-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Bin Laden - more attacks on U.S "as long as you maintain your support of Israel"
- Thread starter goomba
- Start date
- Status
~Devil Trigger~
In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
Oh please
Bin Laden/Al Qaeda dont give a shit about Palestinians. People like him HAMAS, the Brotherhood, Islamic Jihad have done more harmed the "Palestinian cause" than good. Keep screeming Israel's a monster, well stop feeding it.
Bin Laden/Al Qaeda dont give a shit about Palestinians. People like him HAMAS, the Brotherhood, Islamic Jihad have done more harmed the "Palestinian cause" than good. Keep screeming Israel's a monster, well stop feeding it.
ElectricBlue187
Member
LCGeek said:
it's really too bad we'll never know the utopian paradise the middle east could've been if it weren't for the Americans
theignoramus
Member
reposting here.
The entire international community has supported a two state (Palestine/Israel) solution on the June 1967 borders for decades. Have a look at the UN General Assembly's voting record on the Palestine question, the two countries that oppose the UN proposed two state settlement (which gives the full right of return to Palestinian refugees. Clearly, a problem for the Jewish state and its desire to keep its majority demographic Jewish, but this problem could be resolved with a generous compensation package) every year are Israel and the United States. In 2002, the Arab League (which includes Syria and Lebanon) offered Israel fully normalized realizations with every member of the Arab League if Israel returned to the 1967 borders and agreed to a "just settlement" on the Palestinian refugee issue. Unfortunately, a Hamas bombing incident disrupted the peace initiative, but the Arab League, again, in 2007 proposed the same solution. Currently, Hamas refuses to "issue a yes or no" on the peace initiative until the Israelis accept it. Hezbollah and Iran refuse to accept Israel's moral legitimacy, but Hassan Nasrallah has stated that Hezbollah wouldnt "sabotage" what it regards as a "Palestinian matter" and Ahmadinejad has stated "Whatever decision they take is fine with us. We are not going to determine anything. Whatever decision they take, we will support that. We think that is the right of the Palestinian people..."
Israel refuses to commit to the peace initiative because negotiations are contingent upon Israel's acceptance of the plan. Presumably, the Israelis refuse to accept the plan because 1) they want to keep parts of the West Bank and 2)they are worried about the Palestinian refugee question and how it would effect the demographics of the Jewish state.
The entire region, including Hamas, (which, contrary to Israeli propaganda, acknowledges Israel as a fact. What Hamas wont accept is Israel's "moral legitimacy", an important distinction that must be understood) has shown a willingness to resolve the conflict on the consensus supported by the international community, and more importantly, the entire Arab League. there has been a resolution to the conflict for quite some time now, the fundamental problem is the Israeli government's determination to resolve the crisis in a way that keeps the Palestinian refugees out of the Jewish state and allows Israel to resolve the borders in the West Bank and East Jerusalem on it own terms. So this prattle and Israeli propaganda about the vicious Arabs and their determination to "destroy Israel" is extremely deceptive and misleading. The reason Palestinian violence continues is because no senior Israeli official has ever recognized Palestine on the June 1967 borders, the Palestine defined and recognized by the entire international community.
The entire international community has supported a two state (Palestine/Israel) solution on the June 1967 borders for decades. Have a look at the UN General Assembly's voting record on the Palestine question, the two countries that oppose the UN proposed two state settlement (which gives the full right of return to Palestinian refugees. Clearly, a problem for the Jewish state and its desire to keep its majority demographic Jewish, but this problem could be resolved with a generous compensation package) every year are Israel and the United States. In 2002, the Arab League (which includes Syria and Lebanon) offered Israel fully normalized realizations with every member of the Arab League if Israel returned to the 1967 borders and agreed to a "just settlement" on the Palestinian refugee issue. Unfortunately, a Hamas bombing incident disrupted the peace initiative, but the Arab League, again, in 2007 proposed the same solution. Currently, Hamas refuses to "issue a yes or no" on the peace initiative until the Israelis accept it. Hezbollah and Iran refuse to accept Israel's moral legitimacy, but Hassan Nasrallah has stated that Hezbollah wouldnt "sabotage" what it regards as a "Palestinian matter" and Ahmadinejad has stated "Whatever decision they take is fine with us. We are not going to determine anything. Whatever decision they take, we will support that. We think that is the right of the Palestinian people..."
Israel refuses to commit to the peace initiative because negotiations are contingent upon Israel's acceptance of the plan. Presumably, the Israelis refuse to accept the plan because 1) they want to keep parts of the West Bank and 2)they are worried about the Palestinian refugee question and how it would effect the demographics of the Jewish state.
The entire region, including Hamas, (which, contrary to Israeli propaganda, acknowledges Israel as a fact. What Hamas wont accept is Israel's "moral legitimacy", an important distinction that must be understood) has shown a willingness to resolve the conflict on the consensus supported by the international community, and more importantly, the entire Arab League. there has been a resolution to the conflict for quite some time now, the fundamental problem is the Israeli government's determination to resolve the crisis in a way that keeps the Palestinian refugees out of the Jewish state and allows Israel to resolve the borders in the West Bank and East Jerusalem on it own terms. So this prattle and Israeli propaganda about the vicious Arabs and their determination to "destroy Israel" is extremely deceptive and misleading. The reason Palestinian violence continues is because no senior Israeli official has ever recognized Palestine on the June 1967 borders, the Palestine defined and recognized by the entire international community.
Zionists like to hide under the anti-semitism banner, whenever someone points out their dirty tricksLongTimeLurker said:
Fortunately for them, it works most of the time because most people don't know the difference between Zionists and Jews
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuAPaKywuLA
Joel Was Right
Member
Jerusalem is the most fought over piece of land in human history. Israel wants its right to exist, but the Arabs don't want them to exist there - the presumed "promised land" God once promised. So much for a promised land.
theignoramus
Member
At one point, the Arabs were opposed to Israel's existence, but they've since realized Israel isnt going anywhere. The post I just made on this page addresses that issue.Meus Renaissance said:
OttomanScribe
Member
Bin Laden has never done anything for Falastin, rather his grandstanding on their behalf has further legitimised Palestinian oppression by Israel in the eyes of the world. I don't believe he would survive a walk through any Palestinian town, I remember a Hamas spokesman saying he wanted to 'rip him to shreds'.
Bin Laden loves bringing up Palestine because it pulls at the heartstrings of Muslims, but more accurately it calls to the wounded pride that surrounds the issue. I can't recall Bin Laden ever invoking the memory of the genocide of the Cham Muslims in Cambodia, or calling for the reconquest of Sicily. He does not care about that, only the diffusion of his influence and the influence of those like him. Him, Khommeini and the Saudi Kings are all the same in this respect, love using Falastin as a political tool, but when it comes to any real aid, they are often lacking..
Bin Laden loves bringing up Palestine because it pulls at the heartstrings of Muslims, but more accurately it calls to the wounded pride that surrounds the issue. I can't recall Bin Laden ever invoking the memory of the genocide of the Cham Muslims in Cambodia, or calling for the reconquest of Sicily. He does not care about that, only the diffusion of his influence and the influence of those like him. Him, Khommeini and the Saudi Kings are all the same in this respect, love using Falastin as a political tool, but when it comes to any real aid, they are often lacking..
LCGeek said:
No. It stems from the partitioning and practical takeover of large parts of the Middle East, African and India by European powers, most notably France and Britain. The Russian Empire/USSR later, went back and forth with Britain and then the USA over supporting leaders of countries. These countries were a result of the partitioning of the Ottoman Empire after the British had already done things like takeover the Suez Canal and the oil fields of Iran.
France and the UK supported Israels invasion of Egypt for the purpose of retaking the Suez Canal just a few decades ago. The US did not support the military action.
The European powers partitioned and made the Middle East the mess it is, we're just adding it too it because we're the new most powerful Western country.
We started taking heat in the Middle East after we rejected Egypt's request for money and Nasser was pissed at us and turned to the USSR. We again fucked up with the Iranian hostage crisis.
RustyNails
Member
OttomanScribe said:
Yeah but if we keep on supporting Israel's wanton disregard for international laws and look the other way when they bomb 1400 Palestinians to shit, people like Bin Laden will keep popping up. Its the rallying cry towards attacking USA. You really cannot kill him. He dies, another takes over. Its a monster with unlimited heads. This will keep going as long as USA looks the other way. When we actually do become even handed and Palestinians do finally get a homeland under our leadership, it will not only stop people like UBL, it will also increase our security tenfold. But above everything else, justice will be given to Palestinians, the only people who live as refugees in their own land. Too bad Obama will never realize this, not when people like Rahm are around.
Tell me which part of "right to exist" involves taking over a historic capital when there's plenty land elsewhere? I mean, its pretty much agreed now by both Hamas and Fatah and large majority of Palestinians that they have no problems with 1967 borders.Meus Renaissance said:
ElectricBlue187 said:
Nice sarcasm nor was that my point, but hey use another useless fallacy to deflect from shitty behavior we continue to do for no real reason besides insanity. Don't go stirring the pot when it was already bad to begin with let them sort out their damn problems we made a shitty situation worse. Your logic is to keep doing the same thing that has failed the last what is it now the last 7 decades.
Military complex regardless of country has been the backbone for the other countries to keep doing what you mentioned Xeke. I wasn't singling out the US as much as the same complex of business interest who get governments to do most of their dirty work. EU does what it does because they know if they need help and support US would gladly send something in to region as a balancing act.
Ken Masters
Banned
#1 killer in human history = religion
RustyNails
Member
Far from it. Just in the past 10 years alone, how many innocent people have been "killed by religion" and how many have been killed by bombs dropped on their heads?Ken Masters said:
RustyNails
Member
Yeah but it still doesn't explain the near unanimous authorization by the Congress to use force to remove Saddam from power in light of the outright lies presented by the intelligence committee.czartim said:
Ken Masters
Banned
Xeke said:
what do you think most of the wars in human history started over?
RustyNails
Member
Land.Ken Masters said:
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=1§ion=0&article=53213&d=21&m=10&y=2004
So sad the way the Arab world uses Palestinians as pawns.
They don't give half a shit about helping them, destroying Israel is what they care about.
The moment Israel was declared a state, the Arab League declared a "war of extermination and a momentous massacre" against them. They've been attempting it relentlessly ever since and being unable to do it militarily, they're attempting to do so diplomatically and this is simply a part of that.
So sad the way the Arab world uses Palestinians as pawns.
They don't give half a shit about helping them, destroying Israel is what they care about.
The moment Israel was declared a state, the Arab League declared a "war of extermination and a momentous massacre" against them. They've been attempting it relentlessly ever since and being unable to do it militarily, they're attempting to do so diplomatically and this is simply a part of that.
theignoramus
Member
A good example of the Israeli propaganda of which I spoke of earlier. Although I do agree, American client states like Saudi Arabia and Egypt arent fundamentally interested in helping the Palestinians.Salty said:
I love these trick imagines. If any one didn't notice if you flip the picture it sort of looks like a face.LovingSteam said:
ALeperMessiah
Member
Akainu said:
not.sure.if.serious.
theignoramus
Member
What does the refugee status have to do with the Arab's wanting to destroy Israel? You made a claim that the Arab states are trying to destroy Israel diplomatically, then brought up the refugees, as if to imply that the Arab states would try to force them on Israel to destroy the Jewish majority.Salty said:
The problem with this is that the Arab peace proposal specifically calls for a "just settlement" on the refugee question, which means that the Arab League recognizes the contentious nature of the Palestinian"right of return" and is prepared to negotiate the "right of return" on terms acceptable to Israel. As for your conspiracy theory about the Arab League wanting to destroy Israel, in July, Saudi Arabia agreed to let Israel fly its planes over Saudi air space in the event of an IAF airstrike on Iran. Currently, the Egyptians are standing in solidarity with Israel's blockade of Gaza. These are not the actions of States looking to bring about an end to Israel. the Arab countries subordinate to the United States (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan) are fairly subservient to Israel. You have no clue what you're talking about.
theignoramus said:
Since you claim that Hamas is just being misunderstood, let's take a look at the Hamas Charter itself and see for ourselves what Hamas has to say (not some dumb terrorist lover like you) about Israel's existence.
Hamas Charter
NumBaWumba
Banned
Isn't there a website or a youtube video that could just tell me what to think?
theignoramus
Member
Good christ. This is what I'm talking about, the constant spouting of Israeli government propaganda. The Charter is Hamas from 1988.Fio said:
I'm talking about the Hamas of TODAY, post 2006 elections, the Hamas that has stated, multiple times, it will accept the 1967 borders.
Wiki:
On January 25, 2004, senior Hamas official Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi offered a 10-year truce, or hudna, in return for the establishment of a Palestinian state and the complete withdrawal by Israel from the territories captured in the Six Day War of 1967.Al-Rantissi stated that Hamas had come to the conclusion that it was "difficult to liberate all our land at this stage, so we accept a phased liberation." Israel immediately dismissed al-Rantissi's statements as insincere and a smokescreen for military preparations.Yassin was then killed on March 22, 2004, by a targeted Israeli air strike, and al-Rantisi was killed by a similar air strike on April 18, 2004.
Haaretz:09/11/2008
"The Hamas leader in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, said on Saturday his government was willing to accept a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.
The Hamas leader spoke at a meeting with 11 European parliamentarians who sailed from Cyprus to the Gaza Strip to protest Israel's naval blockade of the territory. Haniyeh told his guests Israel rejected his initiative.
Clare Short, who served in the cabinet of former British prime minister Tony Blair, asked Haniyeh to repeat his offer. He said the Hamas government had agreed to accept a Palestinian state that followed the 1967 borders and to offer Israel a long-term hudna, or truce, if Israel recognized the Palestinians' national rights."
This proposal was made during the 6 month "calm" between June 2008 and November 2008. During this period, Hamas respected the ceasefire and punished rebel groups (like Islamic Jihad) that ignored it. On November 4, while the world's attention was directed at the results of the American presidential election, the Israelis launched an air incursion into Gaza that killed Hamas militants. Hamas immediately retiliated and a few days later, Israel offered to extend the ceasefire. Hamas refused, citing Israel's refusal to lift the blockade, and shortly thereafter Israel, using the pretext of self defense, (from rocket attacks that the Israelis had deliberately provoked) launched Operation Cast Lead.
Note the direct relation between Hamas peace initiatives and subsequent Israeli provocation and violence, which is part of a larger attempt to stall peace talks and de-legitimize Hamas as a negotiating partner.
MrMysterio
Member
Dear reader of this thread, if you wonder why there are no citations or references to any source that has any kind of credibility, then you're halfway to knowing why we learn about history and politics in school and university, not from message boards.
astroturfing
Member
one word:
Settlements.
ok another:
Settlers.
Settlements.
ok another:
Settlers.
theignoramus
Member
What I've said is a recompilation of facts easily accessible by the public. With google, and the copy and paste function, anyone can highlight any part of my earlier posts, then fact check within 5 seconds.MrMysterio said:
From your non-link: "Hamas had come to the conclusion that it was "difficult to liberate all our land at this stage, so we accept a phased liberation."
Someone is supposed to agree to this scheme? "Give us some land now, so we can use it as a base to attack you and build up more weapons, and in 10 years, we'll start attacking the rest of you, what do you mean you don't agree?
Btw that "phased liberation" idea is actually a Fatah scheme, from the PLOs 1974 declaration of objectives
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Political_Programme_of_the_12th_Palestine_National_Council
"The Liberation Organization will employ all means, and first and foremost armed struggle, to liberate Palestinian territory and to establish the independent combatant national authority for the people over every part of Palestinian territory that is liberated."
"Any step taken towards liberation is a step towards the realization of the Liberation Organization's strategy of establishing the democratic Palestinian state specified in the resolutions of previous Palestinian National Councils. "
In other news, every piece of land you give us will be used as a base to continue attacking Israel, which is exactly what has been happening, and exactly what Hamas proposed explicitly.
Now if you want to know what Israel actually offered in the name of peace (rather than a scheme like your buddies Hamas) here's what Fatah proudly boasted to have rejected.
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/2074.htm
http://www.memritv.org/clip_transcript/en/2074.htm
Chief Palesinian Negotiator Saeb Erekat: "Olmert, who talked today about his proposal to Abu Mazen, offered the 1967 borders, but said: We will take 6.5% of the West Bank, and give in return 5.8% from the 1948 lands, and the 0.7% will constitute the safe passage, and East Jerusalem will be the capital, but there is a problem with the Haram and with what they called the Holy Basin. Abu Mazen too answered with defiance, saying: I am not in a marketplace or a bazaar. I came to demarcate the borders of Palestine the June 4, 1967 borders without detracting a single inch, and without detracting a single stone from Jerusalem, or from the holy Christian and Muslim places. This is why the Palestinian negotiators did not sign"
Btw, "the holy basin" is the holiest site in the world to Jews. The last time Arabs had control over it (pre 1967) SURPRISE, Jews were denied access.
P.S. Israel didn't reject the recent Saudi initiative, it is currently in negotiations and the Saudis are drafting a newer version in response to Israeli requests.
Someone is supposed to agree to this scheme? "Give us some land now, so we can use it as a base to attack you and build up more weapons, and in 10 years, we'll start attacking the rest of you, what do you mean you don't agree?
Btw that "phased liberation" idea is actually a Fatah scheme, from the PLOs 1974 declaration of objectives
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Political_Programme_of_the_12th_Palestine_National_Council
"The Liberation Organization will employ all means, and first and foremost armed struggle, to liberate Palestinian territory and to establish the independent combatant national authority for the people over every part of Palestinian territory that is liberated."
"Any step taken towards liberation is a step towards the realization of the Liberation Organization's strategy of establishing the democratic Palestinian state specified in the resolutions of previous Palestinian National Councils. "
In other news, every piece of land you give us will be used as a base to continue attacking Israel, which is exactly what has been happening, and exactly what Hamas proposed explicitly.
Now if you want to know what Israel actually offered in the name of peace (rather than a scheme like your buddies Hamas) here's what Fatah proudly boasted to have rejected.
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/2074.htm
http://www.memritv.org/clip_transcript/en/2074.htm
Chief Palesinian Negotiator Saeb Erekat: "Olmert, who talked today about his proposal to Abu Mazen, offered the 1967 borders, but said: We will take 6.5% of the West Bank, and give in return 5.8% from the 1948 lands, and the 0.7% will constitute the safe passage, and East Jerusalem will be the capital, but there is a problem with the Haram and with what they called the Holy Basin. Abu Mazen too answered with defiance, saying: I am not in a marketplace or a bazaar. I came to demarcate the borders of Palestine the June 4, 1967 borders without detracting a single inch, and without detracting a single stone from Jerusalem, or from the holy Christian and Muslim places. This is why the Palestinian negotiators did not sign"
Btw, "the holy basin" is the holiest site in the world to Jews. The last time Arabs had control over it (pre 1967) SURPRISE, Jews were denied access.
P.S. Israel didn't reject the recent Saudi initiative, it is currently in negotiations and the Saudis are drafting a newer version in response to Israeli requests.
theignoramus
Member
The Israeli "fears" of a militarized Palestinian state would have credibility if Israel didnt have the most advanced military and surveillance capabilities in the region. One Palestinian act of violence towards Israel would result in a vicious, overwhelming response by the IDF. In other words, it would be suicidal for the Palestinians to attack an armed, hostile neighbour that would crush them (and likely occupy them again) within a few days.
Oh okay, so now we've backed away from the Arab League wanting to "destroy Israel" by agreeing to IAF airplanes in its no fly-zones and supporting its blockade of Gaza?:lol
theignoramus said:
They certainly still do, the thinking in the region is far more long term, deals are for short term, plans are for long term, just like your buddies Hamas.
Do you admit now to having lied claiming Israel rejected the Saudi initiative by not providing links, or were you merely misinformed?
theignoramus
Member
Salty said:
So now we are pretending that a "refus[al] to commit" and a refusal to accept is the same thing as the meaning of the term "reject."
"They wont tolerate us, so we have to keep a foot on their neck and a rifle at their spine, because they're scheming, scheming, always scheming to destroy us"
Where have I heard that racist rhetoric before?:lol That kind of thinking is attributable to regimes and dictators I dont even have the nerve to mention.
theignoramus said:
So the actual Hamas Charter is a piece of propaganda of Israel's government? Are you dumb or something? Actually you seem to be, since you are saying that when the Israeli government rejected this ridiculous 10 year truce (so Hamas will attack Israel again in 2019, great!) they were being merely intransigent.
And Hamas is a terrorist group, they aren't a legit negotiating partner, end of story. I don't know what kind of stupid reasoning is this: 'They don't accept our existence, they've vowed to destroy us, they've attacked and killed many innocent people, so they clearly are the ones that we should negotiate with, they've earned legitimacy'.
While Hamas doesn't accept the existence of Israel, while it continues to be a terrorist group, Israel won't negotiate with them (and they shouldn't, or this would send a clear message to the other groups: 'Attack us enough and we'll cede to your demands'). Asking Israel to do otherwise is stupid and won't happen, fortunately.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked