10 Killed in Israeli Raid on Aid Flotilla

[Avenger]

Uhm. Palestine never took a side in those wars, as far as I know. They did not attack Israel. Would you kindly explain what warrants Israel's takeover of land, when Palestine never actually engaged in warfare against them?

 

[Rocky]

In his speech to Arab trade unionists on May 26, Nasser announced: "If Israel embarks on an aggression against Syria or Egypt, the battle against Israel will be a general one and not confined to one spot on the Syrian or Egyptian borders. The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel."[101][102]

Speaking to the UN General Assembly in September 1960, Nasser had stated that "The only solution to Palestine is that matters should return to the condition prevailing before the error was committed - i.e., the annulment of Israel's existence." In 1964 he said, "We swear to God that we shall not rest until we restore the Arab nation to Palestine and Palestine to the Arab nation. There is no room for imperialism and there is no room for Britain in our country, just as there is no room for Israel within the Arab nation." In 1965 he asserted, "We shall not enter Palestine with its soil covered in sand, we shall enter it with its soil saturated in blood."[103]

Nasser publicly denied that Egypt would strike first and spoke of a negotiated peace if the Palestinians were allowed to return to their homeland and of a possible compromise over the Strait of Tiran.[79]

Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War#The_drift_to_war

Tell me again that Palestine wasn't involved.

Furthermore:

This war was part of the Arab-Israeli conflict, an ongoing dispute which included many battles and wars since 1948 when the state of Israel was formed. During the Six-Day War of 1967, the Israelis captured Egypt's Sinai Peninsula all the way up to the Suez Canal, which had become the cease-fire line, and roughly half of Syria's Golan Heights.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War#Casus_belli

Land captured from Syria and Egypt. When did we steal more of Palestine?

-Edit #3

Just because I'm on a roll, do you want some fries with your serving of source?

 

[Avenger]

Uhm. You realize you just quoted the Egyptian president, right? I'm confused as to how this means Palestine attacked Israel.

 

[Rocky]

Yes I realise, Egypt attacked in the name of Palestine. I consider that reason enough that Palestine was involved, otherwise why else does Egypt have the right to invade Israel? Also if you read my edits you'll see that the land Israel captured land belonging to Egypt and Syria, not Palestine. I'm confused why you think Israel stole more Palestinian land.

 

[Avenger]

So... if Norway nukes Sweden in the name of the United States, then Sweden would be entitled to invade the United States? Got'cha. That's one hell of an argument.

Edit:

Read Fortnox' posts, one of them has the changes of Palestinian land. Israel started out with 55%, now they have over 80% of the original Palestinian mandate. Something happened along the way, don't you agree?

 

[Rocky]

When one Arab nation claims that it will reclaim the land of it's fellow Arab nation by staining the sands with the blood of it's enemies. Then lines up with several other Arab nations and launches an all out offensive on it's enemies, so that it won't "enter Palestine with its soil covered in sand" but rather "enter it with its soil saturated in blood". You don't think that's a little extreme? A little worthy of retaliation? You've got to ask yourself, what does Egypt have to gain by wiping out Israel, why go to such lengths (twice) to purge the Jewish state?

If a big brother thinks his little brother is getting picked on and decides to attack the other kid who he perceives is picking on him, are not both parties a little guilty? The little brother has obviously done something to get the big brother's attention in order to provoke the retaliation, even if he stands quietly in the corner while his big brother tries to eliminate the threat.

But then who cares when countries invade Israel with a clear intent to destroy it, from what I'm reading in this thread, most of you would be happy if Israel was obliterated.

 

[Avenger]

When one Arab nation claims that it will reclaim the land of it's fellow Arab nation by staining the sands with the blood of it's enemies. Then lines up with several other Arab nations and launches an all out offensive on it's enemies, so that it won't "enter Palestine with its soil covered in sand" but rather "enter it with its soil saturated in blood". You don't think that's a little extreme? A little worthy of retaliation? You've got to ask yourself, what does Egypt have to gain by wiping out Israel, why go to such lengths (twice) to purge the Jewish state?

This does not change the fact that Egypt did not act on orders from Palestine. They did what they did of their own volition. Should we blame the Beatles for Charles Manson, too?

If a big brother thinks his little brother is getting picked on and decides to attack the other kid who he perceives is picking on him, are not both parties a little guilty? The little brother has obviously done something to get the big brother's attention in order to provoke the retaliation, even if he stands quietly in the corner while his big brother tries to eliminate the threat.

It's not a matter of perception. That "kid" was and is picking on the little brother, in your little metaphor. Israel is not some innocent nation being framed. Their reputation is entirely deserved because of their actions in the past.

Zionists illegally entered Palestine before the 1948 partition, and trained up a fairly fierce army, because they knew what they were doing would antagonize the Arabs. Their acts of terrorism against the British cannot be said to be "okay" regardless of your stance here. Israel is not an innocent nation, nor will it ever be, because it was born of bloodshed, and in bloodshed it continues on.

But then who cares when countries invade Israel with a clear intent to destroy it, from what I'm reading in this thread, most of you would be happy if Israel was obliterated.

Yes, I do kind of oppose nations built on the three tenets of subterfuge, violence, and extreme xenophobia.

What I want is a democratically run state that encompasses the entire area of Palestine and Israel, where citizens are treated equally regardless of their race or religion. This will not happen while Israel has the power it does, because it's like a schoolyard bully, pushing all the other kids around.

 

[Rocky]

My answer to everything you've said is.

You believe two wrongs make a right? Even if I were to agree with you (I don't.) Your underlying arguement for your inherent and unwavering hate of Israel is "they started it first!"

Schoolyard logic at it's finest.

/thread

 

[Avenger]

Isn't that more what you're saying?

If Egypt act like bastards, it's RIGHT if Israel steals Palestinian land?

Israel didn't just start it, they also continued it, and they're still continuing it. It's like a big brother punching his kid brother in the arm, then he gets a punch back (weak one, because the little brother can't really punch), and then the big brother jumps on top of the kid brother and repeatedly beats him in the face 'till his face needs major surgery.

I'm pretty sure the big brother would be in the wrong in the above scenario, aren't you?

Oh, and I've never suggested two wrongs make a right. Don't use that kind of bull**** rhetoric on me, please.

 

[Rocky]

It's not a matter of perception. That "kid" was and is picking on the little brother, in your little metaphor. Israel is not some innocent nation being framed. Their reputation is entirely deserved because of their actions in the past.

Zionists illegally entered Palestine before the 1948 partition, and trained up a fairly fierce army, because they knew what they were doing would antagonize the Arabs. Their acts of terrorism against the British cannot be said to be "okay" regardless of your stance here. Israel is not an innocent nation, nor will it ever be, because it was born of bloodshed, and in bloodshed it continues on.

I was going to highlight certain aspects of this post that reflect the two wrongs make a right idea, but in reality the whole thing reeks of it. Their past actions are what makes it okay for the Palestinians to do the same thing? It was born in bloodshed so it will continue on in bloodshed? They illegally entered and built a fierce army so Hamas can do the same?

Sorry my friend, I do enjoy a good banter with you and you challenge my thoughts and ideas and I like that, but you're definitely suggesting, whether you realise it or not that because Israel did it, everybody else can do it.

--Edit

In response to your actual post, Israel "captured" Egyptian and Palestinian land, as far as overtaking Palestinian land within the boundaries of Israel, I don't have any information on that rather than an obscure french map posted by fortnox.

I also don't see where Israel has punched Egypt, Syria and/or Jordan to the ground and repeatedly beaten them to down till they required major surgery. Israel has frequent scuffles with Palestinians, but each are a direct retaliation to something the Palestinians did first. Protip: If firing a handful of rockets into an Israeli civilian settlement provokes a carpet bombing of your schools and hospitals, it doesn't take a ****ing rocket (-edit, lol unintentional pun) scientist to realise STOP FIRING ROCKETS!

My little nephew does the same thing, he'll try and surprise attack me, I'll subdue him convincingly until he stops struggling. Once I let him go his first course of action is to retaliate, causing me to subdue him once more. Once he admits defeat I'll release him and go about by business, BUT WAIT A MINUTE, he's attacking me again! Guess what I do?

Palestine has the maturity level of a four year old. If peace is truly a goal of theirs, it seems obvious to me at least that you stop firing rockets, you disband all terrorist and military factions and activities, Israel stops blockading your territories and you begin to live peacefully! That makes sense to me, but Palestine doesn't want peace. Palestine wants the complete annihilation of Israel.

 

[Avenger]

I never said it was okay for Palestine to do what it's doing. You're building a straw-man, please stop it. My bloodshed remark was aimed at Israel's very existence. They started out by killing people, continued on by killing people, and are still here because they kill people. Hamas did not do anything illegal by creating an oppositional army toward an occupying nation as far as I know. You can't compare the two situations.

I don't think Hamas is "right" in what it's doing, but Hamas is one of the main reasons Gaza has anything at all. They get a tremendous amount of aid from Arab nations, and without that aid, Israel's chokehold would be killing off even more innocent people.

Please stop using poor rhetoric on me, it won't work. If you want to illustrate my supposed "two wrongs make a right" ideology, then please do, because otherwise, you're just building straw-men.

 

[Rocky]

I'm not familiar with the straw-men expression, however I edited my previous post to respond to the other stuff you said.

 

[Pain]

A straw man is a logical fallacy wherein you construct a similar yet inaccurate description of what your opponent is saying, usually resulting in an easier rebuttal.

Example:
Evolution says we came from monkeys.
My grandapa isn't a monkey.
I've just disproven evolution.

The straw man here is in the very first line, wherein the person makes an assertion to what is to be argued against, and then defeats his own interpretation.

 

[Synth]

If 2012 causes arctic areas of the Earth to shift climate we could just move Israel there.

 

[Zeonix]

http://www.alternet.org/story/14711...the_flotilla_attack_was_an_illegal_act_of_war