Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

Right, let's get the Palestinians to hand over their non-existent tanks, non-existent fighter jets, non-existent nuclear weapons . . . How do you expect them to take equal part, when one side is so vastly superior to the other?

So then its not a mutual stand down is it? Its a one-sided stand down.

Besides, there is the rockets and other weaponry which they have. I really don't see any sort of peace happening until a full-scale stand-down by both sides happens.

What
Are
You
On
About

I don't think that a fertiliser bomb has quite the same power as a US-supplied shell from a tank.

How do you expect both sides to stand down equally in any war then? One side is going to be superior in some way, aren't they?

You make little sense.

 djones520 wrote:

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
Agreed.

One thing I don't really understand is how the Israeli government can get away with being racist. They allow all Jews to become citizens, unless you're black.

What?

I'd love to see some supporting evidence for this...

They allow all Jews to permanently reside, but they do not grant automatic citizenship. And I found zero mention about this being blocked if you are "black".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Hebrew_Israelites_of_Jerusalem#Status_in_Israel

My friend is a citizen of both Israel and America, from mixed American-Jewish and Indonesian descent. He said that any Jew can theoretically become a citizen of Israel without too much hassle. I took his word for it.

How do you expect both sides to stand down equally in any war then? One side is going to be superior in some way, aren't they?

So why would any nation logically agree to a stand-down if its going to lose in that instance?

Only with an outright benefit would anyone do that. If Israel's safety can't be assured then they won't stand down. Its all common sense why this conflict won't stop.

Israel is a nation that is surrounded by several belligerant states, who provide plenty of support to terrorist organizations who routinely strike out at Israel and you think they should disarm? Finding peace with the Palestinians won't end their troubles, and it's foolish to think it will.

Mr Hyena wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Besides, there is the rockets and other weaponry which they have. I really don't see any sort of peace happening until a full-scale stand-down by both sides happens.

A full-scale stan-down would require a MUCH more massive effort by Israel than Palestine.

But its more the gesture behind the standing down than the overall arms which are given up. Even if it was just a couple, it would be effectively Palestine saying that they are finally going to deal with the rocket launchers who are causing the continuation of this war, which would help ease the israeli people into peace with palestine.

Which leaves the problem: whos going to keep the rogue arab states from interfering? Like Syria, Iran and the other jihadis?

So... you want Palestine to act as though they are a nation-state, but refuse to recognize them as a nation-state?

 djones520 wrote:

They allow all Jews to permanently reside, but they do not grant automatic citizenship.

Yes, if said Jews qualify under the Law of Return, they do.

 azazel the cat wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Besides, there is the rockets and other weaponry which they have. I really don't see any sort of peace happening until a full-scale stand-down by both sides happens.

A full-scale stan-down would require a MUCH more massive effort by Israel than Palestine.

But its more the gesture behind the standing down than the overall arms which are given up. Even if it was just a couple, it would be effectively Palestine saying that they are finally going to deal with the rocket launchers who are causing the continuation of this war, which would help ease the israeli people into peace with palestine.

Which leaves the problem: whos going to keep the rogue arab states from interfering? Like Syria, Iran and the other jihadis?

So... you want Palestine to act as though they are a nation-state, but refuse to recognize them as a nation-state?

I'm all for a two-state solution. But only if done fairly and equally, with some sort of unbiased, independent body observing, with the ability to get boots on the ground if required should the rogue arab states try to invade again in israel's weakened state (not the UN though, since its full of idiots and pretty much fail at any negotiation/defense process)

WHY have none of the surrounding arab nations not taken in the palestinians?Because it suits them to have the area in a state of almost war.Israel is beset on all sides and at the moment seems to be getting little support really.I am english and christian yet even i can see this.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

I'm all for a two-state solution. But only if done fairly and equally, with some sort of unbiased, independent body observing, with the ability to get boots on the ground if required should the rogue arab states try to invade again in israel's weakened state.

What sort of two state solution do you imagine that would involve a weakened Israel?

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Besides, there is the rockets and other weaponry which they have. I really don't see any sort of peace happening until a full-scale stand-down by both sides happens.

A full-scale stan-down would require a MUCH more massive effort by Israel than Palestine.

But its more the gesture behind the standing down than the overall arms which are given up. Even if it was just a couple, it would be effectively Palestine saying that they are finally going to deal with the rocket launchers who are causing the continuation of this war, which would help ease the israeli people into peace with palestine.

Which leaves the problem: whos going to keep the rogue arab states from interfering? Like Syria, Iran and the other jihadis?

So... you want Palestine to act as though they are a nation-state, but refuse to recognize them as a nation-state?

I'm all for a two-state solution. But only if done fairly and equally, with some sort of unbiased, independent body observing, with the ability to get boots on the ground if required should the rogue arab states try to invade again in israel's weakened state.

Right. But you want an equal disarmament, which is something that the Pals can't actually do.

I don't think that the Arab states would exactly want to invade again, seeing how gung-ho the USA is about defending Israel and their civil rights violations. I mean, if they didn't, Ahmedinejad would have been in there the second he was in office.

 dogma wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

I'm all for a two-state solution. But only if done fairly and equally, with some sort of unbiased, independent body observing, with the ability to get boots on the ground if required should the rogue arab states try to invade again in israel's weakened state.

What sort of two state solution do you imagine that would involve a weakened Israel?

Less US funding, reduction in arms due to the peace process with palestine. They are surrounded by enemies who could take advantage of that delicate time.

I mean, if they didn't, Ahmedinejad would have been in there the second he was in office.

So they can't ensure that there won't be any more rockets fired into israel? How will they function as a nation then?

I'm sure Ahmedinejad would love to, since he doesn't believe the Holocaust happened anyway.

 shingouki wrote:
WHY have none of the surrounding arab nations not taken in the palestinians?Because it suits them to have the area in a state of almost war.Israel is beset on all sides and at the moment seems to be getting little support really.I am english and christian yet even i can see this.

Because THEY don't want the Palestinians either. Jordan in particular does have a decent sized chunk of a Palestinian refugee population and they'd rather they go somewhere else.

 shingouki wrote:
WHY have none of the surrounding arab nations not taken in the palestinians?Because it suits them to have the area in a state of almost war.Israel is beset on all sides and at the moment seems to be getting little support really.I am english and christian yet even i can see this.

Or they're struggling already with their own peoples. Egypt and Jordan are already overpopulated as feth, they can't take them. Saudi was poor at the time, and now they're struggling with immigrant populations. In Syria, well we know how well that country is doing, and before that it would also have been too difficult. The UAE could, but where would they live?

It's also a logistical nightmare, something that hasn't really been done for 500 years (and the methods used then aren't really applicable to modern times).

Finally, the Pals would see that as losing. They believe it's their lands that they're defending. Why would they leave?

 Mr Hyena wrote:

Less US funding, reduction in arms due to the peace process with palestine. They are surrounded by enemies who could take advantage of that delicate time.

Why would the US stop giving aid to Israel due to the inception of a two state solution? And why would Israel eliminate their arms?

The only two state solutions I've ever seen have been predicated on territorial matters.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

I'm all for a two-state solution. But only if done fairly and equally, with some sort of unbiased, independent body observing, with the ability to get boots on the ground if required should the rogue arab states try to invade again in israel's weakened state.

What sort of two state solution do you imagine that would involve a weakened Israel?

Less US funding, reduction in arms due to the peace process with palestine. They are surrounded by enemies who could take advantage of that delicate time.

I mean, if they didn't, Ahmedinejad would have been in there the second he was in office.

So they can't ensure that there won't be any more rockets fired into israel? How will they function as a nation then?

I'm sure Ahmedinejad would love to, since he doesn't believe the Holocaust happened anyway.

The Israelis already have probably one of the best equipped and advanced militaries in the Middle East. Even a small arms reduction would not really change the situation.

You think that the only method of Palestine to stay afloat is to send missiles into Israel? Not enough food? Not enough money? Well, the solution is right in front of them! Send a missile!

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

I'm all for a two-state solution. But only if done fairly and equally, with some sort of unbiased, independent body observing, with the ability to get boots on the ground if required should the rogue arab states try to invade again in israel's weakened state.

What sort of two state solution do you imagine that would involve a weakened Israel?

Less US funding, reduction in arms due to the peace process with palestine. They are surrounded by enemies who could take advantage of that delicate time.

I mean, if they didn't, Ahmedinejad would have been in there the second he was in office.

So they can't ensure that there won't be any more rockets fired into israel? How will they function as a nation then?

I'm sure Ahmedinejad would love to, since he doesn't believe the Holocaust happened anyway.

The Israelis already have probably one of the best equipped and advanced militaries in the Middle East. Even a small arms reduction would not really change the situation.

You think that the only method of Palestine to stay afloat is to send missiles into Israel? Not enough food? Not enough money? Well, the solution is right in front of them! Send a missile!

No, but every nation should have be able to have some level of control over its inhabitants.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
But only if done fairly and equally

Israel's defense budget (~13.6 billion USD) is four or so times higher than the PLO's budget for its entire government (~3 billion USD). More palestinians have died in the past few years than Israelis in the entire length and breadth of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. More and more Palestinians are being forced out of their homes by Israeli settlers (aka murderous thieves) every year. Palestinians aren't even allowed concrete and wood to rebuild the structures that Israel repeatedly destroys with its bombing strikes and tank assaults.

How the hell can the stand down be "equal" in your eyes? Even if Palestine was to completely and utterly disarm and destroy every single weapon in the Palestinian territory, that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the effort that Israel would have to put forth to even remotely be considered standing down.

Oh Israel...what are we going to do with you?

Disarming them and revoking their statehood might be a good idea.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Oh Israel...what are we going to do with you?

Disarming them and revoking their statehood might be a good idea.

...good luck with that!

Yeaaah, I don't think they'd take too kindly to that.

And they'd decide to not take kindly to that with bullets probably. And tanks.

Melissia wrote:Yeaaah, I don't think they'd take too kindly to that.

And they'd decide to not take kindly to that with bullets probably. And tanks.

And a nuclear bomb (thanks France!).

 Mr Hyena wrote:

So feth 'em. They deserve everything they get on the back of this. We owe Israel nothing.

'You' never did nothing. English soldiers never did a thing for Isreal as it stands anyway. The lot of cowards 'You' were.

What on earth are you babbling about? I mean that we (the UK) as a nation owe Israel nothing.

And incidentally, my grandad served in Palestine post-WWII. Y'know, when Irgun were blowing up hotels full of civilians?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ketara wrote:

 Albatross wrote:


OK, you can cut the condescending 'concerned dad' act out right the feth now. You are not my elder or my better. I would be perfectly entitled to view an unsuccessful (and illegal) Israeli airstrike with a certain amused detachment, given the IDF's behaviour in the past. It would serve them right for thinking they can bomb whoever they please with impunity.

It's nothing to do with condescension I can assure you. More the disappointment from one respecting adult to another when the other suddenly comes out with something crass and distasteful. You're generally pretty level-headed about most things, and I respect you and what you write on here as a result of that.

But when you seem to revel in amusement at the thought of the deaths of servicemen of any nation, and then dismiss it with a handwave and 'context', well.... Whilst you are of course free to hold that opinion, I believe I likewise, am fully entitled to state that I thought better of you from what I've come to expect from your posts.

Who said anything about servicemen dying? I said I'd have been amused if Israeli jets were shot down attempting to airstrike Syria.

 Melissia wrote:
Yeaaah, I don't think they'd take too kindly to that.

And they'd decide to not take kindly to that with bullets probably. And tanks.

Bullets and tanks used by one of the finest and most experienced armed forces in the world.

Wait, they use North Korean weapons and tanks?

There are North Korean weapons and tanks?

North Korea has a manufacturing sector?

*snicker* har har Melissa, but the Merkava tank and it's attendant family of armored vehicles are some of the finest in the world, and the Israeli small arms industry is an absolute elite. The TAR-21 Tavor alone is proof of that. Their home grown upgrades and variants of various U.S. equipment, fighter jets in particular are also highly impressive.

As we all know, nothing can ever beat the glorious Korean Peoples' Army in terms of being a fine and experienced military force, and they need no expensive hi-tech tanks or efficient assault rifles to defeat their enemies, only the will of their most glorious and praised leader under the heavens, Kim Jung Un is necessary. Of course, Kim Jong Un would intervene himself, but if he has any flaws it is mercy, and he would not wish to inflict the utmost destructive force that his himself upon us except in the most dire of situations.

At any rate, to get more on topic again...

While completely disarming either side is basically a political impossibility, certainly there's improvements to be made. Such as allowing more relief and building materials to flow in to Palestinian territories, for example, and to force the Israeli to stop attempting more land grabs. On the Palestinian side, there honestly isn't that much that they can do save for stop the rocket barrages, but even then, they're pretty much ineffective and useless as it is anyway so no matter hwat happens, the Israeli government will feel as if it's doing most of the work.

Which is probably because the Israeli government is the one with the real power in this situation, the PLO barely has any even within its own territory-- often specifically because of the actions of the Israeli government to begin with.

I get the Israeli blockade though, when supplies do go in, nine times out of ten then only things they're helping is to aid the PLO build more bunkers and fortifications to attack the Israeli civilian population from, when they aren't setting up their rockets on top of elementary schools any way. If the PLO and Hamas actually bothered to control their own goon squads, without constant threats and attacks to the Israeli civilian population, the leadership in Jerusalem would be surprisingly more amicable. It's kinda similar to North Korea on an extremely tiny scale. The one side uses threats and violence to attempt to get concessions from the other side, which only strengthens the resolve of the other side and pisses them off. It's not a perfect metaphor but the similarity is there.

You're assuming that they even CAN control them at this point.

Given the utter chaos that is Palestine right now, that's not a safe assumption.

Israel really is the one with all the power here, and they can barely control THEIR goon squads a ttimes. Certainly their military is hamstrung, considering they've let settlers literally get away with murdering soldiers for trying to do their jobs.

The settlers are no better than the terrorists. Worse in many regards.

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Oh Israel...what are we going to do with you?

Disarming them and revoking their statehood might be a good idea.

So your wanting another Holocaust by the Jihadists around them?

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Squigsquasher wrote:
Oh Israel...what are we going to do with you?

Disarming them and revoking their statehood might be a good idea.

So your wanting another Holocaust by the Jihadists around them?

They're already doing that to themselves, so what is your point exactly?