, but at least they have the gall to investigate the nature of this reporting themselves and admit that even they get it wrong sometimes.

Media Standards Trust | BBC Report on impartiality of BBC coverage of the Israeli Palestinian conflict

The US media has none of this ability to face up to reality nor self correct. They are completely impartial all the way.

With the kind of media you absorb everyday, it is no wonder that you have the kind of perspective that you do on the issue.

So if we agree that there is some sort of "bias" on the topic of Israel vs Palestine then we can figure that on other issues there are biases about other subjects as well.

I think we can agree that bias exists and that there is bias on other issues too.

[JazMerkin]

I was just making a comment on the "sectarian violence" which MAINLY occurs with the Sunni and Shia but others are involved.

What like Western Armed Forces?? Because I'd very much like you to find me another branch of Islamic religious thought that is involved in this conflict. If it's religion you are talking about then it doesn't involve Kurds who are generally Shia.

My problem is with all kinds of violence, a Christian martyr doesn't KILL anyone, they just accept their own fate if that single idea was common in Islam then the world would be a better place. The IRA vs Northern Ireland was more a political fight than religious.

That single idea is common in Islam, but it isn't common among terrorists. That idea is common among Christianity, but it isn't among Loyalists or Republicans who die murdering people. How hard is this? Btw it wasn't the 'IRA vs Northern Ireland', the issue was far more complex than that. Northern Ireland is mixed with Catholics & Protestants. There was terrorism from BOTH sides. Both IRA (Republicans) & groups like the UDA (Loyalists). Do you really think the issue with Sunnis & Shias in Iraq isn't political. You're right it has nothing to do with Saddam's subjugation of the Shia majority. Nope, that's TOTALLY different from Northern Ireland.

I know quite a few muslims and they may feel the same as your friends BUT they don't have a stage or an audience. As for me vs the "Turbo Christians" I don't have an audience or stage either....unless you know anyone

You know quite a few Muslims, but you've never asked their opinion on this issue you care so much about?? Lyle, are they friends or are they simply people who serve you food at a restaraunt? Anyway let me understand this, you accept that most Muslims are against it, but don't have the means to show it. Who should? Tell me which Muslims with an audience you'd like to see condemning it?

Once again, notes above Lyle

[El Kabong]

OK Jaz, thanks for your "notes" and all but since you would rather be a condescending asshole than debate this topic like an educated man, I'm going to just give up on this thread.

I don't know what you think about me personally but to assume that I have no muslim friends and to insult me like that....that's uncalled for.

[Andre]

To be honest mate;

i'd like to see Muslims openly marching in the streets with placards with their Mullahs and priests or whatever, in the lead 'Saying terrorists get out of our Religion! go make your own one, you murder ,we dont. Stop hiding amongst us, get out. You are against the compassion of Allah and his people.

I'd like to Christians marching too saying we are your brothers and sisters sorry we have killed some of you in bomb drops and kept you out of the loop in world affairs. Our leaders are quite evil like that, sorry!