wow, really didnt see that coming.

but it was a tad over exastencial and general.

i agree with you for the most part, except that that it is the individuality, not the lack of it, that drives our natural condition to be counter productive.the desire to sooth the needs of the
individual rather than the utopic status of a collective.or their wouldnt be a need for religion to exist at all, as we would naturaly function that way, rather than having to learn it and seek to alter ourselves to match it.

but im not really asking for the actual cause of the israeli palestinian conflict, as we all have our own opinions based on guessing wha is going on in the minds of others, and no one is going to change anyone elses guess work on that no matter what they say.

what i am asking is how it is that people can both support the palestinians, while claiming they do so cuz they are against war, when the palestinians are the ones who are waging it.

what i am asking is how the palestinians can make the destruction of israel a center piece to every national position since 48, and how one can not attribute that position to the wars it garuntees.

i sit here amongst people who claim to share my values and morality, so i ask them to explain to me how they are right for supporting the palestinians, so that i may see how i am wrong for not doing the same.

and btw, i cant tell you how often your citation of the "us and them" cartoon paradigm comes to my mind when watching the news, or evaluating matters in general.you really tapped into something on that one.well warner brothers did, but you pointed it out.

THAT , is some beautiful truth writ there . Wish i could go global with it .

no, we call you racist based on your racism, nothing else.

wanna go through the list of evidence you cant deny thus never adress again?

and using a link to the guardian to prove anything would be as if i were to offer a link from fox news to prove anything.kind of the same way a company will make up its own magazine just to claim that magazine awarded their product as the best 10 yrs in a row.

yes we got it, the guardian, haaretz,the huff post and similar media will always offer all the material you like to bash all things israel/jewish.

just as fox news will chanpion israel.

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_nf=3&gs_rn=0&gs_ri=hp&cp=7&gs_id=s&xhr=t&q=hamas+charter&pf=p&tbo=d&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&oq=hamas+c&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=55055420c0027e4b&bpcl=39650382&biw=1093&bih=538

their is the google search, you choose which version you want to pretend doesnt exist.

How hard is it just to site a source?

Well here, since you refuse to offer any sort of proof to prop up your weak premise of Hamas' goal of the destruction of Israel, I will do it for you.

Here is the Hamas Covenant from 1988 from Yale's Avalon Project, which is famous for documents relating to Holocaust promotion, so it must be a true and reliable source (sarcasm).

For the record, I'm not sure if a "Hamas Charter" even exists.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp

Anyways, even in this document Israel is only mentioned four times, and any reference to "the destruction of Israel" is a vague quote from an Islamic leader who wasn't even a member of Hamas and who was assasinated in 1949.

So yes, there is a vague reference to "the destruction of Israel," but the quote isn't attritbuted to Hamas.

See that wasn't so hard.

So perhaps now you can address this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israel
Hamas drops call for destruction of Israel from manifesto

how hard is it to provide a source?

apparently very as you cant seem to check it out for yourself.

from conquering all of palestine, to insuring the only religion is islam as that is the only way peace is possible, to the path of jihad being required, from top to bottom the charter screams war.

if you cant do the required part on your end to educate yourself, why the fuck would anyone else be expected to do it for you.

it is like asking for someone to cite a source that the sky is up.it just is, and if you cant make the effort to figure that out for yourself, that is your bad.

Your premise was very weak, borderline bullshit, so I challenged you to back it up which you refused to do so because your claims are obviously based on some hasbara.

nope, the premise is taking your own premise and holding you to it.

you asked the question"how hard is it to provide a source"which supposed it isnt so i should be doing it.
in agreement with you, that it is not difficult, as i have stated many times before to you that it only requires the most simplest of efforts to get it for yourself.i offer you your own premise that we agree on, that due to how easy it is to come by this info you can do it yourself.

i have even gone so far as to play out what our coversation would be as a result of me posting the hamas charter, thus skipping over that massive waste of time which also validates why i leave it up to you to offer the charter you wish to evaluate, as i dont care to do the usual dance about how my source is invalid.

the only one doing classic propaganda bullshit is you, in both pretending facts arent facts, and refusing on your end to even bother with them.

i know it, and you know it, and aside from your fellow racists, and closeted racists who are cheer leaders for the racism they themselves are too cowardly to pose themselves, everyone else knows it.

i support israel, and do so based on wanting peace.im not the one posting a thread a week on average to sell anything as you do.

- Because their real purpose is to propagate a MYTH , a lie , that serves their agenda . They do not want to see or hear truth .

ok, so once again, the hamas charter as well as every policy of every palestinian government since 48 has been demanding the destruction of israel.

this isnt propaganda, or a talking point so much as it a fact.
even if not written down verbatim to see, which it was and is, that is what declaring war on someone else shows.that you cannot live with them existing, as well as their calls to drive the jews to the sea is pretty unambigious.

it is also a fact that israel didnt declared themselves a state and then declare war on the palestinians.but they declared themselves a state, and the palestinians then declared war on them.

these are all very simple facts, and are the basis for the questions i posed.

how do you support the guys who wage war, while claiming it is war that is what you are against?

Absolutely facsinating dadevil. I always felt that unlike what most Americans may believe, I never believed that all Muslims are evil. And for someone who was once a terrorist against Israel speaking out against his radical muslim counterparts to stop this insanity, and also to Israel to fight if you have to defend yourself against attack, but also to temper that with reaching out to the Muslim people who do want to live in peace. This is a great man. Any man who recognizes the error in his beliefs and works to reverse them is a hero to me.

i am majorly dismayed, in that i apparently was duped into thinking the difference between the right and the left, was that the right caters to the ignorant, and the left seeks the educated.

it would seem, even as i approach this issue as objectively as possible, granting everyones point of view permissable, thinking by doing so i could ask these questions w/o it being an invitation for propaganda grand standing.

but here we are, as i ask these (seemingly simple questions) admitting fully w/o any obfuscation that these questions were inspired by the israeli/palestinian conflict.as to not be playing a game of gotcha with the answers.

and the resident racist propagandists claim i am the one peddling propaganda, even as i made the questions objective.

the rest seem to either see any mention of this issue as a reason to spout the propaganda they like, or even less respectible not even have the balls to commit openly to any position, and just egg on those who do.like the assholes watching a rape, who yell "git'r'done"

even had our resident canadian redneck claim the jews are a cancer.
who also finds the accusation that he is racist to be unfounded.i guess he doesnt read his writings, or isnt aware of his own thoughts.

all i have come away with here, is what i started out with.

we all agree that the violence is a problem, except for dangum for a moment, but in general i think he/she does agree that the violence is the problem.

some of us recognize that despite it being a problem, israel has no choice than to do as she has, as any nation would.

but sadly the majority refused to answer the simple questions as asked, and took the opportunity to repost the same one sided narrow minded bullshit, they have time and time again.doing so in direct avoidance of the issue that if resolved, could very well possibly end the violence we all agree is wrong, but not end it in the way they would like.

no matter how many pundants can say it, or how many ways, i just simply would have never believed that their is an element on the left that is as head up their own ass's as the fox bubble has.but this proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

so you want to claim that other person, who can read, just like we all can, got it wrong, as you then continue to name call and petty insult in the exact fashion that poster claimed was at hand?

i mean, any of us could take anyones opinion and suppose it is invalid.but damn if you didnt just literaly prove his.

wann lavish another few comments based entirely in petty attacks and dismisive accusation, to show how it would be wrong to call what you are doing as petty and dismissive?

remember, attacking me for spelling is always your closer.your big finish, so dont let us down.

Agree 100%

Who is the terrorist regime and who is holding the olive branch?

If you would study history you yourself would have an honest answer. Not all Palestinians do, but anyone who supports Hama's, their tactics and falls for their propaganda machine would fall into the same catagory as those who supported the Nazi regime during world war 2.

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you. I was trying to make sure whether you were considering Israel as the terrorist as Vierotchka and Maasanov. I don't consider the act of continually having to defend one's self by retaliating in kind as being a terrorist. In fact, I'm beginning to believe that the true terrorist in this picture is the US itself with it's constant drone strikes on civilians who once did not support Hamas, but whose views are changing because of the U.S.'s current conduct. We absolutely should not be bombing these people, we should be providing them aid to stand up against Hamas.

Yes in many ways the current U.S. leadership and their tactics in that region are much like Hamas, that could be why we see so much support for them here. As I said before most of those commenting on this thread no nothing of the history of the region or the people living in it. They make assumptions and base their opinions on false propoganda, gossip and lies. They choose to support a terrorist regime.

first off, i think you mean to say state, as of course you know we are a nation amongst nations, thus the palestinians as a people are a nation, despite not having the land associated with it.

so skipping over that, assuming we agree they are a nation just w/o a state, how did that happen?
which while im laying blame in this comment, is no less true for it, that israel declared herself a state, and aside from the most religious nuts, no one believes they had a special ability to do so.

so what prevented the palestinians from doing the same, with the entire rest of the region, which was not only left to them to do with as they pleased, but left to them as their state in the view of the world as it was at the time.

it wasnt israel who declared war on them, as to deny them the right to exist as a state.it was the palestinians who declared war on israel, to try to not allow them to exist as a state.

so how am i wrong to blame the palestinians for waging the wars they waged, when wars result in what they do, and have.

that is the question at hand.

how do you absolve the palestinians of their responsibility in this, while at the same time marking the results of what they chose to do as the problem?

it would be like a bully kicking the shit out of some random kid for his lunch money, and claiming that the its the kids fault for not giving the bully his lunch money while also claiming that it is the theft of money that is intolerable.

you have been here long enough to know me, and to know im proisrael, but far from antipalestinian, as i believe supporting israel is the best thing that can be done for the palestinians, as the million plus of them who are israelis are a testament to.

im asking for objective answers to objective questions, despite them having real world implications.

and i do expect those who are wrong, to be held accountable across the board.no matter what position they are in.winning or losing.

considering the article poster is far from a disinterested 3rd party... this is entirely to be expected of a partisan zealot.

not a matter of assuming anything.

the palestinians delcared war on israel, and never negated it, politicaly or in action.so it isnt even like the open state of war we are in with north korea where it is only political.it has been active since declared in 48, with only various shifts in intensity.

and it isnt an assumption that the palestinians policy calls for israel to be destroyed, as they openly have stated as much always, as well as it being the result of myriads of policies in their governments charters.

if i were making assumptions, i would be wrong by assuming.this isnt a matter of me guessing at anything.

im asking how in the face of these realities one can both condem war for the attrocity that it is, while supporting those who demand it.

if you are not able to see that these are realities, then i suppose this doesnt apply to you.

you are right, and im not asking for debate at all.

im seeking answers.

you guys are right, and im wrong, no show me.
im the horse literally asking for water to drink, i just need you to drag me there, as i cant find the way on my own.

not only are their more than one side to a story, i would venture to say that for every participant and observer exists a side to the story, making their about a billion sides.

but all i have is my side, and i wish to understand other sides.
not the racist sides, not the propagandists sides, but the side of those who claim to not be racist, and who claim propaganda isnt how they conlcude their side.

cuz im pretty imaginative, but i just cant seem to reconsile identifying the war and all that occurs in as the problem, whilst also supporting those who opt for it and wage it.

i get how if you hate the jews kill israel.
i get how if you hate the muslims, kill the palestinians.
i get if how you hate the christians, fuck israel via proxy.
zionism,jihad,theism,conservatism,militarism,socialism,multiculturalism,democracy,secularism,or any number of combinations of them.they all have a pathology that is clearly defined.even tho i dont agree with them i can understand them.

but this pathology i cant seem to understand, so i am asking the loud and proud anti-war, pro-palestinian faction to explain to me how that isnt like being a cattle rancher who is a vegan.

it doesnt make sense.what you guys claim is your values or idealogy, is the opposite of how you exercise your right to express it.explain to me what i am missing.

Ya know, crack, there really isn't a simple answer to your questions as one has to question the legitimacy of western powers' shaping arbitrary borders in that region to begin with--and that goes beyond just Israel. I could argue that the creation of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria etc. also contributed to the ongoing hostilities in that region.

Much can be argued in favor of Israel's policy, but it doesn't take away from the fact that the nations of the Middle East were, for all intents and purposes, created by western powers after the remnants of the Ottoman Empire were eliminated after World War I.

Ask yourself this: What if the Ottomans actually recorded land ownership and riparian rights as western nations do? If they did, do you think things would be different there?

As I've stated before, and before, and before, and before, there are multiple sides to this story.

I agree Vic. It's as unanswerable as the question of "How would things have been different for the U.S. if Wallace (Roosevelt's V.P.) had won election to the WH instead of Truman? Wallace was definitely a people person, but his success was lost due to corruption of the system that would have propelled him into the WH. Under Truman, we had a man not only of small stature but of small mind. He had no clue what he was doing so he just forged ahead with whatever made him feel big. Under Truman we lost more friends than we made, and to this day we are still trying to come to terms with a total lack of trust around the world. To make it worse, we now have the CIA conducting covert operations that even our own President has no ability to control. A prime example is the unmanned spy planes and unmanned bombers (drones) hitting civilian targets and then double-hitting those who come out to lend assistance to the injured in the first bombing.

I can only imagine how different the world would be as we know it since Truman dropped the bombs. I'm sure this would be a much different place. There would "probably" have been no "Cold War." There would probably have been no "arms race." Peaceful negotations would have had a much more reliable avenue for mutual growth around the world because there would not have been such an enormous lack of trust among citizens around the world. These thoughts may be idealistic, but we will never know, will we?

So instead of having a true humanitarian who believed in the people of America, who believed in the doctors' oath to "first do no harm", we got a little man with the big-man syndrome. We had our own Hitler and didn't even know it at the time, because at that time we did not have the technology that we have today to see what the real truth is.

We need a new beginning - a rebirth if you will - based on the premise that whoever our so-called enemies are, we owe it to ourselves and to the world at large to start opening our "listening ears" to a point of view that we ourselves may not readily accept. Bombs are not the answer for a world to live in harmony.

It's sad to see how badly our hands are tied at this time to resolve such issues because we are now experience the damages being done by a radical group who have taken power in the House of Reps, and who has one agenda and one agenda only. That is to totally dominate all areas of democracy and turn it to their own use, whatever that may be. The thought is frightening.

I've been watching Oliver Stone's "Untold History." It's very interesting, and gives Wallace a great amount of praise.

Good commentary.

TRUTH , That is a powerful image .

I had the same question think. I never got an answer.

the sad truth is, the racists who figured out how to sell their bullshit using the left talking points, have dominated the narrative in this conflict, resulting in their racism becoming standard left wing positions.

Question 1 , their parents - They lived in gaza ...Question 2 - no military bases , where should they launch then in their desperation ?

Okay. I watched the video. What it shows is that Israeli soldiers do what they believe at the time is necessary. A soldier with a capability of humanity suffers post-traumatic-stress-disorder (PTSD) once they leave service and face what they had done in the name of protecting their country. Do the Taliban suffer any of this disorder? Does Hamas miltants suffer such a disorder? I rather doubt it. The only ones suffering are the mothers and children who have been so brainwashed into hating Israelis that they raise their children to act on such hate by throwing rocks and molotiv cocktails.

Would you rather be a Palestinian or any Muslim for that matter, arrested and incarcerated by an Israeli political system or would you rather be an Israeli arrested and incarcerated by a terrorist group such as Hamas or Al'qida?

When the civilian population rebels against their own terrorists - stops allowing them from setting up their missiles to be fired from civilian populations - stops being willing to die for their terrorists causes (even if these causes may not be justified in their own minds) - stop encouraging their children to group up with this hatred - then I will condemn any such actions from Israeli forces.

If they want a democratic society where they can be assured a peaceful co-existance with others who don't share in their beliefs but are willing to allow others to have their own beliefs, then they need to show that that's exactly what they want. Right now, I don't see it. If they are bowing to the will of Hamas and the Taliban and other violent extremists out of shear fear, then they who are willing to die for evil should consider dying for the greater good.

Why don't you watch ALL the videos I posted?

I've watched enough to know that they don't answer the base question I have, and that is what are you, Maasanova, and all you other patriotic Palestinians doing to mitigate what is happening so that it can be brought to an end. The Palestinians have fought for and now have received their identity as a State, yet the radical fringe is still exercising its hate for Israelis and is still using their own women and children to be allowed to be brought into the frey. 100 videos won't change the here and now. Where to we go from here to bring peace? Do the Palestinians now continue with their war on Israel? Do they continue to follow the leadership of hate mongers? Where? and When does this mindset change?

Oh please... the Palestinians may have received their identity as a state a few days ago, but as long as Israel denies them that and keeps on stealing their lands, destroying their crops and homes, bombing and slaughtering them in Gaza, depriving them of clean water and food, restricting their fishing rights in their own waters to just a few miles while fishing industrially in the rest of their waters, etc., etc., nothing will be resolved. It is Israel waging a war of aggression on the Palestinians who retaliate with the meager means at their disposal. It is Palestinians that are being killed by the thousands and Israelis only losing a life or two now and then. The hate-mongers are the Israeli government and policies, they sow hatred every day. Get real, wake up and smell the coffee, for heaven's sake, if you have any humanity in you whatsoever.

cuz you only need a couple of minutes of an infomercial to notice it isnt the actual news being shown in the middle of the night, but a cheap fake version that is actually trying to get you to by more viagra?

the real question is why you are pushing bullshit and are surprised when it is noted as such?

whos policies require whom else be destroyed again?

Likud's policy to destroy Palestine and take all the lands, as you know well.

yup, as well as i know likud was not the element that the palestinians were responding to when they declared war and demanded the destruction of israel, but is the result of israel's politics changing in response to the palestinians defacto state of war with them.

i also know that unlike hamas, or the plo,or fatah,or new jihad, or any of the palestinian groups who assume leadership roles, that likud is still subject to the democratic process.which not only limits their ability to do what they would like to do, but causes them to keep their extreme policies limited, as they must appeal to the electorate in order to rule.

making the fact that likud has policies that call for the destruction of the palestinians not an issue any more than any random republican retard who also shares similar policies, as they are not tyranical despots, as hamas are.

when israel abandons their democratic socialist order, and likud assumes total control, then the parallel will be the same.

but other wise, as it is, you are citing the flaw on the part of the palestinians as the problem with israel.

both pointing out that the palestinians are wrong, and that you are content to support them in that error.

My problems with the Palestinians are there terrorist tactics.
Their cause is justified but their means does not justify their cause.

It's only called terrorism by the media because Hamas doesn't have an official army with army bases, uniforms etc.

The Palestinians would have no way to defend themselves if it weren't for the assistance of other Arab states. And to be honest, Israel wouldn't be able to defend themselves either if it weren't for US taxpayers annual $3 billion and growing welfare check and loan guarantees.

But at this time it is a one sided conflict with an obvious conflict of interest by the US.

At the end of the day it's all semantics and propaganda by the pro-Israeli Western media.

The media would call what you consider to be terrorist tactics by Hamas as "guerilla warfare" by "freedom fighters" or "rebels" if referred to a nation-state favored by the West.

no their is.

the hamas charter calls for the destruction of israel repeatedly.
the fatah charter does the same, as has every leadership of the palestinians since the moment they decided that israel must be destroyed, which was what waging war on them sought to do, all of 5 hrs after israel declared independance.

the questions arent hasbara, and you rambling on with your usual racist talking points and childish name calling only serves to highlight who amongst us rests on their propaganda.

im asking objectively, how any nation can both wage war, and not be to blame for the results of it.

and how any nation can demand the destruction of another and not have that be begging for war.

unlike you i am honest with my efforts, and i have no problem admitting that i am asking these questions based on the israeli palestinian conflict.

but they are objective questions that question objective ideas.which is what truly enrages you, as you try so hard to avoid that in your effort to sell the propaganda you so happily claim others are selling.

no it is called terrorism cuz it is.

just as our invasion of the middle east is imperialism, cuz it is.

despite you enjoying the most liberal relationship with words and the concepts they are constructed to express, not everyong functions that way.in fact so much so is the opposite true, that we even compile a reference book for the occassion.

if confused as to what words mean, pick of a dictionary.

Post your charters then. If your information proves to counter the article from the Guardian that I posted and is indeed accurate then I will correct myself.

"im asking objectively, how any nation can both wage war, and not be to blame for the results of it."

No you're not. As Vic noted, your arguments are hinged upon on personal bias and faulty logic, if not outright lies and your presumptions are false.

Have you read the PA charter... Has their openly declared purpose to drive the Israelites into the sea been rescinded... Are they not firing rockets into Israel at will almost daily?... But you know this don't you?... I believe that freecrack is correct in assessing that you're an antisemitic and Palistinian apologist.

You are welcome to post the proof of your claims of the charter along with freecrack. freecrack's charges of me being an antisemitic and Palistinian apologist are very silly. They usually make me laugh.

are you kidding?
like we dont all know the moves to this dance?

i post a link, then you claim the link is invalid.

i post a bunch of other links, like a hamster on a wheel desperate for your approval cheese, to which you claim most of them are invalid under the guise that they are biased, as all media is even tho you dont have a shred of evidence to say what i am offering is biased in any actual way.

you will run and rant about how im this that and the other, trying desperately to dodge the simple matter at hand, as you always do.

and in the end i will still be just as right as i was in the begining, you will be just as racist as you always are, as that isnt impacted by logic to any end or you wouldnt be what you are.and in the middle is a waste of time.

you got google, use it.
you have no problem being able to find every picture of a demonic looking jew to post, or any number of out of context bits of media off of youtube (which the media and youtube are invalid zionist propaganda if not offered by you) so you are more than capable of typing into what ever search engine you like "hamas charter" and getting myriads of sites that offer what is in it.

be a big boy

not silly in the slightest.

let me refresh your memory.

don rickles racist joke, you have a problem with.
every other shock comic who arent jewish, not a problem for you.

helen thomas losing her job cuz of the dumb shit she said, is zionist censorship.
the jewish editor who lost his media job for the dumb shit he said, was justice served.

so i ask you again, as i always do after you have had your fun calling me names you have no proof of, and become defensive about me not placating the racism you are in habit of.

what would you call it when some one posts on a given website stories that have a 90% rate of being against homosexuality?
observant of gay misdeeds or bigoted?
what would you call it when some one posts on a given website stories that have a 90% rate of demonizing muslims?
observant of muslims more than the rest, or a bigot?
and of course, what do you call some one who on a given website posts stories that 90% of the time are about demonizing jews?
the answer to that one, of the website is current, is maasanova.

the proof speaks for itself.im just stating what we all see, that you suppose it a one off, each time a fellow nonracist points out how racist you are.

what are we up to now, about 20 or so individual instances of this error on the part of others in how they view you and your efforts?

The information is readily available, laugh if you want... My opinion of you still stands... prove me wrong.

I agree tverdell: The Palestinians seem to have the same philosophy as the Japanese in WWII. That somehow commiting suicide for your beliefs or your country is a noble thing. In Palestinians it's marytrs. In Japan it was komakazis. The Japanese have turned a page on that chapter in their history. The Palestinians, however, even with their own land, they won't stop trying to destroy Israel.

I don't claim to know the teachings of the Koran or even if I'm spelling it right. Somehow I can't believe any God would teach that dying for your faith is the only way to please that God. All I know is that way back 5,000 years ago, Hebrews and Arabs were basically one people. They had different faiths. Each tribe of either had their own faiths. Some melded, some didn't, and the attacks on the Israelites never stopped. I would like to see it end in my lifetime, but I doubt I will.

I was watching an interview of an Iranian leader - and I'm no great fan of Iran - but I'll be honest with you, what he said about those drone strikes over there, our drones bombing schools, and doing double-hits when people come out to render aid to those injured (which were children), I have heard nothing about this from our government. It was discussed on an interview with an American diplomat and I think one of the Current news hosts. The Israeli was as disgusted as I am from what that Iranian said. And supposedly the White House knows nothing about it because drones are a CIA spying tool. How can there ever be trust if we go around leveling countires because we "think" they have weapons of mass destruction (Iraq), of if we think there's something going on in Iran that ALL the Iranians are in favor of. No, not all the Iranians are in favor of what their more radical group is doing. But why bomb their children? Certainly they are not terrorists.

When you cut a piece of lumber it makes good sense to measure twice and cut once. The CIA checks and fires at the same time. This is just not a way to keep the peace in a region, or to garner the respect of its people.

What ever islamaphobe....seriously....

That's it dude, an ad homin response somehow gives your pov credibility? You're as as misinformed and deceived as Neuville Chamberlain in WW II. Just another useful tool of selective orchestrated ignorance.

Wow. I'd be insulted by your response if your opinion meant shit, not just to me but at all.

I have always felt that , IF the US did NOT support Israel , Israel would be better off , because they would HAVE to work WITH their neighbors , instead of bullying them . It would be a lot more peaceful .

Suicide is what humans are DRIVEN to , when they have NO OTHER RECOURSE . Even you could be put in that position . But for the luck of your birthplace ....

so the haley bob comet people were driven to desperation, not faith?

the people of waco were dirven by desperation, not faith?

everyone ever in the history of man who commits suicide was due to they saw no other recourse, and never a matter of false beliefs?

not a single kamakaze jet fighter thought that killing the enemy and not themselves is preferable?

and who is all about the propaganda and not the fact here?

I agree with you there. Israel should be a soverign nation that should be able to deal with their own issues without anyone else's involvement or financial support, but US support enables them to make bad decisions that are bad for their neighbors and their own citizens even.

the first 20 yrs of israel, were the most war filled, and also the years america wasnt involved.

war for independance, 6 days wars, both were israel on her own.
we actually offer a 3rd party, that is not bigoted inherently that allows for peace to be achieved.

I just read that this morning. Very good article.

and what facilitated israel
taking his water,
burning his trees,
destroying his house,
taking his job (which would be moot w/o having water anyway)
steal my land (which is already covered in taking the house)
imprison my father (which happens to all people based on law, not patriarchy)
kill my mother,
bombard my country
(which seeks recognition as a state, so it isnt actually a country)
starve us all (which wouldnt matter if you didnt have water anyway, as you would be dead before famished,and the population has only grown)
and humiliate us all (which is subjective to cultural values)
to begin with?

if you want to argue cause and effect, take the express lane, and it is all abrahams fault for having isaac and ishmael.

but for those of us who dont validate vengance as a means of functioning, and recognize that war is not an acceptable means of engaging others all yout bleeding heart bullshit is just selling the suffering of one side,rather than seeking a better tomorrow for all.

A hunger. Called greed.

their is no doubt that as long as their is profit to be made, human beings will.if not tobacco wouldnt exist.but it does proudly.

and im sure that is no different in this conflict.

the question tho is, if that is a problem, why support the side of it that demands the paradigm in which the vultures can exploit?that is the part i dont get

You mean what your doing right here and in all your posts for Israel?
Hypocrit much?

nope, as this very thread is an example of me speaking to objective questions, asking for onjective answers, that literally when answered do not validate israel.

you have a childish personal issue, so you are here trolling on a personal level, but your damage doesnt make me a hypocrit, just shows you are very small and angry.

yes so they say, despite not giving a damn about the united nations as they declared war on a new state the united nations specifically went through the effort of voting on.so that isnt an issue, nor is it answering the questions i asked.

but thanks for taking the opportunity, as always to make it about what your idealogical deal is.

just remember when ever anyone else does it they are propagandized idealogical fools.just for some reason, not you when you do it.

while your holier than thou contradictory judgements are valid.

what is good for you isnt for everyone else?

wanna tell us more about how it is others who are childishly attacking others, as you childishly attack them?
how everyone elses material is propaganda, while you refuse to answer the stuff that doesnt fit into your propaganda bubble, as you drop another few pictures of suffering children to appeal to the bleeding hearts, as if that is the entire conflict at hand?

or you wanna tell us we are all wrong for noting you using the guardian as we literally quote you doing it as you claim you didnt?

which element of reality is it that we are supposed to suspend today in order to accomate your particular brand of self rightious bullshit?

which at least if it were genuine could be a snob trying to drag the hordes from their simple existance upward to a better one.but in the end it just proves to be hypocritical, thus useless.

Pro justice .

which united nations law makes exemptions for child soldiers, suicide bombers,plane and ship highjackings, lynchings,rocket launches at civilians, and olympics highjackings again, in which one can stipulate this is based on united nations standards for anything?

who is trying to destroy whom, is who wallows in destruction vs who is blamed for "developing" settlements.

it isnt subjective.

as i state before and will again, or as often as you require, their is absolutely not one single policy that israel holds that requires anyone be destroyed, while it is a demand on the part of the palestinians in every government they have ever had.

which side is more successfull in a given conflict, doesnt dictate who intends what.

other wise their is no difference between drunk driving, murder or premeditated murder.if some one dies then the one who did it is a murderer.and according to you, even if they are doing to to prevent themselves from being killed.

but answer me this, as tho we have no prejudice, or ethnocentric values, and that these questions are objective for the sake of making policy, not representative of any people in particular.

in short, fairly.

how can one demand the destruction of others and not be the dick for it?

and how can anyone wage war, and not be the one to blame for that war?

thats it.that is all im asking, as i cant grasp how it is, unless everyone is racist and just hates jews, and maybe its my own self deprication at hand, but i cant really fathom jews mattering that much to so many.

I don't understand your question,
Perhaps you are saying a one state solution is not fair to Israel?

I agree, it's not fair. It is not fair to either side. None of it was fair.
And this repeats throughout world history.

I think that a new generation of Israelis and Palestinians can just get over it and live together in one state.

Here is America, people still keep their ethnic identity so I would assume they would keep theirs.

Consider the alternative of the suffering and murdering of children on both sides.

I fear a two state solution will just lead to what we already have. One side is going to always want more.

I do sympathize with your frustration.

one state, two states, 12 states, i dont care.

as far as what is fair to israel, i really dont care either.

make israel a nonjewish proscientologist nation.i dont give a fuck.

the point for me is, we all know that people can claim one thing, while actually being not about it, based on prejudice.such as freedom for all people, life and liberty for all, except the blacks.we know this cognative error exists.

i also dont care to claim that error is at play when it is not, as it is far to serious an issue to be played with like that.

so i am asking, objectively, outside of the israeli palestinian conflict specifically, how is it that one can both be against war, find those who wage war to be the problem, while supporting some who are waging war?

im asking how it is that anyone can both support any nations right to exist, when that nation itself denies that right to others?how is that not supporting the right of some nations right to exist and not others in actuality.

what alternative can their be between any peoples when one demands the destruction of the other, other than war?

explain it to me in the pardigm at hand, or objectively.

explain to me how these positions can be held, not contradict themselves, so that their is no room for anyone to guess racism is an issue.

i think you and i are actually on the same page, only i have taken it the next step.

once you get to realize that the suffering, while different in manifestation exists on all sides of a given war, and that one cannot quantify human suffering, the problem is then the state of war itself that needs to be rectified.

so in this understanding, i ask how it can be validated on one side while those same people who validate it, use its results as the problem.

i get how any nation has to defend themselves.
i dont get how one doesnt apply that to everyone equally.