Trump recognizes Israel's claim to the Golan

[Imaginarynumber1]

21 minutes ago, and then said:

That'd be believable if you even occasionally... hell, ONCE, had something negative to say about the killing of Jews by Palestinians.  Go ahead, cite a post where you've shown simple fairness with regard to this conflict.  One will do.  I'm pretty sure I've never seen one but it's certainly possible I missed it.  FTR, about 7 out of ten of the people in that country you obviously HATE... are Jews.  More than half of that group are Zionists in the sense that they agree that they have a right to live on that land.  If they stopped fighting to live on the land they'd be gone from it so quickly it would amaze people.  They'd literally be slaughtered.  Fortunately, they've dealt with your type of hater for millennia and they know their danger.  

ETA:  And they LIVE their lives in more joy than those that hate them will ever know. 

https://unitedwithisrael.org/watch-hamas-relentless-terror-no-match-for-israeli-resilience/

I have plenty to say about the killing of Jews by Palestinians. But not to this audience. I'm afraid you'd get too aroused.

[Imaginarynumber1]

33 minutes ago, and then said:

You're a liar, ape-man.  Either that or you have an irremediable language comprehension deficit.  Since I'm pretty sure that isn't it, I'll repeat the original point - you're a hater so screw you too.   

A big middle finger right back at you, my friend.

[aztek]

that is exactly an attitude that makes civil wars happen, i do not advocate for it, but i know it will happen, with society split like that it has to

[+and-then]

11 hours ago, Imaginarynumber1 said:

I have plenty to say about the killing of Jews by Palestinians.

I'll take your word for it.  I have no way of knowing your opinion on it because I've never seen you share it.  Just as you've never actually seen ME share the hate for them that you say I do.  I've always been consistent in my support for Israel's PEOPLE.  The governments they choose, not always and not so much.  My biggest complaint with the way people attack Israel is that they regularly tolerate a glaring double standard when comparing atrocities with defense.  It seems that the Palestinians have a kind of blanket immunity for any atrocity they commit because it's done as "resistance".  That, sir, is bullshoith. 

When this new attempted "deal of the century" is finally made public, I think we're going to see relatively equal amounts of screaming by Jews and Arabs over the terms.  What will be MOST interesting to see unfold is which side will be willing to take the first step to try for peace.  If it's the Palestinians then I'll cheerfully compliment them and support their leaders who take a REAL chance with their lives for peace.

[Imaginarynumber1]

42 minutes ago, and then said:

I'll take your word for it.  I have no way of knowing your opinion on it because I've never seen you share it.  Just as you've never actually seen ME share the hate for them that you say I do.  I've always been consistent in my support for Israel's PEOPLE.  The governments they choose, not always and not so much.  My biggest complaint with the way people attack Israel is that they regularly tolerate a glaring double standard when comparing atrocities with defense.  It seems that the Palestinians have a kind of blanket immunity for any atrocity they commit because it's done as "resistance".  That, sir, is bullshoith. 

When this new attempted "deal of the century" is finally made public, I think we're going to see relatively equal amounts of screaming by Jews and Arabs over the terms.  What will be MOST interesting to see unfold is which side will be willing to take the first step to try for peace.  If it's the Palestinians then I'll cheerfully compliment them and support their leaders who take a REAL chance with their lives for peace.

We only know what we've shown one another aboutvof beliefs. On any given topic. It may be unfair to judge character based just on that, but if I'm being honest, I'm not saying half of what I believe online. For good or ill.

This site has a huge conservative bias. It's pointless to ever argue otherwise. 

[+and-then]

3 hours ago, Imaginarynumber1 said:

This site has a huge conservative bias. It's pointless to ever argue otherwise.

I've always considered the bias to be more Left-leaning but I never considered it to be so unbalanced that opinions were suppressed, consistently.  It's all about personal perspective, I guess.

[Sir Smoke aLot]

After Jerusalem decision (which was contrary to international law and hard fought consensus - check Jerusalem status under UN) this one surely proves that Trumps intention wasn't ''stability''.

It seems that there was indeed the reason about why Israel never proclaimed it's borders. It's also fun to check who is behind oil business on occupied Golan. 

What i can't understand is the timing. PR stunt which could lead region into disaster. One thing is certain tho, Trump is first officially Zionist president of the USA.

[Peter B]

On 3/23/2019 at 6:14 AM, and then said:

You say it like it's a bad thing   But surely there must be some new screeches of outrage left among those who believe he's Dr. Evil?  

In all seriousness, it's past time for this recognition of Israel's de-facto ownership of that territory.  If Syria wants it back, they can fight for it or shut up.  There is a price for mounting aggression against a neighbor.

There are two reasons the recognition isn't a good idea, both of them pragmatic rather than ideological.

The first is that it weakens America's authority when it wishes to oppose similar moves made by countries unfriendly to the USA. The obvious current example is Russia's annexation of Crimea. A future possibility is a Chinese conquest of Taiwan.

The second is that it represents partisan intervention in the internal affairs of Israel while it's in the middle of an election campaign. That can be interpreted as greenlighting intervention in American elections by other countries.

[Peter B]

On 3/23/2019 at 10:03 AM, seanjo said:

So we shouldn't support the only Democracy in that area? The only country in that area that holds a gay pride parade...

There are other ways of supporting Israel than by recognising the annexation.

[Peter B]

On 3/23/2019 at 11:31 AM, and then said:

It was a long-standing, commonsense tradition - until Jews got around to doing it.  As I said, the Syrians want it back, take it the old-fashioned way - or stop whining.

Actually it was a long-standing tradition until the end of World War Two, at which point wars of aggression were outlawed. That's why, for example, Iraq wasn't allowed to keep Kuwait.

[Peter B]

On 3/23/2019 at 11:46 AM, seanjo said:

The land was gifted to the Jews by the UN after the horrors of the Holocaust. Would you live amongst the Europeans that had betrayed you and murdered your family? Or would you think about finding your own space and defending yourself?

The Golan Heights region was not "gifted to the Jews by the UN". It was captured by Israel for strategic reasons in 1967.

The strategic reasons were sound, and I can understand Israel wanting to hold the Heights until a peace can be negotiated with Syria. But on that basis it should be treated as occupied territory, which means you can't settle it, exploit it or annex it.

[Peter B]

On 3/24/2019 at 6:50 PM, Vlad the Mighty said:

there's a difference in that the vast majority of Crimeans are ethnically Russian and overwhelmingly wanted to be reunited with Russia. Whereas with the Occupied Territories it's the ethnic population that's being driven out by outsiders and forced into, effectively, concentration camps. 

Except that the process by which Russia took over Crimea was hardly in accord with international law.

[Peter B]

On 3/28/2019 at 11:41 PM, RoofGardener said:

Indeed Joc. 

Israel gained control of the Golan Heights when Syria launched an aggressive war of invasion. They where chased back, and Israel took control of the Heights. 

And then Syria refused to stand down from their state of war. Israel offered 'peace for land', just as they did with Egypt, but Syria refused. So far as I know, it is STILL technically at war with Israel. (although Israel is NOT at war with Syria). If it was any other country than Israel - anywhere in the world - then the international community would have sanctioned the occupation of the Golan Heights. But because it is Israel, the world condemns them. It is a disgusting dual standard. 

To hell with Syria. Let them agree to peace, and THEN they can discuss the Golan. But after 50+ years, I'd say the Golan belongs to Israel. 

No, this is not correct. The Golan Heights region was part of Syria until 1967 when Israel attacked and occupied it. This was for strategic reasons - largely, to stop Syrian artillery based there from shelling Israel. The UN condemns Israel for the occupation because it's an occupation of another country's land - exactly the same reason used to condemn any other country's occupation of another country's land.

Having said that, I don't have a problem with Israel continuing to occupy it, for exactly the same strategic reasons they occupied it back in 1967. But military occupation is a very different thing from annexation. If Israel truly wants peace with Syria, then it has to expect to hand back Syrian land (and conversely, if Syria wants the land back, then it needs to agree to peace).

[Phaeton80]

On 23-3-2019 at 2:23 AM, and then said:

You seem to have a problem with sorting causes and effects, don't you?  Don't blow up buses or launch rockets at civilians and no one will attack you with modern weapons.  See how easy that calculus is?  

Argh.. the mindshattering irony, hypocrisy. Were dealing with a militarily occupied people - for over 7 decades - without an army who have taken up arms because of that fact. Everyone, every human being will extremize and take up arms when any foreign military power oppresses and confines, robs them of their freedom. EVERYONE, human nature.

This is the true causal relation, action > reaction. You occupy a people, and you will invoke a violent reaction. The level of self delusion to occupy any foreign territory, treat the local population like sub- humans / animals, killing and maming on a military scale including but not limited to thousands of children, robbing countless families of their freedom and any semblance of a future, only to subsequently scream bloody murder when those people take up arms against you.. is ab so lutely unrivalled, as well as typical for these usual suspects.

All this mind you, based on Christian eschatology, you know.. those people claiming to be followers of Christ, drooling over the potential for war. In all honesty, I wouldnt be surprised if the recent missile attacks were incited by Israeli intelligence (in collusion with, say, Jaish al-Islam) to rationalise further action against the Palestinians. The effectiveness of these missiles in terms of strategic or civilian impact is negligable (while the Israeli response is all but), the media impact however of firing off these home made inferior duds, is huge. Either these people are complete morons extremely damaging their own cause while leaving nothing more than a little scratch on the desired target. It doesnt make sense.

Edited March 30, 2019 by Phaeton80

[Phaeton80]

Quote

The Latest: Israel says Gaza rockets fired by mistake

Israeli defense officials said after a preliminary investigation that the Gaza rockets that hit the Tel Aviv area were apparently fired by mistake.

The officials were quoted Friday in Israeli media. The Israeli military declined to comment on the reports.

It was not immediately clear if the rocket fire was a result of human error or technical malfunction. The Israeli daily Haaretz quoted the officials as saying the two rockets were fired during maintenance work.

The apparent misfire came as Gaza’s Hamas rulers were in negotiations with Egyptian mediators about a truce deal with Israel. The assessment indicated that Hamas had no intention of escalating violence with Israel.

[..]

The Israeli military says it struck 100 'Hamas targets' in the Gaza Strip overnight in response to rocket fire.

The airstrikes followed a rare rocket attack on the Israeli metropolis of Tel Aviv late Thursday. Israel says Hamas fired the rockets, though Hamas and a smaller militant group, Islamic Jihad, both denied involvement.

https://apnews.com/84f958d1d74e4a5ca13642f4a742cadb

 

Quote

Israel says it does not know who fired Gaza rockets, but Hamas responsible

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel’s military said on Thursday it did not know who fired two rockets from Gaza at Tel Aviv but it held Hamas responsible.

“We are still checking which group did the firing. We don’t know who carried it out,” chief military spokesman Brigadier-General Ronen Manelis told Israel Radio.

“The Hamas organization is the main organization in the Strip. It is responsible for what happens within the Strip and what emanates from it.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-security-military-idUSKCN1QV32Y

If I were Israel (as well as a sociopath), and I needed to dispose of such a 'pesky community' without a military who I am occupying and oppressing, it would stand to reason to 'motivate' local insurgent groups to use homemade duds and fire them on my nation.. thereby minimizing damage to my strategic / national interests, while maximizing media impact, as well as the potential to commit wholesale damage / destruction on several levels.

Any occupied minority without a military is pretty hard to demonize (especially if the occupying power is one of the most advanced military machines in the world), which is necessary if one wants to act against them without considerable lashback from the international community.. unless.. terrorists killing civilians, or even merely perceived as such. The only thing that even remotely rationalises the crimes against humanity Israel is committing, are these senseless missile attacks. I truely, truely wonder.. wasnt Hamas created, or at least facilitated by Israel? Wouldnt surprise me one bit.

[+and-then]

7 hours ago, Sir Smoke aLot said:

PR stunt which could lead region into disaster.

Hell, the region already IS a disaster.  It's composed of a bunch of 7th-century zealots that would rather fight than live in peace.  They'd rather die than make peace with a group of people they hate?  Okay.  Let it go on another few centuries.

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, Peter B said:

If Israel truly wants peace with Syria, then it has to expect to hand back Syrian land (and conversely, if Syria wants the land back, then it needs to agree to peace).

Several Israeli leaders were pushed by DC to do exactly this and Assad (father and son) refused.  If Iran and Syria - or Russia - want that land back then they can fight for it.  They won't ever get it any other way.  I believe that just such a fight has been predicted and that prediction includes some pretty bad news for the 3-stooges and their coalition.

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, Peter B said:

Except that the process by which Russia took over Crimea was hardly in accord with international law.

What they're attempting in eastern Ukraine is totally illegal as well.  By the logic they used in Ukraine and Georgia, they could invade the New York Tri-state area, though, it mightn't end well for them  

[RoofGardener]

2 hours ago, Peter B said:

No, this is not correct. The Golan Heights region was part of Syria until 1967 when Israel attacked and occupied it. This was for strategic reasons - largely, to stop Syrian artillery based there from shelling Israel. The UN condemns Israel for the occupation because it's an occupation of another country's land - exactly the same reason used to condemn any other country's occupation of another country's land.

Having said that, I don't have a problem with Israel continuing to occupy it, for exactly the same strategic reasons they occupied it back in 1967. But military occupation is a very different thing from annexation. If Israel truly wants peace with Syria, then it has to expect to hand back Syrian land (and conversely, if Syria wants the land back, then it needs to agree to peace).

Oh PLEASE Peter B

The heights where INDEED a part of Syria. But then the Syrians sent thousands of tanks OVER those heights, and into Israel, as part of the 1967 war. 

Israel repelled those tanks, and chased them back INTO Syria (coming within artillary range of Damascus). 

Israel acknowledged a temporary cease-fire arrangement, imposed by the Arab block in the United Nations. Israel retreated from the bulk of Syria, but kept control of the Golan Heights. As was their right - in the laws of those days - of a victim of an aggressive attack. 

Syria  - for the last 60 years - has refused to rescind the 'state of war' that they created by their original invasion. So when it comes to negotiations about "return of territory", well... sod them. THEY attacked. THEY lost. THEY have refused to rescind the state of war that THEY unilaterally created. 

And THAT was almost 60 years ago. Sod 'em. ... they had their chance... they blew it. 

The Golan Heights are now a part of Israel

Deal with it

 

Edited March 30, 2019 by RoofGardener

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, Peter B said:

There are other ways of supporting Israel than by recognising the annexation.

It was a bold, unexpected move that probably caught Netanyahu and his supporters off guard.  I'm sure Bibi has always made it clear he'd love to have such an announcement but I doubt he or his people expected it.  I can even agree with Sir Smoke on Trump being the first Zionist president.  Which makes it all the more ridiculous when I hear people calling him an anti-Semite.

I really believe that too many people (this isn't aimed at you) are beginning to believe their own rhetoric when they categorize Trump as being slow-witted.  Narcissistic, vain and combative?  Absolutely, but slow, he ain't.  He has a plan to force a peace on that region and he's setting the board.  If I were Bibi, I'd be getting pretty nervous waiting on the other shoe to drop.  He gives them Jerusalem, then the Golan?  It's a quid pro quo kind of world with dealmakers and he's about to put the touch on Israel for a very big "favor".  My guess is it will be half of Jerusalem and a partial right of return.  With the Arab nations in a tizzy of fear over Iran, there has never been a better time to push for peace in the region and even now, those gulf state leaders can only go so far without their people lynching them for dealing with Jews.  Yeah, Israel is going to have to give huge concessions before this is over and even THEN, the treaty won't last.  

[+and-then]

13 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Syria  - for the last 60 years - has refused to rescind the 'state of war' that they created by their original invasion. So when it comes to negotiations about "return of territory", well... sod them. THEY attacked. THEY lost. THEY have refused to rescind the state of war that THEY unilaterally created. 

 

Clear, concise, and totally accurate.  Peace was available after a negotiation.  Egypt and Jordan took advantage of it and regained territory.  Now, the choice no longer really belongs to "Syria", it is in the hands of the puppetmasters in Moscow, Tehran, and to a lesser extent, Ankara.  

[RoofGardener]

2 minutes ago, and then said:

 

Clear, concise, and totally accurate.  Peace was available after a negotiation.  Egypt and Jordan took advantage of it and regained territory.  Now, the choice no longer really belongs to "Syria", it is in the hands of the puppetmasters in Moscow, Tehran, and to a lesser extent, Ankara.  

Indeed And Then

Although.. we should remember.. that Egypt was kicked out of the Arab League for 10 years for the crime of negotiating peace with Israel ! The Muslim Arab states can be VERY vindictive. 

Not sure about Jordan ? 

Edited March 30, 2019 by RoofGardener

[+and-then]

26 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Not sure about Jordan

Jordan is a special case.  The Royals there understand that if they gamble and lose, the most likely outcome will be a wholesale transfer of Palestinians into the Kingdom.  IMO, that's the justest solution.  Jordan's king is walking a tightrope and he knows it.  

[docyabut2]

On ‎3‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 8:49 AM, RoofGardener said:

You're attempting to paint this in terms of race ? That seems downright silly, to say nothing of race-baiting, if not actually racist. 

Sorry I was trying to explained that history of Israel, and who were the first owners of that lands. What's been  going on now is a war for thousands of years between Isaac and ishmael . Two sons of  Abraham descendants  both believe it was their son Abraham sacrificed and God promise the lands. Really it simple that two sons are fighting over a heritage like most families are always fighting over it  just wish both can share, of which  Israel, has tried over and over again,  but the Palestinians don't want to.:(

 

 https://therefinersfire.org/ishmael_and_isaac.htm

Edited March 30, 2019 by docyabut2

[the-Unexpected-Soul]

On 3/22/2019 at 10:14 PM, and then said:

If Syria wants it back, they can fight for it or shut up.

 

 

so you back us on supporting Hizbullah, Hamas, and Iran, it seems we are doing the right thing according to you