Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Saying someone is an Israeli firster isn't a personal attack, it's a description of actions.. Majority of the Republican Party and a large part of the Democrat Party are Israeli firsters. We will never be able to broker a peace deal because of this. America can't be impartial whatsoever because of the Americans that place Israel's interests above American interests.. For example, we turn a blind eye to Israel's undeclared nuclear arsenal and we support their ability to occupy land taken in war... You Israeli firsters are your own worst enemy... You complain about conflict in the middle east and at the same time you support activities that fuel the fire...
Your repeated attempts to classify and pigeon hole people with different views than your own are childish and ignorant.
Israel is a US ally, and just because someone is in favor of giving them a little support does not place that country's interest over ours. But I guess I don't feel so bad since you've called the "Majority of the Republican Party and a large part of the Democrat Party are Israeli firsters." It must be very stressful for you to live in a country like that. Perhaps Iran would be more to your liking.
Israel has given a lot already. It returned the Sinai to Egypt to sign a peace deal with that country. It has also been attacked in a quite few wars as well several terrorism attacks since its establishment in 1948. It also gave withdrew completely from the Gaza Strip with no peace deal and we see how that turned out. So it is the Palestinian Arabs' turn to compromise after their constant attacks against the State of Israel.
Wading into trouble waters...
The measure of what has been "taken" as compared to what has been "given" back must first be considered objectively and accurately before you can start using terms like "a lot." Right?
Sounds like a reasonable idea to me. Why don't you start a thread on the Egyptian Blockade of Gaza and the Mile wide buffer zone that Egypt has created to keep those "peaceful Palestinians" from entering Egypt.
Not a bad idea, but...
That would make for too many threads!
If there were a thread for every bit of this history, details and truth about both sides of this story, we'd have far better a picture about the truth of this history compared to the general propaganda that is obviously pervasive in this country and Israel. Only a fool would argue with that obvious fact...
In addition don't forget the moat used to flood the tunnels coming from Gaza. It's sort of odd that no one mentions Egypt bulldozing more and more homes in order to create a wider buffer zone with Gaza and not with Israel.
Have you EVER made a comment that even hinted at what is also worth considering when it comes to the other side of this story? I might be wrong, but I think not, and whenever you have someone not able to properly balance both sides of the story, you have someone worth no more than an accountant that understands only one side of a revenue/expense ledger.
It's a little bit odd how Arabs like Egyptians don't want the Palestinians. You'd think they would bend over backwards to help their neighbors and fellow Muslims.
"Neighbors?" You mean like our neighbors to the south? The Mexicans? Right. Imagine that...
Why don't you just start a new thread and ask City Data to reserve it just for you. Then you can respond to yourself and post as much nonsense as you want without drowning out everyone else?
I am responding mostly to people who are responding to me. Like you..
I doubt I have the sort of power or influence you suggest, but if you don't like my comments, why don't you avoid reading them? Lots of people avoid hearing what they don't want to hear!
Not so many are as inclined to toss comments into the mix like yours, peanut gallery like, but why don't you start a thread entitled "What I want to hear" and enjoy your bubble?
When have the Arabs sought peace in 70 years. What should the West do, keep waiting? There's always reason why it's a "bad time" for real negotiations and real peace.
Let's face facts; hell will freeze over before Jerusalem goes back.
There are many Arab countries and many millions of Arabs living all over the world, including nearly 2 million in America. Most, like most people in general, want peace, but most, like most people, will push back against injustice, especially when forced to do so...
Excellent post. The arguments to the contrary are really insulting if you ask me. Its like blaming the Freedom Riders for "daring" to traverse the segregated south, knowing that their actions would bring about violent reactions from racist people and organizations like the KKK. Just like the Freedom Riders weren't to blame for the violent reactions from racist bigots, President Trump and freedom loving people throughout the world aren't to blame for the violent reactions from radical Islamist extremists and terrorists who are upset with the decision to recognize Israel. There comes a time to take a stand for what is right and to stop appeasing the violent and unreasonable/irrational among us.
Truman did likewise. The State Department wanted him to delay recognizing Israel until it could negotiate the "disputes." We'd still be waiting.
Truman also desegregated the Army and Army housing. And dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Is Japan an enemy today?
The Arabs will always be angry about Israel, until they aren't. Appeasement never works.
What Truman did...
Britain and the United States, in a joint effort to examine the dilemma, established the "Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry." In April 1946, the committee submitted recommendations that Palestine not be dominated by either Arabs or Jews. It concluded that attempts to establish nationhood or independence would result in civil strife; that a trusteeship agreement aimed at bringing Jews and Arabs together should be established by theUnited Nations; that full Jewish immigration be allowed into Palestine; and that two autonomous states be established with a strong central government to control Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and the Negev, the southernmost section of Palestine.
British, Arab, and Jewish reactions to the recommendations were not favorable. Jewish terrorism in Palestine antagonized the British, and by February 1947 Arab-Jewish communications had collapsed. Britain, anxious to rid itself of the problem, set the United Nations in motion, formally requesting on April 2, 1947, that the U.N. General Assembly set up the Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP). This committee recommended that the British mandate over Palestine be ended and that the territory be partitioned into two states.
Maybe we should have negotiated with Charles Manson, Stephen Paddock and Devin Patrick Kelley. We could have discovered their "inner child." At the very least we could have defused their violent anger.
I know I appreciate this sort of evidence about what sort of "thinking" goes on in the minds of too many commenting in this thread...
What garbage, and to think there are people who probably applaud this sort of comment! Mind boggling...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
