Author Topic: Isreali pullout (Read 1908 times)

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #15 on:** August 17, 2005, 02:03:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hangtime
That's where we come in. You know. Team America, World Police.

National Borders in this day and age are fixed. With Kuwait, the word went out.. cross a border with an Army, yer gonna get yer bellybutton kicked.

Oh how some must long for the days when Might made right.

LOL:D

Silat · « **Reply #16 on:** August 17, 2005, 02:56:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GtoRA2
It is a huge step. But the Palisitians will blow it again.

Isreal can give them everything they want and hamas will still blow up women and kids.

I absolutely agree

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #17 on:** August 17, 2005, 02:59:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Silat
I absolutely agree

Sad isnt it?

Staga · « **Reply #18 on:** August 17, 2005, 03:10:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hacksaw1

...and I think most Israelis would roll their eyes (or worse) if you told them it was for "Lebensraum."

What's your opinion?

Is Israel practising "Lebensraum" politics with their settlements in Gaza strip and Golan Heights?

Skydancer · « **Reply #19 on:** August 17, 2005, 03:55:01 PM »

Its a step in the right direction. But only one small step.

Actualy hacksaw1 I do agree that the nations you mention have to agree Israel's right to exist. But the same is true in reverse. Israel should recognise Palistimes right to exist. Its only fair don't you think old chap!

Curval · « **Reply #20 on:** August 17, 2005, 03:56:33 PM »

I used to think the pullout was a good idea....but I still ended up with three kids.

Go figure.

Hangtime · « **Reply #21 on:** August 17, 2005, 04:00:37 PM »

Yep, plain and simple, Staga's correct; the description fits the definition.

Can't pass negative judgement for occupying and populating land captured in War. The Israli's are handing it back; that's something I never expected to see happen.

It appears the Israli's intended to use the territory as a bargaining chip all along now, dosen't it?

Staga · « **Reply #22 on:** August 17, 2005, 04:18:16 PM »

It's suicidal (both political and physical) way to bargain; first build settlements for thousands of "settlers" and then force them to leave their homes.
No; I don't think so.

More likely this move is indicating the chance in the course after politics realized old way didn't work.
I just hope Palestinians have learned the same lesson.

Eagler · « **Reply #23 on:** August 17, 2005, 04:26:21 PM »

and if the Pals screw this chance up, maybe they should "pullout" next

Nashwan · « **Reply #24 on:** August 17, 2005, 04:27:07 PM »

Quote

It appears the Israli's intended to use the territory as a bargaining chip all along now, dosen't it?

No. To quote Sharon from yesterday:

"It is no secret that I, like many others, believed and hoped that we would be able to hold onto Netzarim and Kfar Darom forever"

That's not just rhetoric now, it's been Sharon's position all along.

Haaretz's settlement correspondent summed up the position as he saw it:

"We are not talking of colonialism. The morality of "settlement" after 1967, is equivalent to the morality of settling the land after 1948. Morally, historically and religiously, the right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel, takes precedence over the right of other peoples here. The internal dispute within Israel is over what is possible within the framework of the security and international reality that the country faces."

Hangtime · « **Reply #25 on:** August 17, 2005, 04:32:38 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Staga
It's suicidal (both political and physical) way to bargain; first build settlements for thousands of "settlers" and then force them to leave their homes.
No; I don't think so.

More likely this move is indicating the chance in the course after politics realized old way didn't work.
I just hope Palestinians have learned the same lesson.

Staga, yah gotta look at it from the mindset of the 'pioneers' that settled that land. From the settlers standpoint it was 'free land' to 'homestead'. No doubt they are less than charmed by having to give it up.. but again, from the perspective of the mostly penniless jewish immigrants that moved onto that land to begin with are NOT giving it up without compensation from the government are they? Betcha they're gettin a good deal.

A lotta Sheckles Changing Hands for the Occupied Lands

Staga · « **Reply #26 on:** August 17, 2005, 04:55:40 PM »

I hope they got better than good deal; they weren't responsible about building those settlements.
AFAIK government build those settlements and practically speaking gave apartments to settlers with some perks like Alaskan residents get from US government.

Hangtime · « **Reply #27 on:** August 17, 2005, 05:09:21 PM »

They populated it knowing full well the 'indians' could kill 'em.. just like any other 'pioneer'. Cost / benefit anylisis for any other 'pioneer' is iffy at best. In this situation the 'cavalry' was always close at hand, and when it came time to leave they get a big payout for being 'pioneers'.

Don't know of any other 'pioneer' group of homesteaders that got as sweet a deal as that.

Gunslinger · « **Reply #28 on:** August 17, 2005, 05:12:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sandman
Hmmm... if my knowledge of history is correct, I believe Israel lost that land "fair and square on the battlefield" to the Roman Empire.

yes but did they not win it back in 1967?

Quote

Originally posted by FalconSix
Does that rule apply to all nations (like Germany, Japan, Iraq, NK etc.) or just Israel?.

Show me what land they won in war and held onto again?

FalconSix · « **Reply #29 on:** August 17, 2005, 05:33:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunslinger
Show me what land they won in war and held onto again?

They did win france and a couple of other countries fair and square on the battlefield. Why did we liberate those countries, and when we did why didn't we keep them? I mean, are we stupid or something?