• 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!

Israeli ground troops enter Gaza

Delve a bit. Palestine was not a country,
So? Doesn't change the property relations.

and the Jews had been busy buying up much of the land for a very long time.
They were 8% of the population of Israel in 1918.

You should also study up on the quaint fact that Islam not only encourages but demands violent conquest, and how much of the Islamic world was converted by force. In other words, they are hardly ion a position to complain about the Israelis acquiring land in a similar fashion, which they have only partly done.
:yawn:

I'm a conservative, I have respect for the ancient culture and traditions of other nations and societies.
Also almost every nation in the world today was founded by conquest. I seem to remember that there is a large island nation off the west coast of Europe with a history of successive waves of conquests and land-grabs in its history. Yet I do not believe that there is a serious case being made to return all of that pillaged real estate to the Celts.
This happened within living memory, it is very different. We are not talking about ancient wrongs but something that happened 60-80 years ago. Shall we just abandon the notion of private property because the land may once been stolen? That is an argument with a gulag for a second.

What do you mean I can't? I just did!
And you look foolish for it.
 
Last edited:
. . . You own nation was none too happy about British rule after a while. . .
Actually, it began as a demand that we have "the Rights of Englishmen." The demand for revolution came after many attempts by the American Continental Congress to affect a reconciliation with the Crown and secure those rights.

British Common Law was the foundation of our own. basically the government was sundered and the culture survived.
 
Actually, it began as a demand that we have "the Rights of Englishmen." The demand for revolution came after many attempts by the American Continental Congress to affect a reconciliation with the Crown and secure those rights.

British Common Law was the foundation of our own. basically the government was sundered and the culture survived.

I know this but that little to do with the "rights of men" as spouted by French revolutionaries and it was the arbitrary power and abuses you talk of which were behind a lot of our imperialism. Burke supported the rights of the colonies as surely and fastly as he attacked Warren Hastings and he was the very voice of "the rights of Englishmen".
 
Last edited:
I know this but that little to do with the "rights of men" as spouted by French revolutionaries and it was the arbitrary power and abuses you talk of which were behind a lot of our imperialism. Burke supported the rights of the colonies as surely and fastly as he attacked Warren Hastings.
Just think. If King George had been just a little less insane (or his insane physician had been run over by a wagon in the street,) the reconciliation might have gone through, and then we'd be countrymen.

I wonder where that would have left Churchill.
 
Last edited:
Just think. If King George had been just a little less insane (or his insane physician hod been run over by a wagon in the street,) the reconciliation might have gone through, and then we'd be countrymen.
I dunno, my country is as much Wessex and Dorset as Britain.

I think it was better off this way anyway, the US is already far too big.
 
Just think. If King George had been just a little less insane (or his insane physician had been run over by a wagon in the street,) the reconciliation might have gone through, and then we'd be countrymen.

I wonder where that would have left Churchill.

It would have left him with more land and a need for more alcohol.

Churchill was brialliant but man did he love to drink.
 
It would have left him with more land and a need for more alcohol.

Churchill was brialliant but man did he love to drink.
Actually, people who knew him said that Winston liked to sip generally, but enjoyed having the reputation of a hard drinker.


Churchill on being accused of being drunk by Bessie Braddock:
"And you, madam, are ugly. But in the morning, I shall be sober. "
 
Last edited:
You know democracy, the thing when you vote in the person you would like.

Every democratic country ****s up for example, Israel refused to allow journalists in Gaza until a supreme court ruling said otherwise and even then it is restricted. No democracy is perfect

Whereupon Hama immediately kidnapped one of the journalists, causing the rest of them to flee in terror.

Good grief, at least understand all sides of an issue, don't just pull out the parts that support your personal beliefs.
 
For those who are interested in the nature of the Hamas regime, the following was published in the January 4, 2009 edition of The Jerusalem Post:

Fatah officials in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post that Hamas militiamen had been assaulting many Fatah activists since the beginning of the operation last Saturday. They said at least 75 activists were shot in the legs while others had their hands broken.

Wisam Abu Jalhoum, a Fatah activist from the Jabalya refugee camp, was shot in the legs by Hamas militiamen for allegedly expressing joy over the IDF air strikes on Hamas targets.
 
What I'm saying is that from the position of the Israeli leadership there is no option. Anything they try is going to be futile in the end.

I disagree. Israel's error is in not finishing the job. With ground forces, it may be easier for them to isolate the civilians and go after the terrorists and members of Hamas. IMO, they need to remain in Gaza and cleanse the area of terrorists and Hamas members, arresting as many as possible, until civilians, those who want no part of Hamas can take charge of their government. After watching this situation for years, and listening to many members he say that the civilians are unable to remove Hamas, Israel should do it, and do it now. It helps both them (stops the attacks that are their people) and the Palestinians civilians (prevents deaths due to collateral damage). Israel needs to end this, already, and since the Palestinians in Gaza are unable to do it, Israel needs to remove the terror organization, Hamas, the group that near everyone agrees is the cause of this, from power, once and for all.
 
Last edited:
Israel attacked a Mosque whilst people was ****ing praying.

They KNEW civilians would be in there yet still attacked, that is killing civilians knowingly - how is that any different than Hamas? It is not different.

That story is from Al Jazerra. It is propaganda. It is designed to anger muslims such as yourself. Do you pray in the Mosque at midnight? That is when this attack took place.
 
I don't want Hamas in power but i think they should be removed using democracy - the same way they entered.

Yet most claim that this is not possible and it hasn't happened. No, Hamas needs to be removed. They are a danger to the sovereignty of Israel and they are a danger to the lives of the Palestinian civilians.
 
For those who are interested in the nature of the Hamas regime, the following was published in the January 4, 2009 edition of The Jerusalem Post:

Fatah officials in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post that Hamas militiamen had been assaulting many Fatah activists since the beginning of the operation last Saturday. They said at least 75 activists were shot in the legs while others had their hands broken.

Wisam Abu Jalhoum, a Fatah activist from the Jabalya refugee camp, was shot in the legs by Hamas militiamen for allegedly expressing joy over the IDF air strikes on Hamas targets.

Also if you are intrested in the nature of the Hamas regime as told by an insider and former member Musab Hassan Yousef son of one of the original founding members of Hamas I suggest reading this thread. Then research it further. You can see some video of him speaking on youtube.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/relig...fox-special-escape-hamas-sat-1-3-09-10pm.html
 
Firstly you are of course assuming Israel is in the right. I personally believe a two state solution needs to be found but I always consider Israel the aggressor. They came to someone else's country and took over.

Secondly you cannot compare the affairs of nations to individuals in such a simplistic way.

Who's country was it then? It certainly wasn't Palestine.
 
This is a big bully punching the little bully and the civilians being stuck in the middle.
Your jolly old England wouldn't put up with being rocketed for a single day let alone for months on end. Since the ceasefire ended in mid-December, over 500 Hamas rockets have struck Israel. You do the math.

No nation would put up with this and none should. Even the Egyptian government is sick and tired of the Hamas crappola...

By Steven Erlanger
Published: January 2, 2009

<snip>Few criticize Mr. Mubarak himself, and there are widespread feelings here that the radical group Hamas provoked the current crisis.</snip>

<snip>Government officials including Mr. Mubarak and Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit have blamed Hamas for abandoning the cease-fire with Israel and seeming to seek Israeli retaliation.</snip>

<snip>“Egypt is working for peace while trying to work realistically with the situation in Gaza, where a radical group took over the territories next to Sinai, a sensitive subject for Egypt,” Mr. Said continued. “So Egypt is trying to support Palestinian humanitarian needs, but not allow a radical group to control the situation, dominate the Palestinian issue or affect Egyptian internal politics.”</snip>

<snip>Those demanding that Egypt open the Gaza border do not understand the dangers, said Samir Abdel Haadi. “If we opened it, we’d be the Iraq of the Palestinians,” he said. “There will be terrorism in the Sinai, and that’s our country.”</snip>
Source: NYTimes
 
Ugh...This sounds like a horrible idea. They've already explicitly said that their goal is just to end the rocket attacks, not overthrow Hamas. WTF? An invasion (and possible occupation) of Gaza that doesn't even overthrow Hamas is the worst of all possible worlds for Israel.

All it does is enrage people and allow Hamas to declare victory when Israel inevitably withdraws, who will almost certainly go back to the rocket attacks as soon as Israel leaves. Or if Hamas is really lucky, the Israelis will stick around permanently and Hamas can go back to its old pretense of wanting to end the occupation.

Did Israel learn absolutely nothing from the Second Lebanon War? What the hell does this accomplish? :doh
 
Last edited:
I disagree. Israel's error is in not finishing the job.

Israel cannot "finish the job" in the same way that the US cannot "finish the job" in Iraq, in the same way that no colonialist country has been able to "finish the job" in permanently subduing those it is oppressing/displacing.

There is a reason for Hamas existing that you are not recognizing.

Your jolly old England wouldn't put up with being rocketed for a single day let alone for months on end. Since the ceasefire ended in mid-December, over 500 Hamas rockets have struck Israel. You do the math.

No nation would put up with this and none should.

"Earlier on Saturday CNN invited Gen. David Grange on, one of the military commentators outed by the New York Times as part of a Pentagon influence-peddling scheme for the media. Grange kept talking about what "we" would do if "we" took rocket fire the way the Israelis had from Hamas. Grange did not say what "we" would do if militant European refugees landed at Newport Beach, took over Virginia, expelled its population, and then kept the refugees from McLean huddling over in West Virginia in camps for decades with no reparations, recently denying them sufficient food and fuel to avoid a humanitarian crisis. But of course that would never happen to the Granges, so why bother to even mention any point of view but the hawks'?"
Juan Cole
 
Your jolly old England wouldn't put up with being rocketed for a single day let alone for months on end. Since the ceasefire ended in mid-December, over 500 Hamas rockets have struck Israel. You do the math.

No nation would put up with this and none should. Even the Egyptian government is sick and tired of the Hamas crappola...


Source: NYTimes

And his jolly land is not occupied by strangers for decades now claming that his land is theirs by Force and Western conspiracy.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom