'Occupy' types

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Weren't these Arabs living in Palestine/Israel before 1967? During the Ottoman Empire in the 16th and 17th century, there was a small Jewish population living in the area known today as Israel. But there was a much sizable population of Muslims living in that area.

If I am not mistaken, I believe a lot of these native Palestinian Jews lived somewhat peacefully along with the majority Muslim population. It was the immigration of European Jews and the Zionist movement that propelled the conflict between these two groups, along with the growing Muslim nationalist movement of the early 1900s.

This.

There is a lot of revisionist history going on on both sides of this thread.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Lotus

This.

There is a lot of revisionist history going on on both sides of this thread.

Exactly. I honestly find it a bit laughable when people in this country have passionate opinions about the Arab/Israeli conflict. I am not saying that people should not have an opinion, but it is this extremism that continues to fuel this conflict.

The way I see it, both sides are right and both sides are wrong. Israel has reason to be paranoid of other Arab nations, yet they have been aggressive in occupying and building up communities in areas outside of the pre-1967 borders. Israel has a right to defend itself, but often when Palestinians throw rocks at Israelis, the Israelis retaliate with bullets. Israelis are the victims of terrorism and denounce it, yet their country was formed by terrorists and their military tactics are pretty much terrorize the Palestinian population.

Palestinians on the other hand, have been screwed over by the other Arab countries, as much as they by Israelis. They claim a right to exist, but ally themselves with countries that want to drive Israel into the sea. They want self determination and their own government, but then they elect Hamas to the government. They also have no unity within their government and pretty much shun those leaders that are willing to negotiate.

I am pretty pessimistic about this conflict, a lot of people are dying on both sides, and it directly affects our security. I had the fortune of taking a class taught by an Israeli and a Palestinian professor, and got to see both sides of the conflict. I feel that a lot of us here in the U.S. only see the Israeli good side and the Palestinian bad side. But there is a lot that we don't know, and we are never going to be a broker of peace if we have people here be so one-sided on this sad conflict.

[JoeRedskin]

Well said Ruhskins. Good insight.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Israel has a right to defend itself, but often when Palestinians throw rocks at Israelis, the Israelis retaliate with bullets.

Should the IDF only be permitted to throw rocks back?

You're missing out on the occassional 'harmless' rocket attack, 'prank' suicide bomber and other manifestation of post-Friday-prayer japery that comes out of the poor, downtrodden Pali's.

But I'm biased...

[Alvin Walton]

Israel vs Iran is not the only subject when it comes to Iran having nukes.
Its not far fetched to think their govt would not hold parts of the region hostage with threats of using nukes if they didnt get their way.
It would not surprise me to hear them threaten to nuke one of our carrier battle groups if it entered the straights. They have already threatened it in a conventional way.
It would also be a good way for them to try to get their sanctions lifted.

Rinse, repeat...........

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Exactly. I honestly find it a bit laughable when people in this country have passionate opinions about the Arab/Israeli conflict. I am not saying that people should not have an opinion, but it is this extremism that continues to fuel this conflict.

The way I see it, both sides are right and both sides are wrong. Israel has reason to be paranoid of other Arab nations, yet they have been aggressive in occupying and building up communities in areas outside of the pre-1967 borders. Israel has a right to defend itself, but often when Palestinians throw rocks at Israelis, the Israelis retaliate with bullets. Israelis are the victims of terrorism and denounce it, yet their country was formed by terrorists and their military tactics are pretty much terrorize the Palestinian population.

Palestinians on the other hand, have been screwed over by the other Arab countries, as much as they by Israelis. They claim a right to exist, but ally themselves with countries that want to drive Israel into the sea. They want self determination and their own government, but then they elect Hamas to the government. They also have no unity within their government and pretty much shun those leaders that are willing to negotiate.

I am pretty pessimistic about this conflict, a lot of people are dying on both sides, and it directly affects our security. I had the fortune of taking a class taught by an Israeli and a Palestinian professor, and got to see both sides of the conflict. I feel that a lot of us here in the U.S. only see the Israeli good side and the Palestinian bad side. But there is a lot that we don't know, and we are never going to be a broker of peace if we have people here be so one-sided on this sad conflict.

Well-considered and well-put.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Should the IDF only be permitted to throw rocks back?

You're missing out on the occassional 'harmless' rocket attack, 'prank' suicide bomber and other manifestation of post-Friday-prayer japery that comes out of the poor, downtrodden Pali's.

But I'm biased...

Rocket attacks are typically carried out by Hizbollah (if I am not mistaken), since they have been supplied by Syria and Iran with Katyusha rocket launchers. Unless you are talking about rocket-propelled grenade attacks, which I am sure Palestinians have.

I never said that IDF should not defend themselves. But they go to the extreme when they defend themselves. And that is the side that no one sees. I am not being one of these ultra liberals that goes on a rant about how horrible Israel is and blah blah blah, but I do think that there is a side to this conflict that no one sees. There are many Israeli and Palestinians that want this conflict to end. Heck the Oslo Accords were started by 2nd and 3rd track diplomacy efforts. But we just seem to hear the sides of the extremists, and here in the US we get to hear the side of Israel.

And I guess all of us here in the US have the luxury to be extremist about this conflict, since we don't have to worry about a suicide bomber blowing up a bus on the morning commute or having the IDF shoot a anti-tank missile while they are retaliating.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Israel vs Iran is not the only subject when it comes to Iran having nukes.
Its not far fetched to think their govt would not hold parts of the region hostage with threats of using nukes if they didnt get their way.
It would not surprise me to hear them threaten to nuke one of our carrier battle groups if it entered the straights. They have already threatened it in a conventional way.
It would also be a good way for them to try to get their sanctions lifted.

Rinse, repeat...........

The same way that nukes have helped Israel avoid conflict with the major Arab powers since the 1973 War.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

The same way that nukes have helped Israel avoid conflict with the major Arab powers since the 1973 War.

Avoid and threaten are two different things.

[firstdown]

Lets give all the rag heads nukes that are programmed to only attack each other. Then cut on the cams and watch them kill each other on HBO.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Avoid and threaten are two different things.

I would say hold a strategic advantage. I am sure that if Israel uses nukes against their neighbor, it is going to affect them in some way shape or form since it is such a small area.

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Lets give all the rag heads nukes that are programmed to only attack each other. Then cut on the cams and watch them kill each other on HBO.

Feck HBO, I'd rather watch it live on a webcam.

[SmootSmack]

Let's refrain from saying rag heads

[dmek25]

is rag heads an acceptable term?

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Lets give all the rag heads nukes that are programmed to only attack each other. Then cut on the cams and watch them kill each other on HBO.

I imagine that....would Trump being voted off the Island.....