Olmart Advocates Israeli Pullouts..

[GoateMass]

Ehud Olmert, Israel's outgoing prime minister, has said that Israel will have to leave much of east Jerusalem and allow Palestinians to form a state equal in size to the area of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

In an interview with the Yediot Ahronot newspaper, published on Monday, Olmert also said that peace with Syria would require withdrawal from the Golan Heights.

"[I am saying] what no previous Israeli leader has ever said: we should withdraw from almost all of the territories, including in East Jerusalem and in the Golan Heights," he was quoted as saying.

"A decision has to be made. This decision is difficult, terrible, a decision that contradicts our natural instincts, our innermost desires, our collective memories, the prayers of the Jewish people for 2,000 years

continue reading here
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/mi...411387754.html

why would he be saying such stuff.. or is he sincere?
I think over all it would be good for israel's future..

[mehdi84]

Huge props to Olmert. This guy really brings a smile to my face. Unfortunately, he doesn't hold the leverage we once did

[Thinman]

He is right. It is probably the only thing that will work.

[NuggzTheNinja]

Originally Posted by GoateMass

continue reading here
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/mi...411387754.html

why would he be saying such stuff.. or is he sincere?
I think over all it would be good for israel's future..

He's the "outgoing" PM for a reason. I don't know anybody here who thinks he's done any good for this country.

[GoateMass]

Originally Posted by NuggzTheNinja

He's the "outgoing" PM for a reason. I don't know anybody here who thinks he's done any good for this country.

well I think he is taking into consideration that the status quo of neighboring countries is not going to last for ever and therefore the policies of these countries is probably going to drastically change, maybe not in 10 years or 20 or even 30, a few decades isnt much in terms of history...

so i guess its better that when such changes could occur, its better that Israel has not been belligerent for quite some time.

state building is not an easy task when in a state of perpetual war, but as some neo-realists put it sometimes war is necessary to maintain local unity.

Israel is living on borrowed time with its current policies.

[1devil]

Originally Posted by GoateMass

well I think he is taking into consideration that the status quo of neighboring countries is not going to last for ever and therefore the policies of these countries is probably going to drastically change, maybe not in 10 years or 20 or even 30, a few decades isnt much in terms of history...

so i guess its better that when such changes could occur, its better that Israel has not been belligerent for quite some time.

state building is not an easy task when in a state of perpetual war, but as some neo-realists put it sometimes war is necessary to maintain local unity.

Israel is living on borrowed time with its current policies.

I tend to agree with most of your observations. However, if Israel is to make such concessions, I feel that the Palestinians need to make one major concession as well. They need to give up the right of return.

[nick187]

Olmert the crippled duck is only making these statements because he is worried about his legacy and how he is going to be remembered in Israeli Politics.

We all know that his statements don't amount to jack.

There are over 5 Million Palestinians living in Diaspora and should return to their homes and they should not make any concessions what so ever after all its the Israeli regime which is occupying their homes and their land.

[1devil]

Originally Posted by nick187

Olmert the crippled duck is only making these statements because he is worried about his legacy and how he is going to be remembered in Israeli Politics.

We all know that his statements don't amount to jack.

There are over 5 Million Palestinians living in Diaspora and should return to their homes and they should not make any concessions what so ever after all its the Israeli regime which is occupying their homes and their land.

Oh so maintaining their current status is what's best?? Ok. There are way to many idiots on both sides of this issue.

[GoateMass]

Originally Posted by 1devil

I tend to agree with most of your observations. However, if Israel is to make such concessions, I feel that the Palestinians need to make one major concession as well. They need to give up the right of return.

I think that is very pragmatic.. but thats not up for me to decide.. maybe Palestinians... however.. they were still kicked out of their homes and maybe ought to be compensated some how..

[Morbid_Mind]

I've done the pullout before, can be tricky but playing in the rain with no boots if pretty fun.

[ripper6]

Appeasement stopped WWII from happening, didn't it? History repeats itself. Giving Hitler the Rhineland, Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, gave us "peace in our time."??????

[GoateMass]

Originally Posted by ripper6

Appeasement stopped WWII from happening, didn't it? History repeats itself. Giving Hitler the Rhineland, Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, gave us "peace in our time."??????

what is exactly "appeasement" besides you can not make such comparisons they are two entierly different contexts and if you are going to say

appeasement = more annexation

then you will have to come up with more than that.. you will have to define exactly what appeasement is.. and establish several common indicators for peace negotiations in several case studies which ended up in the "appeaser" losing more land via annexation with the negotiated party/group/state.

your historical proposition is baseless and unsupported as a precedent for a social historical pattern.

[ll ReNeGaDe ll]

The offer has already been made, and Palestinians rejected it.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...581536,00.html

Where have you been? Or is this sort of thing not reported in the arab news?

[makavelli1988]

Originally Posted by ll ReNeGaDe ll

The offer has already been made, and Palestinians rejected it.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...581536,00.html

Where have you been? Or is this sort of thing not reported in the arab news?

Can you tell me why millions of people that were forced out of their country, and contains their holy city, would accept anything less than what they had before their forced removal?

i have already had a debate with you, in which i posted quotes from Ben-Gurion acknowledging the Zionists as invaders, and you then came with the most ridiculous rebuttal, which was say the quotes were false, even though i quoted legitimate sources. Those sources were not from anti-israeli sites as you predictably claimed, but included the New York times, LA times, Books and autobiographies.

[makavelli1988]

i also find your sig pretty offensive and also a sign of your ignorance of the conflict. the Palestinians are in a Nationalist conflict similar to ETA, the IRA and the Tamil tigers. The religious aspect is overplayed and used by both sides for political reasons.

"these Jews, that have contributed so much to society and have elevated our culture to heights unknown with their contributions to art, philosophy, medicine, all the sciences"

You are severly lacking in historical knowledge if you believe Muslims did not contribute to any of those fields.

It is very easy and dangerous to point the other side as barbarian, this allows you to commit many evils against those people without feeling remorse or guilt. You should understand Hitler used this while conducting the Holocaust, as did many others when conducting genocide. This is also the a technique used by terrorists, who seem to be causing much of your ire, use for slaughtering innocents. Be careful with painting other humans as barbaric, for that way fascism lies. Which unfortunately seems to be the case with many right wing governments being elected or coming to power.

[makavelli1988]

Originally Posted by ripper6

Appeasement stopped WWII from happening, didn't it? History repeats itself. Giving Hitler the Rhineland, Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia, gave us "peace in our time."??????

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

these two cases have absolutely nothing to do with eachtother, nor are they comparable.

Ironically your analogy of the conflict is better suited if you put the Zionists as Hitler rather than the Palestinians. The Zionists were 'appeased' by being allowed to take Palestine, so that there could be 'peace' for jews.

[ll ReNeGaDe ll]

Originally Posted by makavelli1988

Can you tell me why millions of people that were forced out of their country, and contains their holy city, would accept anything less than what they had before their forced removal?]

1) They didn't "have" sh*t. The land belonged to Britain before Jews on that land declared independence.

2) They were not forced out. They chose to leave after pressure from their Arab bretherin told them to in promise that they will kill all the Jews inside. i got quotes too from the PA media itself confirming this.

i have already had a debate with you, in which i posted quotes from Ben-Gurin acknowledging the Zionists as invaders, and you then came with the most ridiculous rebuttal, which was say the quotes were false, even though i quoted legitimate sources. Those sources were not from anti-israeli sites as you predictably claimed, but included the New York times, LA times, Books and autobiographies.

Actually i never claimed the quotes were forced. i claimed that they were not from legitimate sources. You claimed the quotes were from the NYT, LA times, etc..... but how am i to know that's true? Because it was part of your copy and paste?

Originally Posted by makavelli1988

"these Jews, that have contributed so much to society and have elevated our culture to heights unknown with their contributions to art, philosophy, medicine, all the sciences"

You are severly lacking in historical knowledge if you believe Muslims did not contribute to any of those fields.

And in the last few hundred years they made no siginificant contributions to anything other than blowing things up.

Originally Posted by makavelli1988

It is very easy and dangerous to point the other side as barbarian, this allows you to commit many evils against those people without feeling remorse or guilt. You should understand Hitler used this while conducting the Holocaust, as did many others when conducting genocide.

Actually, Hitler never painted the Jews as barbarians. I'm only going by the facts. The Palestinian culture is barbaric. Their wide support for terror is barbaric. Their honor killings is barbaric. The mothers rejoicing over their son's suicide mission is barbaric. The glorifying mass murderers is barbaric. Their government-sponsered hate and incitement of terror is barbaric. The cartoons they show their children is barbaric.

But no, lets not paint them as barbarians.

[GoateMass]

Originally Posted by ll ReNeGaDe ll

1) They didn't "have" sh*t. The land belonged to Britain before Jews on that land declared independence.

the land belonged to English men.. I wonder how did they acquire such owenership from an island thats in the Atlantic...

people like you are what only makes situations worse, its a genuine problem that some third / second generation Jews find where they live as home which was actually unjustly annexed by their parrents/grand parrents. while the orginal owners of such land are in exile of it living in diasporas in camps and what not.

you could just talk in the language of one in power sure.. maybe you have a hobbsian view of the world. but in return the Balance of power will not last on your side, the surrounding nations Status Quo wont last forever.. and expect the neighbours of Zion will also use such language when they have the upper hand....

I just wonder then what kind of leadership character will it be, Some one like Salah-Ud-Deen who is forgiving or someone who would say eye for an eye.

your people's time will come renegade.

[ll ReNeGaDe ll]

the land belonged to English men.. I wonder how did they acquire such owenership from an island thats in the Atlantic..

And before that it belonged to the Turks.

people like you are what only makes situations worse, its a genuine problem that some third / second generation Jews find where they live as home which was actually unjustly annexed by their parrents/grand parrents. while the orginal owners of such land are in exile of it living in diasporas in camps and what not.

Nothing was annexed. They left (and thus, forfitted their property because their Arab bretherin urged them to). Now they're in camps because their Arab bretherin won't allow them to assimilate into their societies. The entire Palestinian refugee problem was caused and maintained by Arabs.

Lol @ you not being aware that the deal you approved of was already offered, and rejected by the Palestinians. Why live in peace when you can continue to murder Jews, right?

[1devil]

Debating who owned what and when is pointless. It's time to move forward. The Jews have land and a country, so I see no problem with the Palestinians having the same. The current situation is a cyclical time bomb. This is no way for anyone to live. I guess people can feel free to have a debate that is entirely rooted in past events. However, this line of reasoning seems to yield the same result every time. Maybe this is a sign that a new approach is necessary.

[GoateMass]

Originally Posted by ll ReNeGaDe ll

And before that it belonged to the Turks.

you didnt answer my initial question....
it did not belong to turks rather it was under the rule of the Ottoman Empire which was perfectly ok with Palestinians as it did not matter where the khilafa was run from.

Nothing was annexed. They left (and thus, forfitted their property because their Arab bretherin urged them to). Now they're in camps because their Arab bretherin won't allow them to assimilate into their societies. The entire Palestinian refugee problem was caused and maintained by Arabs.

they did not simply leave as you put it. why would any one leave their land in the first place? reality is they were forced out and those who stayed were murderd in cold blood. Now I do not agree about the policies of certian Arab countries towards the refugee problem but it seems that they see if they acknowledge and assimilate the refugees then they are giving up the right to return... Ironic is they arent called "refugees" for nothing.



anywas it seems there is no use of talking to you.

as in one of the Palestinian Jihadi Nasheeds says ;
"days have taught us that calling upon death maneuvers the best of negotiations."

PA is a failure as it does not recognize the use of force to achieve goals.

[MantisShrimp]

The two state plan is not altruistic...it's ethnic gerrymandering and necessary to the ethnic and political unity of Israel...love it or hate it, thats the facts, and the theories have been on the books for some time, demographic trends aint too hard to track...handing the Palestinians their own state is like handing a 5 year old a box of grenades for his birthday...it'll definitely get him out of your hair!

I'm in favor of ending the codependency. You hate Israel so much? Here...run your own

[ll ReNeGaDe ll]

Originally Posted by GoateMass

you didnt answer my initial question....
it did not belong to turks rather it was under the rule of the Ottoman Empire which was perfectly ok with Palestinians as it did not matter where the khilafa was run from.

It was not ok with the Palestinians when the Turks owned the land because the Palestinians haven't existed yet.

they did not simply leave as you put it. why would any one leave their land in the first place? reality is they were forced out and those who stayed were murderd in cold blood.

Many Palestnians themselves have admitted that they were not forced to leave their homes, but did so under the encouragement of their Arab leaders.

Remind me of one real cause from all the factors that have caused the "Palestinian Catastrophe" [the establishment of Israel and the creation of refugee problem], and I will remind you that it still exists... The reasons for the Palestinian Catastrophe are the same reasons that have produced and are still producing our Catastrophes today.

During the Little Catastrophe, meaning the Palestinian Catastrophe the following happened: the first war between Arabs and Israel had started and the "Arab Salvation Army" came and told the Palestinians: 'We have come to you in order to liquidate the Zionists and their state. Leave your houses and villages, you will return to them in a few days safely. Leave them so we can fulfill our mission in the best way and so you won't be hurt.' It became clear already then, when it was too late, that the support of the Arab states (against Israel) was a big illusion. Arabs fought as if intending to cause the "Palestinian Catastrophe

- Jawad Al Ba****i, Palestinian journalist in Jordan, writing in Al-Ayyam, May 13, 2008

"...The leaders and the elites promised us at the beginning of the "Catastrophe" in 1948, that the duration of the exile will not be long, and that it will not last more than a few days or months, and afterwards the refugees will return to their homes, which most of them did not leave only until they put their trust in those "Arkuvian" promises made by the leaders and the political elites. Afterwards, days passed, months, years and decades, and the promises were lost with the strain of the succession of events..." [Term "Arkuvian," is after Arkuv - a figure from Arab tradition - who was known for breaking his promises and for his lies."]

- Mahmoud Al-Habbash, Palestinian Journalist in PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, December 13, 2006

"We heard sounds of explosions and of gunfire at the beginning of the summer in the year of the "Catastrophe" [1948]. They told us: The Jews attacked our region and it is better to evacuate the village and return, after the battle is over. And indeed there were among us [who fled Israel] those who left a fire burning under the pot, those who left their flock [of sheep] and those who left their money and gold behind, based on the assumption that we would return after a few hours."

- Asmaa Jabir Balasimah, Woman who fled Israel in 1948, Al-Ayyam, May 16, 2006 [Al-Ayyam, May 16, 2006]

An Arab viewer called Palestinian Authority TV and quoted his father, saying that in 1948 the Arab District Officer ordered all Arabs to leave Palestine or be labeled traitors. In response, Arab MK Ibrahim Sarsur, then Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel, cursed those leaders, thus acknowledging Israel's historical record.

"Mr. Ibrahim [Sarsur]. I address you as a Muslim. My father and grandfather told me that during the "Catastrophe" [in 1948], our district officer issued an order that whoever stays in Palestine and in Majdel [near Ashkelon - Southern Israel] is a traitor, he is a traitor."

Response from Ibrahim Sarsur, now MK, then Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel:

"The one who gave the order forbidding them to stay there bears guilt for this, in this life and the Afterlife throughout history until Resurrection Day."

- PA TV, April 30, 1999

Fuad Abu Higla, then a regular columnist in the official PA daily Al Hayat Al Jadida, wrote an article before an Arab Summit, which criticized the Arab leaders. One of the failures he cited, in the name of a prisoner, was that an earlier generation of Arab leaders "forced" them to leave Israel in 1948, again placing the blame for the flight on the Arab leaders.

"I have received a letter from a prisoner in Acre prison, to the Arab summit:
To the [Arab and Muslim] Kings and Presidents, poverty is killing us, the symptoms are exhausting us and the souls are leaving our body, yet you are still searching for the way to provide aid, like one who is looking for a needle in a haystack or like the armies of your predecessors in the year of 1948, who forced us to leave [Israel], on the pretext of clearing the battlefields of civilians...So what will your summit do now?"

- Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 19, 2001

It is clear from these statements that there is general acknowledgement among Palestinians that Arab leaders bear responsibility for the mass flight of Arabs from Israel in 1948, and were the cause of the "refugee" problem. Furthermore, the fact that this information has been validated by public figures and refugees in the Palestinian Authority media itself confirms that this responsibility is well-known - even though for propaganda purposes its leaders continue to blame Israel publicly for "the expulsion."

[1devil]

Originally Posted by makavelli1988

i also find your sig pretty offensive and also a sign of your ignorance of the conflict. the Palestinians are in a Nationalist conflict similar to ETA, the IRA and the Tamil tigers. The religious aspect is overplayed and used by both sides for political reasons.

"these Jews, that have contributed so much to society and have elevated our culture to heights unknown with their contributions to art, philosophy, medicine, all the sciences"

You are severly lacking in historical knowledge if you believe Muslims did not contribute to any of those fields.

It is very easy and dangerous to point the other side as barbarian, this allows you to commit many evils against those people without feeling remorse or guilt. You should understand Hitler used this while conducting the Holocaust, as did many others when conducting genocide. This is also the a technique used by terrorists, who seem to be causing much of your ire, use for slaughtering innocents. Be careful with painting other humans as barbaric, for that way fascism lies. Which unfortunately seems to be the case with many right wing governments being elected or coming to power.

The religious element is not the only elemment, but it is an indisputable element. Jerusalem is home to the second more important site in Islam as well as home to the Western Wall. You don't think that plays a role in the debate?

[makavelli1988]

Originally Posted by 1devil

The religious element is not the only elemment, but it is an indisputable element. Jerusalem is home to the second more important site in Islam as well as home to the Western Wall. You don't think that plays a role in the debate?

not once did i say that, rather, people like to paint it as solely a religious war. and is normally used by both sides when they require external support

[makavelli1988]

Originally Posted by ll ReNeGaDe ll

1) They didn't "have" sh*t. The land belonged to Britain before Jews on that land declared independence.

you must seriously be retarded. so please tell me, did the Britains fight during the Crusades? i m sure it was arabs. Not to mention the land was called Palestine under the Turks and during the Crusades.

Originally Posted by ll ReNeGaDe ll

2) They were not forced out. They chose to leave after pressure from their Arab bretherin told them to in promise that they will kill all the Jews inside. i got quotes too from the PA media itself confirming this.

not all of them did. there were many that remained, that were forced out. i showed you the quotes from Jewish leaders, but whenever a quote is shown to you that doesnt fit your view, you dismiss it.

Originally Posted by ll ReNeGaDe ll

Actually i never claimed the quotes were forced. i claimed that they were not from legitimate sources. You claimed the quotes were from the NYT, LA times, etc..... but how am i to know that's true? Because it was part of your copy and paste?

I posted links to books, with a direct link to google allowing you to preview the book and see what page it was on. what more do you want? not to mention those books had jewish authors.

Originally Posted by ll ReNeGaDe ll

And in the last few hundred years they made no siginificant contributions to anything other than blowing things up.

lol. the first act of terrorism in those lands was by Jews. search Irgun and Lehi. you really have no clue. as for Muslims contributions,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc9CXH3mU6s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KItNg0WEKHw

Originally Posted by ll ReNeGaDe ll

Actually, Hitler never painted the Jews as barbarians. I'm only going by the facts. The Palestinian culture is barbaric. Their wide support for terror is barbaric. Their honor killings is barbaric. The mothers rejoicing over their son's suicide mission is barbaric. The glorifying mass murderers is barbaric. Their government-sponsered hate and incitement of terror is barbaric. The cartoons they show their children is barbaric.

But no, lets not paint them as barbarians.

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. i m pretty sure it was a jew who used that to justify the Irgun and Lehi attacks.

[makavelli1988]

Originally Posted by ll ReNeGaDe ll

- Jawad Al Ba****i, Palestinian journalist in Jordan, writing in Al-Ayyam, May 13, 2008


- Mahmoud Al-Habbash, Palestinian Journalist in PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, December 13, 2006




- Asmaa Jabir Balasimah, Woman who fled Israel in 1948, Al-Ayyam, May 16, 2006 [Al-Ayyam, May 16, 2006]



- PA TV, April 30, 1999



- Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 19, 2001

It is clear from these statements that there is general acknowledgement among Palestinians that Arab leaders bear responsibility for the mass flight of Arabs from Israel in 1948, and were the cause of the "refugee" problem. Furthermore, the fact that this information has been validated by public figures and refugees in the Palestinian Authority media itself confirms that this responsibility is well-known - even though for propaganda purposes its leaders continue to blame Israel publicly for "the expulsion."

let me do what you do. You claimed the quotes were from the Palestinian media..... but how am i to know that's true? Because it was part of your copy and paste?

[Grimbeard]

Too late, Iran is gonna wipe them off the map!

[72cutlass]

unless im mistaken post WWI the area was under british rule and the country of palestine was created for the jews. Jerusalem was divided itself too wasnt it?

post WWII the country was divided between the jews and arabs. Basically in a nut shell though the arabs went to war and lost their country damn near over night to the israelis.

given those circumstances how the palestinians think anything beyond their original country laid out in '49 is owed to them is beyond me. The palestinians themselves have an awful lot of pride for a country that really only existed because the brits decided to create it. I suppose the same could be said for the israelis though as well

[ll ReNeGaDe ll]

Originally Posted by makavelli1988

you must seriously be retarded. so please tell me, did the Britains fight during the Crusades? i m sure it was arabs.

Mind-numbingly irrelevant.

Not to mention the land was called Palestine under the Turks and during the Crusades.

The land was given that name by the Romans, who drove the Jews out of their homeland out of spite. So of course that's what the land was called.

I posted links to books, with a direct link to google allowing you to preview the book and see what page it was on. what more do you want? not to mention those books had jewish authors.

So you agree that there is no way of knowing that those quotes are from the NYT and other mainstream sources? Good, i'm glad we settled that.

lol. the first act of terrorism in those lands was by Jews. search Irgun and Lehi. you really have no clue.

That is false, and irrelevant if true, but still false.

as for Muslims contributions,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mc9CXH3mU6s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KItNg0WEKHw

Lol, more lies:

My question is, how many modern inventions have come out of primarily Islamic countries?

I'm not sure how you can call most of those "Muslim inventions" since they were made by a collaborated team which generally consists of one or two scientists who (allegedly) are Muslim.

http://www.google.com/patents?id=tHU...BAJ&dq=5615335

Here is one of the "Muslim inventions" mentioned in the video.

Inventors: Joshua P. Onffroy, Rehan Masood, Brian B. Mullahy, Harold F. Pritoni, Jr.

Shall we poll the rest of the inventors and chalk this up as a "Christian invention" and an "Atheist invention" and whatever other religions they are?

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. i m pretty sure it was a jew who used that to justify the Irgun and Lehi attacks.

The fact that you have to go back to the 30s to find a Jewish terrorist organization speaks volumes.

Actually, Hitler never painted the Jews as barbarians. I'm only going by the facts. The Palestinian culture is barbaric. Their wide support for terror is barbaric. Their honor killings is barbaric. The mothers rejoicing over their son's suicide mission is barbaric. The glorifying mass murderers is barbaric. Their government-sponsered hate and incitement of terror is barbaric. The cartoons they show their children is barbaric.

But no, lets not paint them as barbarians.