Imperia Online International

WARNING : Oki its a serious topic so please serious answers without spams ( for K_Mihai , Kopsi , KoSaC - if you dont know what to say please dont enter here ) ...i saw in a few posts K_mihai is a smart boy so i think he has some good things to say here.....Kopsi is stupid like s**t so he only can say some stupid  ,senslles , sexual phrases and nothing more....

" When the power of Love overcomes the love of Power , the world will know peace "......

let's see who can say something smart about these words :
- Central Banck's
-Terrorism
-The greatest story ever told ( about gods , our believes and all this bulshit )


for more interest try to find and wiew the documentary movie : Swhadows of Past"  the proofs there are just incredible.....it openes the eyes .......

1)oki lets start with believes and the gods.....lets star with Jesus Christ ..sorry but this is bulshit.....if you make some researches you see that the same story of jesus christ is repeated in history another 12-13 times ..word by word..in many countrys before his time.....THE MOST ANTIQUE IS IN EGIPT....theyr god Horus( SUN) 3000 BC long time before Jesus Christ some 3000 years.....okey lets see
Horus - Born on December 25 , born of a virgin , Star in the East , ADORNED by 3 KINGS , TEACHER at 12 , BAPTIZED/MINISTRY at 30 , 12 DISCIPLES
Jesus CHRIST - Born on December 25 , born of a virgin , Star in the East , ADORNED by 3 KINGS , TEACHER at 12 , BAPTIZED/MINISTRY at 30 , 12 DISCIPLES


Hm...so lets see its the same story.....today im a litlle tired so tomorow ill give you another 10-12 gods that are the SAME , and more then 40 with just litlle alternations before and after Jesus Christ.....


2)ooo Federal Banck's the REAL POWER AND ADMINISTRATION of evry country......here please put your answers ill explain evrything detalized tomorow why the own the country and how they rule..i wanna see some good answers


3)             "ALL THE WORLD IS A STAGE"

Terrorizm keep  the sociey unite and make them go as blind sheaps after theyr leaders ....this give to all society an Open materialization of the enemy


"Nearly all terror suspects detained are relised without charges.............but that's after they make it to the front page for you to see "

TERRORISM - 1)Most common definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants. Some definitions also include acts of unlawful violence and war.


                   2)Technique used by Governament to manipulate public opinion in order to further  an agenda

I believe sincerly that you just jump in big tremenduous subject. why do not take more litle steps, cause an answer to your question is innevitable a book.
I dearly  recomand you
Philosophy in a Time of Terror
Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas
and Jacques Derrida to better understand the world in wich we live .

btw: what the *bip* do we know movies is full inexactities as much as stories that they count for searching theyr arguments.leave populistics ideas behind.go read&see quality-certified materials.

I must say 2 things First,  this can turn into a great subject (ie. No spammers or Idjits) second is that if no one tries to insult another's OPINION . BECAUSE OPINIONS ARE LIKE ASSHOLES, EVERYONES GOT ONE!!!!

   WITH THAT SAID

  On Terrorism/ lets take the root word terror. this is S>O>P> for any governing Body going back past the Egyptians. the word My be relatively new as far as written words go. But the premise of the actions have not changed Nor has the desired outcome of such acts.
  In the 20th and 21st centuries  Present day we throw the word around Like a wet noodle. Like we invented this. 
  As far as present day  (as George W.) so gently put it  The axis of evil. More bull comming from a Person truly out of touch with reality. the acts of these religious or idealogical fanatics of today are no different than when Moses went to Pharaoh <    It was a form Terrorism. granted  it has been whitewashed so many times and portrayed In this awe inspiring way .  The truth shall set you free............more to come as time permits

Fights started this morning Georgia/South Ossetia (in Caucasus, between Caspian and Black Sea). Georgia send army in a surprise attack (good move, people were concentrated on Olympic games, except the ones who have reserves against China`s policy in Tibet, which i share) against the break-away region of Southern Ossetia, who are backed by Russia (Northern Ossetia is in Russia), while Georgian authorities are mainly US backed. Russian planes were his and they started moving tanks in South Ossetia (where a lot of people have Russian citizenship), while Georgians were assailing the capital.

Georgia was part of Soviet Union, and when that broke away, Russia, supported separatists in Abhazia, Adjaria and South Ossetia, and send forces to other regions of that country.  A new president in Georgia, Mikhail Saakashvili regained control of Adjaria and sent home some of the Russian forces. Ofc, a major oil&gas pipeline, BTC goes though there and control over the Caspia Sea-Central Asia oils and gas reserves (at least 5% of world proven reserves goes there). Days before, they were negociating.

IMO, it won`t be a long conflict, either Russians will manage to beat Georgians in one day or two (after being humiliated), or they will have to settle down this issue.

http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-08-08-voa10.cfm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4485527.ece
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7429354.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7549594.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7549736.stm

There is no terrorism at all (or is senseless) without media which creates the public opinion. So terrorism, in the form that we know him already, is born in XX century. To understand what is terror we don't need to study etymology of the word itself, and this is true for many concepts, not only for terror.

@Pygmilian
Is not the first time the evil axis is created as a form of propaganda. This does not mean that it exist, but it even negate itself. You are mixing 2 different concepts. The first is out projection for good and bad, which generally is a question of dominant moral. You can be a member of a subculture who don't accept general moral, but that does not give you the right of the truth. The second is the popular prejudice, which is generally condemned, without understanding why it exist. General prejudice exist because humanity understood that a single life is too short to analyze individually everything and everyone. So we believe other opinions, which makes our life much simpler. This can seem a utilitarist point of view, and maybe it is in itself, but it explains better why prejudice exist.
One or more persons who can use the united power of humanity, which generally means statal power, do properly what they should do. This is not a manipulation. If you call this manipulation, than we simply like to be manipulated.

@Darksoul:
What you say about Jesus Christ (or better to religion) does not express everything. All you say is true, but that does not mean anything. Religion does not try verify or push you to do the same. You must believe and have faith. That's all. If you have faith then you will tell that all those facts exist because devil put them there. Ok, i know this can seem a ignorant argument, but this will make you understand that is IMPOSSIBLE to discuss about religion in this mode.
All those movies are populists because they express (and exaggerate) in a mediatic form, what was well known to scientists of the field.

@Every conspiratorial lover
Not behind everything is something!

in 19th century, terrorism become an available tactic. media isn`t a 20th century invention. the most important terrorist act in history, who really changed a world (by indirect effects), was in 1914, before mass radio, TV, CNN etc. in rest, mostly i agree with you.

Good Evil as you so aptly put it was not what i had said but that is neither here nor there .

   and as far as prejudice goes one is only prejudice when one is ignorant to all else that is around them. Ignorance of the facts has been used by so many that it has become an excepted part of society regardless of the century you want to discuss.
  I have seen so much prejudice here in IO that it is not funny. Oh I hate Americans Oh I hate Bulgarians oh I hate this Oh i hate that. If everyone on the planet continues to hate everything and everyone they do not understand or take the time to get to know before making judgments. then Prejudice racism terrorism will continue regardless.

   and as usual it is easier to attack or rather pick apart ones opinion than to actually speak from the Heart and that is the real issue.  with out mentioning names I can be partial yet those of you who think you are so righteous in your convictions continually to berate Hoping that your sole opinion is always correct and that is why prejudice will never dissipate.

  As far as the religious aspect of this conversation goes regardless what you call your higher power it all translates to the same thing GOD.  We All Bleed RED  we all started at the same point in time. ......................more to come as time permits

For point 1)
I don't understand what is your point Darksoul?


People need something to believe to, it is not important in what they believe, could be golden bull if they wish, but it is belief and with that hope what gives us all strength to go further.

I'm Rome-Christian by belief, but not by my choice. I believe that there is something that control this universe, but it is not necessary a god or gods.
Some sort of Force maybe. I like idea of Force from Star Wars.   *ok* *freak*
Saying that I will not believe and will newer believe in destiny, because idea that my life is premade in stars, tarot cards, .... is simply not bearable. :evil3:

In the end my point is   live and let live (you can believe in green Fairy if you wish as long as you don't try to impose those belief to me  [:-} )

i know you dont like spammers..but this is some deep stuff *rose*

Well I have a few choice things to say about all of the above, but I'll only address the point that no one here has discussed in depth yet, about central banking, its flaws, and the power its owners wield. I have two points I'd like to raise.

First off, if you honestly think that money and governance can be artificially separated, you simply do not understand what money is. We've all gotten used to think of money as being grounded in some agreed-upon resource or value, but values shift, and these resources (if they exist at all - US central banking no longer backs up with gold reserves) are only valuable by the same shifting standards. I assure you, if a nuclear apocalypse happens tomorrow, a $ backed by a gold reserve will be as useless as a $ not backed by one, because you can't eat paper nor gold. Values shift, my friends.
What doesn't shift are two basic things: Production (and labor), and the basic principle of ownership. And since ownership is largely over resources created or extracted using labor, these are one and the same. So money, in essence, represents the distribution of both existing wealth (what we've created) and directing our future endeavors (what we will create).

If you've been following me this far, please consider this last point. Money, or the value it represents, is given to people in order to accomplish projects. That's not the money you and I know. When you and I think about money, we think small, because small is all we know - for us money is what we buy in the supermarket, a new purchase we might make, a change in our lifestyle. But think big for a moment - the billionaire's wealth is virtually unaffected by his individual spending. Food, travel, luxury, all that has no effect. What do they do with the money? Invest in projects. But what does that investment mean? When the billionaire decides whether to invest in a plant in Minnesota or one in North Carolina, they change economies by that decision - they create jobs, they get buildings erected, they basically direct what people will be doing. This is a great responsibility, and it's directing a policy - it's something a lot of people would assume would be in the hands of an elected official - but, it's not.

Because, money is society's way of recognizing your right to tell other people what to do.
Governance is the right of society to tell you what to do, also.
Money is governance.

I repeat, money is governance, just a freer and more quantifiable form of one, but it still is that. Until you've realized this, you can keep on wondering why government and capital are always so intertwined.

The top reason why free market economies flourish, is because they give this power - this great responsibility - to those who can get it. Now I'm not saying you can't win the lottery, but odds are you have money because you did something that other people wanted you to do. And you get a lot of money by doing something that a lot of people want you to do very much. So on the whole, the billionaire has a much better chance of being adequate for making these decisions than you and I, or even an elected committee. If he doesn't - if he makes a wrong decision - the money and the power associated with it would drain away and dissipate back into the general populace, bit by bit.

Where are the banks in all this? The banks shift the wealth (and the power associated with it) - temporarily - to people desiring its immediate use. That's the loan you get. They used to take that wealth directly from those willing to wait before they used that power (deposits and savings). These days, while basing off of these, they loan based on a loose estimation of the public's capacity for labor, inferred from all sorts of tell-tale signs that I will not bore you with. And yes, that system causes crashes - it is more efficient on the whole (less idle money at any given time), but more vulnerable to fluctuations.

And yes, the banks will charge you interest for the loan, and they bloody well should. Anyone who advocates interest-free loans is advocating gross injustice. (I'm not saying that more interest=more justice, mind). Why should you get to buy a car now, and not me? Why should you get to build a hydroelectric dam in your country, and not that my country progress its space program? An interest free loan is something you get from a friend because, yes, a loan is a sacrifice, and the time in which you have the money is valuable. And if you've had a negative balance for ten years in your account, it means that you got from society a lot of resources 10 years before you were actually entitled to them, and yes, I expect you to damn well pay for it.

It may seem like I'm defending central banking here. That's only partly true - I think central banking has lots of flaws the way it is done today. But, it is important to have, in a free society, some way to petition for more resources. If I want to launch a new product, Capitalism is offering me a way to get that opportunity, which Communism does not - in the form of a loan. Yes, society will own my ass if I fail (through my debt to the bank, which means I'll have to work hard and consume little). It may or may not be just, but it's an option. Be thankful for that option, do not take it lightly, and use it with wisdom.

My second point is a much shorter one. Simplistic movies, while giving you a broader understanding of how credit works, ultimately make that understanding rather shallow. They'll give you the impression that the banks always gain wealth and power - after all, they generate interest which always goes to them, while the rest of the money stays the same, right? Wrong. That's not the case at all. I've been working in the credit card industry for the past 5 years (quit today, BTW, I'm moving to high-tech), and I know something these movies will never show you - how the banks lose money. Banks make errors too. If a bank lends 300 million to some guy wanting to build apartments in Russia, and that guy disappears with the money, that money is gone. If they lend it to someone who goes bankrupt, again, that money is gone. It is not repaid, ever. But that person did buy things with that money, so essentially that's money leaking from the banks, back into the general populace. They make up for such losses by gains from interests on loans and more successful investments. So yes, that does mean we're paying for bank mistakes, but that is true of most businesses - when a business makes mistakes, it covers the losses with its profit, so everybody loses. The business owner loses more, and loses more immediately, but everyone loses when a business makes a mistake. And the more money is involved, the more society loses from such mistakes. Because, get this into your heads already, money is governance. It's a responsibility. Any body given the job to manage and distribute it will always be powerful... And power corrupts. It's not because they are banks - it's because they are human.

What can be done to make this better?
I'll let you know when I have the answers...

Peace.

about central banks, is kind of impossible to have a modern economy (even communist) without them. they give an important impulse to wealth creation, by directing currency flows (in part).

but even so, money per se exist in a pre-definite political order. they are power, but only in societies who value wealth creation over other values. most modern ones are like that, but, for example, wealth in an feudal society was not as important as in contemporary ones. there is always the need of an authority to uphold property laws, guarantee contacts. since perfect market is an illusion (perfect competion doesn`t exist in RL, most markets are oligolopolistic), and the self-regulation works only up to a certain level, there is also the need of someone to bail out the economy in crisis (like US Fed did by the nationalization of Bearn Stern in the sub-morgage crisis). same at international level, when there is no agreement between major powers on economic fundamentals, there is no significant global economy. for example, world markets almost disintegrated between 1919 until 1945. that`s to point out the relativity of currency and also the close link to political power. there is always force in background. in 19th century, most advanced economies sent fleets to take over indebted countries who fell in crisis, now, they send IMF.

about the link to production, that is severed in consuming societies. most of world financial growth come from financial derivates, currency speculation, and hedge fond, who borrowed money from banks and bet on market. there is no direct link between that growth and the level of economies, best example being US, where the level of economies stagnates, but Wall Street was growing. and more firms valued more marked value than real indicators. Enron case, where management faked statistics to get better shares valued and then gave themselves huge bonuses on fake future estimates was not quite an isolated case (that`s significant about management responsibility). also, since the world financial system is not regulated since 1971, when Nixon destroyed Bretton Woods order, it works with a succession of bubbles and crises (mortgage crisis in 2007-8, Argentinian crisis in 2002,  dot com crisis in 2000-2001 , East Asian, Russian and Brazilian one in 1997-1998, Mexico crash in 1994, European Monetary System fall in 1992, Wall Street crash in 1987, again Mexican, Brazilian and Argentinian crisis started in 1982 etc). those were all contained, but the whole thing is very fragile, and if unforseen events happened, and global management falls, a big catastrophe can follow. many of the disasters of the 1930`s, rise of Hitler, World Word 2, were impossible, had not the 1929 crash occurred. is true that in most of those cases, US Fed (more or less with the help of IMF, but IMF is 2 poor to handle a major crisis on its own) acted as a baker of last resort and bailed out countries in crisis to avoid a major disaster, but US herself lives of credit from East Asian and European countries (is somehow shameful that the biggest economy of the world is also the biggest debtor, no big responsibility here either) and may one day be unable to contain or foresaw a big crisis. 

Edit

ops, i forgot about Enron, Arthur Andersen etc and Long Term Management Fund crashes, who were due directly to manipulation of markets.     

This is all very true... And I think there's not enough regulation regarding how far you can go on speculation. Most people lack the economic understanding (and time) to supervise the very companies they have invested in, and that includes most brokers. The more we rely on indicators for future growth, the more vulnerable we become to these bubbles and crises; and yet, the less we'd rely on future growth, the more we'd stagnate, because ingeniuity and innovation always have only that to go on, which is precisely why free market economies grow so fast despite the inherent inefficiencies involved in economic crashes.

Normally I'd say the best disinfectant is sunlight, when it comes to something controlled by the public (such as share prices), but unfortunately share prices can become very disconnected from the actual prospects of a company and, like I said above, most people won't recognize a scam if it hit them in the face with a foreclosure warrant. And if you don't believe that, then I have some acres to sell you (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_MacGregor) in the Bay of Honduras, and some Poyais Dollars.

I'd also normally think that education might help, but so long as the market is open, greed will trump real understanding, every time. Sham operations can go on for years and years looking to the entire world like the most profitable businesses known to mankind. This screws with risk management equations, as evidenced in the latest mortgage credit crash, which cost the public billions and billions in failed projects.

Maybe we need to dictate certain guidelines for investment - not allow contracts that bind you without the ability to evaluate risk, or set a fallback value for lost investments backed by government, or what have you. But, every solution I try to come up with strikes me as completely inadequate.
People who have no idea what they're doing in the market tend to get stripped of their wealth at some point. Is that as it should be? Something tells me it's too easy to be convinced to invest in something you don't understand, and lose that money; and it's in the interests of pretty much everyone else that you do - your loss is their gain. Most people just rely on others in which they trust, figuratively gambling their money on the trust they have in that person (like a broker) - this ties in with what Reni said about the evolvement of general prejudice. This promotes not only bigger errors but also corruption, because you can betray that trust for your own ends, something which is sometimes hard to prove. It's all a vicious cycle with many victims.

But, and this is the big question, is there any way to separate monetary policy from the interests of people who stand to gain or lose from that policy? Or to make such interests irrelevant to the decided policy?

I suspect any such way would require rethinking the whole concept of the free market, and monetary theory.


EDIT: I hope we weren't being TOO serious, enough to kill this topic? So careful what you wish for, guys ;)

↑this is only post i actually read..omg, *hahaha* *hahaha* *hahaha* *hahaha* *hahaha* *hahaha*

shud up little spammer or i ll kick ur assssssss

*freak* im 191 cm tall  *freak*

1.94 + lot of experience in body battles :))) many enemies crushed so lets try :)) *kissgirl*

Ok, i agree. In fact i was not considering printed media, so you are right.

how do you sustain that?about israel.

They miss one of the main factors dude: TERRITORY  *pardon*, which in physics in translated: SPACE.

I don't see that happening... Israel is actually trying to get rid of the land it already occupies! (sort of  *pardon*)

I don't think it's made-up that some people are targeting innocent civilians on purpose. I find that very real and wholly evil.

*freak* you coward,dare to hit smaller then you :P

At which point did the NRA ,PLO, JDL,Cia just to name a few . invent the Word terrorism.  Roma I do not see how you can put it just on the Americans and jews to be the sole originators of terrorism.

   Terror is the key word here the Romans did this for yrs , The Egyptians did it for yrs, The Irish did it for yrs, the Scotts did it for yrs, Germany did the same.  the simple Fact that people feel terrorized is an act of terrorism in itself...

 
   there is a huge difference between the car bomber and Hiroshima and Nagasaki .  the Car bomber takes out people that are living in peace and have the right to live that way without the fear of having to watch ones back because some Idiot wants to kill himself.
   And does the bombers Other miscreants help rebuild no hey doit over and over. that is terrorism.

    Hiroshima and Nagasaki were done in the times of a world war And after the war was over The US   helped rebuild Japan and support its people till They as a country could stand on their own feet again.
   this act By the US ushered in a time of peace and understanding.

 Those that use the car bomb or suicide bomber tactics are doing nothing to help in world peace But only wish to further their private agendas

Of course you speak for a part of muslims believing such a idiotsy. If that is true, then why they (that part) are happy after every successful terrorist act? That had to be sick and condemn the terrorist as CIA agents, but they never did that. Can you tell me why?
If bin Laden is CIA agent, why don't they catch and kill him? If he is not, why he takes the responsibility for terrorist acts?

Dude, there are a lot of contradictions in that "believe"... sorry.

Granted  Bin Laden was CIA trained Buit not part of CIA and we have tried to take him out BUt in the spy game all truths are not what they seem

I've always enjoyed that irony... the americans attacked civilians.. civilians!! they're pricks, period... they blame Saddam's reign of terror, but they've never been accused of War crimes, which they did with Hiroshima and Nagasaki... and while they were saying "Oh, we're attackin Iraq cause in 20 years Saddam killed 400K people, bla bla bla" In freaking Darfur in 2/3 years 200K people were killed and 1M lost their homes... why didn't the mighty americans went to darfur? I've always tought, ofc they don't have bloody oil... but then a mate warned me, they do have oil... but that oil already have an owner... China -_- wow aren't the american brave? *SARCASTIC*
this are the type of subjects I love the most... :)

I havent got the time to read all posts, sorry, but i have some words about the idea about TERRORISTS in the middle east...
I wanna start with afghanistan,,, it is true there is alot of weapons and alot of terrorists come from there,,, but since 11 september this country has been bombed allmost everyday, not everybody sees wat really happens behind the scenes, i saw once the American AirForce bomb 120 people that where on their way to make a wedding, because they thaught it was terrorists transporting weapons,,,, ok so if i was a simple guy or student from afghanistan, after seeing this, i would like to grab a gun and to fight back, get a revenge... is that terrorism? anyway

2_ PALESTINE : man does any1 say this word these days??? ok israel has the right to have a country blablabla, now does the palestenian people have to suffer bcoz of that?palestenian houses are demolished without any rights, its people have to leave those areas, then Israel builds new houses for its people... MAN I SWEAR IF THIS HAPPENED MY FAMILY/MOTHER/SISTER/FATHER , i would go grab a gun and wack some israeli soldiers without any conscious...those kids that grow up that dont have any oppurtunities in their life, wat would they like to do when they grow up?grab a gun ...

3_Hezbollah in Lebannon : terrorists!!!!!!!!! why? coz they are the only one left to defend against Israel... good enough reason for USA,,, i am HALF LEBANESE, and let me tell you, Israel still holds alot of lebanese territory is the SOuth, rich in water,,, when i go to lebannon i see everyday ISRAELI PLAINS flying above my head, but nobody talks about that....
Because of Israel wherever i go and they see Lebannon on the passport, i have to be checked 100 times, questionned , searched ( in AIRPORTS )

Conclusion : the fighting of terrorism has caused to more terroristic( or watever it is ) cultures, believes... PLEASE WHEN YOU WATCH CNN AND OTHER NEWS CHANNELS, TRY TO PUT YOURSELF IN THE PLACE OF EACH SIDE AND TRY TO SEE HOW IT FEELS , MAYBE U WILL UNDERSTAND THINGS THEY DONT SHOW U ON TV

dudes about gods, true it might be hard to believe that there are any, but the fact that life by itself would be empty and dull if we didn't had any expectations for smething beyond, that it just doesn't ends after death, that all of our sacrifices will have an immortal meaning, and that love will last forever *kissgirl*    i may be atheist, but i hope really bad and i expect that this is not the only thing, that there is an endless road to go to

also an atheist. :) or agnostic, whatever, I don't believe in anything... but every piece of information I have from Buddishm I enjoy... cause to me seems to be the only "preacefull" religion... I never saw Budhism making a Jihad or a Crusade... they're just there, minding their own business...

Lebanon... heh... that war (2 years ago I think) was freaking pathetic... Israel only did that cause the USA would shutp up about it... the USA only started talking peace after people started demanding them to put a leash on the Israeli government, I'm not saying Israeli are bad folks... I would get angry as welll if Hezbollah or something else were launching missles over my head... but fuck... that freaking "war" will never end... (honestl just like Zohan said lol) that whole region is starting to annoy me, and getting pathetic.. people now fight only for revenge... both sides say the other side started, both sides have no idea why it has started, so they come up with reasons to fight...

yeah ur rite...to be more precise about the start of the war,,,hezbolah wanted to free some of its prisoners held in israel,for more than 10 years,so they went and kidnapped 2 israeli soldiers and said they would trade them for 100 prisoners *freak* they got mad and started bombing all of lebannon,they destroyed all the bridges, and some industrial facturies that had nothing to do with the war,just to f*ck our economy  *hmm*

that just opens dangerous precedents... like do you know ETA? from Spain... sometimes they wander around near the portuguese border they troll around with portuguese license plates on their cars, etc...
It actually crossed my mind when USA invaded Afghanistan and Iraq searching for Bin Laden, or Israel went after Lebanon searching for Hezbollah... if the spanish someday won't do it with us... invading Portugal in searching for ETA lol...

are you from lebannon?

yeah im half Lebanese half Russian

so why is the hate against jews even b4 war started?  *pardon*

man the war started in 1948 when they arrived to palestine and started their country
and since Lebannon is on the borders it was heavily influenced, it changed our country forever...
i dont hate Jews pal, i hate Israel and USA policy and the way they influence all the world and give a bad image about my country,
are you Jew? *freak*

nope, but i've read that the arabs are determine to destroy israel, and i think that they have the right to have their own homeland *freak*

those are old ideas that vanished with time... Jews have the rite to have their country, and Palestenians have the rite to have their contry BACK...
you cant just come to a country say its yours, and leave its people without any identity destroying many years of culture

i though palestinians have a country  *xxx*

thats wat u thought... look at an international map... do u see palestine??? can u believe Israeli police arrested 2 years ago the whole Plaestenian gouverment and kept em in cells coz they made a decision not to have peace before Israel declare a free Palestine? wat kinf of bullsh*t is this!!!! *crazy*
so NO country NO gouverment now...
see? people donno bout these stuff, media hide it, they show u wat they choose to show...

its tru that it doesn't shows palestine, so has israel occupied all of palestine? is it an international agression or an independence civil war? *xxx*

defenetly international agrresion!!! and yes all of palestine, actually palestenians live in a territory circled by walls, BIG WALLS, like mouse in a cage...

was it like that since the creation of israel or what? *xxx*

well no... first english and french started to bring Jewish people to Palestine and assembled them in a way to form a circle around the country,( by the way there was always Jews in Lebannon and Palestine), then Jews started to push IN, and when the world declared the formation of Israel in 1948 or so , war started (.......)
then when Jews took control they decided the Isarelis should not mix up with the Palestenians, so they circled them between these walls
Can u imagine? 2 weeks ago we were celvrating the memory of the Fall of Berlin Wall...
now there is Israeli WALLS *freak*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clbpyNePW5k

the video is kinda long, but it will give u a little idea bout wats happening there *Censored*

but couldn't threre be a palestinian state on the west bank? there is no need for just one state to survive there can be jews and palestines sharing that place, and if they continue attacking each other everytime there'll be more aggression each side, israel can't put weapons down while the arabs are determined to destroy it, and palestine will continue to suffer war till there is real determination to stop the insanity on both sides.

i just watched it for the first time, i hope u do when u have the time ... as the man said in minute 17 : if there was 5% kamikaza, next year they will be 60 %
this whole discrimnation gives you the feeling to pay back, to revenge, to fight for ur rites by all means necessary, they are develloping terrorisme , then to use it against them

you are rite, for one lebannon and syria are the only arab countries left who didnt sign peace wih israel so arabs dont share the cause, syria doesnt fight, lebannon too, only hezbollah wich is in lebannon has the ability to mess around with them...
i was watching news the other day and israeli prime minister said he doesnt expect peace to happen before 3 years minimum...
i think when even when they will propose peace, they will do it with a mediocre offer, giving palestenians a very small piece of land, so that palestenians refuse it, then they can say : Look ! they dont want it...
all i wanna see is as u said a palestenian state, and a respectable one

the problem is i guess some other pple just wanna see one state, instead of 2

and even if Israel "allowed" Palistine as a country... they'ld always "froze up" when talking about Jerusalem... cause that freaking city is one of the roots of the war... it's holly to catholics,jews and muslims... so everyone wants it... honestly the city could be blown to pieces for all I care... that city (not it's citizens) just brings war and hate... but nobody sees it.. they only see it as a "holy" city... but all it brings is death...
I do not think the arabs and the muslims in that region hate the jews... they just hate Israel, cause the have their holy city, they beat up palistinians (that are in majority muslim right? ) and then because Israel is a freaking small coutry with big guns, that think they are the best (because the USA backs them up)... just like the kids in school, there's the 1,20m tall bully that beats the other kids up cause he has a 2 meters brother behind them... and the other bullies don't want to mess up the small bully cause then they'ld have to face his brother...
a full scale war with Israel, would destroy Israel, but the USA would interveign and the muslims in that region would suffer a very big war....
WWIII will start cause of the muslims/arabs vs USA... the problem is that the ones who win will feel they've accomplished everything when in fact they'ld have just fucked the whole world...
bah thinking of those maniacs makes me sick

righto about jerusalem *bravo*
why don't they just make jerusalem a state just like vatican, nobodys land *pardon*

but who would rule it? Vatican is ruled by catholics

defenetly israel wouldnt even consider it...

ofc not at least while the thing they have the arabs by the balls *tired* and if smt happens and arabs gain control they wouldn't do that neither *hmm*

belive me arabs will never gain control  *freak*

maybe someone gets a nuke and flush israel out of the toilet together with palestine *freak*

IRAN  *freak*

you think they wanna get one? *freak*

they allready got one, wat pisses me off that israel sure has one , but The World isnt worried about that, Israel is Angel, Iran is evil  :evil4:

i believe i heard they have one, but they haven't used it tho  *pardon*

Wow, so much misinformation going on in this thread! :o

I would love it if you showed exactly which territories those are! Because the UN has agreed that Israel has already fulfilled all of its obligations in fully retreating from Lebanon. How about you show these areas on a map?
The truth of the matter is, Hezbollah has absolutely no excuse for firing rockets at civilians. Not that there ever could be one, anyway.

Your reframing of the Israeli-Arab conflict is likewise false. You present a narrative with good guys and bad guys, the poor Palestinians/Lebanese suffering under the yolk of the ruthless Israelis, which conveniently ignores both historical records and the current situation on the ground. Last I checked, good guys did not explode buses full of civilians or fired mortars and rockets at kindergartens.  :evil4:

It is also false that Israelis are not willing to compromise in Jerusalem. Just one of many examples can be found in this (http://www.geneva-accord.org/) initiative. Grassroots movements such as this (http://www.onevoicemovement.org/) one can further show you that substantial parts of both people are willing to compromise and live side by side.
Both Israelis and Palestinians support a two-state solution, where Palestine and Israel both have a right to exist side by side; sadly, the extremists control the discourse through violence and unilateral action.

were gonna take this step by step  :)
1- Here you are , those are Shebaa Farms occupied since forever,
2- " Hezbollah has no excuse firing rockets at civilians ".... what civilians? dude Hezbollah didnt fire anything on civilians before Israel started the war, they just kidnapped 2 soldiers to trade them for lebanese prisoners held in Israel
3- And whats so false there referring to the case as Israel being supported by USA?, and Arabs turning their back to Palestine coz of the American lobby influence?  ISRAEL USED PHOSPHORIC BOMBS IN LEBANON WICH IS FORBIDDEN IN INTERNATIONAL LAWS! we saw it, we filmed it, we had evidence of it, and still in International court they were found innocent :(

You say good guys do not explose bombs on civilians.... when i was watching the war on Lebannon from Africa :( ,they showed a statistic of TF1 ( french tv channel ), they showed how many civilians Israel killed from 2004 till 2006, and how many Israeli civilians were killed, the number were rdidiculous! in one month Israel killed 1100 civilians in Lebannon , that was LARGLY more than Israeli civilans killed over 2 years.

And they bombed big Lebanese Industries such as our biggest CHocolate factory ( GHANDOUR ) , and a big Glass industry wich took projects in Dubai that Israeli industries wanted to grab first
4- Why didnt you say anything about the BIG WALL ?

Where is the misinformation? things i say here most of you wont ever see or hear on your TV because of the big propagana wich is: Arabs = terrorists and evil, Israel and USA = the GOOD power, fighting terrorism in the world
Where did this so called Terrorism come from? if you or your father were obliged to destroy your own house, and move beyond THE WALL, what would you feel groing up? check this link http://www.poica.org/editor/case_studies/view.php?recordID=2100 , this was forbidden to be shown on popular TV channels in France, because of the strong Israeli LObby, but they showed it on Channels that are rarely watched

Nice, you didn't show that on a map. But I will.
The Shebaa farms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Shebaa_Farms.jpg) are an area of 22 square kilometers that was captured along the rest of the Golan heights during the Syrian offensive in 1967.
Even assuming that this is indeed Lebanese territory, which is itself in dispute, this forms roughly 0.2% of the total 10,452 km² territory of Lebanon.
Hezbollah was formed while Israel was occupying South Lebanon, from which Israel has withdrawn unilaterally. Mind you, this was after years and years of trying to reach a withdrawal by agreement, except Hezbollah refused to commit to stopping the rocket attacks against Israeli towns. The final withdrawal is complete by any standard, something to which the UN has agreed (http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2000/20000618.sc6878.doc.html). Hezbollah did not exist in 1967 when the Shebaa farms were set up, indeed not for 15 more years at least, and basically it has no reason for even existing still - much less attacking Israel.

So to summarize, Hezbollah is justified in fighting Israel for a disputed 22 km² territory that may or may not be Lebanese to begin with? And this justifies their attacks on civilians? This has to be the worst Casus Beli I've ever heard about, right after the Lilliputian wae over which side an egg should be cracked on.

There are two serious problems with that argument.
The first is, Hezbollah has fired mortars, rockets and shells, both before and during the kidnapping.
In May 2006, months before the fighting began, rockets were fired (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/29/world/middleeast/29mideast.html?_r=1) deep into Israeli territory. There have been earlier attacks as well; Israel's foreign affairs ministry has conveniently kept a record (http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/exeres/9EE216D7-82EF-4274-B80D-6BBD1803E8A7,frameless.htm?NRMODE=Published) of all attacks between the withdrawal in 2000 and the eruption of fighting in 2006, and though obviously they are biased, I don't think you would dispute the following:
Or this one:
In addition, the kidnapping itself was accompanied by rockets fired at Zar'it and Shlomi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zar%27it-Shtula_incident#The_incident), two civilian villages. So, Hezbollah, has been firing at civilians all along; both when Israel was inside Lebanon, and when it was outside it. That doesn't seem to matter.

The second glaring error in your argument is that the kidnapping and killing of these soldiers was somehow justified, in order to release Lebanese prisoners held in Israel.
I will remind you, that the Hezbollah operation was named "Freedom for Samir Al-Quntar and his brothers". Samir Al-Quntar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samir_Kuntar), we will note, was in Israeli prison after having infiltrated the country (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samir_Kuntar#Raid_from_Southern_Lebanon) by way of a rubber boat, entered into a peaceful town in the dead of night, and brutally murdered as many people as he could find, including a four year old girl he beat to death with the butt of his rifle.
That is who Hezbollah kidnapped and killed two soldiers for. Samir Al-Quntar was not a prisoner of war, nor even a soldier, for that matter. He was and still is a heinous murderer. In a word: A terrorist. To claim that releasing him would justify anything, much less the death and destruction brought on by the kidnapping, would be laughable if it were not so appalling and morally bankrupt.

While these points can be disputed, I was referring to your very one-sided description of the origins of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well as the current situation in the West Bank and Gaza. I find it to be misleading and unfaithful to the intricacies of the situation.

First, I'm not aware of any Israeli soldiers or officials tried in an Intl. court, for this allegation or any other. You may want to provide a source for this claim.

Second, is this better or worse than firing rockets with metal-pellet warheads (http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/07/17/lebanon-hezbollah-rocket-attacks-haifa-designed-kill-civilians) designed to harm civilians, directly into city centers? Is that more or less forbidden under International Law than posing as UN personnel and holding up the UNIFIL insignia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Hezbollah_cross-border_raid#The_Abduction) in order to kidnap soldiers? Phosphorous shells at least have a purpose in attacking armor; what's Hezbollah's excuse?

The fact of the matter is, Hezbollah has always been more than willing to use every dirty trick in the book, be it hiding among civilians, attacking civilians directly, posing as peacekeeping forces, kidnapping people and not letting the Red Cross visit them (is that according to Intl. Law?), or even letting their families know if they're alive, for years on end. I find it amazing that anyone is trying to justify their actions.


Let's get a few things straight.
First of all, a death toll does not make a person, or an ideology, right. People get killed by accident, as well as by intention; some fighting forces risk their civilians more than others, in the absence of military might. That isn't to say that Israel's actions were proportionate, or careful enough; and yet, disregarding civilians when firing at targets and targeting civilians directly are two actions that are not morally equivalent.
Secondly, the 1100 deaths you cite were not all civilians. That is another example where you try to embellish the situation to make it seem more one-sided, but the fact of the matter is Hezbollah fighters did not wear uniforms, and the line between where a person is a civilian and where they are a combatant becomes blurred when dealing with such entities. That isn't to say, that no civilians were harmed, in large numbers; but let's not make up facts.
Third, even though Israel's actions were not justified, they were not the naked act of aggression you make them out to be but rather, an attack fueled by frustration. The sentiment in the Israeli street has been one of impotent rage for many years, following the continued attacks. Continuing from what we discussed above, right after the retreat from South Lebanon, Hezbollah kidnapped three soldiers. The organization then refused to let them be visited, or indeed disclose any information about them, unless Israel releases hundreds of prisoners in exchange. After 4 years of torment, the pressure from the families was too much and Israel acquiesced to these demands, only to receive bodies in return to live, healthy prisoners. The soldiers apparently bled to death during the kidnapping while the kidnappers did nothing.
Israel's decisive attack in the wake of the 2006 kidnapping was a direct attempt to avoid repeating that sort of tragedy again. In addition, Hezbollah was being armed with thousands of short and medium-range rockets by Syria and Iran for those six years, a fact well known to both Israeli decision makers and the Israeli public. When the serious assault on Israeli towns began, this naturally escalated and intensified the attacks on Lebanon.
The point to be made here is not that Israel's actions were justified; but rather, that this cycle of violence brings no solutions, but rather only propagates more violence. Where such a cycle exists, no side can claim innocence, since their own actions perpetuate it.

What do you want me to say? People shoot at cars and infiltrate night clubs with bombs strapped to their bodies, and then they cry when their targets erect a wall to stop gun fire and prevent people from just crossing into wherever they please.
While the path of the separation barrier is in dispute - indeed, it was a unilateral move that created some serious problems - there is nothing inherently wrong with having a barrier between two territories. Many borders around the world have a fence or a wall, including North/South Korea, India/Pakistan, and other hot borders (these two also happen to have started from one state with a mixed ethnic composition, mind). Spain, Morocco, Saudi Arabia... Walls are not out of the ordinary. The only real issue is that the separation wall is not built along an agreed-upon border - an unfortunate consequence of many years of unilateralism, a legacy of the Bush doctrine. In that, I think we agree.

It can be found in the following quotes, all of which I dispute:

*****************

See my link to the two movements in the earlier post.

Again, see my link to the Geneva Accord. 100% of the territory of the WB and Gaza is "giving them a small piece of land"? Or rather, all the land they're currently sitting on, plus a little more from Israel's territory?

Are they a minority being discriminated against fighting to have equal rights as citizens, or a whole different nationality under occupation striving to have their own country? You can't have both, yet it seems you try to.

WAY overly simplistic, and wrong at points. Support your claims with references, this can't be taken seriously.

Likewise misrepresents the facts.

*****************

Such world views are overly simplistic; it doesn't help that you try to provide an opposite yet similarly simplistic, and similarly false, view of the events.

That your link was somehow banned from television is patently absurd, because it's not a video segment. You also should have summarized what it was about, because no one is obligated to visit those links on the pretext that they somehow prove your point and/or are shocking.
Regardless, all it shows is that houses get demolished if built without a permit. The segment you bring describes this as part of some plot to be mean to poor Palestinians, but conveniently neglects to mention that houses built within Israel that do not comply with zoning committee regulations also get demolished, by court order - either self-demolished or by the municipality.
In most modern countries, buildings require a process of authorization before they are built, you can't just build whatever you want anywhere you want. If a country can't enforce this by demolishing illegal structures, how can it enforce this?
This isn't to say, that the demolishing of buildings is without its loopholes, exploits, and bad judgement - but only as part of the general nasty business that is bureaucracy, not as some insidious plot.

In short, some healthy criticism will do you a world of good. There is a good reason why people have been branded terrorists and are feared and loathed. Nothing justifies strapping on explosives and going to blow up a bus or a restaurant. It is understandable that they are frustrated and angry, but targeting innocents does not become any less heinous because of it.

WOW Poly i can quote you on every post and we can go at it endlesly...

For one, dont think everybody in Lebanon supports Hezbollah, and some want them to surrender their weapons, so why doesnt Israel make a step forward, free Shebaa Farms and release Lebanese prisoners, so that Hezbollah would have less arguments when their weapons are brought into cause in discussions?
And what do you expect when Israel entered Beirut in 1982 when it was meant for them to advance just to Litany River? Of course resistence forces will get supplies and ammunition and get more popular among citizans! Should we mention what happened in Sabra & Chatila camp ?( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre ) , you can find as many videos and stories about this bloody massacre, which was followed by the entrance of Israeli forces, those who carried out this massacre was the Lebanese Forces ( aka Phalangistes ), Ariel Sharon gave them all they required to carry out this massacre, Israeli tanks provided light on this camp during nights so nobody escapes, there was so many blood spilled in one week... Is that a good enough reason for existing for Hezbollah aor fighting back Israel?

2-Hezbollah is a resistence force, and what do you expect them to fight with? forks and knives? while israel has that elite aviation fleet provided by USA? nobody minded that obviously in the early years

3- You say i make one sided arguments... what about you? your like asking proven evidence so i can prove Phosphorus bombs...here is a link http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5519433.ece , and i have loads of pictures on my mail inbox of phosphorus bombs used in Palestine, i can provide that too

4-1100 were all citizens! all children , women and citizans! hezbollah has lost over 1700 fighters i think maybe more i dont recall the exact number, and you say hezbollah fighters dress as civilians... where they in discize in that GHANDOUR factory or that GLASS factory? or even in north of Lebannon where Hezbollah doesnt even exist? you just hit a builiding where you think hezbollah fighters are hiding, and then 50 civilians die, and you say : well this is war, civilains die.... yeah how one sided from one my part really

Theres much more i can say .... but Poly are you saying that Israels acts have been fair since they established their country? you make your country in Palestine by force, take plaestenians homes, build new israeli homes,  submitt palestenians to Israeli laws , geez the palestenian goverment was arrested once for 2 weeks because they refused to sign a peace treaty or a cease fire!!!!!!!!!

Living in Lebannon my freind, im sorry i cant be more supportive for Israel. Ive seen enough suffering and conflicts in my country, that all i want to see now is just everybody stop playing football on in our field! all middle east conflictsdepend alot on what happens in Lebannon and politticians bargain on that. All i wanna see is that Palestenians given their country and state back(, and a fair deal, not a one that will violate their rite, and when they refuse just say they are the ones that are not willing to settle) , giving Lebannon back Shebaa Farms ( 22KM², i dont care its still ours , without it were not 10425 km²), Hezbollah surrending their weapons, and finally PEACE PEACE PEACE!!!!!!

yeah nobody is obliged to check this link, niehter obliged to read your posts even, still i provide the link for those who want to know what is really going on, you really break it out wisely dont you?
" Houses that build within Israel municimality thadt do not complywith zoning commitee regulations "....i will summarize : Israel settles downs in palestine, sets new rules that say in this zone no Palestenian houses are allowed, take them down!!!!! YES HOW FAIR !!!!! now at least they have rules to  back up the destruction of those houses.
 And i want to say this out loud :  THEY WERE OBLIGED TO TAKE DOWN THEIR HOUSES , IF NOT, YES THE MUNICIPALITY WILL TAKE THEM DOWN, BUT BUT BUT THOSE PALESTENIANS SHOULD PAY THE MUNICPALITY THE DESTRUCTION FEES!!!!!!
so you build a house, now new laws and rules are in place and suddenly your house is illegal, and you should destroy it with your own hands, or pay for it to be destruct.
you say il giving one side arguments, well your ( as many others ) defenetly not a bit concerned of what the Palestenians have suffered and see only one side of the story, this is why i speak from the other side....

read this http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL3475163

OMG..who writes so much... *freak*

Feel free. But try not to insert more misinformation into the conversation.

Like Israel withdrew from South Lebanon in 2000? That "step forward" didn't get the attacks to stop, did it?
If it's not the Shebaa farms, they will fight Israel in the name of aiding Palestinian struggle against occupation. If Palestinians get a state, they will find some other excuse.

You require Israel to unilaterally acquiesce to the demands of its attackers in order to get the attacks to stop, but with no promise or guarantee that they will. Here's a better, more sensible idea: Why don't Lebanon, Syria and Israel sit down to negotiate an actual peace agreement, that may include returning occupied land and releasing prisoners? Such an agreement would require the militias to disarm, of course. But if all they want is an end to the occupation of land, why wouldn't they agree to it?
The fact of the matter is, Hezbollah has refused to such initiatives in the past. Thus Israel has absolutely no incentive to cede over land or release prisoners - Israel believes the attacks will continue if they do. So do I. Unless the warring sides sit down to talk peace, I don't see any reason to believe otherwise.

No, it's not. Or at least, it's not anymore. I'm not saying there was no justification for resistance against occupation; but that occupation is gone. Hezbollah has no justification for its existence as an armed militia anymore, because the very things you cite as the reasons no longer exist.

Resisting what, exactly? Israel no longer occupies South Lebanon. Your "resistance force" has parliament members in a (supposedly) sovereign state. That's not very guerrilla of them, is it? They don't exactly live in caves and holes

Two problems with this.
First off, Hezbollah is very well armed and trained, receiving financial, ordnance and training support from both Syria and Iran. This is also why this organization is promoting their interests in the region, rather than those of the Lebanese people themselves.
Secondly, what I expect is that if Hezbollah is a legitimate resistance movement, it would fight the "oppressing" military exclusively, in the occupied region. That means not targeting civilians. I notice that you bring no counter evidence to this organization's use of anti-personnel rockets against cities nor other methods of targeting and killing innocents, nor the other violations of International law. This undermines your point that they are a legitimate organization. Rather, they are a terrorist group.

Again, the sensible solution is for the sides to come to an agreement. I reject your justification of Hezbollah attacks on civilians by them being a "resistance movement" or having less resources than the IDF, as if that can ever justify murdering innocents.

I don't think I did. You're welcome to quote me and show what you think is out of balance. Note that I have pointed you to two bi-national movements' websites.

Re-read what I said. This link discusses spent shells found in Gaza. It does not speak of Israeli soldiers in International court, which was what I asked support for. I did not dispute your claims of white phosphorous being used in Lebanon, nor did I agree with them. I did not find it relevant to the discussion, because I was not trying to defend Israel's actions. You, on the other hand, claim that Hezbollah is justified in its actions. I have shown that it is not.

I am sure I never said that. Feel free to quote where I did. In fact, I'm fairly certain I said this sort of careless disregard of civilians is wrong.
However I stand by my original statement: Though not justified, such actions are not morally equivalent to deliberately targeting civilians.

I am not saying that, no. Some actions were justified, others were not. The same can be said about all other parties. That is where our accounts differ, with yours being one-sided.

If "being attacked by seven other nations in addition to civil war" is considered "make your country in Palestine by force", then yes. Again this is a misrepresentation of the facts, since the UN recognized Israel as a state, which was followed by attacks from its neighbors with intent to destroy the fledgling nation. Note that Jewish settlements where the defensive failed, such as Kefar Ezion, were destroyed utterly, with every last defender getting gunned down.
This is a bit of a double standard for you, because you seem to think it's alright for the Palestinians and Lebanese to strike back with force, but it's not alright for the Israelis to have fought to defend their own homes.

The Palestinian refugees problem is much more complicated than this.

People building homes. How evil.

Actually, with the exception of those in annexed neighborhoods of Jerusalem, Palestinians are under military occupation, so they are subject to military law. This is precisely the issue at hand regarding Israeli occupation of the West Bank. But it's not as if Palestinians were under their own rule before 1967; the land was just as occupied, only by the Jordanians.
At any rate, an occupying army is required to govern an occupied territory and set rules there, by international law, until the region is returned, which of course we all hope will move forward expediently. The only other alternative is lawlessness, which I don't think would be in the best interests of the Palestinians.

Regarding those Palestinians in annexed neighborhoods of Jerusalem, they do answer to Israeli law, and are free to move around in Israel. They are also entitled to social security benefits and are generally better off than many Arab citizens around the world. However I agree that a more permanent solution is required, as well as them receiving citizenship in their own sovereign nation.

I would like a reference for this extraordinary claim. This is the third one you make with no sources.

While I feel for you, I think the objectivity is warranted, regardless of where one lives.

The Palestinians never did have a state which they can get back. Their attempt to finally get one is at the heart of the conflict.
As for a fair deal, as I have previously shown, there are fair proposals on the table right now, which many people from both sides agree to. The principles of one of those (the Geneva Accord) have been directly referenced by the current Israeli PM in the Bar Ilan speech. He also said there that Israel is ready to reopen negotiations with no preconditions. Currently it is the Palestinians who refuse to negotiate, putting forth preconditions to be met. That is not productive to moving forward.

On this we agree. However I believe such things should happen by agreement, not unilaterally under the threat of violence.




The principle I am referring to is, references are brought as supporting tools in a debate. They support an argument. If you bring a reference that is outside the forum, it is up to you to summarize why you brought it up and what it is supposed to prove. Otherwise people need to guess what your argument is, and that's no way to debate.

This is false. And is part of your misrepresentation of the facts. The fact of the matter is, illegal Israeli settlements have been demolished too. While, as I said, there might be some injustice and some callous bureaucracy, this is not part of some conspiracy against the Palestinians.

I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion. Yes, if you build something that is illegal, you are responsible for setting it right, including any fees that may apply. You may not like it, but that's how law and order generally works. Israel isn't out of the ordinary in that regard.

You have once again brought up a reference without tying it to anything or even having the courtesy to summarize it. That does not form an argument, in fact it forces one to guess your logical argument, and this is the last time I'll do it.
The reference you bring describes legal battles over houses in East Jerusalem based on land ownership. Specifically it brings the story of a house built 10 years ago, which a Jewish Israeli had ownership for the land.
This fails to demonstrate your point for several reasons:
- The article mentions 7 such cases, each of them taking many years in court to resolve. In a Palestinian population of millions, such occurrences are a drop in the bucket at best. This undermines the claim that there's some sort of organized, state-endorsed plot to "liberate" land from Palestinians.
- I don't know of any place in the world where it is ok to build on somebody else's land. In fact, there is a serious double standard here, because Israeli settlements that do this are condemned for it by you and others. The difference is that East Jerusalem was annexed and is subject to Israeli law, whereas settlements are not.
I would regard settlements built on previously Palestinian-owned land a bigger problem than houses built on Jewish-owned land being evicted. Note though that Palestinians do receive compensation if their land is used for anything - again, problematic, but not exactly some earth-shattering conspiracy for land grab. Incidentally, drafts of the possible agreements with the Palestinians include a land swap in a ratio of 1-to-1, which means that Israel has both paid the owner for the land and may well cede equal land in return, so it essentially pays twice. Not exactly the evil overlord approach, there.
- These incidents are not actually tied to any of your arguments. I've done my best to try and give your reference some relevance, but this is the last time I try it. It's too easy to misinterpret what you're trying to say when you don't say it outright. So from now on I'll only answer actual supported arguments, if you have any left.

False. Israeli law as well as military law cannot be applied retroactively. Only if the action (building a house) was illegal when you did it, the law may apply to it.
Again, you might find a case here and there of injustice in applying these rules, but that's personal tragedy that's part of the larger tragedy that is occupation - not conspiracy.

I don't see why you think that. I unequivocally think that the situation for Palestinians is intolerable and they suffer greatly under the occupation. I also believe they have the right for self definition and their own sovereign state.
However I object to the implication that this justifies violence against civilians; as well as to the narrative where Israel as a whole plots to deprive the Palestinians of land, rights, and life.

I hope we're clear on that and can reach an understanding.

you two will not reach an understanding... from what I've seen here... you seem like a muslim believer vs a catholic believer discussing religion... it will not end...

poly are you israely? and paco is lebanese right?... so my money is on "you'll never reach and understanding"...

Paco is lebanon but he's not a muslim, polymeron is just having an intelectual Ego battle, his post are so long the only one that reads them is paco.

If you find any of my arguments unreasonable, feel free to explain. I'm very open to differing opinions and interpretations.

Does it matter who I am? Facts are facts no matter where you are. The truth remains the truth. While perspective may help as well as impede, people should be able to agree on the facts, if nothing else.

To my mind, the main question out of the discussion is whether or not directly and deliberately attacking civilians can be justified. My position is that it cannot, and in that I think I am in the consensus.

Yeah, sorry about that  :hard:

nope, I don't understand very well that israelis wars... so I cannot debate like you and paco concerning this matter, I can only read what you guys say.
nope it doesn't matter, I just asked out of curiosity, you seem very passionate about in defending Israel, sorry but eve if that's not what you intended, it what it feels like.
Nope it's not justified, in a war, civilians should not be killed, soldiers should, that's their job, to fight for "their country" and if must die doing so.

and me :P  *freak*

OH so we should be very thankfull that they at least withdrawed from lands that have been occupied for more than 15 years? wat you just said just shows that Israel have always occupied foreign territories. and Yes maybe they will find another excuse, but for now for them being Lebanese, their excuses are valid for a certain category of people, but if israel withdraws from Shebaa and gives Palestine a free state, watever excuse they will give will not be enough fo the peple to support them, and their popularity will go down radically till they fall apart

like you said before : this post cannot be taken into serious , you dont know the exact details of what goes on under the table , and the bargains that go down, dont forget that Syria plays a VERY BIG role in this whole deal, nothing will go down without Syria's approval, and lets just say Syria and Lebannon are not the perfect neighbours anymore

The bloody history of Israel will always exist in the minds of those who saw the blood... And let me tell you in 2000 when Israel retreated Hezbollah was considered the main reason for that resistence, sure it wasnt the lebanese army  *freak*

there is still Shebaa and the Prisoners, and the Free Palestine State  *pardon* give them that, and for Palestine, give em back their country :head_hurts_kr:

first of all im not a huge fan of Hezbollah, but when it comes to comparing them to Israel both are terrorist in equal measures to me, i believe Israel has soilled blood much more than Hezbollah, and for Israel being a country its NO excuse not saying " Isarel is Terror ". I agree 100% on wat u said about their supplies from SYria and Iran, and the propaganda, it is a fact. The fact that it is a militia it doesnt have the chance to get anti- aircraft weapons due to many reasons.
Again i belive much more innocents have been killed by Israel in palestine and Lebannon, than those killed by Hezbollah or Hamas. In a way you too dont seem to mention that

HAVE YOU EVEN JUST FOR ONCE TRIED TO PUT YOURSELF IN THE SHOES OF PALESTENIANS? just maybe to understand wat they felt and feel now?another Nation has aprroval to settle down in your country,your not even asked about it, its like nobody cares about you( and nobody so far cared about palestenians ). Dont you think this was in a way unfair to Palestinians? I understand what have the Jew population went through, and i try to understand the suffering they went through. But why make a population suffer as much as you did? Look at palestenians NOW man! those who are living in foreign countries dont even say their Palestenians! those who are living in Arab countries will never get another Arab passport, they will alwyas be considered Refugees.

OH SO WHEN A PALESTENIAN BUILD HIS HOME 10 YEARS AGO? THAT WAS EVIL RITE??? BUT ISRAELI HOUSE BUILDING OVER PALESTENIAN BUILDIDNGS IS JUST SOOOOOO PERFECT

As much as i feel for Palestenians in that matter of Citenzship, i still think giving them citizen ship in Sovereign COuntries gives Israel a big satisfaction of a burden on its shoulders, so no, Palestenians should live in a FREE PALESTINE!

EXTRAORDINARY? here you are :
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_kmafp/is_200609/ai_n16926803/
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3291212,00.html
but im sure youll find some Israeli laws and say they were applied properly...

first of all i dont need for anyone to feel for me, second Objectivity is not provided by western media, so i can speak clearly from the other side;

ITS REALLY SHAMEFULL AND INAPPROPRIATE FROM YOUR SIDE SAYING THAT. yeah sure Palestenians were nomads and Israel just came and settle in a free space.

I agree on that, now Palestenians leaders dont seem to agree on certain things, due to the conflict between Hamas and Mahmoud Abbas.

just dont go offtopic, i made arguments, you asked for a referecne i gave it to you, now if you dont wanna read it thats another thing

Some Injustice??? what happens to those Palestenians?

why dont we go back in time a bit, and see " If there's any place in world " where all this discrimination is happening to a Population? you dont have any regard for human palestenian life and the way they live. SUbject to Israeli Law... Poly was it considered fair when Jews were killed by " Subject of Hitler Laws " ? ohh guess not...
Stop using the word law as its absolute and indiscussable subject

Obviously those " personnal tragedies" and "injustices" seem to happen alot, and while you choose to skip them, well i dont! because this popluation has a history on injustices of their rites, and i wont close my eyes on that , as you do.


I really wanna stop quoting, i had alot of conversations of this kind, and i know where is this going, you seem very attached to your point of view as Israel being very rite about every thing it does, and then you just add " Well maybe some unjustice happened " , no my freind alot of unjustice happens everyday in Palestine, if you dont want to admitt it, it stays your personnal opinion.
And i really want to reach an understanding so we can stop quoting each other on every single sentence, and put an end to the bloody history that keeps being passed from generation to another, Peace is the only way out

You have grossly misrepresented a lot of the things I said, put words in my mouth, and attacked lots of straw-man arguments and claims I never made. As well as rolled this into personal attacks.

I invite you to re-read what I have written and see if you actually disagree with what I said, rather than with what you imagine I said. Then we can have a civilized discussion. Or do I need to explicitly show all the places where you did that?

There's definitely no need to get so angry, we're trying to talk here  *rose*

what? you dont like the links i provided? are you dissapointed i was rite about the arrest of Palestenian ministers ????
 to be honest reading this : " Palestine was never a state " , that wat sounded really grossly

This is a very rude thing to say. Like I explained, I am trying to have a discussion with you.
Now, I can answer to what you said, in a bulleted list, but there are several glaring problems with that:

- The long quote-and-answer format seems to bore our fellow forumites
- I feel that the discussion has led you to an aggressive stance that is not productive - if you misread everything I say as something else, there really isn't much use in saying more things, is there?
- If I give the full list of places where you have misrepresented me are attacked me for things you agree with, it will make you look bad, and I'm not after that.

(I still offer you to take a second look at what I actually said, for instance about citizenship in their own sovereign state, for which you attacked me - apparently for not using the right jargon?).

So instead, I'd like to offer you a chance to start over in a way that is more productive, and also less tedious for us and fellow forumites. I will ask you a simple question, which I think warrants a simple answer:

"Do you feel that your position is consistent and objective?"
If you answer that, we can move forward. Of course, I'd be happy to answer a similar question if you have one for me  *rose*

rite now? NO im not objective to be honest, because some of your posts offended my national beliefs.
Is saying " Palestine was never a state " propriate ?
i still say we can continue this conversation peacefully.
so you can reply to my last quotes,
 and sorry if i took it to you personaly, you can close your eyes on that and we can pursue the discussion  *rose*

Well, I don't see how one would take offense to a statement of fact, except if it was false. But even then, you shouldn't take offense just at someone being wrong.
To my knowledge, Palestine has never been a state. Before Israel, there was the British Mandate. Before that, the Ottoman Empire ruled the region. Prove me wrong though... Show me a picture from before 1948 flying the Palestinian flag, or show me a record of the first Palestinian ruler before Israel, or something of that sort.
Now, I feel that you may be attaching some connotations to this, so I'll clarify. While some think that this somehow sours the Palestinian claims to their own nationality/statehood, I do not think so. I believe they have a right to self-definition, including forming their own nation state.
The sole reason I brought up their not having been a state before is not that it's relevant to the discussion; it really isn't. The reason was that you said you want to see "Palestenians given their country and state back", and I found it to be a misrepresentation of the facts - because you cannot be given "back" what you never had in the first place.

I don't see how a dispute over the facts can be seen as offensive. I did not take a stance in that case on whether something was right or wrong, whether things should be the way they are. I gave a simple statement of fact with no moral judgment whatsoever. So your outrage is misplaced, I think. If your account differs than mine, feel free to bring supporting references.

I still think that might be unproductive, so let me rephrase my question.
"Do you believe your position is consistent and without double standard?"

its not the discussions that offended me, its just closing eyes on some events and taking the " little injustices " and " personnal tragedies for granted ".
you can see me one sided on some points, but in other u see  wat i said about supporting Hezbollah and their popularity....
ill do my best to stay objective if your posts show objectivity too, and regards for human life

I very much resent the implication that anything I said showed anything but the utmost regard for human life. That is why I recommended you to re-read my post, because that accusation is very much out of touch with the position I stated.

Alright, let's see if we can wrestle a clear position out of this very tangled discussion we've had so far. I propose the following method. Consider it a challenge, if you will, and let me know what you think about it.

We start a new post (or two - see ahead). In it, we take turns asking each other questions. The questions should be simple and to the point; for instance, "do you believe that X?". No trick questions or loaded ones, just simple queries. The other person answers what they believe - the answer can be short or long, simple or complicated, depending on the circumstances, but it should answer the question fully. The first side gets twenty questions, not including requests for clarification if a question was not answered fully.
The main goal is to remain consistent. If the answering party answers all twenty questions, and did not contradict themselves, they are considered to have remained consistent (they "win"). If a clear contradiction can be pointed out, that is a "win" for the asking party (but more importantly, it means that they should rethink their position).
The secondary objective is to make your point. If you manage to get through the 20 answers without committing to a position your opponent finds objectionable on its face, and not accepting their starting position, you "win" - because they basically agree with you. On the other hand, if your opponent gets you to embrace a statement you originally objected to; or points out a position that is highly unreasonable you committed to just to avoid a contradiction, your opponent "wins". What is unreasonable is subjective, of course; we can have a moderator arbitrate that, or we can ask forumites if they're willing to subscribe to a particularly egregious statement to get an estimate.

I'm willing to ask questions, answer them, or both in parallel - your choice. Moreover, I think it would make for an interesting discussion (and probably not just for us).

...Or, we can continue to bicker about each other's quotes, if you prefer it. But I'd like to try my method :)
What do you say?

+k!!! *hahaha* *hahaha* *hahaha* *hahaha* *hahaha* *hahaha* OMG!!! its like 2 old ladies discussing each other moral values *freak* *hahaha* *hahaha*

well ofc... the sentence of give Palestinains back their country, is false in gest, but in way it only means give palestinians, their land their homes to be ruled by them not by somebody else... I read that before Israel was made, the area was a British Mandate, and it had jewish and arabic population, the UN adoted a resolution for that aread divided by religion/cultures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_UN_Partition_Plan

but I admit I didn't read everything (I'm at work *freak* ) but the jews accepted it and made Israel, the arabs rejected it, and attacked Israel, Israel did the right thing and fought back, defended themselves, but then  conquered Palestine... and never withdraw from it... People have the right to freedom, what they do with that freedom is their problem as long as they don't interfere with other's people freedom's... so if the Palestinians want their country "back" or wanna stabilish their own government/country, let them.. if they destroy themselves in faction wars or something.. as long as they don't envolve others in it.. it's their problem... Because wether they'll hold on their own after Israel, it's their problem they've to decide...

for eg.. Madeira... it's Autonomous region of Portugal, the president (or something) João Jardim, enjoys an excellent popularity among it's people... but he's constantly bickering with the government, sometimes it seems he wants Madeira to be a country/kindgom where he would be the king/president... but ever since last weeks storm.. he's now all nice with the government, because he knows that without the portuguese government, the help would be scarse.. but I'll be getting off-topic if I continue...

Look on what I found out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine#1948_to_current_times
Read the first paragraph, apparently the arabs did make Palestine a state... it seemed like a puppet state, but a state I believe.

Lebannon was a French mandate too,, but its still Lebannon and we got our independance by resisting the French, in Palestine, UK retreated and let Israel do watever they want... If they stayed there and tried to establish peace or create 2 countries ( states inside ) it would have spared alot of lifes

and thanks for the invitation Poly but i wont play this game, as winning or loosing wont affect anything, all i cared to say that some facts are invisible to some people, as the arrest of the Plaestenian Ministers, which obviously u never heard about, and this is wat i was trying to tell the people here, dont believe everything they show u on TV, or dont even believe they show u everything...

i think polymeron will win  *SCRATCH*

No one can have serious discussion with a hypocrite, it is a big waste of time.....all those injustices done must be endured and then forgotten like some kind of season illness or the circle of violence will never break. We, the people, are so prone to taking perspectives that suits our faith and/or (limited) understanding of things, that makes it so hard to come to the truth, not to mention final destination, peace....Greetings from Serbia  *rose*

nicely said... +k
unfortunately most people are closeminded and stick to what they believe into.
pozdrav iz hrvatske  *freak*

hi...

me alcool poor man in history from france who read the poker cards only i can say US politic is biatch messing all over the world..they enter in deep shit at Israel side during the time because most bankers are juif* jews* and now Obama would like to get out with clean hands from this deals but he cant because its huge amount of cash behind all this creepy small land ...and fking Israel taking advance pushing US and assure full authority in those teritories ..Syria Lebanon +Egypt cant really mess up with some real actions because they have the carrot in the ass ....if Iran will develope more weapons in next 20 30 years they will stabilise this conflict once forever! If i would be France presisent tomorrow i would declare war to fucking israel and lets see what US is saying about it...i would get ally with Germany and fuck everybody who is against it with many sieges + pillages  *freak* i think i would get Russia at my side ..they like ideea to fuck some US ...Saudit Arabic they stay away because many bussines with US...also some Chinese would be good to win some teritories over the atlantic ocean :)) its actually good ideea China is running out of room in small Asia and US is quite large can welcome 500 mil chinese ;)  *hahaha* *hahaha*

@beicumine
Excellent speech, my poker friend..  *rose*

12 families are the owners of the Federal Reserve of the United States.. Rothschild family & Rockefeller family on top.. They are responsible for U.S. foreign policy.. That policy is hard bitch.. Look Iraq today.. What happened in Iraq was not a war, it was an execution not only for the men, women and children.. It was an execution of real journalists by the CIA, MI6 and MOSSAD and that is not including the hostages that were also taken by MOSSAD and the CIA of Ken Bigley and the red cross worker Margaret Hassan, and we was all told they were taken and murdered by AL ZAKAWI who had been long dead by about 5 years, and these false flag events are still going on in Afghanistan and Pakhistan, and I would not be surprised if they hunt down and kill Al Zakawi and Osama Bin Laden for the time.. So now there are very few journalists if any in the war zones, and one day there has to be a reckoning and it will be the public that will catch the flack as always.. And OLGA L. asks the question "Why cant we live without wars?" the answer is "Yes we can but the bankers and the world club elite cant, because they earn a lot of money out it, because they fund all the wars of all sides, and they are your real enemy because they also create the wars, and it will keep on happening while you have tin soldiers with empty heads!" I do not blame the agents of secret services, they just do their job.. In Iraq they earned a salary, specially guys from CIA.. Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims are attacking each other, at the same time when the CIA is on the side and count the dead Muslims..

I hope that my comment will remain at least 24 hours.. Thanks to all who will read..

Guess who's not running for President? Well, it should have been obvious, Hillary Clinton.. Pffff.. Hillary Clinton.. Cry, baby cry..