To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 12819
12818  |  12820
Subject: 
Re: Response to Misinformation (Some other perspectives on the tragedy)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Sat, 15 Sep 2001 15:59:15 GMT
Viewed: 
895 times
  
Bill Farkas wrote:
If possession of land is respected in law, and U.S. law at least tends to
favor use, then how is that any group (the U.N.) can give land to third
group (Zionists) that was already resided upon by the Palestinians?  Really
you are just justifying U.N. hooliganism here...

I didn't justify their actions. Just stated them as the catalyst.

let me add to this then - there has _always_ been a jewish settlement in Israel.  Way before 1948.  And since the late the 1880s, there has been a secular-jewish settlemens in Israel as well.  So the UN did not give "a third group" a land that was "Palestinian" - they gave one of the groups living in the land the sovirenity to rule it.  And btw, most of the arabs living there at the time stayed where they were, and are not arab-israelis.  Todays "Palestinians" are mostly the people who ran away (either at '48 or '67) for fear of Israeli revenge against them.  Of course, no such revenge was ever taken.

They were not the aggressor. I respect the fact that the Arab people
disagreed with that determination and fought to retain the land - but the
fact is that they got their butts handed to them. And, after many further
attempts to  regain the land, they repeatedly had their butts handed to
them. Reality is sometimes harsh. Israel is there and needs to be dealt
with. Israel is willing to co-exist, the Palestinians are not.

Are you admitting that the land was taken by violence -- violence backed by
the U.N/U.S.?

Yes, it was taken by violence. I have demonstrated numerous times that
violence is not always bad and is sometimes necessary.

It was _defended_ by violence against attacking external forces - Egypt, Syria, Jordan for the most part.  The land was settled by zionists over 70 or so years before that.

Dan



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Response to Misinformation (Some other perspectives on the tragedy)
 
(...) Didn't those folks actually go in and buy land from people who they sincerely and with good foundation believed to be the rightful owners at the time (1) rather than settle lands from which the previous owners had been evicted, which is the (...) (23 years ago, 15-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Response to Misinformation (Some other perspectives on the tragedy)
 
(...) Not callous, realistic. War is messy. Some bullets/bombs go astray. I'm not saying it's acceptable - just true. Every death is a tragedy. A deeper tragedy is that men choose evil and cause death needlessly. (...) huh? (...) At a specific time (...) (23 years ago, 14-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

66 Messages in This Thread:



















Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR