It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Israel resumes military campaign against Gaza

page: 5
9
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: OpinionatedB
a reply to: beezzer

Just curious...

What would you do if someone came into your house and took 2/3 of it over... told you that you could only use here and here in your house.

Then, what if they cut off the ability to go in and out of your house, except only with their permission, making it near impossible to get the food and water you needed.


What if you sold 1/2 of that land to "someone" who lived there with you and whose family was coming to town, and an arrangement was made to live side by side in two separate houses, but some of your family decided they wanted the whole plot and set out to eliminate the other land-owners completely. In the course of the fighting that followed, you not only failed to take the other house, but ceded the entire territory. Then a good number of the militant members of your family got waxed or had to flee, while those in your family that decided to stay and live in the other land-owners' house prospered and lived peacefully even gaining full familial rights in the other house. The remaining members of your militant family (not the peaceful siblings who just picked up and got on in life in the new house) were then allotted 1/3 of the land by the "new-comers" anyway as a practical measure.

Since that time you continue to kidnap the members of the other family. You blow yourselves up on buses and in markets to inflict casualties on the other side, hoping to get your land back. You launch rockets at the other house and are in a continual state of aggression over the part of your land that was "stolen". In response, the other family reacts hard-handedly. More of your siblings die and parts of your house are crumbling. The response certainly seems disproportionate. Your bitterness knows no bounds. They won't let you come and go as you please on their (still disputed) property because of the violence. They put up fences. They stop and peek at the goods entering your house from their land because they don't want more weapons being delivered. What's worse is your close cousins also will not offer you a place to stay or let you roam their land on account of your volatile nature -- they, too, also check goods being delivered even though they hate the other family almost as much as you do and fought with you to take their land in the beginning. They had far greater amounts of land taken in the fighting, but got it back with an agreement to let the other family live in peace.

You're offered full autonomy and aid from neighbors far and wide who are tired of the endless fighting -- on the condition that you lay down arms and agree to let the other family live in peace, but you just can't bring yourself to do it. It's all or nothing.

Everytime your family attacks the other it scarcely makes a dent despite your very best efforts. If only you hurt them badly enough, maybe they'll let you live in peace and return your land your family cries. On the other hand, the other family believes in hitting back hard. You try launching rockets from valuable cultural centres like schools, hospitals, mosques in the hopes they won't strike you there. Sometimes the other side doesn't hit back, but sometimes it does. Your family loses another important piece of infrastructure and more family members die.


Other members of your family in the West Bank are trying to come to terms with the other family. It's a tough road, and there are lots of difficulties. But they have mostly quelled the fighting there. And in contrast, that area is not a war zone. Few attacks are stemmed from there. The head of that branch of the family is actively trying to stop militant members. When they fail the other family comes in and rounds up the fighters and then leaves. That area is relatively prosperous compared to your home.

In the meantime the other family continues to supply you with water and electricity despite your family having not paid the bills. In fact, you're in arrears to the tune of over half a Billion dollars.

I think I know which course of action I would try next...




posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

If your interpretation of "invading" is the acceptance of a UN declared boundary in a region that was never a sovereign Palestinian territory, then you are absolutely right.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

I do say what I mean. Until Hamas is neutralized. Hamas. HELLO? If some Palestinians are acting in concert with Hamas, I include them as well.

Israel has my support. FULLY.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 12:47 PM
link   
NO support for Israel on this.

A group of terrorists shooting rockets into Israel, does not give Israel the right to kill unarmed civilians with sniper fire, target children and hospitals and shelters with bombs or destroy entire neighborhoods.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: voyger2
I try to base my views on personal life experiences, what I would do in that person's shoes, so to speak, and attempting to view things from both sides. The flaw in this system, is personal comfort zones[and the accuracy of the data one is using.

It's a funny thing that you say that, because in the base of all this conflict is the lack of "putting yourselves in the others person shoes".



originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: voyger2
I will say the black PR campaign run on a world-wide basis against Israel and the U.S., for that matter, leans me to support both.

Maybe a clash in the media is happening (awakening, could it be?). But why everything has to be considered "against israel" instead of pro-Palastine, aren't they also human beings? At this moment they have no right's just because some "extremists" want to grab the rest of the land owned by the them.

To achieve that, they created the "boogie man"...


originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: voyger2
If you have a specific question as why I believe what I do, and judging by your post, your a reasonably honest person, I'd be glad to respond.
That's the best I can do.


Much appreciated by your honesty as equal. Thanks, it goes likewise.
edit on 8/8/2014 by voyger2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: voyger2 Incorrect re putting oneself in the other's shoes.

The Palestinians got the short end of the stick when Israel was formed. true.

It's also true that no one would take the Jews right back into the 1930s. The Brits, bless their black little souls, were issuing limited entry into region for displaced European Jews even then.

They had to go somewhere. No one wanted them. Anywhere they went would step on the toes of someone, no matter where that 'somewhere' was. The native homeland of the Jews was chosen. Tough luck Palestinians. Deal with it.

Otherwise, the Jews lose their homeland? Back to no homeland? Create a new "victim"? No thanks.

One plays the cards one is dealt as best as one can. get rid of Hamas, negotiate in good faith and the Palestinian people will get a deal they can live with. it won't be perfect, but it will be livable.

When I see even one of the so-called Palestinian sympathizers venting at Jordan's possession of "Palestinian land" just one, I'd give you some credence.

Once again, I'm in full support of Israel. Nothing I've seen this day even remotely causes any wavering to that support.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Humanity4Ever
a reply to: intrptr

If your interpretation of "invading" is the acceptance of a UN declared boundary in a region that was never a sovereign Palestinian territory, then you are absolutely right.

If it was never "Palestine", why did you just refer to "them" as Palestinians? is that an honorable mention to dupe people into thinking that there is a country somewhere with UN nation status and all due rights afforded "real" people?



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Humanity4Ever
a reply to: intrptr

If your interpretation of "invading" is the acceptance of a UN declared boundary in a region that was never a sovereign Palestinian territory, then you are absolutely right.

If it was never "Palestine", why did you just refer to "them" as Palestinians? is that an honorable mention to dupe people into thinking that there is a country somewhere with UN nation status and all due rights afforded "real" people?



It's helpful to read the sentence you are critiquing. It "was never a sovereign Palestinian territory". Nowhere in the post did it say there was never a geographical area called "Palestine".



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Humanity4Ever

I don't have a problem with that definition, but Israel forces in past month showed that they are at the same level, if not worst. Both should be prosecuted and people responsible for destruction on both sides should be behind bars, including politician on both sides.

If you don't agree with this, I suggest you ask admin to change your nick to Inhumanity4Ever.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Let's be clear. It's not a question of wanting or not wanting Jews. The question is, Jews robbed more than half of Palestinians Home land. At this moment thee theft of territory is more than 78% of the initial homeland, the objective is the left 22%.

Now I will ask you this, do you agree with the following:
- "Free the Palestinians. Contribute for right of self-determination. Help establish there nation. Share the land in equal proportion, giving them back some of their land to achieve that purpose."

If not, tell me please, what and why?
edit on 8/8/2014 by voyger2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: voyger2 show me a way of doing it and ensure Israel's survival-to wit- not merely create a new issue named Jewish instead of Palestinian and I'm sure Israel would listen in as well....

It's only been tried for decades.

But...there's that but again, if the rockets and attacks cease. Otherwise....



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 03:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
show me a way of doing it and ensure Israel's survival-to wit- not merely create a new issue named Jewish instead of Palestinian and I'm sure Israel would listen in as well....

Why every pro-israeli runs from questions?

Please, Sir I will ask you again:
do you agree with the following:
- "Free the Palestinians. Contribute for right of self-determination. Help establish there nation. Share the land in equal proportion, giving them back some of their land to achieve that purpose."

If not, tell me please, what and why?


originally posted by: nwtrucker
It's only been tried for decades.

What has been tried for decades? clarify that please.
edit on 8/8/2014 by voyger2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: voyger2



What has been tried for decades? clarify that please.

Its called the "Peace Process". I've been subjected to that media campaign my whole life. it never leads anywhere except back to more pounding of the people Israel is trying to subjugate.

Belies their true intentions. The only peace Israel is interested in for Gaza and the West Bank is the peace of the grave.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: voyger2

Run? LMAO. Tell me that to my face.


Do I agree with your Free the Palestine people. What does that mean? Your questions are loaded one sided and BULLS**T.

Neither side has any "right". The winner makes his "right". You nor I have any say in it. Period.

Always was, always will be.

If the Palestinians make this go right , via guys like you, et al, all the more power to them. Likewise Israel, who are no angels themselves.

Either way it will be OVER. Given a choice, I side with the Israelis. At least they build things as well as they break them.

Your premise is useless, in my view. The Kiwi's aren't giving back their Islands, not the Aussies, nor is anyone else-including whatever country you live in. There's your "running". I don't run from manure, I just keep it down wind....


edit on 8-8-2014 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital
I'm curious why you didn't title this thread "Hamas resumes attacks after ceasefire ends" as that would be the more accurate description of events. I'm sure you didn't mean to imply that Israel broke the ceasefire first, right?



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Trap a tiger and put it in a cage. Then deny it food and water while subjecting it to repeated shocks thru the bars with a cattle prod. It finally dies or succumbs, performing tricks on stage to the crack of a whip.

Nothing personal tiger, we need you…

the show must go on.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr The why, pray tell, haven't they done it years ago? They have the means.

In my view they've shown amazing restraint. Answer that one...oh, yes don't try the World opinion response either. Per your guys world opinion is against them now. It isn't even slowing them down.

If Israel wanted the extermination of Palestinians it would have happened decades ago. They know well the experience of attempted extermination. It is not something a person having been in those shoe would visit upon anyone. Especially themselves. NEVER AGAIN.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: voyger2 "let's be clear", the two cannot be separated. It very much is a question of Israeli survival as much as Palestinian survival. Until you understand that, this will go nowhere.



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Do I agree with your Free the Palestine people. What does that mean? Your questions are loaded one sided and BULLS**T.

Well I'm no semantics and syntax professor, but the question, I believe, is very well defined in English terms. Do please answer the question. Don't forget the other ones.
For the rest of your statement it seems I stroked a little nerve, please point the Bullls**t of the questions?


originally posted by: nwtrucker
Neither side has any "right".

So Jews have no "right".


originally posted by: nwtrucker
The winner makes his "right".

oh I see, bombarding defenseless and innocent people (children included), UN facility's, commiting Genocide of one People, makes the winner "right".


originally posted by: nwtrucker
You nor I have any say in it. Period. Always was, always will be.

Wrong Sir. I do have a say on it. and I'm doing it now, I will always raise my voice for those who haven't or have been taken.


originally posted by: nwtrucker
If the Palestinians make this go right , via guys like you, et al,

Guys like me? What is that supposed to mean? Stand up for your accusation, please


originally posted by: nwtrucker
I side with the Israelis. At least they build things as well as they break them.

Besides of your siding with the israelis (perfectly obvious), what is the point of that statement?


originally posted by: nwtrucker
Your premise is useless, in my view.

What permise? And why it's useless?


originally posted by: nwtrucker
There's your "running". I don't run from manure, I just keep it down wind....

why are you taking this conversation to your bedroom?
edit on 8/8/2014 by voyger2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 04:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker
"let's be clear", the two cannot be separated. It very much is a question of Israeli survival as much as Palestinian survival.

what you just said is nothing new, whats the point?
Wow, you really don't answer any questions.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
Until you understand that, this will go nowhere.

Does it mean you are running away from answering those questions?
edit on 8/8/2014 by voyger2 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join