I have done, sad to say that no-one here seems to care. My guess would be the Palestinian supporters in this thread all secretly support Islamic State anyway, and the Israel supporters don't care about non-Sunni Iraqis because they don't have white skin.
Israel/Palestine Shenanigans
- Thread starter Allnamestaken
- Start date
- Status
I have done, sad to say that no-one here seems to care. My guess would be the Palestinian supporters in this thread all secretly support Islamic State anyway, and the Israel supporters don't care about non-Sunni Iraqis because they don't have white skin.
Have you considered that the reason this topic is getting more attention is because it's a contentious issue, has a long history dating back a very long time & is part of an active & live thread.
Also your guess is utterly wrong, not everybody
who posts on here has an axe to grind with Jewish or Muslim people.
Yep thats 100% factually correct, don't let the thread door hit you on the way out
In what way is it factually incorrect? I bet I know a lot more about the history of this conflict than you do.
Glasgow city council wading into the argument by hoisting a Palestinian flag over the city chambers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-28682483
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-28682483
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 3,114
Dude are you trolling ?
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 May 2011
- Posts
- 12,144
- Location
- Woking
We support the right of the Palestinians to live in their own country. Whether they're Islamic or not is of no importance.
That is not what I said at all. British Mandated Palestine is part of the history of the conflict, that doesn't mean that we're responsible for the Zionism and the establishment of the state of Israel, just that we failed to stop it.
Doesn't matter how many times you debate it if you're still wrong you're wrong.
Do you extend the same support to the Yazidi in Iraq?
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 May 2011
- Posts
- 12,144
- Location
- Woking
Look, man, you can't know about every conflict or group of people around the world all the time. You're just being unrealistic and pedantic. I care about Palestine, end of.
Don
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,050
- Location
- In a house
Wow, I was just reading and keeping my head out of this crossfire, but that comment is fascinating!
Can you elaborate on this point?
I agree with the latter, disagree strongly with the former.
We caused the mess in Iraq and should be helping solve it, unfortunately it would involve teaming up with Iran and the Syrian government which our government would not do. Ergo they are ******.
With regards to the former, disregarding the history, we (western nations) support Israel and supply them with the means to carry out this attack, whilst backing them up in the UN, vetoing resolutions against them. We are just as responsible for this mess and yet are still supplying arms to the Israelis. If we were supporting IS and providing them with arms (which, except for potentially a few unfortunate cases, we aren't) then your argument would have better standing.
Are you for real?
Why don't you go away and read up on the 1917 Balfour Declaration, UN Resolutions 181 & 242 amongst many others, have a look at the massive US Foreign Aid diverted to Israel and think about the UK's arms exports to Israel.
I'm sure you are absolutely right about what is happening in Iraq and perhaps you should create a thread about it but please stop trying to peddle the lie that the West isn't up to its neck in supporting Israel.
The mess in Iraq is caused by a religious and tribal differences that were previously kept in check by a dictator. I am not sure, whatever your argument about whether or not we should have removed that dictator, teaming up with two more dictators (one of which who is brutally repressing 'his' people on a scale a hundred times worse than the recent Gaza conflict) would be the best way to go.
At the very least, teaming up with Syria and Iran would put us in exact political opposition to a number of countries such as Turkey (the so-called regional gateway to the West), Jordan and Egypt.
That would not be very bright.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Well lets be clear, Britain "gave up" Palestine, and rather than let them take it over themselves(they owned 89% of the land, were the massive majority population(less large a majority after effectively the zionist movement emigrated there in huge numbers, but still 89% of the land was Palestinian owned, and cities were palestinian built, etc) we took the Swiss way out of just letting someone else deal with it.
The UN vote itself, well, there had just been this war in in europe and this option basically gave europe a "we don't have to deal with them if we give them land somewhere not in europe" so a lot voted for it. North/south america mostly voted for, China didn't, India didn't, most of the middle east and africa didn't.
The people who voted against it or... effectively everyone who saw the obvious 50+ years of war coming by randomly creating a ridiculous new state while displacing so many native people, This was the West's crude, quick and "easy" fix to where all the displaced jews could go.
Then both England and the USA have been the biggest financial and military supporters of Israel. Israel could NOT have dropped any of these bombs on Palestine if we hadn't supported them for over 60 years. They have a strong economy purely because the two most powerful Western countries gave them money and support to do so, they have a strong military because we either gave them weapons, sold them weapons or gave them money which led to a strong economy which led to them being able to buy weapons.
Without the money from the start, Israel would have a crap economy, very little of the business there currently is there would have moved there, the likes of Intel having a plant there because the support we gave them allowed them to be the dominant power in the region militarily and to build the kind of infrastructure Intel needed. This is directly, every single part, down to Western support.
The Israel/Palestine problem is ENTIRELY the west's making.
If England had just given the land to the Palestinians rather than asking the UN to come up with some bat **** crazy plan, there would be no Israel to protect or fight for.
AS for the supporters all wanting a muslim state..... wow, that is an interesting thing to say. I don't believe in any good, I find religion pretty laughable. I don't think any serious leader in the world is religious, but power hungry people using religion as a tool. It's funny how ever interpretation of every religion always results in people fighting for and dying to make a single guy in particular more money and power. Funny that every religious war boils down to one guy getting more powerful....
I would quite happily (if I was PM) send in troops to wipe out Isis. Not because they are muslims, or a particular sect of whatever, but because people who threaten to kill people if they don't convert, fear and murder is not a tool used by reasonable people with reasonable goals. Isis could be a political group and try to get elected, but this guy wants power, wants people to love him, and can't actually win an election. We should blow them off the earth and protect people who are trying not to fight and trying not to die.
In general regardless of the conflict I support the oppressed, the invaded, the victims. We should have sent planes and parachuted in barrels of water already and we should send in troops. We should have sent in troops asap when the first towns were being hit, before they used fear/threats of death to bolster their ranks by the thousands.
But to pretend we had no involvement in the Israel/Palestine situation is.... I don't even know, it's so beyond the realms of denial/blindness/ignorance that I can't think of a bunch of safe words to use to describe it.
The UN vote itself, well, there had just been this war in in europe and this option basically gave europe a "we don't have to deal with them if we give them land somewhere not in europe" so a lot voted for it. North/south america mostly voted for, China didn't, India didn't, most of the middle east and africa didn't.
The people who voted against it or... effectively everyone who saw the obvious 50+ years of war coming by randomly creating a ridiculous new state while displacing so many native people, This was the West's crude, quick and "easy" fix to where all the displaced jews could go.
Then both England and the USA have been the biggest financial and military supporters of Israel. Israel could NOT have dropped any of these bombs on Palestine if we hadn't supported them for over 60 years. They have a strong economy purely because the two most powerful Western countries gave them money and support to do so, they have a strong military because we either gave them weapons, sold them weapons or gave them money which led to a strong economy which led to them being able to buy weapons.
Without the money from the start, Israel would have a crap economy, very little of the business there currently is there would have moved there, the likes of Intel having a plant there because the support we gave them allowed them to be the dominant power in the region militarily and to build the kind of infrastructure Intel needed. This is directly, every single part, down to Western support.
The Israel/Palestine problem is ENTIRELY the west's making.
If England had just given the land to the Palestinians rather than asking the UN to come up with some bat **** crazy plan, there would be no Israel to protect or fight for.
AS for the supporters all wanting a muslim state..... wow, that is an interesting thing to say. I don't believe in any good, I find religion pretty laughable. I don't think any serious leader in the world is religious, but power hungry people using religion as a tool. It's funny how ever interpretation of every religion always results in people fighting for and dying to make a single guy in particular more money and power. Funny that every religious war boils down to one guy getting more powerful....
I would quite happily (if I was PM) send in troops to wipe out Isis. Not because they are muslims, or a particular sect of whatever, but because people who threaten to kill people if they don't convert, fear and murder is not a tool used by reasonable people with reasonable goals. Isis could be a political group and try to get elected, but this guy wants power, wants people to love him, and can't actually win an election. We should blow them off the earth and protect people who are trying not to fight and trying not to die.
In general regardless of the conflict I support the oppressed, the invaded, the victims. We should have sent planes and parachuted in barrels of water already and we should send in troops. We should have sent in troops asap when the first towns were being hit, before they used fear/threats of death to bolster their ranks by the thousands.
But to pretend we had no involvement in the Israel/Palestine situation is.... I don't even know, it's so beyond the realms of denial/blindness/ignorance that I can't think of a bunch of safe words to use to describe it.
Last edited:
So you agree, we will just sit it out and watch the genocide?
My personal opinion is that we should not have removed Saddam on the first place. We went there under false pretenses and got involved in a tribal conflict as you say. It's exactly the same problem we ave in Libya and to a lesser extent Palestine.
I think we should have sat out of the whole middle east from a long time ago. Let them get on with it, whenever we try to help we make things worse and make more enemies.
We should be focused on issues closer to home.
Why don't you go away and read up on the history of Zionism and tell me how many Jews per year were migrating to Palestine before the Balfour Declaration and after? I think you'll find the declaration made little difference, except that post declaration the British administration was able to work with Jewish groups in Palestine to for example, attempt to curb migration when the number of Jewish refugees rose dramatically as Nazism came to power in central Europe. Why don't you read up on Jewish insurgents in Palestine post 1946 who would kill British soldiers there because we were trying to maintain something vaguely resembling peace between the Jews and the Arabs.
The West never intentionally created Israel, the Israelis created it for themselves, which ultimately is the only way that stable countries get formed - the strong displacing the weak. Anglo-Saxons displacing Britons, Arabs displacing Iberians, Americans displacing Native Americans etc.
Last edited:
- Status