- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why Does This Board Support Israel/Zionism?
Posted on 7/30/14 at 3:26 pm to trackfan
Posted on 7/30/14 at 3:26 pm to trackfan
Drop the Likudnik line. According to Bill Clinton, the Likud government of Israel offered to give up lands that would be part of Greater Israel for peace with the PLO, but Yassir Arafat rejected the offer made by the Likudniks. The people who haven't abandoned their dreams are Hamas, and their ilk.
1
Posted on 7/30/14 at 3:41 pm to Poodlebrain
quote:
Drop the Likudnik line. According to Bill Clinton, the Likud government of Israel offered to give up lands that would be part of Greater Israel for peace with the PLO, but Yassir Arafat rejected the offer made by the Likudniks. The people who haven't abandoned their dreams are Hamas, and their ilk.
Educate yourself on the difference between Likud and Labor and then get back to me. Anyway, here's Clinton in his own words regrading Netanyahu.
quote:
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is responsible for the inability to reach a peace deal that would end the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, former U.S. President Bill Clinton said on Thursday.
Speaking on the sidelines of the Clinton Global Initiative conference in New York, the former U.S. president was quoted by Foreign Policy magazine as claiming that Netanyahu lost interest in the peace process as soon as two basic Israelis demands seemed to come into reach: a viable Palestinian leadership and the possibility of normalizing ties with the Arab world.
“The Israelis always wanted two things that once it turned out they had, it didn’t seem so appealing to Mr. Netanyahu,” Clinton said, adding that Israel wanted “to believe they had a partner for peace in a Palestinian government, and there’s no question—and the Netanyahu government has said—that this is the finest Palestinian government they’ve ever had in the West Bank.”
“The real cynics believe that the Netanyahu’s government’s continued call for negotiations over borders and such means that he’s just not going to give up the West Bank,” he added.
LINK
By the way, are you a Clinton fan?
Posted on 7/30/14 at 3:46 pm to trackfan
quote:
Drop the Likudnik line. According to Bill Clinton, the Likud government of Israel offered to give up lands that would be part of Greater Israel for peace with the PLO, but Yassir Arafat rejected the offer made by the Likudniks. The people who haven't abandoned their dreams are Hamas, and their ilk.
quote:
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is responsible for the inability to reach a peace deal that would end the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, former U.S. President Bill Clinton said on Thursday. Speaking on the sidelines of the Clinton Global Initiative conference in New York, the former U.S. president was quoted by Foreign Policy magazine as claiming that Netanyahu lost interest in the peace process as soon as two basic Israelis demands seemed to come into reach: a viable Palestinian leadership and the possibility of normalizing ties with the Arab world. “The Israelis always wanted two things that once it turned out they had, it didn’t seem so appealing to Mr. Netanyahu,” Clinton said, adding that Israel wanted “to believe they had a partner for peace in a Palestinian government, and there’s no question—and the Netanyahu government has said—that this is the finest Palestinian government they’ve ever had in the West Bank.” “The real cynics believe that the Netanyahu’s government’s continued call for negotiations over borders and such means that he’s just not going to give up the West Bank,” he added.
poodlebrain caught in a lie yet again. i'm somehow not surprised
Posted on 7/30/14 at 4:29 pm to Burt Reynolds
quote:Just so you'll know, the purpose of war is to kill people and break things. It's not micro-surgery. This might come in handy next time you step outside the bubble.
Why Does This Board Support Israel/Zionism?
And while you're here, tell us about the extreme measures that Hamas uses to ensure no civilians are harmed in Israel.
This post was edited on 7/30/14 at 4:44 pm
Posted on 7/30/14 at 4:34 pm to Burt Reynolds
quote:Not based on the facts of the negotiations.
poodlebrain caught in a lie yet again. i'm somehow not surprised
The revision-free facts are that Arafat walked.
Period.
Barak offered, and offered, and offered.
Arafat had no interest in a deal.
Nothing to do with Sharon.
Had nothing whatsoever to do with Bibi.
Barak has been retrospectively open about the process ( LINK), and its disappointments. Barak lays blame where he should -- at the feet of Arafat. Sadly in the end, Arafat was a tiny man, both in stature and capacity.
Posted on 7/30/14 at 4:51 pm to Burt Reynolds
Pardon me for making a mistake. Ehud Barak was a member of the Labor Party. But what happened in 2008 when Ehud Olmert, a Likud Praty member, made substantially the same offer to Mahmoud Abbas?
My mistake does not change the fact that Likud members have been willing to compromise the ideals that Trackfan attributes to them. Thus, my assertion was correct, but the evidence provided was incorrect. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to correct my mistake.
My mistake does not change the fact that Likud members have been willing to compromise the ideals that Trackfan attributes to them. Thus, my assertion was correct, but the evidence provided was incorrect. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to correct my mistake.
Posted on 7/30/14 at 5:00 pm to trackfan
Why do you quote Clinton statements from 2011? He hadn't participated in peace talks for over a decade when he made those statements. When exactly did Bill Clinton participate in peace talks with Benjamin Netanyahu?
Posted on 7/30/14 at 5:07 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
Migration
good one. Mass "migration" to land which is bought does not indicate the disorganized free for all that you seem to suggest in a place whose only distinction is that they have no flag.
Posted on 7/30/14 at 5:12 pm to Poodlebrain
quote:
Land was purchased by Jews
Some of the land was purchased by Jewish settlers, but there came a point in which the Palestinians seemed to realize what was going on and they began to refuse. Violence ensued.
Anyway, the Jewish terrorist factions were created LONG before 1947 and they, again for the reading impaired, started bombing and terrorizing almost immediately. Arabs revolted against Jewish occupation in 1936. Not the actions of willing land sellers.
Posted on 7/30/14 at 5:24 pm to Poodlebrain
quote:
Pardon me for making a mistake. Ehud Barak was a member of the Labor Party. But what happened in 2008 when Ehud Olmert, a Likud Praty member, made substantially the same offer to Mahmoud Abbas?
My mistake does not change the fact that Likud members have been willing to compromise the ideals that Trackfan attributes to them. Thus, my assertion was correct, but the evidence provided was incorrect. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to correct my mistake.
If you check my post history, you'll see that I've always given Labor and Meretz credit for being serious about peace, but Likud has never been serious about making the Palestinians a serious offer, because their charter won't allow it. Also, Olmert was a member of Kadima in 2008, not Likud. In 2006, there was a split in Likud between those like Olmert who were interested in peace and those like Bibi who weren't, and the "peacemakers" left Likud to form Kadima, which is to the right of Labor and to the left of Likud. However, Olmert was a lameduck on his way to prison for corruption, so he never had the political backing to close the deal.
This post was edited on 7/30/14 at 6:59 pm
Posted on 7/30/14 at 6:34 pm to Poodlebrain
quote:Olmert was forced to resign due to domestic corruption charges? Livni had to call an election to seek a new mandate because Olmert's napkin map included parts of East Jerusalem and Shas had threatened to pull out of Kadima's coalition? Livni lost the election to Bibi, who broke off that round of negotiations and started Cast Lead?
Pardon me for making a mistake. Ehud Barak was a member of the Labor Party. But what happened in 2008 when Ehud Olmert, a Likud Praty member, made substantially the same offer to Mahmoud Abbas?
This post was edited on 7/30/14 at 6:35 pm
Posted on 7/30/14 at 7:24 pm to UL-SabanRival
Do they pre-date 1915? In 1915 all of the Jews of Jaffa were expelled on Passover. Resistors were hanged.
The Jews in the Levant in 1936 purchased the land they occupied. Riots against landowners by jealous neighbors is evidence of intolerance by the Arabs, not evidence of anything wrong on the part of Jews.
The Jews in the Levant in 1936 purchased the land they occupied. Riots against landowners by jealous neighbors is evidence of intolerance by the Arabs, not evidence of anything wrong on the part of Jews.
Posted on 7/31/14 at 12:00 am to Poodlebrain
Now I understand your posts. You have no idea what terrorism is and apparently, you have never heard of a thing called World War 1. When the Ottoman Empire entered the war on the axis side, they expelled everyone from the area who was from or sympathized with Allied nations. In fact, the migrations were organized by Jews, who had been using the confusion of the war to continue their mass migrations.
In fact, it was mostly Turks who occupied the area, which included Tel Aviv. And of course, after the British drove them out of the area during the war, they were thanked for it by the attacks by Jewish terrorist groups against British soldiers. Again, the FIRST terrorist groups in the region were Jewish/Israelis and again, they are no one's friends.
The name "Arab revolt" is a sick joke and, as I've pointed out, the eternal victims killed ten times more Arabs than Arabs killed Jews during that conflict. Another "defensive war" leading to massive territorial expansion.
I have a hard time believing you're a troll. Who would want to "troll" his own decisive, complete embarrassment? But hey, if so, um, nice troll.
In fact, it was mostly Turks who occupied the area, which included Tel Aviv. And of course, after the British drove them out of the area during the war, they were thanked for it by the attacks by Jewish terrorist groups against British soldiers. Again, the FIRST terrorist groups in the region were Jewish/Israelis and again, they are no one's friends.
The name "Arab revolt" is a sick joke and, as I've pointed out, the eternal victims killed ten times more Arabs than Arabs killed Jews during that conflict. Another "defensive war" leading to massive territorial expansion.
I have a hard time believing you're a troll. Who would want to "troll" his own decisive, complete embarrassment? But hey, if so, um, nice troll.
Page 32 of 32
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News