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 to build 1,600 more settler homes

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I don't know if it's right to build these houses or wrong to build these houses. But, I do know that it is really absolutely not my places to meddle in the internal affairs of a sovereign nation not my own.

The Isrealis and Palestinians need to settle their differences themselves. Or don't settle them and keep on fighting. Their choice.
edit on 12-8-2011 by robyn because: added




posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   
I'd say let em fight and get it over with. The winner takes all.

Then no more problem



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by gravitational
 


Nice to see you back to your usual trickery, but it was originally an Arab city and the pre-June 1967 borders do not incoporate East Jerusalem. I am a rational person so I won't say your re-writing history but I will say your omiting parts of history and facts that you don't like. Nice to see Israel taking the first steps to peace... you know building a few more houses illegaly even when they know this does nothing but delegitimize the peace process. Where is Yitzhak Rabin when you need him?
edit on 12-8-2011 by SpeachM1litant because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 


Hey I want your house, lets have a fist fight, the winner takes all?

Do you see how rediculous your premise is?



posted on Aug, 12 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 


Not at all and that's the way the world works. If you want my house and I want to keep it we will both use the resources available to us. You will start moving your furniture in and I will call the police and you will go to jail so I will win.

When America wanted the land from the Indians they simply moved in and used the resources available to them. The Indians tried their various methods to keep their land but failed.

When America wanted it's independence it fought with the British and both sides brought all the resources they have and one side was the winner the other was the loser.

Let Israel and Palestine fight for it and do whatever they can to win and at the end of the day the situation will be over with one side laying claim to all of Israel.

It's the way the world works and always has.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 


Not at all and that's the way the world works. If you want my house and I want to keep it we will both use the resources available to us. You will start moving your furniture in and I will call the police and you will go to jail so I will win.

When America wanted the land from the Indians they simply moved in and used the resources available to them. The Indians tried their various methods to keep their land but failed.

When America wanted it's independence it fought with the British and both sides brought all the resources they have and one side was the winner the other was the loser.

Let Israel and Palestine fight for it and do whatever they can to win and at the end of the day the situation will be over with one side laying claim to all of Israel.

It's the way the world works and always has.


Oddly I thought we'd become a little more civilized than that..

I thought it's why we have laws etc..

Sounds like you're living in the 16th century...



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpeachM1litant
reply to post by gravitational
 


Nice to see you back to your usual trickery, but it was originally an Arab city and the pre-June 1967 borders do not incoporate East Jerusalem. I am a rational person so I won't say your re-writing history but I will say your omiting parts of history and facts that you don't like. Nice to see Israel taking the first steps to peace... you know building a few more houses illegaly even when they know this does nothing but delegitimize the peace process. Where is Yitzhak Rabin when you need him?
edit on 12-8-2011 by SpeachM1litant because: (no reason given)


Originally you say ?
clearly such a bold statement requires some real evidence, don't you think?
While you do your research, please tell us where the city of David is located, where are the Israelite kings buried, when where and why were the mosques built, how many times does the Qur'an mentions Jerusalem, why was Jerusalem under Jordanian control until 1967, why it's not anymore, how come a Jewish village by the name of Shiloah which is mentioned in the bible many times as part of the city of David, is all of the sudden named in Arabic “Siluan”, and finally, when oh when was Jerusalem ever the capital city of a Palestinian state that never even existed.

Trickery, is what you use to deceive your uninformed readers from the minute you started writing on these boards.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   
Just a little reality check.
The relocating of some 8000 Israelis form Gaza strip in 2005, cost 12 billion Shekels.
Relocating 100,000 settlers is estimated at 150 billion shekels. There are about 350,000 settlers in Judea and Samaria. The annual budget for 2011 is 366 billion Shekels. In this day of age - unfortunately for some of you - it simply ain't gonna happen.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 03:34 AM
link   
But oddly they can afford the expense of building new settlements.


BTW, at some point are you going to address the topic??

IMO it appears the current crap coming out of Israel saying they are serious about peace and borders is nothing but more BS to get Palestine to back off the UN vote..

Do you have an opinion??



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


I've stated my opinion many times in the past, you just have a bad habit of reading what suits you.
You can scream illegal settlements all you want, but I couldn't care less really.
And the water issue was not brought up to this thread by me, in case you didn't notice.
You just can't see someone that have answers to your BS (I know you love this word) propaganda, so you're trying to divert it to where you feel more comfortable.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 04:17 AM
link   
It's irrelevant what you said in the past..

It's NOW that Israel have said they are interested in peace and prepared to discuss borders and settlements on the condition that Palestine stops the vote..

Do you have an opinion and if not, why the hell are you posting off topic posts??

I use the phrase BS mostly when discussing Israeli actions and promises..
My strike rate is pretty damn safe with them.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by gravitational
 


I never said Jerusalem was the capital of a Palestinian city. Nice to see you are digging up ancients history though. The land I am standing on was the home of Aboriginals. Yet they aren't as daft to kick me out of my house and say it belongs to them. If you are going to try to use the bible to justify the settlements then I should stop you there, you are only deligitimizing your argument. Just as you are when you posted that survey from the Jpost (a source with no inherent bias according to you). I have a source that disputes your "survey".

www.geneva-accord.org...



Two State Solution remains the only acceptable resolution for vast majority of Israelis and Palestinians: Despite reports that support for a two state solution is waning, 78% of Israelis and 74% of Palestinians are willing to accept a two state solution. Majorities on both sides support a negotiated peace: 71% of Palestinians and 77% of Israelis feel negotiations are “Essential” or “Desirable”. 78% of Palestinians and 74% of Israelis feel that that a peace agreement which leads to both states living side by side as good neighbors to be “essential or desirable.” Wide support for a civic engagement on peace agreement: 96% of Palestinians and 58% of Israelis deem a referendum “essential” or “desirable”. 74% of Palestinians and 58% of Israelis feel that it is “essential” or “desirable” that civil society get more involved in the peace process, and 94% of Palestinians and 74% of Israelis find it “essential” or “desirable” that the people be kept informed on progress in negotiations.


Of course, you are obviously an honest man with no bias what-so-ever and there is absolutely no reason why you would want to only present a one sided argument. (I hope you can sense the sarcasm)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Yeah .. because they know what the regime in Israel is about to do


Every criminals when they do their nasty stuff .. killings and/or stealing
they go run into a deep protected hole to avoid any retaliations from their victims

Its because of these REGIMEs in Israel since 67
that suicide bombers became to life
Its because of all the past/futur actions from these regimes
that Israel need so many bunker maped everywhere on his soil
even Americans citizens dont have that many bunkers
fearing the russian/chinese/cuba missiles

So this news only confirm what Israel is about to do
and its not peace
edit on 8/13/2011 by Ben81 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


[[SNIP]]

“On topic”, Jerusalem was never a Palestinian anything. Jerusalem will never be divided.
Judea and Samaria were never a Palestinian anything. The Arab occupants in Judea and Samaria had a chance for an independent state in 1948. they lost that chance. They never called for an independent state while under Jordan's control. They lost that chance again when they vote against 242 resolution. They lost again and again and again while refusing any reconciliation in Oslo and both camp David. Instead, they chose the path of war.
They have the exact same mentality as you have, first you pick a war, then they whine and cry when losing.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 





Just as you are when you posted that survey from the Jpost (a source with no inherent bias according to you). I have a source that disputes your "survey".


How exactly does the Geneva initiative survey disputes Jpost survey?
1- The first was done in 2009 and the later (Jpost) in 2011.
2- you say the survey is biased (the same can be said about the Geneva initiative), but you probably missed that the poll was conducted in partnership with the Beit Sahour-based Palestinian Center for Public Opinion.

In any case, here are some more sources:

www.turkishweekly.net...
www.freerepublic.com...
www.liveleak.com...

the two polls do not entirely contradict each other. Hamas said several times they are willing to enter negotiations, but it's only a phased doctrine, since later they will fight to gain all of Israel.
I have showed it in a video somewhere on this board. This is the same phased doctrine of the PLO for decades.
For you it's just words and a mean to pass time. For Israel it's to be or not to be, so if it's games you're after, don't play it with the lives of Israelis, especially since you know so little on that subject.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by gravitational
 


73% of 1,010- Very diverse survey picking from a large pool of participants (sarcasm).
The two surveys do contradict eachother, one states that only a third accept the two state solution and the other states that 74% accept a two state solution. What more? You stated that the survey was conducted on West Bank Palestinians when it incoporated 656 from the West Bank and 353 from Gaza. Another lie. You also carefully omit that the original publication of the documents was on The Israel Project.

Here is some interesting information: Greenberg's current and former corporate clients include British Petroleum, British Airways, Monsanto Company and General Motors. Not that it means anything.

Anyway, how exactly does prolonging an unpopular occupation which only inflames anti-Israeli sentiment, help keep Israel safe. Most of the population of Jordan and Egypt were both against establishing a bilateral peace treaty with Israel. When was the last time Egypt launched a military offensive against Israel? Anti-Israeli sentiment will always be there and it is somthing Israel will have to live with. It is a new country established in the heart of the Arab world and it wont be accepted quickly, however overtime it will be unless it continues to destabilize the region and prolong anti-Israel sentiment. It is in Israels best interest to establish a strong Palestinian state that will keep those Arabs in line. Frankly I care far more about the Jewish people than you with your short sighted view and greater Israel ideals.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   
It's awfully nice of America to keep giving Israel Billions every year so they all can work for their Government and make lots of money to have their own homes.


Meanwhile American's can't get their own home.....


Ain't that just funny?



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 


This is how survey are made. It's called statistics and probabilities.
From the looks of it, you never studied statistics in your life.
If you got complaints on how survey are made, and I agree they can be flawed at times, send your criticism to the academia. Funny how you find one survey to be statistically correct and the other not, according to you likes and dislikes.



“You stated that the survey was conducted on West Bank Palestinians when it incoporated 656 from the West Bank and 353 from Gaza. Another lie.”


You called me a lair, how many times by now? A hundred perhaps?
Where have I wrote those numbers? Are you in the “I see dead people” stage right now?



“Anyway, how exactly does prolonging an unpopular occupation which only inflames anti-Israeli sentiment, help keep Israel safe.”


They shouldn't have attacked Israel in the first place. They lost, grow up and Deal with it.
Judea and Samaria are not only Historical Jewish lands, but also serve as a buffer zone. No country in the world would agree to leave a narrow strip of 9 miles, stretching from a hostile entity to the sea.
And once again, in case you missed that, Israel never occupied 'Palestinian' lands, since there never was such a country in the history of menkind.



“Most of the population of Jordan and Egypt were both against establishing a bilateral peace treaty with Israel.”


And yet, the “palestinian” leaders refuse for any compromise. Rabin went as far as resurrecting PLO and its chairman Arafat who were in Tunisia, to arm them and let them rule their own people.
But we all remember what happened don't we ? incidentally, 70% of Jordan's population are “Palestinian” citizens. How many countries do they need?



" It is a new country established in the heart of the Arab world and it wont be accepted quickly, however overtime it will be unless it continues to destabilize the region and prolong anti-Israel sentiment.”


Oh, talking like a true ignorant propagandist now. So Israel is to blame for destabilizing the region. It's not, god forbid, Lebanon, Hizballa, Jordan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Egypt, Sudan, Palestinians, all tried or still try, at one point or another to destroy Israel. All of which killed a hundred times more Arabs than Israel have in all its wars combined. Yeah, the religion of peace has always been striving for peace in the region.



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by gravitational
 


Never mind the fact that I am studying mathematics and I am fully aware that statistics surveys are conducted in smaller numbers, but when only interviewing 1010 people from a diverse population of over 4 million, well there is alot of room for statistical error. Especially since it won't incoporate an even pool of Western Palestinian Intelegentsia, poor-rural peasants, urban civillians and elite. The numbers you presented corrolate with views most likely held by the un-educated class.

I never said you wrote those numbers. I said that you said it was a West Bank survey when it is both a Gaza and West Bank survey.



They shouldn't have attacked Israel in the first place.

The usual retort. One that is both simplistic and irrational.



Judea and Samaria are not only Historical Jewish lands,

irrelevant



but also serve as a buffer zone.

From who... Jordan? Heres a simple solution, negotiate a peace which would allow you to maintain early warning outposts. Or if you are afraid of a Palestinian military offensive simply do what has been already agreed on. A demilitarized Palestinian state with a strong police force which would collaborate with the IDF to a) Curb terrorism and illegal border crossing and b) weaken Hamas
Why instead of collaborating with Palestinians receptive of Israel do you insist on bypassing them and continuing an occupation which is both costly and unpopular. Which strains Israel from the Arab world and ensures that Israel and Palestine don't both grow economically into the Singapore of the Middle East which they should be.



And yet, the “palestinian” leaders refuse for any compromise.

Please point out where they refused to compromise. Last time I checked the Rabin peace initiative failed when Netanyahu reversed verbal commitments given by Rabin and Peres. Last time I checked Israel was offering extremely limited concessions under Barack who pulled out of negotiations during election time and admitted himself this was the reason. Last time I checked Shlomo Ben Ami himself said he would have rejected the "concessions" Israel offered. Last time I checked Rabin was offering only 4% of Palestine to be entirely administered by a Palestinian authority during a "transitional phase". Last time I checked in 1993 during the Madrid conference huge steps were taken by the Palestinians to establish peace and Shamir himself was laughed at by the international community for his irrational intransigence. Last time I checked Netanyahu was infront of a dual sitting of Congress saying Israel would never return Judea and Samaria and now is only offering to negotiate as Palestine seeks statehood. Who can trust the word of a man that has previously pulled out of commitments and promises.




Oh, talking like a true ignorant propagandist now. So Israel is to blame for destabilizing the region.

Not directly but you would be burying your head in the sand to think that establishing a Jewish state in the post-colonial and post-imperial era in the heartland of the Arab world is destabilizing. It is not their fault but denying that Israels presence in the Arab world without reaching an agreement to this century old conflict which so much of the Arab world stands in solidarity behind is destabilizing. It is not just me, but Brent Scowcroft (National Security Advisor under the Bush administration) and Zbiegniew Brezenski (National Security Advisor under the Carter administration) both agree that a solution to the Palestinian problem will play a major part in stabilizing the Middle East- along with a conclusion of the Iraq war and phased withdrawal of the American presence in the Middle East.

Frankly peace and stability in the Middle East is far more important to most the Western world, not because they care about the Palestinians or Israelis wellbeing, but because stability is vital in order to keep the markets free and the energy open to the Western world. Not to mention that America has been generally liked by the Arab world however its imperial initiatives (which the Arabs view its one-sided approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict has been a part of) has reversed this. When the US was evenhanded with its approach (as it was Under Bush Snr) the Arabs grew generally receptive of America and the region continued on a path to stabilization, but when it pursued a one-sided approach (as it did under the Clintion administration) in favour of Israel, the Arab world grew less receptive of the US. I have always said it, that the Arabs are a strategical asset and Israel is a strategical liability. Simply look at the first Gulf war. The Arab coallition would have broken up if Israel was involved.



posted on Aug, 14 2011 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 


Although I agree with your thoughts I'd really like to see threads like these stay on topic..

The topic has again been derailed with the usual ancient crap and sadly you are helping that along..

It would have been interesting to see some response to the new settlements being announced on the back of Israel saying they were interested in peace as long as Palestine withdraws from the UN vote..

Even silence on the subject would have shown the truth...

But no, instead we cop the off topic rants.




top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join