How the Nazi Jews from burning Kiev plan to do a Golan Heights style of genocide, or something, I lost track of this shit

[Colin]

17 hours ago, Strannik said:

And a bit of satire to finish a night:

 

 

 

 

Remind me again what pieces they took? It was the Arabs who did not support the partition plan and wanted to drive the Jews into the sea. The Israelis handed back the Sinai and Gaza, along with other concessions. The fact that Syria lost territory after attacking Israel is not Israels fault. That territory has now been in Israeli hands for longer than it was in Syrian hands. Not to mention those borders were drawn up by French and British Occupiers post WWI.

[Colin]

39 minutes ago, sunday said:

West Bank, Colin? Unlawful settlements?

Edited to add quote of post that was answered.

Jordan was fooled into confronting the Israelis by Egypt who needed them to tie down Israel forces. None of the Arab countries at that time acknowledged Israel's right to exist. 

[Colin]

16 minutes ago, Strannik said:

Hello https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/israel-invades-egypt-suez-crisis-begins

and they gave it back upon peace negotiations. Do you think Russia will ever hand back Crimea willingly?  

[Strannik]

9 minutes ago, Colin said:

and they gave it back upon peace negotiations. Do you think Russia will ever hand back Crimea willingly?  

They kept Golan Heights, they annex lands as we speak little by little.

No, that train had left in 2014.

And these all questions are beyond your original point (non-sequitur).

Edited September 28, 2022 by Strannik

[crazyinsane105]

28 minutes ago, Colin said:

and they gave it back upon peace negotiations. Do you think Russia will ever hand back Crimea willingly?  

I mean, Golan Heights hasn’t been given back. And in the Sianai, the Egyptians cant deploy any troops or aircraft without explicit approval from the Israelis.

It’s a peace deal in which Israel gets to dictate how the lands of other countries are being used. 
 

More or less, it’s not something Ukraine will agree to with Russia if something similar were to be in place 

[TrustMe]

4 minutes ago, crazyinsane105 said:

I mean, Golan Heights hasn’t been given back. And in the Sianai, the Egyptians cant deploy any troops or aircraft without explicit approval from the Israelis.

It’s a peace deal in which Israel gets to dictate how the lands of other countries are being used. 
 

More or less, it’s not something Ukraine will agree to with Russia if something similar were to be in place 

Israel has offered to give back the Golan Heights (a strategic area not just for it's mountains but also becase its a source of water) in exchange that Syria signes a peace treaty with Israel. So far they haven't done so and the longer it doesn't the less willing Israel wil be to give it back.

[Yama]

11 minutes ago, TrustMe said:

Israel has offered to give back the Golan Heights (a strategic area not just for it's mountains but also becase its a source of water) in exchange that Syria signes a peace treaty with Israel. So far they haven't done so and the longer it doesn't the less willing Israel wil be to give it back.

Not exactly; Israel offered to retreat to 1923 line, which is slightly smaller territory, and most notably excludes Syrian entrance to Sea of Galilee.

EU position is that Golan Heights is similar in status with Crimea - area gained in a war, and thus cannot be legally accepted as property of the conqueror.

[crazyinsane105]

37 minutes ago, TrustMe said:

Israel has offered to give back the Golan Heights (a strategic area not just for it's mountains but also becase its a source of water) in exchange that Syria signes a peace treaty with Israel. So far they haven't done so and the longer it doesn't the less willing Israel wil be to give it back.

Adding to what Yama said, even if Golan Heights was ever given back to its fullest extent (which the Israelis don’t plan on doing), the Syrians will have to abide to a huge number of restrictions on what they can specifically do on their own territory, similar to what was signed with Egypt. 
 

Which again, is something Ukraine isn’t necessarily willing to accept nor should they 

[Strannik]

26 minutes ago, Yama said:

EU position is that Golan Heights is similar in status with Crimea - area gained in a war, and thus cannot be legally accepted as property of the conqueror.

In a lip service kind of way similar - without any serious teeth.

[crazyinsane105]

1 hour ago, Colin said:

Little to zero sympathy for the Arabs, not only did they start the war in 1948 with the intent to kill, but also to ethnically cleanse the region of Jews. Thankfully the Arabs could not organize a orgy in a whorehouse and everytime they tried to win through warfare, they lost more ground. Egypt signed that peace treaty because they got their ass kicked, despite a initially very good operation. Currently in the Sinai the IDF and Egyptian Army work together to fight insurgents. 

As for the Golan, Syria held that part for 21 years, Israel has held it for 55 years. Syria initiated hostilities in 1948 and continued to assist in the destruction of Israel.  Israel is very much the Ukraine in this matter and the Arabs are the Russians. 

But you understand the point I’m trying to make, right? On one hand, the West is perfectly fine with Israel occupying land that isn’t rightfully theirs (and even if Europe doesn’t view Golan Heights as the land of Israel, they aren’t going to do much to sanction Israel to make them return it). But when it comes to Russia occupying Crimea and now other parts of Ukraine…it’s an issue.

IMO, it’s a pretty glaring double standard. 

[Colin]

19 minutes ago, crazyinsane105 said:

But you understand the point I’m trying to make, right? On one hand, the West is perfectly fine with Israel occupying land that isn’t rightfully theirs (and even if Europe doesn’t view Golan Heights as the land of Israel, they aren’t going to do much to sanction Israel to make them return it). But when it comes to Russia occupying Crimea and now other parts of Ukraine…it’s an issue.

IMO, it’s a pretty glaring double standard. 

No I don't. Israel was not the aggressor in the first place and state of war pretty much existed since 1948, with the Arab publicly stating their goal was the annihilation or the expulsion of the Jews/Israelis. Defending yourself against genocide is a very different story. The only reason you can attempt to use it as an example is that the Arabs screwed themselves time and again by screwing each other and then lost ground to the Israelis. Basically they are whining that being a bully did not work out. 

You could try using your example in the context of Russia vs Georgia or the Azerbaijan vs Armenia  

Edited September 29, 2022 by Colin

[Perun]

2 hours ago, Colin said:

Little to zero sympathy for the Arabs, not only did they start the war in 1948 with the intent to kill, but also to ethnically cleanse the region of Jews. 

...

Israel is very much the Ukraine in this matter and the Arabs are the Russians. 

What is diference between Arabs and Israeli now? Today Arabs live in ghettos and is only question of time when Israelis will try to resolve Palestinian question by gas chambers. Nowdays David became Gholiat

...

Ukraine is in no way similiar to Israel or Arab-Israel dispute.

Edited September 29, 2022 by Perun

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, crazyinsane105 said:

But you understand the point I’m trying to make, right? On one hand, the West is perfectly fine with Israel occupying land that isn’t rightfully theirs (and even if Europe doesn’t view Golan Heights as the land of Israel, they aren’t going to do much to sanction Israel to make them return it). But when it comes to Russia occupying Crimea and now other parts of Ukraine…it’s an issue.

IMO, it’s a pretty glaring double standard. 

But the standard is 'Does the territory belong to a Democratic or western leaning state'. And also, and im sorry to say this, the metric of whats allowed in the middle east is considerably lower than whats allowed in Europe. If we intervened for every border dispute that went on in the last 50 years, we would have been in the Sandy place about 3 times longer than we were.

If you say that all borders should be respected, I entirely agree. But then NATO didnt seem that bothered when British overseas territories were invaded in 1982. And half the UN were positioning to try and negotiate it out from underneath us, perceiving it, incorrectly, as an Imperial issue.

Its worth remembering, the US intervened in Lebanon in 1982 because it was getting incomfortable about the size of the Israeli operation. And that did end with weapons drawn. Does the US really want to pick a fight with Israel? I frankly doubt it. So what other options are there? Its very easy to say something must be done, but short of a war, there is comparatively little that could be done. And we would get zero thanks off the Syrians, who would just use the territory to bombard Israel again.

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, Perun said:

What is diference between Arabs and Israeli now? Today Arabs live in ghettos and is only question of time when Israelis will try to resolve Palestinian question by gas chambers. Nowdays David became Gholiat

...

Ukraine is in no way similiar to Israel or Arab-Israel dispute.

Can you cut the antisemitic shit out please? We dont need it on this site.

[Perun]

47 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Can you cut the antisemitic shit out please? We dont need it on this site.

I don't know what you are talking about. Please stop with your sick fantasies

[RETAC21]

2 hours ago, Colin said:

No I don't. Israel was not the aggressor in the first place and state of war pretty much existed since 1948, with the Arab publicly stating their goal was the annihilation or the expulsion of the Jews/Israelis. Defending yourself against genocide is a very different story. The only reason you can attempt to use it as an example is that the Arabs screwed themselves time and again by screwing each other and then lost ground to the Israelis. Basically they are whining that being a bully did not work out. 

You could try using your example in the context of Russia vs Georgia or the Azerbaijan vs Armenia  

Actually, that's not true, Israel has been the aggressor multiple times (and this was acknowledged by Moshe Dayan himself) before and after 1948. As for Arab goals, saying that their ultimate goal was the annihilation of the Jews is akin to believing all Russian propaganda, it wasn't, and they didn't even have a common goal, much less a concerted effort.

After 2 tries (1948, 1956) Israel realised that taking the ground and then giving it back was kind of pointless and in 1967 those chickens came home to roost for the Arabs, but not all Arabs lost equally.

For Egypt it was an existential threat as the canal was closed and the country was going down the drain, Sadat tried to negotiate out of it, but Golda Meir would have none of it and the only way to shake the Israelis was through a limited war, whose only aim was to cross the canal and hold out until the UN ceasefire.

Jordan's King was glad to get rid of the troublesome Palestinians, who didn't acknowledge him as leader and to let the great Jordan dream of his grandfather wither away if he could have a reasonable relationship with Israel and the support of the US/UK to stay in the throne (as he could see what had gone on in Iraq)

Syria lost a few miles of not very good farmland of no consequence to its existance, but being a chaotic failed state, failed to reach an agreement with Israel.

The Palestinian refugees proceeded to destabilize all the countries that received them, first Jordan, then Lebanon, and their aim of returning to Palestine was replaced with setting up their own states within the host state.

This conflict can't be simplified as the Arabs wanted all Jews death and therfore the Jews are justified as doing whatever they want, not even the Israelis see it that way.

[lucklucky]

4 hours ago, Perun said:

What is diference between Arabs and Israeli now? Today Arabs live in ghettos and is only question of time when Israelis will try to resolve Palestinian question by gas chambers. Nowdays David became Gholiat

...

Ukraine is in no way similiar to Israel or Arab-Israel dispute.

Both Palestinians dictatorships want to destroy Israel  . If Germany still had Nazi Governments after losing the war they would still be occupied today.

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

2 hours ago, Perun said:

I don't know what you are talking about. Please stop with your sick fantasies

So you talk about Jews setting up Gas chambers, and Im being the aggressor?

Cut it out. If you dont, the moderator im sure will.

[Yama]

2 minutes ago, lucklucky said:

Both Palestinians dictatorships want to destroy Israel  . If Germany still had Nazi Governments after losing the war they would still be occupied today.

 

Given that Israel is actively destroying Palestine, seems it is just quid pro quo.

[Markus Becker]

3 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Can you cut the antisemitic shit out please? We dont need it on this site.

Seconded! Textbook antisemitism of the most primitive type. 

[sunday]

If criticizing the English role in the Bengal famine in WWII is not Anglophobia, nor criticizing the atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis is Germanophobia, then criticizing the Israeli excesses against Palestinians should not be Antisemitism, IMHO.

Edited September 29, 2022 by sunday

[TrustMe]

Let's just get to the root of the matter. The Israeli's and Palestinians hate each other. They've been killing each other for a hundred years. There never going to get along.

[Soren Ras]

5 minutes ago, sunday said:

If criticizing the English role in the Bengal famine in WWII is not Anglophobia, nor criticizing the atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis is Germanophobia, then criticizing the Israeli excesses against Palestinians should not be Antisemitism, IMHO.

Saying "Today Arabs live in ghettos and is only question of time when Israelis will try to resolve Palestinian question by gas chambers" [emphasis mine],   is rather more than "criticizing Israeli excesses".

In this case, Stuart is entirely correct in pointing out the garbage statement made.

[sunday]

2 minutes ago, Soren Ras said:

Saying "Today Arabs live in ghettos and is only question of time when Israelis will try to resolve Palestinian question by gas chambers" [emphasis mine],   is rather more than "criticizing Israeli excesses".

In this case, Stuart is entirely correct in pointing out the garbage statement made.

Hyperbole could be a delicate matter, yes.

[sunday]

7 minutes ago, ink said:

Agreed! There is much more to it than that, of course, but I really think you can stay at that level of broad strokes analysis and live happily until the end of your days.

Well, seems it was necessary to go to that level in order to make an understandable point.