Recognising a Palestinian State?

[Symmetry]

Good plan: disband the one functioning and stable democracy in the entire region and replace it with yet another bloodthirsty Islamic dictatorship.

It's called "symmetrical diversity".

Don't be a racist.

Never heard of it.

[HapSmo19]

Good plan: disband the one functioning and stable democracy in the entire region and replace it with yet another bloodthirsty Islamic dictatorship.

It's called "symmetrical diversity".

Don't be a racist.

Never heard of it.

Well, in this instance, it is represented by the desire for a more diverse group of bloodthirsty islamic dictatorships.

[saxitoxin]

Query for the neo-cons: in just the last ten years Israeli bribes to your leaders have cost the US $60 billion and 3,000 dead Americans (I'm not even counting the trillions more and 5,000 additional lives you spent taking out their regional enemy as they sat back relaxing).

What have the snakes given you in return and was it worth it?

Within ten years America will be bankrupt. One way or another the subsidy to Zionist colonialism will end. Once it does the nations of the Middle East will shove Israel into the ocean. Why don't you save yourself a few dollars by pulling up stakes now and unhooking yourselves from the puppet strings Israel has planted in your back?

Who are you more loyal to - the Zionists or the memory of 90 brave American sailors the Zionists machine gunned in the water after they sank the USS Liberty?

[saxitoxin]

Israel is America's greatest ally we're told. To how many of the U.S.' many wars has Israel contributed troops or treasure? Korea? Vietnam? Grenada? Kosovo? Iraq #1? Iraq #2? Afghanistan? Panama?

Answer: Zero.

The only time American and Israeli forces have greeted each other in a combat theater was when the IDF sank a U.S. Navy ship and then strafed the survivors in the water.

If Egypt had done that to a Soviet naval vessel I could count in minutes the amount of time it would have taken Cairo to be turned into a sheet of glass. But brave American soldiers and sailors are expendable commodities when it comes to Israel.

For the last 40 years Uncle Sam has been bent over a table with an Israeli cock up his ass. America, you have the power --- put your mind to the job and avenge your dead and maimed sailors ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I379HHdy7ak&t=1m8s

[HapSmo19]

...brave American soldiers and sailors are expendable commodities when it comes to Israel.

It's why we've begun the transition to a 100% openly gay military.








(if you don't think that's funny, I know who you are)

[DangerBoy]

I wonder if this hypothetical new Palestinian state will allow for openly homosexual marriages.

[Ray Rider]

Lol @ Hapsmo

@Saxi: you already discredited yourself on the first page of this thread, as Inklosed has shown. You're wasting your hot air around here

[saxitoxin]

Lol @ Hapsmo

@Saxi: you already discredited yourself on the first page of this thread, as Inklosed has shown. You're wasting your hot air around here

Expendable Commodities:


Treasured Allies:

[Dukasaur]

The future belongs to secular Pan-Arabism.

You might almost have a point, if only the Islamists didn't have such a near-perfect record of assassinating any secular Arab leader of note. Assad is the last, and he's not long for this world. Every other secular Arab state has now fallen to the radical Islamists -- Egypt is gone, Libya, Algeria, Iraq (okay, in Iraq the radicals did need American help to topple the secular regime, but nonetheless the deed is done), one by one they've all gone over to the fundamentalists. The once-moderate sheiks of Oman, Bahrein, and the U.A.R. have had to backpedal on their moderation and become radical Sharia-enforcers in order to be allowed to live. Ditto for neighbouring non-Arab states. Turkey is now becoming radicalized, Azerbaijan is gone, Iran went radical a generation ago. In Pakistan the days when a moderate like Bhutto could get elected are over; the future belongs to nutcases. In Lebanon a centuries-old truce between the Muslims and the Christians has ended and the Christians know they're scheduled for extermination.

So where are these secular Pan-Arabs supposed to come from?

[saxitoxin]

The future belongs to secular Pan-Arabism.

You might almost have a point, if only the Islamists didn't have such a near-perfect record of assassinating any secular Arab leader of note.

I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a joke or not?

It's got to be a joke.

Yes, of course. The Muslim world's secular leaders have been/are being toppled despite the strong protestations of the U.S. and the Zionist Occupation Regime in Palestine ... e.g. Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, la la la, etc. etc.

Across the whole world, progressives stand united against the ZORP regime. Peace can only come when Israel is dismantled, the squatters resettled to Europe and North America, and full Palestinian sovereignty over Palestine is recognized. The only meaningful negotiations are negotiations for a timetable to dismantle Israel.

[Phatscotty]

It is possible that all this "opposition" from the Obama Administration is just posturing to look more reasonable to the Jewish American community. In addition, given the nature of the recent special election, he is ready to give up this posturing, as the Jewish vote is likely lost already. Any takers?

It would go past possible and say you nailed it. A republican has not held that NY seat in almost 100 years, and that district is the most Jewish district in America.

Obama has been coddling Muslims and courting Muslims and defending Muslims too hard for too long. On the bright side, it worked! American Muslims have an 85% approval rating for Obama.

[Baron Von PWN]

It is possible that all this "opposition" from the Obama Administration is just posturing to look more reasonable to the Jewish American community. In addition, given the nature of the recent special election, he is ready to give up this posturing, as the Jewish vote is likely lost already. Any takers?

It would go past possible and say you nailed it. A republican has not held that NY seat in almost 100 years, and that district is the most Jewish district in America.

Obama has been coddling Muslims and courting Muslims and defending Muslims too hard for too long. On the bright side, it worked! American Muslims have an 85% approval rating for Obama.

I suppose not scare mongering about Muslims is now coddling.

[Phatscotty]

It is possible that all this "opposition" from the Obama Administration is just posturing to look more reasonable to the Jewish American community. In addition, given the nature of the recent special election, he is ready to give up this posturing, as the Jewish vote is likely lost already. Any takers?

It would go past possible and say you nailed it. A republican has not held that NY seat in almost 100 years, and that district is the most Jewish district in America.

Obama has been coddling Muslims and courting Muslims and defending Muslims too hard for too long. On the bright side, it worked! American Muslims have an 85% approval rating for Obama.

I suppose not scare mongering about Muslims is now coddling.

Coddling, defending, courting...He didn't get 85% approval rating amongst American Muslims by being neutral, or just not scare mongering. There is nothing wrong with him courting certain groups of people. My point is Obama went way too far out of his way to kiss their asses, and he is going to be bitten in the ass by the Jewish vote because of it, and may be an important reason why he might not get re-elected. Don't worry about any of these factors though, we can just yell that everyone is racist if Obama loses and we won't have to look at the actual reasons.

[PLAYER57832]

Nope, there has never been a nation called Palestine. There have been a lot of empires and kingdoms that ruled that land, but usually they ruled a lot more land too (see Ottoman Empire, UK, Romans).

True, but irrelevant, particularly when it is people of the US and Canada speaking.
Also, the link between the Israel of ancient times and today is tenuous at best... and the current state is not truly tied to it, except that both were partially Jewish.

[Baron Von PWN]

It is possible that all this "opposition" from the Obama Administration is just posturing to look more reasonable to the Jewish American community. In addition, given the nature of the recent special election, he is ready to give up this posturing, as the Jewish vote is likely lost already. Any takers?

It would go past possible and say you nailed it. A republican has not held that NY seat in almost 100 years, and that district is the most Jewish district in America.

Obama has been coddling Muslims and courting Muslims and defending Muslims too hard for too long. On the bright side, it worked! American Muslims have an 85% approval rating for Obama.

I suppose not scare mongering about Muslims is now coddling.

Coddling, defending, courting...He didn't get 85% approval rating amongst American Muslims by being neutral, or just not scare mongering. There is nothing wrong with him courting certain groups of people. My point is Obama went way too far out of his way to kiss their asses, and he is going to be bitten in the ass by the Jewish vote because of it, and may be an important reason why he might not get re-elected. Don't worry about any of these factors though, we can just yell that everyone is racist if Obama loses and we won't have to look at the actual reasons.

How has dhe done that exactly? the Cairo speech?

[Phatscotty]

Nope, there has never been a nation called Palestine. There have been a lot of empires and kingdoms that ruled that land, but usually they ruled a lot more land too (see Ottoman Empire, UK, Romans).

True, but irrelevant, particularly when it is people of the US and Canada speaking.
Also, the link between the Israel of ancient times and today is tenuous at best... and the current state is not truly tied to it, except that both were partially Jewish.

wtf? Didnt you give me a completely different answer the same question?

I asked if Palestine ever existed...and you are all "WRONG!"

Now are you saying "true" that Palestine never existed?

[DangerBoy]

Nope, there has never been a nation called Palestine. There have been a lot of empires and kingdoms that ruled that land, but usually they ruled a lot more land too (see Ottoman Empire, UK, Romans).

True, but irrelevant, particularly when it is people of the US and Canada speaking.
Also, the link between the Israel of ancient times and today is tenuous at best... and the current state is not truly tied to it, except that both were partially Jewish.

wtf? Didnt you give me a completely different answer the same question?

I asked if Palestine ever existed...and you are all "WRONG!"

Now are you saying "true" that Palestine never existed?

Not only that, but she's saying that despite the fact that there's a truthful point contradicting her opinion, that it's irrelevant. This has to go in the Player Top 10 list.

[Symmetry]

Nope, there has never been a nation called Palestine. There have been a lot of empires and kingdoms that ruled that land, but usually they ruled a lot more land too (see Ottoman Empire, UK, Romans).

True, but irrelevant, particularly when it is people of the US and Canada speaking.
Also, the link between the Israel of ancient times and today is tenuous at best... and the current state is not truly tied to it, except that both were partially Jewish.

wtf? Didnt you give me a completely different answer the same question?

I asked if Palestine ever existed...and you are all "WRONG!"

Now are you saying "true" that Palestine never existed?

It exists now, and has done for some time. The question is whether it should be recognised. What are your feeling on Taiwan, another unrecognised state that has existed for a similar period of time, but whose recognition gets vetoed by China?

[Symmetry]

I wonder if this hypothetical new Palestinian state will allow for openly homosexual marriages.

It doesn't at the moment, I suppose it's possible in the future, similar to Israel, the UK, and many states in the US.

[Phatscotty]

Nope, there has never been a nation called Palestine. There have been a lot of empires and kingdoms that ruled that land, but usually they ruled a lot more land too (see Ottoman Empire, UK, Romans).

True, but irrelevant, particularly when it is people of the US and Canada speaking.
Also, the link between the Israel of ancient times and today is tenuous at best... and the current state is not truly tied to it, except that both were partially Jewish.

wtf? Didnt you give me a completely different answer the same question?

I asked if Palestine ever existed...and you are all "WRONG!"

Now are you saying "true" that Palestine never existed?

It exists now, and has done for some time. The question is whether it should be recognised. What are your feeling on Taiwan, another unrecognised state that has existed for a similar period of time, but whose recognition gets vetoed by China?

Taiwan is in dispute. Don't get this all twisted, I just asked if Palestine existed at any time in history because I heard someone at work say it and I didn't want a wiki answer. Here I am just telling Player she has said 2 different things. Player and I have a hard time communicating but I am trying again. There will be lots of confusion in these exchanges so don't let it throw you off.

I'm just here to learn on this one, because I I have not made up my mind about the Israel/Palestine thingy.

[Symmetry]

Nope, there has never been a nation called Palestine. There have been a lot of empires and kingdoms that ruled that land, but usually they ruled a lot more land too (see Ottoman Empire, UK, Romans).

True, but irrelevant, particularly when it is people of the US and Canada speaking.
Also, the link between the Israel of ancient times and today is tenuous at best... and the current state is not truly tied to it, except that both were partially Jewish.

wtf? Didnt you give me a completely different answer the same question?

I asked if Palestine ever existed...and you are all "WRONG!"

Now are you saying "true" that Palestine never existed?

It exists now, and has done for some time. The question is whether it should be recognised. What are your feeling on Taiwan, another unrecognised state that has existed for a similar period of time, but whose recognition gets vetoed by China?

Taiwan is in dispute. Don't get this all twisted, I just asked if Palestine existed at any time in history because I heard someone at work say it and I didn't want a wiki answer. Here I am just telling Player she has said 2 different things. Player and I have a hard time communicating but I am trying again. There will be lots of confusion in these exchanges so don't let it throw you off.

I'm just here to learn on this one, because I I have not made up my mind about the Israel/Palestine thingy.

Well you have my word on it that it exists now and has done for some time, and so certainly can't be said to have never existed. Your colleague was perhaps misinformed, or perhaps thinks that a state's right to exist relies only on it's existance in the distant past. Taiwan would be the most relevant comparison, in my mind. Or perhaps one of the other Arab states that has a similar history of turmoil, but is still recognised as a state by the UN and US.

I really don't see many of these arguments being thrown out by the more conservative posters as having much relevance, so I can understand your confusion. Dangerboy seems to think gay rights are important in recognising a state. The guy with the shark seems to think that the problem is that recognising Palestine destroys Israel, or something. You seem to be worried about a point that would cast doubt on the legitamacy of your own country.

I don't see the relevance.

[saxitoxin]

We may all disagree on the nuances of this situation, but at least we can all agree on one thing.

[Phatscotty]

Well you have my word on it that it exists now and has done for some time, and so certainly can't be said to have never existed. Your colleague was perhaps misinformed, or perhaps thinks that a state's right to exist relies only on it's existance in the distant past. Taiwan would be the most relevant comparison, in my mind. Or perhaps one of the other Arab states that has a similar history of turmoil, but is still recognised as a state by the UN and US.

I really don't see many of these arguments being thrown out by the more conservative posters as having much relevance, so I can understand your confusion. Dangerboy seems to think gay rights are important in recognising a state. The guy with the shark seems to think that the problem is that recognising Palestine destroys Israel, or something. You seem to be worried about a point that would cast doubt on the legitamacy of your own country.

I don't see the relevance.

That's one hell of a conclusion. I had to read it over twice cuz it didn't make sense to me.

What I'm worried about? the legitimacy of my own country? That assumption is beyond left field on Jupiter, and it's your continued obsession with destroying America that got you out there, which also will not garner that assumption relevant. I'm not worried about that at all, and I'm not talking about that at all.

As for Dangerboy, I would bet the point he was trying to make is also attributed to your ardent support of homosexual rights, yet he wonders why you are so hard up for Palestine when it should be clear that homosexual marriage will not be allowed and homosexuality will probably be punished, and in fact will be a million times worse for gays, especially with Iran having more of a say then ever. I'm sure at that time however you will still be making threads about the tyranny against gays in America.

[Symmetry]

Well you have my word on it that it exists now and has done for some time, and so certainly can't be said to have never existed. Your colleague was perhaps misinformed, or perhaps thinks that a state's right to exist relies only on it's existance in the distant past. Taiwan would be the most relevant comparison, in my mind. Or perhaps one of the other Arab states that has a similar history of turmoil, but is still recognised as a state by the UN and US.

I really don't see many of these arguments being thrown out by the more conservative posters as having much relevance, so I can understand your confusion. Dangerboy seems to think gay rights are important in recognising a state. The guy with the shark seems to think that the problem is that recognising Palestine destroys Israel, or something. You seem to be worried about a point that would cast doubt on the legitamacy of your own country.

I don't see the relevance.

That's one hell of a conclusion. I had to read it over twice cuz it didn't make sense to me.

What I'm worried about? the legitimacy of my own country? That assumption is beyond left field on Jupiter, and it's your continued obsession with destroying America that got you out there, which also will not garner that assumption relevant. I'm not worried about that at all, and I'm not talking about that at all.

As for Dangerboy, I would bet the point he was trying to make is also attributed to your ardent support of homosexual rights, yet he wonders why you are so hard up for Palestine when it should be clear that homosexual marriage will not be allowed and homosexuality will probably be punished, and in fact will be a million times worse for gays, especially with Iran having more of a say then ever. I'm sure at that time however you will still be making threads about the tyranny against gays in America.

Nice try, but I kind of already suspected that DB was going for an ad hominem.

You kind of dodged missed out on answering my point on the issue of historical letigimacy though. I largely consider it irrelevant. Should it have been an issue with the US? No, of course not. Should it be an issue with Taiwan? The US doesn't think so. Should it be an issue with Palestine? You tell me.

[Phatscotty]

Dude, my original question was not to prove a point about historical legitimacy, so your point is not related to my previous point, so there will be no dodging, just a reminder that your response did not follow mine, according to me.

I understand why you and others are over-defensive on this issue, which makes you assume I was trying to be anti-Palestine, when really I only wanted to know so I could bring it up to my friend at work the next day.

I think historical legitimacy is more a positive then a negative for one who wants statehood. Relevance is debatable, but that was never my point anyways so, been fun.