Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Chat' started by Dahlis, Jul 12, 2006.
It's mostly just you.
"they could have approached it in a more civilised and direct manner rather than attack another nation"
Almost any country would fight back if attacked. It's the right thing to do.
They were already scathed before they did anything.
So exactly what is your answer to the question?
Would Israel let the Palestinians in occupied areas to join Israel or would they force them out?
Its all Syrias fault!
I keep reading "Israel attacks London"
They must have spotted a couple of their missing soldiers riding a double-decker to the pub.
LOL! Yeah! <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/grin.gif"></A>
Are you a bit slow?
I asked you what is your answer to:
Quote from lizardmech
I have a bit of an ignorant question. If the palestinians surrendered would Israel just absorb the land and make them israeli citizens or would they expect them to all leave and move to other countries?
Your reply doesn't answer his question, you just go on about how great Israel is.
If Palestine was peaceful nothing would happen, there would be no need to have a buffer zone so Israel wouldn't need to take any of their land.
The answer is that if the Palestineans hadn't attacked Israel from the Gaza Strip just recently, they would already have control over that (note that Israel gave them back control over Gaza essentially as a reward for their relatively good behavior) and they would likely get control over the West Bank as well. The ONLY thing that keeps preventing the Palestineans from having their own real country is the actions of Islamic terrorists against Israeli targets..
I answered his question very thoroughly and then you asked "Would Israel let the Palestinians in occupied areas to join Israel or would they force them out?" I don't know what you're asking.
He's asking a loaded question. He's saying that if the Palestineans stopped fighting, would Israel A) allow the Palestineans to join Israel or B) would they force all the Palestineans out of Gaza and the West Bank. Obviously, neither of these looks like a good option from the Palestinean perspective. However, in reality, the answer is C) the Palestineans would already have their own #$%#ing country that would be comprised of essentially the entire West Bank and the entire Gaza Strip.
Bollocks. It may be an important factor, but it's far from the only thing.
Actually joining Israel wouldn't be so bad for Palestinians, it be worse for Israel because this would in hurt their Jewish majority (ie Israel is suppose to be a Jewish state).
On the other part, Israel depends largely on the West Bank for the majority of their water supply, do you honestly see them ever giving that up?
Both parts of the posts are false.
Jews would still be the majority, even if just by little.
And our water come from the Sea of Galilee and underground water reserves found at the coastal planes/Negev.
You didn't answer anything, talking about how great Israel is, is not an answer. (Then again, it's a typical response from you)
Maybe I should have cleared the first part, when I say the Jewish majority would be hurt, I mean they would enjoy the amount they have now, if this is the case how much longer can Israel declare itself a Jewish state? What if a Muslim party manages to get the most seats? What you think of a Muslim as the leader of Jewish state?
Yarkon-Tanninim Aquifer - Supplies Israel with about 340 million cubic meters of water annually, which are used by the Jerusalem-Tel-Aviv area. Palestinians use about 20 million cubic meters a year.
Nablus-Gilboa Aquifer - Supplies Israel with about 115 million cubic meters a year, largely for agricultural irrigation in the kibbutzim (communes) and moshavim (cooperative settlements) in Galilee.
The Eastern Aquifer - Supplies about 40 million cubic meters annually to the Israeli settlements in the Jordan Valley, and about 60 million cubic meters to the Palestinians.
You honestly think Israel wants to give up control?
If you're asking if Israel would let all the Muslims from the occupied territories migrate to Israel:
1.)I couldn't understand your question. That's why I didn't answer it. That's not a criticism. I commend people who speak more than one language. I only speak English. Israel probably wouldn't do that for obvious reasons. No country would do something like that, nor should they. If the Muslims truely want their own country, they wouldn't do that anyway.
2.)That's not what the original question was. I answered the original question very thoroughly. The fact that I didn't answer a question that wasn't even asked yet, doesn't mean that I dodged the question which was already asked.
Bullshit. Can you honestly tell me that if the Palestineans immediately stopped attacking Israel, they would not have their own country right now?
Yes, it would hurt the Jewish majority and that's a reason why the West Bank will likely never be a full part of Israel. They are worried enough as it is about the growing Muslim population in Israel.
They do get some from the West Bank, but it's not significant enough for them to really worry about it. Besides, it's not like they would ideally want to isolate themselves from the Palestineans and the Palestineans certainly wouldn't want to isolate themselves from Israel.
Israel is a 'country' built on religion. Someone mentioned earlier about what the deal with Israel was. Like he said, imagine a bunch of druids in England/Wales whatever claiming they were promised land by mother nature or whatever. Tell me you wouldn't take a piss at them?
Also, Israel's entire existence is a religious principle - They want to bring their Messiah (The whole anti-christ principle - Christians will know what I mean) to save them or whatever. Why do you think Americans support Israel? Do you think they like jews? Hell friggin' no!
The entire talk of peaceful existence and all that other sweet-talk is BS.
Both the parties need to shut the f**k up. The Palestinians and Israelis. No ONE PARTY is right. Both of them are wrong.
If the Druids were being oppressed, and if they were a separate ethnic group with a different language, there would be pressure on the Brits to give them some kind of autonomy. BTW, I think the Brits should give Northern Ireland back to Ireland. I also believe that the Kurds should have their own country.