Who Truly Deserves a State? The Kurds or the Palestinians?

unfortunately your are correct here , they have not shown support to a kurdish state which is a pro Arab/American Sunni Muslim nation but they are not Arabs so its not their problem .

however on the other hand i really want the Palestinians and the Israels to settle their conflict and accept a 2 state solution , so that Kurdish issue can be solved accordingly , a 4 state solution or 1 greater Kurdistan currently occupied by Turkey Iran and Syria .

 

Iraq won't stay together as one country. Iraqi Kurdistan will be the foundation of a new country. Parts of Syria and Iran will come loose and join. Ultimately Northern Kurdistan will fall. Be patient.

 

Always interesting when someone tries this line. There was in fact nothing defensive about 73.

Why? Because Israeli forces were already on the offensive. They had already moved into the Sinai, set up their guns along the bar levi line, declared sharm el sheik could never be relinquished and were building towns in Egypt.

If on Yom Kippur the Israelis had been sitting inside the original jewish allocation minding their own business you have had a point. But no they werent.

They are the perpetrator, rather than the victims.

 

Having originally stated that should Israel do 'the right thing' the world will have 'no further complaints' against it, you have done your utmost to prove the opposite. Every one of your subsequent posts was a totally one sided and biased attempt to paint everything in black and white colors and blame all the bad stuff that has happened so far on Israel.

There can absolutely be no doubt in anyone's mind that going forward you won't change your MO and no matter how many unilateral concessions Israel may make and no matter how many rocket attacks the Palestinians may "reciprocate" with, you will still be coming up with thousands of excuses, explanations, deceptions and pure spin and keep hating and blaming Israel.

 

In the last posts Ive been speaking about what Israel has done in the past. Indeed the facts are against Israel.

Your the ones making excuses for your actions, you try to excuse your seige policy and gaza, and everything else you do too. No matter what you always will try to claim victim status.

However, that doesnt mean that Israel cant have peace and security in the future. As long as people like yourself arent so sensitive any time someone corrects you on matters of middle eastern & Israeli history. You hate palestinians, and arabs and have never avoided an opportunity to blame them as intransigents and kick them when they are down.

 

Who Truly Deserves a State? The Kurds or the Palestinians?

Everyone except the zionist racists, who have proved themselves unfit to live amongst other humans - but, then, perhaps we can give them a section of Antartica - except they would start shooting the young penguins and assassinating albatrosses while screaming 'Antisemite' at them. Heil AIPAC!

 

Actually, it's those perennial losers the so-called Palestinians who claim victim status, assisted by puppet mouthpieces like you who spread their nonsensical claims using all your favorite weapons: hyperbole, distortion and lies.

The only status Israel claims -- and should ever claim -- is hard-earned and well-deserved victor status.

 

Indeed its a line. My fact is backed up by more facts than your line is backed up by. Feel to tell us how and why israel was not settling egyptian territory in 1973.

If you dont find it interesting then go away. Ive no need to discuss these matters with people who dont read books.

Thats because they are victims. All theyve ever done is what anyone else would ever do.

Dont bother accusing me of lying without backing it up.

Read the book Righteous Victims. It will help you.

 

Thank you. Offhand, I can't think of anything that will help you, but if I do I'll be sure and let you know.

 

Facts? You are kidding, right? You had no facts in your posts, just speculations, distortions and all too predicable one-sided litany of complaints what are planted in the imagination of Israel haters, not reality and history.

The assertion that Israel has not fought defensive wars is so absurd and preposterous that it hardly needs a rebuttal. And you should tell the "fact" that Israel is not a victim to thousands of victims of arab terror. Let alone the entire state of Israel that has to spend 20% of its budget on weaponry instead of spending it on cancer research, because being militarily stronger than the rest of the Muslim world is and has always been their only hope of survival. It's not for the lack of Israel's enemies trying that Israel still exists and is not the victim of Muslim aggression. Yet 'erasing Israel from the page of history' is their only true goal and I am not talking just about Iran or the Arab states but the entire muslim world.

These are facts together the one more fact, that your claim of the world opinion warming up to Israel if it offers one (or a hundred) more unilateral concession is a bold-faced lie. Your excuses and baseless revisions of history is the best proof of that.

 

Prove it...

 

Lol, Borat exemplifies a typical Zionist. He/she will vehemently disregard the facts whilst providing misinformation (e.g. The Arabs invaded in '67; the Balfour Agreement called for a Jewish state, etc...). He/she will consequently cry victimhood and then turn to inform us about the new scientific discoveries Israel has found, ending in the expected demonization of Arabs/Muslims. Now, your layman individual who has no education whatsoever concerning the conflict (save for the images he/she has witnessed on the news) will fall for such tripe, but those who are quite informed about the conflict (with special regards given to the initial years of it (eg. the unwelcome immigration of European Zionists to Palestine faciliated by imperial Britian, the ethnic cleansing of Arabs, etc.)) simply won't. The interesting thing about a Zionist, DA60, is that they know that they are spreading falsehoods; in other words, they know that they are lieing. Thus, it is best to ignore Zionists like Borat because there is no point whatsoever in engaging in an argument with him for he/she will simple do the expected (as mentioned above). It is thus best to inform and educate those who are quite neutral to the conflict.

 

"Our aim is the full restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people. In other words, we aim at the destruction of the State of Israel. The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel." – President Nasser of Egypt, November 18, 1965


"Brothers, it is our duty to prepare for the final battle in Palestine." – Nasser, Palestine Day, 1967


"Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight . . . The mining of Sharm el Sheikh is a confrontation with Israel. Adopting this measure obligates us to be ready to embark on a general war with Israel." – Nasser, May 27, 1967



"We will not accept any ... coexistence with Israel. ... Today the issue is not the establishment of peace between the Arab states and Israel .... The war with Israel is in effect since 1948." – Nasser, May 28, 1967

 

None of your various quotes support your claim that the Arabs invaded israel in '67.

Fail.

 

I have no idea what you are talking about but in the context of this discussion and the quotes above (there are many more of course) it was an undoubtedly defensive war for Israel. The arab world was going to eradicate Israel as they explicitly and repeatedly declared.

The national aim: the eradication of Israel." – President Nasser of Egypt, November 18, 1965

Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel – Nasser, May 27, 1967

 

Naturally.

 

Why doesnt it make it offensive in 73? What more do you want? They were miles inside egypt, an settling it.
The war was entirely defensive on the egyptians part because all they wanted to end the Israeli aggresion onto egypt. Really tell us what more would you like?

You were in an Israeli mental institution for all anyone can know. So please just go read a book and leave us alone since you find it all so uniteresting.

No try victims of grand theft. What else would you call it when someone takes your house and villages?

And israelis could have had peace decades ago if they werent so land hungry. How stupid are these people?

Oh feel free. Just make sure you can back it up. Try reading, it will help - and use the quote function to at least prove youve got half a brain.

What would help me is you using the quote function but I think its beyond you.

 

Ive given you the facts in many of the last posts. Youve not taken your opportunity to deny them or spin the settlement of egyptian land as somehow a defensive act or anything else either. Not my problem you cant.

Easily dwarfed by the amount of palestinian civilians youve killed, while taking their land too. Again, offensive not defensive.

It takes alot of money to keep taking peoples land. Some gets spent on US weapons, the rest is spent on building high walls and fenced roads, and communties in all the territory youve taken since 48.

Having enemies is not a proof of ones defensiveness. Just ask Germany or Japan. Or Syria even.

Ah yes, 'wipe israel off the map' etc etc. Just keep repeating it your US buddies again and again. Nevermind all the serious peace offerings made over the years.

None of these are facts, Ive directly contradicted each of them.

If you think the last is a lie then feel free to demonstrate this. In fact demonstrate anything you likel for example perhaps there in fact is no peace agreement made between arabs and israelis in history? Now that would be proof of what you say about the future.....Go on please show us this fact.

 

What a strange little fellow you are. What is this obsession you have with the quote function? I use it the way I use it -- I like to respond in red, in hopes it works like waving a red flag. In your case as in a few others, it seems to work.

Look, if it bothers you that much, I'll always do it that way in the future. Promise.

 

Nope, just opinions and spin, mostly nonsensical. Israel is attacked by several nations on the holiest day of the Jewish calendar and you claim it to be a non-defensive war. LOL get real.

Anyway here are the facts:


"Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab people want to fight . . . The mining of Sharm el Sheikh is a confrontation with Israel. Adopting this measure obligates us to be ready to embark on a general war with Israel." – Nasser, May 27, 1967

"The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel . . . . to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations." – Nasser, May, 30, 1967 after signing a defense pact with Jordan's King Hussein

 

Actually Im bigger than you so why do you lie about me?

The quote function is something you use so that otther people can more easily argue the points you wish to make, its a courtesy one extends to other forum members.

I dont think its beyond you intellectually. I think that you beleive your fellow members so beneath contempt its ok to make them tidy up your posts for you.

Your promises will be believed when some evidence of your veracity is provided. Good luck.

 

Whats spin about the presence of settlements and positions across egypt for years up to 73? What more do you want?

If you want to discuss Nassers comments in 67 theh just say so.

 

We were discussing defensive wars, Nasser's comments on the imminent eradication of Israel by Arab armies gets all the i's dotted and t's crossed.

The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel." – President Nasser of Egypt, November 18, 1965

Egypt and Syria accepted a ceasefire in 1967 which they broke in 1973 and started another war.

 

Let's take a look at some other comments:

"I do not believe that Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent into Sinai on May 14 would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it."

-Yitzhak Rabin

"The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches did not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him."

-Menachem Begin

Nasser knew that he couldn't defeat Israel; his comments were merely politcal rhetoric (both Israel and the US knew likewise).

 

CUT THE CRAP!

On the eve of the war, Egypt massed approximately 100,000 of its 160,000 troops in the Sinai, including all of its seven divisions (four infantry, two armored and one mechanized), four independent infantry brigades and four independent armored brigades. No fewer than a third of them were veterans of Egypt's intervention into the Yemen Civil War and another third were reservists. These forces had 950 tanks, 1,100 APCs and more than 1,000 artillery pieces
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

No my dear clueless lying friend, not two divisions - seven divisions, a thousand tanks etc...and it's just Egypt - one of 7 arab participants. Egypt at that time kicked out the UN peacekeepers and closed the Straits to Israeli shipping -all violations of previous armistice agreements and acts of war...

Oh and lest we forget, add the rhetoric of Israel's annihilation into the mix coming not just from Nasser but from every arab capital and you'll have no doubt that Israel waged a defensive war and the Arabs got exactly what they bargained for.