Gunmen kill Israelis in West Bank

Gunmen have ambushed an Israeli army patrol near a Jewish settlement in the West Bank, killing three soldiers and injuring at least one other person.

They struck just after sunset near Ofra, east of Ramallah and close to the Palestinian village of Ein Yabrud, Israeli sources reported.

Rescue services and security forces rushed to the area where a bomb is also thought to have exploded.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3205818.stm

Well, you know, it's kind of hard to continuously expand your borders and have "security" as well.

A smart lad pointed out last night that these things are mutually exclusive in the first place. (See page 10, "Al Jazeera releases new Osama tape". It's the last one I think and about to rollout so go now)

Chinese attacking D.C.

It's terrorists shooting a civilian vehicle. No comparison.

Hey, I would LOVE for you to explain the difference between the two in an intelligent debate!

Lets keep it clean and respectful to each other, and debate Israel in this progressive forum for all to see, eh?

After all, we have to decide which Democrat can handle Israel soon don't we?

Keeping in mind that it is not THEIR land my friend, the Israelis have no right to keep moveing forward grabbing land and crying that Palestinian people are whacking them in the back or blowing themselves up later!

And don't give me any sob story about a single bomber or a single blown up car (taking out perhaps 100 people) at their largest when Israel is slughtering or displacing THOUSANDS at a pop.
(THOUSANDS AT A POP!)

BULLDOZING MILLIONS OF PALESTINIAN HOMES TO DUST SINCE 1948, AND BUILDING ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS IN THEIR PLACE IS NOT DEFENDABLE.

If the Chinese were in Washington D.C. to protect their "security" in this way, you can bet your hooey I would take as many Chinese soldiers people out as I could, and in as many petty ways as I could (like car bombs) until the Chinese left AND STAYED OUT!

Anyone want to debate this is what Americans would do if the Chinese showed up in town and imposed Martial Law on us Americans?

To the Palestinians, the Israelis are Chinese, period.

There is no difference in the Palestinians right to defend themselves from people who are crushing THOUSANDS of homes at a pop!
(Like last week for one of MANY examples.)

If Israel had their hands any farther up the butts of these Palestinians, they could tickle their darn tonsils!

Hyperbole, while enjoyable, and stirring to the blood, does not really do much to advance debate, or the cause you advocate.

I advocate no cause save Ameica sir.
Israel is an international embarrassment and the entire world knows it.

No allies (save us).
No political or military value without the Cold War.

If it was not for America misusing their veto power, there would be DOXENS of U.N. resolutions against this rouge regime of Israel.

And yes, I said MILLIONS have been FORCIBLY displaced by Israel since 1948.

I have followed that little place for quite some time.
After much deliberations, I have determined that Israel is worthless to America.
Israel sends nothing but spies like Aldrich Aimes to take our nuclear secrets, Israel sinks 164 Americans on the U.S.S. Liberty, and in 2003, the biggest spy ring in the entire HISTORY of America was broken up stealing our business and military secrets.

WHAT A GOOD FRIEND ISRAEL IS TO AMERICA!
AND LOOK, THEY EVEN LET US BE HATED TO NO END IN THE MIDDLE EAST!

I find it funny, that no person will debate me on the facts about Israel. They cut and run or toss little intellectual insults at me.

I just want one person, ONE PERSON to explain how WE (not Israel) have benefitted since 1948 for supporting these people who sat on a hornet's nest 60 years ago and then started beating it with a stick.

Why shouldn't we let the Israeli's get a taste of their own bitter medicine and get America out of Israel like Osama says will make him happy and not want to nuke us anymore?

Let America's biggest welfare state either go on W2 or fail as a failed country should.

I advocate no cause save Ameica sir.

You don't care about the rest of the world?

Israel is an international embarrassment and the entire world knows it.

What do you define as an embarrasment? It's a useful tool for neocon agenda, certainly.

No allies (save us).

True enough.

No political or military value without the Cold War.

Plenty of both, actually, if you're a neocon startegist trying to impose your New World Order on the Middle East.

If it was not for America misusing their veto power, there would be DOXENS of U.N. resolutions against this rouge regime of Israel.

There already are dozens.

And yes, I said MILLIONS have been FORCIBLY displaced by Israel since 1948.

Not only is that statistic an exxageration, but it's not what you said. You said that millions of homes have been destroyed. Re-read your post.

I have followed that little place for quite some time.
After much deliberations, I have determined that Israel is worthless to America.
Israel sends nothing but spies like Aldrich Aimes to take our nuclear secrets, Israel sinks 164 Americans on the U.S.S. Liberty, and in 2003, the biggest spy ring in the entire HISTORY of America was broken up stealing our business and military secrets.

It's worthless to the people of the US, certainly, but not to the government. Neocon foreign policy in the Middle East is supplemented by that country's power. And the USS Liberty didn't sink.

WHAT A GOOD FRIEND ISRAEL IS TO AMERICA!
AND LOOK, THEY EVEN LET US BE HATED TO NO END IN THE MIDDLE EAST!

It's our foreign policy as a whole, not simply US support of Israel, that causes us to be hated.

I find it funny, that no person will debate me on the facts about Israel. They cut and run or toss little intellectual insults at me.

Here's one.

I just want one person, ONE PERSON to explain how WE (not Israel) have benefitted since 1948 for supporting these people who sat on a hornet's nest 60 years ago and then started beating it with a stick.

An outpost to test our weapons is always useful, and a power to stand against the Soviet allies in the Middle East was also useful. Currently, they help advance the neocon agenda. Bad for us, but good for those who are in power.

Why shouldn't we let the Israeli's get a taste of their own bitter medicine and get America out of Israel like Osama says will make him happy and not want to nuke us anymore?

Osama won't be happy until we completely overhaul our entire Middle eastern foreign policy - which needs to be done, but in ways that I doubt will make him - or the neocons - happy.

Let America's biggest welfare state either go on W2 or fail as a failed country should.

It is far from a failed country.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Okay, I DO conceed the point that I said "millions of homes" then said "millions of people".
(I meant millions of Palestinians displaced and there is little point in debating how many millions are in Lebanon right now sekking that right of return thing.)

Millions of Palestinians are CURRENTLY displaced. Their fathers and mothers were displaced by Israel. Therefore, the actual number displaced by Israel is not in the millions.

I care about America FIRST, (as should you if you are American).
The world is the world, and to thine own self be true.

As a HUMAN, I care about humanity first.

I define "embarrassment" as Websters 9th edition definition b does: "difficulty arising from the want of money to pay debts".
(Can you answer how much Israel has repaid us financially since 1948?)

I also "personally" define embarrassment not as a neo-con would, but as a progressive. I would say they are a wild child over there in Israel.
Flaunting the (very few) U.N. resolutions that did squeak through the U.S.'s ever-present veto against them. (And Israel has ignored them JUST AS SADDAM DID, so what is the difference?)

I would say that is embarrassing to America!

About this, I agree. I was simply pointing out why those policies of US aid to Israel continue. I do not think we disagree so much; I simply cannot abide gross exxageration.

You creeped me out to no end with that an, "outpost" (to test weapons) phrase.
Maybe America would be better off testing our newsest weapons on sheep or cows instead of Iraqi's and Palestinians.
That one was WAY over the top my friend on the your creeping me out meter, and I just CANNOT concede you this point as it is stated because it is beneath our "rational" conversation here.

I call it that, because that's partially what it was.

During the Six-Day War, the Arab-Israeli War of 1973, and the invasion and subsequent occupation of Lebanon from 1982-2000, many new US weapons systems have operated in combat for the first time. This sort of data was essential to the Cold War, in order to test Us systems against equivalent Soveit ones wielded by the Arab military powers. This was but a minor factor, however. Far more important was the usefulness of an ally in the Middle East in a sea of Soviet allies.

Personally, I agree with you about the inherent inhumanity of such a tactic.

Lastly, (and whew that was some typing) Israel IS a failed state economically regardless of the crybaby reasons they give us like "constant warfare", "terrorism", or whatever

The single reason Israel's economy HAS failed is because of lack of tourism. Those reasons are actually accurate, unless you want to join the chorus of fools who say that Israel's economic troubles are due to their "socialistic" nature.

You are a little off in relation to the '67 conflict. At that time, Israeli weaponry was predominantly French, or reconditioned surplus from the Second World War and immediately after. The bearest thing to an important U.S. system in Israel's arsenal was the HAWK anti-aircraft missile: this was a mature and well-tried system already by that time.

Nor was there much testing of U.S. weaponty in '73, although by that time there were substantial amounts of U.S. weaponry in Israeli service. They were all mature systems thoroughly vetted in Viet Nam, principally F-4 Phantoms.

In the Lebanese incursion, there was new weaponry tested, particularly reconnaisance and decoy drones, that were being developed jointly by the U.S. and Israel. The efforts of the Syrian air force were so poor, that little useful information concerning combat performance of F-15 and F-16 fighters was actually obtained, in later engagements.

is it not true that various Soviet anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles were tested for the first time - with some success - against various American weapons systems?

There was a new shoulder-fire anti-aircraft missile, that did prove alarmingly effective. There was also an anti-tank missile, used in an unexeptedly massive way: rather than single shots, a whole ripple of several was fired. It was not known if this was actual Soviet doctrine, or an expedient by Soviet advisors to insure against poor performance by their Egyptian charges.

Much of the information gained about performance of Soviet weaponry in these conflicts was clouded by that factor, for it could never be known for certain if the stuff would not have performed better, or been wielded differently, in the hands of Soviet crews. Where machinery was captured, hard facts of capability could be established, but even these are not quite as important as tactical doctrine for its use, and the latest models and best refinements were not provided the Arabs, just as the fighters we export to, say, Saudi Arabia today, do not have the same electronics as U.S.A.F. equipment.

So, it appears Magistrate that you too are capable of causing an error that could cost a company millions.

(Snicker)

And you know you DESERVED that snicker for trying to look down your nose at a man with little typing time.

What VALUE is Israel to America Magistrate?

Surely that is not a conundrum for one such as you, is it?

Okay here I go.
(But if we have to nit-pick into these TINY LITTLE details to this extent we are defeating the debate itself.)

To me, it does not matter if it happened "in my lifetime" or not. Millions were moved out since 1948 and quipping on this detail is like saying was it 5.5 million or 6 million in WWII.
(And I'll even give you the concession that the USA was side by side with the IDF chasing out those Arabs during that al-nakba thing. W were in that one up to our eyeballs with Israel.)

Yes, you are right. Like you, I probably DO care more about the world first, and my country second. Regardless of the order America places in the two, Israel is NOT America.
I am far more worried as a citizen of America about getting Osama who caused 9/11 than battling Israel's foes by proxy like Iraq when that place also has little geo-poplitical or military value for the USA.

Like I said. That one about tourism is just another "excuse" as to why Israel HAS failed as a State (that can support itself).

Besides, from what I hear, Israel shot up the Church of The Nativity twice now THEMSELVES. ISRAEL's Sharon went right up to that wailing wall place (or the Temple Mount) a few years ago and caused the subsequent riot personally "to get elected".
(Shooting themselves in the foot is no one's fault but their own that Muslims and Christians will not make the pilgrimage now.)

You can't shoot yourself in the foot like that when a large part of your income is derived from these places.

Millions were moved out since 1948

That is an untruth. It is not nitpicking to point that out.

Everything else you said has little to nothing to do with our argument.

Surely al-nakba and the "in the book wars" Israel ADMITS TO displaced over 1 million BY THEMSELVES.
(Yes, I said admits to for the continued moves forward by Israel meet all definitions I have heard of low-medium intensity warfare.)

I have to go back and look to see if I babbled about "nothing" in the rest of that one since it was made before I took the family out to eat.

What VALUE does Israel bring to the table for us in America then?
(Politically, militarily, or even economically if you wish. Three ENTIRE AREAS to choose from right there folks.)

Truly it can't be that hard to answer why America should NOT just dump Israel like it was a hot potato and find new "allies" to send spies, shoot at our ships, roll over Americans like that activist Rachel was, and all the rest of this stuff?


I am having fun watching people dance "around" this same question in a few places now.
Well, DESPITE MY "PETTY" ERRORS, It appears that I might STILL have made my main point for all the world to see if SOMEONE does not try to answer this one!

You are dealing with matters of historical record, about which you are very poorly informed. If your data are innaccurate, so will the conclusions you draw from them be.

Uninformed?
Not totally it seems since I can't get a straight answer as to what kind of VALUE Israel gives to Amwerica from anyone else here so far.

Furthermore, I just cannot accept your premise that these kind of MINOR details matter SO DARN MUCH (to an American) in order to challenge the VALUE of Israel to America!

Does "shot at" or "sunk" the Liberty REALLY mean that YOUR answer to what VALUE Israel has to America will "suddenly" change when about 164 Americans died nonetheless at Israel's hands? (PERIOD)

Does "1 million" or "2 million" (or 10 million) Palestinians matter when it is common knowledge that Israel has been tossing Palestinians out since 1947 like it was a midget tossing contest? (PERIOD)

My point is that Israel "almost continuously" (debate that P.C. term once)grabs new lands from it's "neighbors" (debate that word) then cries bloody murder when these three Israeli's get shot at or blown up as the "typically" forward advance passes by the Palestinians.

(I am gagging on these P.C. words over here Lithos, buit I am rapidly cathching onto the "game" being played here!)

You all seem to want to argue SEMANTICS while I want to argue VALUE TO AMERICA. (And we danced all around that question on this forum.)


I have made a few "clerical" errors true enough, admitted them as well, true enough, and yet, it STILL appears that an Israeli attitude is being shown here over an American attitude.
(That attitude being, "No we just CANNOT start debating the VALUE of Israel to America until YOU sir have a doctorate in Israeli history and can name all THEIR horoes, villians, and ANY of THEIR special dates FLAWLESSLY!)

Yah, yah. It IS getting a little lame in here all right but I'll keep whacking away until I get a biter.

The numbers of persons who fled the '48 conflict are well established: their descendants have not been displaced, but reside where they were born. You cling to fictions like a cartoon coyote clutching an anvil off a cliff's edge, and it will serve you no better than it does your avatar. Millions have not been displaced, whether in your own, or any other's, lifetime.

You are again flat wrong in stating there was U.S. assistance to Israel in '48. Neither monies, weapons, nor man-power was supplied. The United States voted for the Partition in '47, and recognized the state of Israel on its declaration. So did the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union also supplied Israel with substantial quantities of weaponry, via Czechoslovakia, recently become a Soviet satillite at that time: indeed, the first Israeli fighter planes were Czech manufactured Messerschmitts. France, too, supplied quantities of weaponry.

As to your comments on that particular hill in Jerusalem: are you of the opinion Jews should be barred from visiting sites they consider holy?

Agh, again with the nit-picking on trivial details like "how much" the U.S. assisted in the formation and desires of Israel from 1947 on!

Okay fine, my friend.
No American troops fought in 1947-9.
No American weapons were used in 1947-9.
No American has ever "fought" there. (I wrongly believed we helped the Israeli's fight their way in and THEN we backed out never to fight again for fear of the political repercussions.)

But can YOU my friend say that America was not "informed" of what was to about to occur in these same years?

America practically created the U.N. that (very soon after) said Israel should be right about here (pointing to map).

We are arguing "degrees of American help" I guess then, and America HAS vetoed almost any resolutions condemming Israel since day 1. (With a few squeakers making it through though against Israel.)

And sometimes my friend even you have to KNOW that "political support" (open or silent support) is what matters MOST when you are driving people out like cattle for 60 years like Israel has.

America WAS complicit in 1947, (if not directly fighting), period.
I'll just stick with that then.

Can YOU name ONE area where Israel has political, economic, or military value to the USA in return?

Please do not give me that Cold War "they are guarding the oil" either.

We all know that if America truly wanted to drill some geo-thermals like Denmark has, or build some tidal plants like Britian has, or wind-farms on the ocean like (I forget who) has, but the USA could sink so many wells and build so many of these other things in just 5 years (with the 2.7 million Bush unemployed) that America would not NEED oil EVER!

Half the time I think the oil over there in the Mid-East is just a excuse (meant for the world to cry about) while we "meddle" with the economies of our enemies far more often than anything else, you know?

Seems to me, if you turn your back on the dollar, you are going to get invaded PERIOD (Panama, Iraq, e.t.c.)
We want that dollar "in place" at any cost and that is why I want Dean to be elected President to get us out of this circle.

The world is loing patience with us in defending Israel for no good reason. We have to dump them as dead wood soon!

I mean, sooner or later they have to get off American welfare anyway right?
Sink or swim Israel.
Sink or swim.

The number of Arab Palestinians displaced in '48 is generally taken as three-quarters of a million. This is the basic refugee population; the difference between this and the current population is the result of natural increase. There was some flight to Jordan in '67, but not a consequential number. The number of persons displaced for settlements in lands overrun in '67 is not known to me, but it would surprise me very much if it was in excess of half a million. You are simply going to have to bring your numbers into line with reality, if you intend serious discussion.

You are conflating Ames with Pollard: the latter indeed passed information to Israel; again, it was not related to nuclear matters. That is not much the business of espionage nowadays; how to contrive the construction of those devices is no secret any more. The U.S.S. Liberty was not sunk: that is a flat fact. Apart from your being unable to tell the difference between 2001 and 2003, it seems you are refering to the great "art student" brouha, which was a triviality that excited many conspiracists, but few others. It is clear you not only know very little, but have little idea how to learn to boot: it is unlikely you will provide even much by way of low amusement.

Deaspite my failing to use vernacular that will distance myself from common readers, I AM in the 85th percentile, and could certainly orate much better in person.

So far, I do not see anything but taunts and nit-picking on TRIVIAL DETAILS from my combatant friend.

Of course I meant Mr. Johnathon Pollard, and a more polite person would simply correct me on this in a short exchange (since I am willing to cede certain aspects of this debate WITHOUT resorting to those tactics).

You MUST have a vested interest in the place of which I speak (Israel) that is clouding your vision sir.

And yes, I also meant 2003 concerning the date of the big spy ring bust. (Again a trival point designed to degrade the conversation, which I am more than aware of here BARRING TRIVIAITIES.)
(Besides, to imply that an intelligence agency is incapable of calling someone a "student", is insulting in itself since that is the standard modus operandi.)

I am sorry I must go now to dinner, however if you wish to explain WHAT CURRENT VALUE Israel is to America. Please post it and I will return in a few hours to pick this back up if you are still game.

Take care.

DEAN 4 Prez.

What "spy ring bust" are you refering to?

Links?

Okay.
I will not cede the point of Israeli spies in America as "art students" because THE GOVERNMENT WILL NOT ACTUALLY RELEASE WHAT THEY DETERMINED WAS WORTH DEPORTING SO MANY ISRAELI'S!

I will just drop it because only a FOI request in 30 years or so will reveal the truth on this point since we are at a logger-head on it.

I will just keep with Pollard and the U.S.S. Liberty then.
(Though I COULD pull out many more hostile acts against OUR American interests by Israel((and thereby against America)). Things like selling OUR reverse-engineered American technology. I think to China or India. Some kind of AWAC or rader systems that was our stuff.) ALL major public papers carried this story because the U.S. did not want Israel to (yet once again) stab the USA in the back over the technology "leak"/"sale".

No way to slice it other than all of these were hostile acts against OUR national security, unless you can tell me what was good about it for America.

Dean will put Israel in it's place and put it on W2 though.
(I just have a good feeling about DEAN!)

sadly enough.

In his meeting with the Jewish leaders in New York, Dean said he chose his words in order to keep Israel's policy of targeted assassinations, which he supports, within the realm of international law. He said that under international law it is legal to attack enemy combatants, or soldiers, whereas the issue is more problematic when speaking of civilians.

Dean told the group that Israel should not have to give up east Jerusalem in a future peace deal with the Palestinians, and that another arrangement should be found to deal with the capital.

Regarding the road map, Dean said it is a good plan, but there is no reason to negotiate with Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat, since he is first and foremost concerned about his survival, not peace-making. Arafat, Dean said, worries about himself, not the Palestinian people.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1066540921746

(near the end of the article)

Darn, Darn, Darn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You actually made me change my mind about something here Gimel!

The DEAN avatar for capatainamerica101 is being pitched with severe prejudice.

This is by far the strongest support FOR Israel I have heard from Dean yet and he HAS to be let go for a new democrat. (Grumble,grumble.)

That was my LAST hope for a dem who would rage against the Israeli machine.
(Grumble,grumble)

Well, I WAS worried he would be too tough in foriegn policy (like Bush)when Clark definitly has "dicipline" pouring from his ears that will greatly aid all the damage that has to be repaired overseas.

GAHHH! I do not even know where Clark stands on jack with him being so new to the race. I have to study some Clark in a bit now but I do know he is "with" Israel in all this so I am out of luck on my MAIN issue for 2004.
(Grumble,grumble)

You may yet come to know the meaning of the word, for indeed "the bleating o' the kid excites the tiger," but this is little more than kittenish batting at a butterfly. Perhaps something more serious may arise when you expound more fully on what "vested interest" of mine in Israel there "MUST" be: that could be rum fun indeed.

When you get your facts straight, dear, there might be some point in engaging your more grandiose distortions and misapprehensions. There is little point to doing so until you establish some factual basis for them. As yet, you cannot even provide a correct correction, repeating "2003" as the date in question. What you would make of such sloppy work in an employee under your supervision is a suitable subject for speculation, but few would tolerate it where monies or inventory were concerned. Still, we must be careful where someone "in the 85th percentile" is concerned, especially when he is kind enough to share that lofty credential with us lumpenproles.

"As you make your bed, so you lie there.
But who'll tuck you in when you do?
And if someone steps up I'll be that one
And if someone gets stepped on that one's you!"

You are killing me with laughter, "dear"!
You just do not get it, do you?

1.) This is not my dissertation.
2.) I am not before the U.N.
3.) A wonderfully warm and pleasant secretary types for me.
4.) Even if Mellisa WAS here, I would not fault her a BIT for repeating a wrong date (like 2003) knowing there is no paper "file" in her hand to double check it in "casual debate" such as this.
5.) I assure you. Any employee who EVER worked for me would not be fired or even talked to if the "mistake" did not surpass 1,000 dollars.

And you know what? They work TWICE AS FAST "recouping" any of there MINOR production or "number losses" in short order!
My people LOVE me BECAUSE I am not a vulture on their shoulder, a man to be feared, or a Felix Unger type from, "The Odd Couple".
Besides, retraining new workers costs money, slower workers cost money, and UNHAPPY workers cost money.
Presiding over 33%-39% economic growth each year since the 1990's DOES NOT GET YOU FIRED! (That WAS rich though.)


BUT, if I must fall to my knees and throw myself uopn my fate...
You got me.
I did it.
I TWICE said 2003 when indeed it was 2001 the Israeli "art students" WERE DEPORTED. (You know, for being "art students" in America.)
(I was chatting with a person below on this as well.)

Perhaps I should not have been on three different pages.
It does tend to take some more typing skills than I currently enjoy, but it appears I have war on a few fronts and who can say no to any "war" in Bush's brave new world he is carving out for us all. (Chills.)

Again though, the "date" is trivial in this arguement (supposedly about Israel) since we both seem to be aware of the same "art students" being DEPORTED, correct?

Now then...
What VALUE does Israel have to America in a post Cold War world, "dear"?

Bet she could just eat you right up....

You got it wrong.
I "LOVE HER to bits" for putting up with ME!
I would be lost without her. (Possibly literally.)

(Biggest desk in whole the building for it all too.)
(Barry, the president, just hates it and calls it "a monstrosity", but she was the very FIRST employee in 1993, and he knows what she has done for the company since.)

First, I am going to delete your post for the following statement:

I would add more but now I am tired. (Oh, yeah. Here is one for the Catholics. Why do they want this "Armageddon" so bad? If you believe the Bible, then it follows that no Israel means no Armageddon.)

As it is against IP Guidelines. Specifically:

Do not discuss the truthfulness and/or stupidity of various religions. Do not assume you know what someone believes simply because they practice a certain religion.


Second, facts would serve you well. Please take the time to review them before posting.

Aimes

First, it's Aldrich Ames, not Aimes.

Ames spied for the Russians and not only compromised many agents (11 of which were known to have been killed), but also much of how the US spy system worked inside of Russia. See: http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/spies/ames/1.html?sect=23

Another Russian spy was Hansen who also compromised much of the FBI's counter intelligence system.

Perhaps you are confusing him with Pollard? Pollard was convicted of transferring technological secrets (such as arms shipments, chemical weapons development in Syria, and information about Pakistani A-bomb development, but not of the type you have stated.


The USS Liberty.

First the Liberty did not sink, nor is it depicted as such on the website.

Check out www.usliberty.org and you will find the following:

Comments which say the ship was attacked, no where do you find the phrase "sunk".

Three pictures showing a ship (not sunk) in Dry Dock in Malta.

And searching shows this picture of the ship following the attack. While it is listing, it is not "sunk".

http://www.ussliberty.org/00/sliberty.htm


Regards

Lithos
FA/NS Moderator
Democratic Underground

Hey, I AM a (former) Catholic Lithos!
Watch how far you "read into" that one Lithos because it's as "innocent" as it can be, I'm telling you.
(Although I guess you are right that I COULD have said that one without sounding like I was about to flip a record on the air like a D.J. or something)

All that about "no Israel, no Armageddon" is in any Bible I ever picked up as a boy Lithos. I made no fun of it for it is deadly serious in a Catholics mind Lithos.

2.) I WAS "rusty" about Pollard and what he did in the name of Israel to betray America. (Okay, it was NOT nuclear secrets... It was a littany of other stuff with very little difference in the government's eyes when considering the damage to America's national security for which he WAS imprisoned.)

I also confused him with Aimes and misspelled Aimes as well.
(If you look at my other posts Lithos, you will notice a brand new typist.)

3.) Yes,the U.S.S. Liberty did not "sink" I guess all right Lithos. I went back and looked.
(Funny, how picky these people are though Lithos. To me, the difference between "Israel attacked and killed 164 American sailors on the U.S.S. Liberty" or saying, "Israel attacked, SUNK, and killed 164 Americans" is like the difference between murder by knife or murder by gun.)

If you notice, these people are being WAY TOO picky about these MINOR details on purpose just to avoid the debate.

As I told several of these people Lithos, many of these MINOR things are "trivialities" to me.
(Although I DO appreciate you chiming in and giving me a refresher on some of these issues to help me deal with any Felix Unger type later, the CORE FACTS remain 100% correct when I state that Catholics believe in Armageddon, Israel killed a bunch of Americans on the Liberty, and Israel sent a spy over here to sell America out.)

To me, I feel ALL these things squarely stand on their own two feet. I came in here to discuss Israel's VALUE to America Lithos. I came here to discuss WHICH democrat is going to put the lid on Israel for good.
If you look at how this all started, you will see that I am getting dragged down the old petty detail motorway here, you know?

Anyway, no offense to any readers (or you Lithos) if I am the type who just does not care if Israel "sunk a U.S. ship" or just "attacked and killed a bunch of us Americans on a U.S. ship".
I just don't get it Lithos. I just don't get it.

You had better check again: deaths were nowhere near 164. Of course, as you are used to rounding off to the nearest thousand, mere scores and dozens may be beneath your notice....

Is, "over a hundred" "acceptable" then in this "carpet shop" before I am deemed "worthy" to continue?

Oh yes, I am rounding off to the nearest number.
No, I do not care about these numbers!
YOU do.

If you wish to give me the exact number to save me reading the Liberty website all over again as I had done last year. (Short scan today as well.)

Let me try some reverse pshchology on you then...
If YOU can clearly explain how you are "confused" when I say U.S.S. LIBERTY, AND DEAD AMERICANS, AT ISRAEL'S HAND'S explain why!

My core arguements ARE 100% right. You all know it, and a missed e or something like that only matters to Felix Unger.
(Although I WAS way off with Aimes, how does adding a few letters and sayinf Pollard change the fact that EVERYONE knew what I was speaking on.

This, I do not understand you dearie stuff is getting old.

What VALUE does Israel give to America?
What GOOD are they FOR AMERICA?
(We can always buy "allies" JUST LIKE like Israel in places like oh, Somolia (as in Black-Hawk down kind of allies), so please save that word and the friendship word too.)

Is not some chant to shout out for cover of belligerent, willful, and sloppy ignorance. Semantics is the study of conveyed meaning, engaging what meaning is conveyed by verbal symbols, or even if any meaning is so conveyed. Serious students of the discipline have advanced the proposition, indeed, that the meaning conveyed by verbal symbols is solely that taken by the auditor, without any reference to that intended by the utterer. This seemingly whimsical proposition is actually, on close examination, rather difficult to refute, and it certainly has the virtue of clarifying several things, such as the need for a vast field of shared knowledge between two persons for any comprehensible communication to occur between them, and the tremendous difficulties involved in communication concerning abstract conceptions. As these are something people seem most eager to engage in violence over, the problem is a serious one.

You seem to wish to hash over the well-gnawed bones of the U.S.S. Liberty. You have a view of that matter, based on the presumption, apparently, that it was a deliberate act, intended from the highest levels of the Israeli government to sink a U.S. naval vessel. That is a proposition that is hardly settled fact. Several official inquiries have reached the opposite conclusion, and anyone conversant with military matters will be familiar to the point of weariness with the prevalence of blunder and misapprehension attendant on combat operations. Not even the modern "knowledge warfare" armies of the present day can reliably undertake not to produce a high proportion of their own combat casualties through their own actions, after all. In Iraq in '91, for example, U.S. forces, using their ultra-efficient sighting equipment, on several occassions identified U.S. or English equipment as Soviet vehicles in Iraqi use, though their characteristics were very different, and fired accordingly to great and unfortunate effect.

As you are unwilling to acquaint yourself with even quite basic facts concerning this particular incident, and indeed, do not even seem to feel the facts of it are of much importance, it is unlikely you can bring much of value to debating the matter, and certain to be a waste of time and energy to engage you on it.

Sort of hard to argue with you, then...

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

First, welcome to the I/P forum! This forum is probably the most unique one on DU. Many people who post here come from all walks of life around the world including some who are living the reality of the I/P debate each and everyday.

The emphasis on facts is not surprising considering the large number of lies and spin used by both sides of the I/P conflict. There is just no sense in creating more. Besides that, having a firm grasp of the facts not only helps reduce the fog caused by these canards, it provides a common point of reference and it tells people that you are serious and prepared to debate that aspect of the I/P conflict.

1) Before posting, I would make sure you understand the I/P guidelines. Due to the intensity of the I/P debates, this forum operates with additional rules to insure that sanity and rational discourse prevails.

Please note that new threads not based on a recent news or op-ed article are not allowed. While I am sure many aspects of the I/P debate are new to you, I can guarantee it is old hat to many here, so free-form posting often degenerates quickly.

Part of the reason why you might not have been able to post a new threads already is that this functionality requires a minimum number of posts. I don't recall the specific number (it changes depending on Skinner's and Elad's feelings about the matter), but you will have to wait until you've posted enough times.

2) The flaming gif is just a visual marker which shows that the room has at least 28 posts. It is supposed do show a "popular topic".

3) As for moving a "thread", the reason why this happens is when a thread is inappropriate for the forum it is in. DU has forums for specific topics. While there is some overlap, you are to try and post to an appropriate forum. For instance starting up a thread about your favorite song will have it moved to the DU Lounge which is the appropriate forum. Starting up a thread about the I/P conflict anywhere but the I/P forum will cause it to be moved here.


Lithos
FA/NS Moderator
Democratic Underground

First, I am going to delete your post for the following statement:

I would add more but now I am tired. (Oh, yeah. Here is one for the Catholics. Why do they want this "Armageddon" so bad? If you believe the Bible, then it follows that no Israel means no Armageddon.)

As it is against IP Guidelines. Specifically:

Do not discuss the truthfulness and/or stupidity of various religions. Do not assume you know what someone believes simply because they practice a certain religion.

I think I've got it now. If someone says that Catholics want an Armageddon or if someone says Muslims support anti-semitic comments, that's not acceptable. If they say MANY Catholics want an Armageddon or that MANY Muslims support anti-semitic comments, that's completely different. Cool....

Violet...

Generalizations of a large group are against not only I/P, but DU rules. Point them out via PM or alert please.

L-

In one case three times. I just figured it was allowed after all, which at the time I thought was pretty strange...

Violet...

And cannot find such an alert.

L-

Let me know if you don't get anything, okay?

Violet...

L-

Do you even read what you write, fellow?

Mr. Ames worked for the Soviets, and trafficked not in nuclear informations, but tradecraft and double agents within the Soviet security services.

The U.S.S. Liberty was not sunk, though badly shot about.

You are going to have to clarify your hyperventilation concerning "the biggest spy ring in the entire HISTORY of America" being apprehended this year, but if it is on a par with your other "facts" and difficulties in assessing scale, it might be difficult to sustain.

If you stay around any length of time, you are quite likely to find yourself debated, and probably will not like the experience too much.

I type slow as well.

Being an Inc 500 Co. suprvisor, I usually do not have to type.

I will cover the above now....

Compared to a FORTUNE 500 supervisor, I am no one.

I guess you could probably term it as a "middle class" sort of FORTUNE 500 supervisor in the Inc. 500.

I was the 10th person hired in 1995.
39% growth (or more) every year and suddenly I am playing golf with the big wigs from other companies.

I was lucky.
(Not made "rich", but I am doing very okay compared to a typical small business owner.)

Titles do not serve me well but the girls sure like to hear it though.
(They are into that stuff.)

You find "the girls are really into" that supervisor title, eh?

It is a strange world we live in alright.
People placing more value on your title than your morals.
Imagine that!

Did not intend "sexism" in that one my friend, but it IS hard to explain how old girlfriends knocked down the door in my own case after I had business cards and a new Park Avenue.

They had been your girlfriends before, after all....

Quite right.
However old girlfriends usually do not seek you out in clumps like I saw unless something else is up (like my salary).

It (money) was one of the first questions out of one in particular, but I cannot be certain on anyone else.

1000 's ..tens of 1000's
I beleive quiet a few villages were destroyed...

Israeli soldiers in West Bank ambush
Sunday 19 October 2003

Three Israelis soldiers were killed and several more wounded when they were ambushed by Palestinian gunmen on Sunday evening near Ram Allah in the West Bank.

The ambush, carried out by al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, took place in the Palestinian village of Ein Yabrud near the Israeli settlement of Ofra.

The soldiers were on patrol in the village - which is now under curfew - when they were attacked in a so- called drive-by shooting.

--snip--

An Israeli army spokesman confirmed the deaths to Aljazeera.net. When asked if the dead were civilian or military, he added: "We can confirm the dead are soldiers and another one was wounded."

--snip--

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/FA0502F5-1B15-4E84-A0E0-B237659659AF.htm

As you said in another thread, "Meanwhile, the attacks on innocent civilians continue."

The Haifa suicide bombing attack this month killed 21 civilians. Do you think that's the last attack on Israeli civilians? Why do you think there are such patrols?

It's terrorists shooting a civilian vehicle. No comparison.

The article in question says nothing about a civilian vehicle. Again, it says:

The Israeli army says three soldiers were killed by Palestinian gunmen in an ambush near Ramallah in the West Bank on Sunday.
In a statement, the army said the gunmen attacked an army foot patrol in the Palestinian village of Ein Yabrud, east of Ramallah. A fourth soldier was wounded.

Do you have a comment on Palestinian attacks on military targets?

Do you have a comment on Palestinian attacks on military targets?

I do not rejoice that at last the terrorists have hit a legitimate target. They weren't under attack when they shot the soldiers in their backs.

Often non-combatant soldiers are targeted near army bases. Non-combat units are targeted, soldiers on buses or at bus stops are not necessarily combat soldiers.

This only increases the hostilities. Palestinians want free access to Israeli cities, no checkposts or roadblocks. This is not the way to achieve a peaceful solution.

No matter who you are, if yr land is being occupied by a hostile foreign force, then it's exactly the same and what people feel is the same...

What civilian vehicle? The article said it was a foot patrol. Has the article changed since it's been posted? Sometimes that happens with Ha'aretz articles..

"In a statement, the army said the gunmen attacked an army foot patrol in the Palestinian village of Ein Yabrud, east of Ramallah."

Hey, maybe if one of those soldiers was wearing a pair of sneakers, you can think up a theory where you get to say: 'It's terrorists shooting a civilian pair of sneakers.'

They attacked a military patrol, therefore it wasn't an act of terrorism...

Violet...

Or are they using civilian vehicles? Like the US accuses Saddam of housing weapons factories in civilian areas? What is going on? For Christ's sake, Israel is occupying Palestinian territory...the settlers are part of an occupying force...they are not civilians... they are pawns in an evil, evil Zionist movement.

There would be no peace in the world Isrelis using american soldiers die for the Isrelis. and spend 87 billion us dollars for the safe of Israels survival.

Welcome to DU Jorje! :hi: :bounce:

American soldiers have died for Israel? The correct answer is none.

a Jewish officer in the US army got a new name and went to Israel to fight for the iDF in 1948. Can't remember his name, but he tried to break the siege of Jerusalem, but failed because an Israeli soldier mistook him for an Arab and shot him.

I'm sure there are others. That's simply the first that comes to mind.

Capt. Mickey Marcus was the gentleman's rank and name. He was charged with construcying a road around the Latrun positions of the Jordanian Legion, and did indeed succeed at: the first truck passed just before the first cease-fire, leading to the ruling that the Israeli position at the New City of Jerusalem was not cut-off, and so would not have to be evacuated under cease-fire terms. Shortly after, he was indeed shot by a young sentry, in some linguistic mix-up over challenge and password.

You would not credit the dis-array my books are in just now; it is impossible to put hand to anything....

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/biography/marcus.html

http://www.rightpolicy.com/marcus.htm

The last one describes him as a full Colonel.

L-

He was therefore an Israeli soldier. A volunteer advisor does not justify the charge.

Within days, David Ben-Gurion asked Marcus to recruit an American officer to serve as military advisor to Israel. Failing in his attempts to recruit one of his friends, Marcus decided to volunteer himself. The U.S. War Department granted Marcus, who was a reservist, permission to accept the offer, provided Marcus not use his own name or rank and disguise his military record.
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/biography/marcus.html

Israel has looted over 2 trillion in total value from America for what started as 850,000 people in 1948 and is now about 4.5 million according to Israel's own website's.

If you do the math you see Israel gets over 38 miilion from America (per Israeli) since 1948.

Someone will challenge that 2 trillion, so just use the 7 billion from this year alone in loans and grants and divide by the current population in israel.

American do not get millions of dollars per person, so why does Israel?

Excuse me, I have a good challenger above who detailed a long one.

first fact wrong.

I was on official Israeli sites and I cannot find ONE that "counts" the 1.5 million Arabs living in "greater Israel" at all.

They ALL take great pains to say there are "about" 4.5 million Isreali's, THEN they mention that there are about 1.5 million Arabs living inside Israel.

Last week I heard on the news that Israel "has 6 million people".

If you add those numbers up, it seems right to me.

Besides, you cannot count the 1.5 million Arabs as Israeli's since they were never granted the same rights of the Israelui citizens. (Which continues.)

If you have a link you can dig up to refute "about" 4.5 million Isreali's, post it up.
(Really, the whole point does not matter much in the end if you divide all the American aid since 1948 by 4.5 million or 6 million. Besides, it is such a small difference in people, it does not affect the dollar toal that much at all.)

that they DO have essentially the same rights, you are correct.

But since they do, your argument completely falls apart.

Just saw something on World Link T.V. about this one and I could have sworn they said this is not the case.

I could have sworn they said there are SERIOUS citizenship issues for the Arab Nomads at the very least if not for the rest.
I know I will spell it wrong, but I believe they are called (sounds like) "bed-o-ins".

I must admit that I am SOMEWHAT at a loss on the voting rights, traveling rights, and general citizenship rights issues of these "Israeli" people, but I WILL look into it for later use, I promise.

I also could have sworn that the "regular Arabs" inside Israel are barred from the (sounds like) "El-al" airport and passports are rarely issued for Arab Israeli's as well.

and the other differences are minor - certainly minor enough to remove them from citizenship counts.

And, last I checked, there are approximately 5.1 million Jews in Israel, not 4.5.

Not only do they serve in the IDF, many are fully integrated into Israeli society.

Israel`s bedouin tribes distraught over state neglect
Bedouin feel the squeeze as Israel resettles the Negev desert
Angry Bedouin find loyalty to Israel goes unrewarded
Bedouin in the Negev Face New "Transfer"
Bedouin land under Israeli air attack
Bulldozers Send Bedouin Packing Again

etc..

for all Israelis, not just Bedouin. Why make such an exception? Israel is full of problems.

it happens to Arabs alone.

The fellow was farming on public land. Israelis get thrown in jail with little cause all the time. A Jew would have gotten the same treatment. It just wouldn't be international news if it happens.

Because Jews only owned 10% of historic Palestine before the War for Indepence/Nakba, the remaining 90% became "public land" through the Absentees’ Property Law.

These lands are then managed by the Jewish Agency or the Jewish National Fund who as a practice have never doled out an inch of property to an Arab. There was a landmark case in 2000 that said they couldn't discriminate but the family who brought the case because they wanted to move into Katzir still isn't living there today. Last I heard they were considering throwing up a tent in the community. I'd love to see this honestly. They would be the first Palestinian "settlers" and I expect Israel's reaction would fall somewhat short of the tolerance they expect out of the Palestinians.

Arab land remained Arab land, such as the villages in the Galilee which are still Arab today, the city of Nazareth, which is still 100% Arab occupancy, sections of Tiberius and Haifa, sections of Yaffo, and the areas near Modi'in forest that are Arab inhabitants. Therefore simple subtraction from the 10% Jewish land to arrive at 90% "Public land" is greatly erroneous.

First, Israel is not all of Mandatory Palestine, but only about three-quarters of it. Thus, 10% of that jurisdiction is a somewhat greater proportion of Israel. Second, a sizeable proportion of Mandatory Palestine was already state land, having no title-holder but the Ottoman imperium when the English took the place over: this land continued as state land under the English authorites, and was taken as such under Israeli rule at its foundation.

The general thrust though is that's managed by the Jewish Agency and that it's very purpose is to settle Jews throughout Israel at the expence of Arabs if need be.

I don't know the URL you have referenced, but the Ministry of Foriegn Affairs site is here:

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00me0

The latest census report was 6.7 million however:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0nc60
The Jewish population of Israel stands at approximately 5.4 million (38% of the world Jewry); the non-Jewish population is approximately 1.3 million (82% Muslims, 9% Christians and 9% Druze).

Implies theft. You will have to demonstrate that this was gained by subterfuge, or constitutes some other form of skullduggery, to sustain the usage.

Of course, you could try just breathing slowly, perhaps into a paper bag, until you become used to a calmer state, and express yourself in a reasonable manner.

Yes it implies theft! That is my point.

America's biggest "welfare", "aid", "loan" AND "grant" recipient is Israel hands down.
They have taken aid for about 60 years from America and they refuse to stand on their own two feet financially.
(In America, when a person does this, yes it is called "theft" and they are usually criminally liable and prosecuted when lots of money disappears.)

We have few if any controls on Israel.
In many cases, they even openly REFUSE to spend the money we give them "as we ask".

Are you going to mince words and use some cheap proaganda to call it "gifts to allies" or something silly like that when we all know all the AMERICAN money since 1948 "disappeared" with little to no repayment at all.

Since that is what they are, that is what it is appropriate to call them. You will find most of it given over after the rise of Soviet influence, coincident with Nasser's rule, and subsequently, at which time Israel was a quite useful ally, being by the kate sixties approximately equivalent to a pre-positioned NATO armored corps and tactical air force ready in the region.

The greatest portion of these monies are spent in the United States, acting as a sort of subsidy for weapons manufacturers, and effecting a reduction in the cost of equipments to U.S. forces, since extending the assembly run reduces unit costs.

We will leave aside your foolishness about "welfare" in this country, which you seem to imagine it is criminal to be a long-term recipient of. You really do need to inform yourself better: you have not invented the wheel just now....

You will find most of it given over after the rise of Soviet influence, coincident with Nasser's rule

Nixon massively increased US aid to Israel in 1971, after Nasser.

In fact, US aid for that one year alone was roughly equal to the first ten years of Nasser.

Also, US aid to Israel stood at $74m in 1954, and it was actually reduced to $52m in 1955.

All figures (some rounded) from:

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/U.S._Assistance_to_Israel1.html

but Nasser or not, the point about Soviet influence is correct.

Prior to the early sixties, as your figures point out, U.S. monetary aid was a trifle. In the period '54-'55, the U. S. was avidly courting Nasser, only to meet frustration shortly before the Suez War, which marked the first sizeable infusion of Soviet weaponry to Arab states. It was only after this that any appreciable U.S. weaponry was made available to Israel. The aid given in '71 was coincident with another great build-up of Soviet assistance to Egypt and Syria, including advisors and air force personnel, during the "Attrition War" prior to the Yom Kippur War.

The point of my reply was to address the continually retailed misapprehension that the U.S. was a vast backer of Israel from its beginning, and your figures rather support that debunking: aid before Nasser was trifling, and even aid during Nasser was eclipsed by aid during the '70's. The close affiliation of the U.S. and Israel does not date from its origin, but grew up during the Cold War.

I think it was after they realized that Israel was a better club against independent Arab nationalists than the CIA was (CIA? bungled failures? no way..--really, it's true :)). It was technically no change in policy, just altering the methods--failed attempts to combat "Nasserism" and other independent tendencies discreetly littered the 50s & 60s before then.

That is, a marriage of convenience more than anything. A bit schizophrenic combined with the other approach toward suppressing any independent tendencies in the area, but that has only clashed on three notable occasions.

It's the aid that gets your goat. There are now 6.6 million Israelis by the latest census.

Israel gets a package deal since the Camp David Peace agreement with Egypt, similar to Egypt's. The grant in aid is matched with a loan. Israel repays the loan while Egypt's debt has been forgiven. Loans are paid with a 10% interest added.

Refinancing has allowed Israel to repay the loan and get private financing at a lower interest. Detractors charge Israel the difference in rate. So they claim Israel is taking needed money from the US and also repaying it too soon to earn the interest for the US coffers. If the money is so needed, they should not complain.

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/egyptaid.html
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/U.S._Assistance_to_Israel1.html
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/US-Israel/boldaid.html

Your right about the attached interest Gimel, but you neglect to mention how many times a U.S. "loan" was "forgiven" (cancelling out many of the benefits all this "interest" you speak of has allegedly generated us).

You ONLY make "loans" to those who will NOT be "forgiven" or there is just no point in being a banker.

Any major bank will tell you that to keep a loan "sucker" on the hook, you change the interest rate AND DO NOT FORGIVE THE BALANCE EVEN "ONCE"! (Let alone who knows how many times loans from Israel have been "forgiven" to negate ALL NET BENEFIT.)

(And now I am in MY field. Here in economics I can slam some keister.)

Care to answer what VALUE Israel is to America in this seemingly circular situation of loan, loan, loan, loan, forgive one loan, loan, loan, loan, loan, forgive one loan, loan, loan, loan, loan, forgive one loan?

IT'S LUDICROUS!

As far as what gets my goat about Israel, I nary know where to start Gimel.
There are SO many interconnected issues for such a dinky little place (but hey, it's ever growing).

Maybe on top on my list is the land-grabbing thing, refusing to pull back after WHIPPING the entire area in 1967 is #2. (I dislike that intensely and I have no Muslim beliefs or Arab blood in me at all.)
(Israel is not even following the most barbaric rules of warfare, where you win the war, you loot the pants off the place you beat, then you go back HOME.)

THEN it is the deadbeat (or shall we politely say, "a dead-end") ally who does not TRULY "contribute" to this "relationship" in any sense that can be named so far.

I could go on and on here of course Gimel, but it is the cummulative effect of many of these things (and more) ON AMERICA that infuriates me most.

The return of the Sinai Peninsula (a sizable tract of land), the buffer zone to Lebanon, and the negotiations to return the Golan to Syria in exchange for peace? Also, the various agreements to divide Israel so as to give the Palestinians a state in the Gaza and West Bank? Israel has not grown an inch in the last 35 years.

The day that the US pays the native Americans for the continent at current market value, I'll say your claim has validity.

Okay "roughly" 1800 A.D. I am sure that date will get nit picked a by someone and they will inform me that the majority of land was done being grabbed right after the 1840's and the Mexican American War was "over". (January 14th, 1848 EXACTLY!)
(WEEKS BEFORE gold was found at Sutter's mill on February 2, 1848 to be even MORE exact.)

(Beat you to it this time folks.)

Maybe I am "rough" on some of these Mid-East dates and figures, but just TRY to "correct" me on AMERICAN dates (and people) once and you'll find that you WILL all fail at that one.

As far as "Israel not growing 1 inch" in the last 35 years...
Perhaps the most blatant fib I have ever heard on this topic yet!

This one is so outrageous that I had to leave and go get a link for this one to myself join the nit-picking on semantics.

Here you go: http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/03/sp_world_abunimah043003.htm.
(Well, I must have cut and pasted wrong, but there is a major ragpaper story from 2003. I'll be a pro at this in a few weeks. I could operate Frontpage so I do not see why I am not getting a hyper. Oh, well. Next time.)

We call that "indian giving" the way Israel does it though.
(No offense to Indians meant by that one though.)

Israel is in and out of there like it is making whoopie with the whole darn area for Pete's sake!
Like it is all a bunch of Monopoly parcels to hand out and "trade off" when you want to!

MSNBC ALSO had a very good Flash about Israel's NON-STOP growth in 2002 but I am pretty sure it is gone by now and I do not want to dig into and debate this issue too much as I would be guilty of the same overkill on semantic differences I am crying about from others.

I have ceded PLENTY of partial points so far, but on this issue of "growth" I stand firm.

I will even give Israel one small point of praise (though I do not believe Israel "belongs" there in the first place which negates this point but what the heck).

Israel DID pull back during the first war intended to "claim" Israel in the 1940's.
(But Egypt and the rest took "another shot" at making the Israelis leave, AND FROM THAT POINT ON ISRAEL HAS NEVER LOOKED BACK OR TRULY "STEPPED BACK" AGAIN! At least in a similar way.)

Israel has been almost like an apple tree since 1967 on. (Constantly growing but occassionally "dropping" a single apple of land or freedom to these folks in order to proclaim to the world, "Look how humane we are ((to give back FRACTIONS))in Israel. Meanwhile the tree is dropping dozens of little apple on the land itself to keep making new trees.)


What say you?

While Jews are indiginous to this area (dates are only historical references) and have a continuous presence for over 3000 years, the area known as the British Mandate was held in promise for the Jewish people to build the modern homeland. The legal standard is not fixed by US history. In fact, as you point out, the "rules of war" change over time.

If there was "Indian Giving" involved, look at the history of the Mandate and the promises to settle the Jewish population that was being forcably expelled from Russia (pogroms) and Germany (the rise of Hitler). It was the British who promised Palestine, and then renigged about 4 times.

The Balfour Declaration of Nov 2, 1917 announced the intention of allowing a homeland for the Jews in Palestine:
http://www.ariga.com/treaties/balfour.shtml

The British White Paper of 1922 which limited the development of the Jewish homeland, and restricted immigration from Europe.

As for the Jewish population in Palestine this document contains this sentence:

"During the last two or three generations the Jews have recreated in Palestine a community, now numbering 80,000, of whom about one fourth are farmers or workers upon the land...."
http://www.ariga.com/treaties/whitepaper1922.shtml#top

Considerable information about the growing Jewish community and its place in Palestine is also documented here.

However, under pressure from Arab groups which gathered force in London. The League of Nations subsequently issued a promise based on Balfour Declaration which was again limited by a second British White Paper in 1939.

All the documents are available at the URL:
http://www.ariga.com/treaties/

As for the Washington Post online dialogue and concerning the Road Map this is noted by the participant Ali Abunimah:

It does demand an end to the occupation --which is good -- but does not specify full, total Israeli withdrawal and the removal of all of Israel's illegal colonies. The Road Map does demand that Israel stop building settlements and remove some small outposts erected since March 2001, but it is silent about the future of existing major settlements built since 1967. It is vague on all of these issues and simply repeats very vague Oslo formulas.

It is clear that the Palestinian leadership found the Road Map too limiting for its aspirations.

From the Camp David agreements reached with Pres Carter, the principle has been "Land for Peace". Israel returned the Sinai a second time in 1981, including the Israeli built tourist town of Taba (a later negotiated settlement).

If you have trouble understanding the concept of land for peace, you just have to remember that an "intifada" which bombs Israeli cities is not peace.

The other issues you've raised are not phrased in very specific terms. Therefore, I shall not respond. Non-stop growth in terms of population numbers is happening throughout the world. It's called the population bomb. The Arab birthrate is higher than that of the Jewish population. Both people need a homeland. Peace is necessary, and a stop to terror and suicide bombing attacks on Israeli citizens.

I was impressed with your thouroughness for your claims on "Israel's land". Very well done to you. (No joke)

BUT, it is again argueing about the meaning of what is is like Clinton had to.

It is well known to ALL that there is not a TRULY "indiginous" person (barring Africa perhaps) in the whole world!

We are ALL "migrants" Gimel!

Everybody from the Indians of America who we in America "threw out" of power to the people of "Israel" who the Arabs "threw out" of power (oddly enough ALSO right) "about" 200 years ago, WERE 100% MIGRANTS in origin!

In the history REALITY (where I dwell alone it seems), ALL of the Israeli's (AND our own American Indians) were "tossed out" of their homes EXACTLY RIGHT SMACK IN THE MIDDLE of the times when the laws of, "survival of the fittest" pretty much reigned supreme all over the world with "little" exception BEFORE the U.N.. (Not like the L.O.N kind of "international law" that failed.)

My main point then is that while all YOUR stuff above IS quite impressive to make it sound as if these Israeli's somehow "belong" there (really, it was the "smoothest" propaganda I ever saw Gimel) the fact remains that by the time (1945 U.N.) "international law" was created MORE THAN 3/4ths of what you might call, "Jews" (but I will call semi-Caucasians for P.C.'s sake) were LONG GONE FROM WHAT IS CALLED "ISRAEL" in the natural ebb and flow of humanity through man's petty wars, poverty, hunger and such BEFORE the U.N. EVER came to be!

The problem I have with your WHOLE piece is that it CLEARLY applies the rules of a POST U.N., "interational law" situation to speaking of the place called "Israel" (which does not belong there).

International law was created AFTER the, "Israeli's" were mostly "out of there" Gimel (for "whatever" number of times) and you know it full well!
There was BARELY a fingernail of a "semi-Caucasion" population left in all of Palestine by 1945 and you know it.
The Israeli's were out of luck like the Indians of America by 1945 and you know it.
Foundation of current international law was laid in 1945.
Borders were approved, the world maps were printed and distributed, and the whole time (since 1917 I hear)there was a group of Israel "dreamers" saying, "STOP THE PRESSES on these maps, we have a GREAT IDEA! Give us a small place to call home (we do not "need/want" more we promise) and THE WHOLE WORLD WILL WELCOME US AS "LIBERATORS" OF THE HOLY LAND! We will be a beacon of peace and make you all PROUD of us in Israel if you just help us "move" these people out of our way just a FEW FEET. We will bring them all democracy and light and peace. We will be welcomed as liberators.
(Sounds familiar to modern Iraq,eh?)


Sure these "Israeli's" forced (British/American/U.N.)to create a place out of thin air and call it, "Israel" AFTER the U.N. created "international law", but it does not make it right!
(The Israeli's either made us/paid us/"lobbyied" us, ((take your pick)), to create something right out of thin air that NEVER existed on any 1945 U.N. map when our current international law was drafted ("roughly 1945")and approved by all the nations of the Earth that were participating in the U.N. by 1946.)

To follow this logic path of yours for supporting "countries" created right out of thin air not even SEEN on 1945 U.N. map JUST because a person or a few persons "claim" to have lived there in a "here and there" kind of way (LONG BEFORE "international law"), would lead one to conclude that the American Indians should have all the land taken from them BEFORE "international law" returned as well.
(Quick everybody, head for Texas!)

Well,if you are advocating THAT kind of state "creation" for ANY "former/occassional residents" on this Earth (as you seem to advoscate for Israel), well then YOU endanger AMERICA'S national security Gimel because we are not giving up Texas.

Are you NOT supportive of the 1945 map of America or should we go back to 1849 and give Mexico some turf back as well because a few Mexicans lived there as well?
How should we divide America then between the Eskimo's claim, the Indians claim, and the Mexicans claim then since they too "lived there once" in the same ever-changing numbers? (Just as the Israeli's of history claim.)

Hey Gimel, Spain "passed through" South America and left some blood-lines there before 1945, what do we do about them?

See, Gimel you have to have an HONEST "starting point" with our MODERN U.N. laws and NOT try starting with 2,000 year old books ((literally from, "the dawn of time")) that promise the Israeli's something (rightly or wrongly) that can't even be verified (YET) as being an authentic "promise" anyway.


What say you?

The partition of Mandatory Palestine in a Jewish Zone and an Arab Zone was an act of the United Nations, toward the end of 1947. Care to try a comment on how "international law" was violated by that act of the United Nations? My time is too short to deal with the farrago of misperceptions and ignorance you have put up here for general amusement in any detail, but that will do for a start from your end, dear.

Enquiring minds want to know!

:eyes:

Jews are semi-Caucasians?

With friends like that you don't need enemies.

or his campaign. If I was, you may rest assured that my actions would be quite different.

I simply gave him a link to information about Mr. Kucinich's stance on the issue. I do not see why I should stop speaking my mind because I did so.

I didn't think he would make a very credible supporter of DK. I wouldn't ask you or even suggest you stop speaking your mind. I just wouldn't want this person representing a candidate I backed.

I guess I'm simply desperate.

We are facing a whole new set of rules in the world today. There is a China with indiginous Chinese. But of course, you could go back to the Hun invasion, the Japanese invasions, and you have confusion of pure blood lines everywhere.

The Arab population is close to the Jewish racial heritage. The Jewish people are not semi-caucasian. There are Sephardic Jews and Ashkenazic Jews. Both are semitic peoples.

My point was that, as stated in the Balour Declaration, the Jews have a heritage linked to Jerusalem and the area of Israel today. It is recognized by historians and has been the basis of international law. One could even make a claim theat the League of Nations was begun with Balfour and with Israel as it's first declaration, international law was created for Israel. And Israel was created to begin a new era.

I'm writing this in the early morning hours, my time, so I am going to conclude this post for now. Perhaps I have not covered everything you brought up, but I'll write more later. Thanks for your compliments on my previous post. I'm glad it has given you something to consider.

..

on people trained to fight back as oppossed to, say, shoppers or diners.

It is preferable that the fighting be between people who are suppossed to be fighting. It may become a true resitance movement.

It took a while to wade to the bottom of this thread, but it was worth it as I totally agree with everything you said....

Violet...

But Israel couldn't care less. The latest talking point is already well crafted:

Gen. Moshe Kaplensky said if the patrol had not been in the area, the terrorists would have reached the highway and opened fire on innocent Israeli civilians (yediot aharonot)

(emphasis mine)

I assume no further comment is necessary.

Anyway, even if al-Aqsa was interested in being a resistence movement (it isn't: only 6% of attacks are in the OT and 75% of all attacks are civilians), Israel's response (massive attack in Gaza) is the same whether or not soldiers or civilians are targetted.

Understandable, but there is no need for the U.S. to take that view, because doing so will naturally drive the militant/terrorist groups into attacking easier targets (i.e. civilians), since there is no gain for them whatever if they choose the harder option.

If they're going to get called terrorists regardless of their chosen targets or actions, they'll conclude that they may as well be terrorists.

But that general's self-serving blather need not concern us too much here. This was certainly a legitimate military action by Al Aksa. If actions such as this one were the general case where the various irregular bodies of Arab Palestine were concerned, my opinion of them, and probably the opinion of many others, would be different than it is. Clearly, it is possible for these groups to engage Israeli soldiers, particularly in the lands overrun in '67, where the soldiery is frequently spread out in penny-packets. Practice of "sparrow-war" against these, rather than a policy of "frightfulness" directed against enemy civilians, would have a much superior political effect, and do more to advance the legitimate aspirations of the people of Arab Palestine.

I'll agree with everything you posted, but Yediot Aharonot actually says it was members of Tanzim, not al-Asqa who carried out this attack.

Of course, that fact actually reinforces my original post (and yours as a consequence). :)