• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Possible ceasefire in Gaza

ludahai said:
The UNSC is debating now. Libya is proposing a resolution that puts all of the blame on Israel and only calls for guarantees for Gaza. I wonder what will happen if they are still debating at midnight New York time regarding the five members whose terms end in five hours.

Now, the Israeli Ambassador is speaking after the Palestinian envoy completed his speech.
Click to expand...

Richard Roth just answered that question on CNN. The five (including the current UNSC president) would leave the room and the five new members would enter. Indonesia would leave while Japan would enter - for example. That would change the dynamics slightly.
 
bub said:
a ceasefire is temporary, it would be a truce. That would be the first step before negociation with the Hamas. They could negociate the end of the blockade vs. end of rocket launches.
Click to expand...

Yes, because Hamas can be trusted to keep their word.

Oh, waitaminute...
 
SgtRock said:
I think it would be a big mistake for Israel to agree to a ceasefire until all Hamas in Gaza cease to exist. I suggest they ____ __ ___. fill in the blanks. Even if it takes an extensive protracted ground invasion supported by close air support. Give Hamas what they want, martyrdom. Send them all to hell where they belong!
Click to expand...

Knowing that most of Palestinians in Gaza support the Hamas, and that you want to destroy the Hamas, do you basically advocate a kind of holocaust or what?
 
bub said:
The blockade does not work. If it did, then the IDF would not be bombing Gaza.

The rest of the answer is in this post. http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news/41754-possible-ceasefire-gaza-4.html#post1057866218
Click to expand...

I didn't say that it would be COMPLETELY effective, because they do have another border and tunnels have allowed them to get in supplies, including weapons. However, Israel has the right to prevent those who would attack them from getting those weapons with which to attack.
 
ludahai said:
I didn't say that it would be COMPLETELY effective, because they do have another border and tunnels have allowed them to get in supplies, including weapons. However, Israel has the right to prevent those who would attack them from getting those weapons with which to attack.
Click to expand...

When you weight the pros (ineffective protection against rocket smuggling) and the cons (huge negative consequences on Palestinians, with the result that they support Hamas) it is obvious that the cons (see examples here http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news/41754-possible-ceasefire-gaza-4.html#post1057866218 ) win.

It's as if you had an antivirus on your computer that
- is not effective
- attracts more viruses
- slows down your computer a lot
 
bub said:
Knowing that most of Palestinians in Gaza support the Hamas, and that you want to destroy the Hamas, do you basically advocate a kind of holocaust or what?
Click to expand...

Its not a holocaust when you are destrying an enemy that is bent on your destruction. What took place during WWII was a holocaust. Jews were not attempting to destroy Nazi Germany. Surely you can see the difference.
 
SgtRock said:
Its not a holocaust when you are destrying an enemy that is bent on your destruction. What took place during WWII was a holocaust. Jews were not attempting to destroy Nazi Germany. Surely you can see the difference.
Click to expand...

You are right, there is a difference. But you still advocate their deportation, don't you?
 
Yes I do. When Jews began to resettle Israel after the war Arabs began to come to what is now Israel from other countries. Yasar Arafat was in fact born in Cairo Egypt. This is where his family is from. My point is Palestine up untill that point in history never exhisted. There never was a nation of Palestine. The so called Palestinian people where nomads. But many of them like Arafat who is not a Palestinian clamed to be, and for what? To stop the much hated Jews from returning to and settling in their homeland. So you are right, I do believe they should be deported. Every last one of them.
 
Last edited:
SgtRock said:
Yes I do. When Jews began to resettle Israel after the war Arabs began to come to what is now Israel from other countries. Yasar Arafat was in fact born in Cairo Egypt. This is where his family is from. My point is Palestine up untill that point in history never exhisted. There never was a nation of Palestine. The so called Palestinian people where nomads. But many of them like Arafat who is not a Palestinian clamed to be, and for what? To stop the much hated Jews from returning to and settling in their homeland. So you are right, I do believe they should be deported. Every last one of them.
Click to expand...

So you think that Jews have the right to occupy the whole territory of Israel + Palestine, and that the 1947 borders have no validity.

So, the non-Jewish people who lived there before 1947 should be deported, because they are a threat to Israel.

A question: what gives them that right? The torah or something like that?
 
Vader said:
Giving terrorists what the want is not the answer either
Click to expand...

That would make disappear their reason of existence. They would not have any reason to attack Israel anymore
 
Israel has great momentum. They shouldn't stop until every gosh darned Hama's member and every supporter is put out of commission.

I really wish they would end that thing over there, one way or another.
 
Captain America said:
Israel has great momentum. They shouldn't stop until every gosh darned Hama's member and every supporter is put out of commission.

I really wish they would end that thing over there, one way or another.
Click to expand...

I agree.

Doing so would partially neutralize Iran's propaganda machine.
 
bub said:
That would make disappear their reason of existence. They would not have any reason to attack Israel anymore
Click to expand...

It would also teach them that terrorism works. THIS IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION.
 
Vader said:
It would also teach them that terrorism works. THIS IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION.
Click to expand...

well I'm sorry to have to make this comparison, but the Jews in 1947 behaved kinda like terrorists too, and they won.

After the war, the Haganah carried out anti-British operations in Palestine, such as the liberation of interned immigrants from the Atlit camp, the bombing of the country's railroad network, sabotage raids on radar installations and bases of the British Palestine police. It also continued to organize illegal immigration.
Click to expand...

Haganah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some of the better-known attacks by Irgun were the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem on 22 July 1946 and the Deir Yassin massacre (accomplished together with the Stern Gang) on 9 April 1948. In the West, Irgun was described as a terrorist organization by The New York Times newspaper,[2][3], the Anglo-American Committee of Enquiry[4], and prominent world and Jewish figures, such as Winston Churchill[5], Hannah Arendt, Albert Einstein, and many others.
Click to expand...

Irgun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Lehi was described as a terrorist organization[4] by the British authorities and United Nations mediator Ralph Bunche.[5] Lehi carried out the Nov 1944 assassination in Cairo of Lord Moyne along with other attacks on the British authorities and Palestinian Arabs. The newly-formed Israeli government banned the organization under an anti-terrorism law passed three days after the Sept 1948 assassination of the UN mediator Folke Bernadotte.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(group)

The Deir Yassin massacre refers to the killing of between 107 and 120 Palestinian villagers,[1] the estimate generally accepted by scholars,[2][3] during and possibly after the battle[4][5] at the village of Deir Yassin (also written as Dayr Yasin or Dir Yassin) near Jerusalem in the British Mandate of Palestine by Jewish irregular forces (Irgun and Lehi) between 9 April and 11 April 1948. It occurred while Jewish Yishuv forces fought to break the siege of Jerusalem during the period of civil war that preceded the end of the Mandate.

Contemporary reports, originating apparently from a commanding officer in Jerusalem of one of the irregular forces involved (the Irgun), Mordechai Ra'anan[6], gave an initial estimate of 254 killed.[7] The size of the figure had a considerable impact on the conflict in creating panic and became a major cause of the 1948 Palestinian exodus.
Click to expand...

Deir Yassin massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Balad al-Shaykh massacre - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Al-Khisas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Semiramis Hotel bombing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sa'sa' - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cairo–Haifa train bombings 1948 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...

So, yes, terrorism works: the Brits left and Jews got their state.
 
bub said:
When you weight the pros (ineffective protection against rocket smuggling) and the cons (huge negative consequences on Palestinians, with the result that they support Hamas) it is obvious that the cons (see examples here http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news/41754-possible-ceasefire-gaza-4.html#post1057866218 ) win.

It's as if you had an antivirus on your computer that
- is not effective
- attracts more viruses
- slows down your computer a lot
Click to expand...
only if you buy into the modern day delusion of sanitary wars with no collateral damage
a fantasy put forth by deluded intellectuals
of course they exclude Palestine from such standards :roll:
bub said:
That would make disappear their reason of existence. They would not have any reason to attack Israel anymore
Click to expand...
did you really just become a terrorist appeaser?
I know you used to point out the wrongs on both sides, but i do not recall ever seeing you being an appeaser
are you from belgium or France ;)
 
Back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper "Trouw" published an interview it had with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. This is what he had to say:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism.
Click to expand...

I know we have had this debate before here at DP. And it is clear that Palestine and the so called Palestinian people are a myth concocted by arabs to stop Jews from reclaiming the land that is rightfully theirs.

Now you have generations of people who believe they are Palestinians. Nothing could be further from the truth.
 
DeeJayH said:
only if you buy into the modern day delusion of sanitary wars with no collateral damage
a fantasy put forth by deluded intellectuals
of course they exclude Palestine from such standards :roll:
Click to expand...

we were talking about the blockade, not the raids.

as for the raids, I could accept collateral damages if the raid had a chance to prevent Hamas from launching rockets. Unfortunately, you know as well as me that it won't be the case, and that Israel may kill 3 or 4,000 Hamas members, new ones will come and bomb Israel again next week.

did you really just become a terrorist appeaser?
I know you used to point out the wrongs on both sides, but i do not recall ever seeing you being an appeaser
are you from belgium or France ;)
Click to expand...

It's rather "pragmatism" or "realism" than "appeasment"
 
SgtRock said:
Back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper "Trouw" published an interview it had with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. This is what he had to say:



I know we have had this debate before here at DP. And it is clear that Palestine and the so called Palestinian people are a myth concocted by arabs to stop Jews from reclaiming the land that is rightfully theirs.

Now you have generations of people who believe they are Palestinians. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Click to expand...

It's not important how you call them (Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims...): they inhabited this aera in 1948, most fled in other countries because they feared being killed by Jewish people (this has been the case in several villages, there are links to these massacres a few posts above) but many stayed. The UN granted them the right to stay in what is called "Palestinian territories".

You call them the way you want, they inhabited there in 1948 and were granted the right to stay.
 
bub said:
we were talking about the blockade, not the raids.

as for the raids, I could accept collateral damages if the raid had a chance to prevent Hamas from launching rockets. Unfortunately, you know as well as me that it won't be the case, and that Israel may kill 3 or 4,000 Hamas members, new ones will come and bomb Israel again next week.



It's rather "pragmatism" or "realism" than "appeasment"
Click to expand...
take off the gloves
let loose the dogs of war
crush the enemy
break their will
they reap what they sow
the suffering of the Palestinians is due to Hamas and other Arabs
Not israel
 
DeeJayH said:
take off the gloves
let loose the dogs of war
crush the enemy
break their will
they reap what they sow
the suffering of the Palestinians is due to Hamas and other Arabs
Not israel
Click to expand...

the problem is that they are using the strong way for years, and the only outcome was intifadas and more extremism.

If you want peace then you need to make concessions, it's not a mistery
 
bub said:
the problem is that they are using the strong way for years, and the only outcome was intifadas and more extremism.

If you want peace then you need to make concessions, it's not a mistery
Click to expand...
I would argue that Israel, due to international pressure, has fought hte Palestinians like we fought Iraq
half heartedly in an effort to keep it sanitary and minimize collateral damage
Powell Doctrine would have worked better in Iraq, and in Palestine as well
if not the Powell Doctrine than the Conan Doctrine
no more half assed ****
but i am beggining to think that as the Arabs are using Palestine as an issue to cry about
Israel may be using the constant attacks as a way to garner sympathy and support from abroad
 
bub said:
It's not important how you call them (Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims...): they inhabited this aera in 1948, most fled in other countries because they feared being killed by Jewish people (this has been the case in several villages, there are links to these massacres a few posts above) but many stayed. The UN granted them the right to stay in what is called "Palestinian territories".

You call them the way you want, they inhabited there in 1948 and were granted the right to stay.
Click to expand...



Yet more liberal rhetoric.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom