Israel declares war on Hamas

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by blankall

There are people on both sides who need to accept that the other side exists. If you are trying to use military conflict to end the other side, it's not going to end well.

And despite what your out of context quote says, Israel was founded legally by the UN, and the land that Israel was founded on was almost entirely already owned by Jewish people.

The context is kind of irrelevant, it's the facts that he knows and presents. Do you disagree? Because history has proven him correct. That's the point. And nothing has changed, so why should anything be different? And if that is the case, how do you justify starving and murdering innocent humans? Will that suddenly change the reality? It was known it would lead to war, and here we are. Congrats.



Legally founded or not, that doesn't mean it was going to be peaceful, or that it was even right do to. I'm also incredibly dubious about your statement that it was mostly Jewish owned land. Do you have a neutral non-biased source for that?

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by blankall

There are people on both sides who need to accept that the other side exists. If you are trying to use military conflict to end the other side, it's not going to end well.

And despite what your out of context quote says, Israel was founded legally by the UN, and the land that Israel was founded on was almost entirely already owned by Jewish people.

Do you have anything to back that up? The UN says the literal opposite of your claim:

It can therefore be said that very little land was acquired by the Jewish minority, whose holdings had been practically negligible up to then, and they did not make any sizeable acquisition of land until the Jews of Eastern Europe, lured by the promise of a Jewish homeland in the Balfour Declaration, started to immigrate into Palestine under the pressure of the social and economic conditions obtaining in the countries in which they were living. Two periods may be distinguished in the Jews’ acquisition of land in Palestine. During the first of these, extending from 1880 to 1920, the Jews were small landowners, and the amount of land they owned was not very large compared with that of the Palestine Arab majority.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The context is kind of irrelevant, it's the facts that he knows and presents. Do you disagree? Because history has proven him correct. That's the point. And nothing has changed, so why should anything be different? And if that is the case, how do you justify starving and murdering innocent humans? Will that suddenly change the reality? It was known it would lead to war, and here we are. Congrats.

Legally founded or not, that doesn't mean it was going to be peaceful, or that it was even right do to. I'm also incredibly dubious about your statement that it was mostly Jewish owned land. Do you have a neutral non-biased source for that?

Guys like him just post BS and make guys like us do the legwork to fact check them. It's so fkn annoying.

[Zary's-Mustache]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Guys like him just post BS and make guys like us do the legwork to fact check them. It's so fkn annoying.

That's actually a tactic israel uses. They did it with the dead and burnt babies. It's a very effective tactic.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The context is kind of irrelevant, it's the facts that he knows and presents. Do you disagree? Because history has proven him correct. That's the point. And nothing has changed, so why should anything be different? And if that is the case, how do you justify starving and murdering innocent humans? Will that suddenly change the reality? It was known it would lead to war, and here we are. Congrats.



Legally founded or not, that doesn't mean it was going to be peaceful, or that it was even right do to. I'm also incredibly dubious about your statement that it was mostly Jewish owned land. Do you have a neutral non-biased source for that?

There are some Jewish Israelis that don't want an Arab state. What's your point?

So Arabs don't want to acknowledge that Jews founded a state on land they largely owned. They don't want to acknowledge the treatment of their own Jewish populations that led them to flee to Israel and form the majority of current Jews in Israel.

So, we should just pander to Arabs who want an endless war to undo historical facts that have been in place for decades? The Arabs who are pushing for war aren't themselves responsible for the wars?

I've posted this before:



Map of Jewish land ownership in the Mandate of Palestine in 1944.

Map of UN partition plan:



Very similar with the exception of the Nagev dessert, which is and remains largely uninhabited. What's biased about this? Looks like straight facts to me.

[Zary's-Mustache]

I can't even see any words on that map it's so blurry.

[blankall]

Well it's all a moot point anyways. If you're arguing that Israel shouldn't exist, that's just not going to happen. And if you're arguing that terrorism in response to Israel's mere existence is justified, then you're just arguing for more conflict.

[AltaGuy]

Ah yes - all the "legally" purchased land by Zionists from the occupying colonial power. With the express purpose of using the "rights" to said land to found a new colonial enterprise for European Jews. Despite - you know - there already being a native population occupying said land. It's such a sad "legal" argument to justify Israel's disenfranchisement of Palestinians.

Regardless, Israel is most definitely here to stay, and the wrongs of the past are not on today's Israelis. However, the current continued land grabs, humiliations, and genocide should certainly be blamed on today's Israelis, most of whom just look the other way as the far right lurches their country to full fascism.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by blankall

Well it's all a moot point anyways. If you're arguing that Israel shouldn't exist, that's just not going to happen. And if you're arguing that terrorism in response to Israel's mere existence is justified, then you're just arguing for more conflict.

And if you are arguing Israel "defending itself" through slaughter and starvation, then you are also just arguing for more conflict? See how this works? Which goes back to my original quote(still trying to figure out why you say it is out of context). This was always known to be the outcome, but they did it anyway.

And ya, your blurry map doesn't prove anything, other than the second one being a giant reminder of the progress Israel has made in it's long term goals.

Perhaps you just need to accept the fact that Israel treats war and death as a necessary part of it's existence, and none of its current actions are going to change that. Is that something you can accept based on all the facts?

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by blankall

Well it's all a moot point anyways. If you're arguing that Israel shouldn't exist, that's just not going to happen. And if you're arguing that terrorism in response to Israel's mere existence is justified, then you're just arguing for more conflict.

Hey liar: quit your lies.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by AltaGuy

Ah yes - all the "legally" purchased land by Zionists from the occupying colonial power. With the express purpose of using the "rights" to said land to found a new colonial enterprise for European Jews. Despite - you know - there already being a native population occupying said land. It's such a sad "legal" argument to justify Israel's disenfranchisement of Palestinians.

Regardless, Israel is most definitely here to stay, and the wrongs of the past are not on today's Israelis. However, the current continued land grabs, humiliations, and genocide should certainly be blamed on today's Israelis, most of whom just look the other way as the far right lurches their country to full fascism.

The land was actually purchased from private land owners.

Edit: I've also never defended any settler expansion. That's an extreme act of aggression. Unlike the post I was responding to that was clearly defending the terrorist attacks, as it was justified for Arabs to be angry about Israel's existence.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Hey liar: quit your lies.

Really? What's the point of this?

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by blankall

Really? What's the point of this?

The point is to ask a liar to quit posting lies. How on earth was that confusing?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Sliver

The point is to ask a liar to quit posting lies. How on earth was that confusing?

Care to point a single "lie" I have made.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by blankall

Care to point a single "lie" I have made.

Sure, here's two lies on this page alone:

Originally Posted by blankall

There are people on both sides who need to accept that the other side exists. If you are trying to use military conflict to end the other side, it's not going to end well.

And despite what your out of context quote says, Israel was founded legally by the UN, and the land that Israel was founded on was almost entirely already owned by Jewish people.

I already fact checked and posted the truth from the UN site and even linked the source.

Originally Posted by blankall

Well it's all a moot point anyways. If you're arguing that Israel shouldn't exist, that's just not going to happen. And if you're arguing that terrorism in response to Israel's mere existence is justified, then you're just arguing for more conflict.

First point is debatable as to whether or not people are making that argument, so I'm not going to dispute it, but the second point literally nobody is arguing, so it is a lie.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Sure, here's two lies on this page alone:



I already fact checked and posted the truth from the UN site and even linked the source.



First point is debatable as to whether or not people are making that argument, so I'm not going to dispute it, but the second point literally nobody is arguing, so it is a lie.

Nobody has argued that the Palestinians are justified in not making peace and continuing a military conflict? The way the Palestinians have, thus far, operated their military conflict has been via terrorism. So if you are arguing the Palestinians are justified in their military actions so far, you are arguing for terrorism.

And if that's the case, well I've horribly misunderstood all these posts about Israelis only understanding violence and that Arabs should never accept peace. In which case I guess were all in agreement.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by blankall

Care to point a single "lie" I have made.

The thread is full of people pointing out where you spread misinformation or just completely make things up. Why are you pretending otherwise? You literally just made up that someone was “defending terrorism” lol.

You either think people here are stupid enough to believe this stuff or your comprehension is so poor that you actually believe it.

Based on your go-to being some form of pretending you’re above the discussion or the points are worth discussing whenever you’re called on it, my guess is probably the former.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The thread is full of people pointing out where you spread misinformation or just completely make things up. Why are you pretending otherwise? You literally just made up that someone was “defending terrorism” lol.

You either think people here are stupid enough to believe this stuff or your comprehension is so poor that you actually believe it.

Based on your go-to being some form of pretending you’re above the discussion or the points are worth discussing whenever you’re called on it, my guess is probably the former.

The last "misinformation" I spread was when I pointed out that reporters had confirmed that videos showed gunmen shooting from the roofs of WCK vehicles prior to tracking the vehicles. Please be specific about the misinformation.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by blankall

The last "misinformation" I spread was when I pointed out that reporters had confirmed that videos showed gunmen shooting from the roofs of WCK vehicles prior to tracking the vehicles. Please be specific about the misinformation.

Dis you from 90 minutes ago?

Originally Posted by blankall

There are people on both sides who need to accept that the other side exists. If you are trying to use military conflict to end the other side, it's not going to end well.

And despite what your out of context quote says, Israel was founded legally by the UN, and the land that Israel was founded on was almost entirely already owned by Jewish people.

[Beninho]

Neither Jews or Palestinians owned much land given in the partitions. Most was state land owned by the Ottomans and then the British, I believe at around 85%. By 1947 Jews owned roughly 7% and I believe the local Arab population owned roughly the same. I could be wrong but this is just what I remember from school.

Jews did not own the majority of land given to them in the partition but neither did the local Palestinians. Jews were a slight majority in the land given for Jewish state at I believe 55%, with 60% of the land given being the sparsely inhabited Negev desert. I think maybe Blankall means that Jews owned more land than local Arabs in the land that was partitioned for a Jewish state, but the majority of land was not owned by Jews.

The partition of land is confusing, Jews did not own the majority of land that was partitioned to them, but neither did the local Palestinians. 85% of the Land was passed from the Ottomans to the British.

I could be wrong about some of these facts, I don’t have time to look up sources.