falxori

which only makes the point of preventing him getting nukes at all costs clearer. if you base your claims on the narrow minded logic that Israelis' have a right in Israel only because of the holocaust, then you're right. too bad for you that historic facts place jews here long before that (in addition to the 1917 Balfour declaration that has nothing to do with the holocaust) O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

agreed. but its the government that openly calls for for the destruction of israel (and openly supports terror against it) that will soon have nukes. I'm not worried about the Iranian people but i'm very worried about an Iranian extremist regime wite nukes... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

The difference between what the Nazis did (mostly to jews but not only) and the other cases mentioned in this thread is not the numbers. the issue here is not the jews being the victims, it's the fact that the only reason was pure,arbitrary hatred for certain groups of peoples considered to be lesser forms of life. in all of the other cases (as horrific as they may have been) there was war over resources, land or political power and the genocide was a mean and not the goal itself. the holocaust is the first, only (and hopefully the last) case in history in which millions were murdered only for the sake of murdering them. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

just post details here, it will save a lot of PMs... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

you can argue with the legimacy or even morality of a strike where civilians get hurt because the terrorists hide among them but you can not compare it to a terror attack in which the civilians are the actual targets, big difference. ok then, you support these actions? me too. if the terrorists would have clear markings such as uniform and military bases (not in civilians areas), it would have been normal war in which war rules apply. they can't use civilians as shields and claim to be protected by the rules of war. and btw, they do have an army, and at least in gaza it is intact. the PA simply doesn't use its own forces to take care of the terrorists, so Israel has to. what does this statement have to do with what i said about the Iran sponsering Hamas, Jihad and Hizbollah? i'm not sure which "peace" you're talking about, but if you mean the "second intifada" started at 2000, it was Arafat who sent back to viloence after he didn't get everything i wanted to in camp david. and that fact is well accepted all over the world. and you know very well that the israeli military operation in the west bank was the result of this outbreak of terror and not the cause of it. this thread is about Iran and its current crazy leader, not about the Iranian people. and i'm sure that with less outside support to terrorism, the PA (which i do believe wants peace) would be able to control the palestinians better). i'm sure you feel Iran's sponsership for Hamas is helping the Palestinian cause. i think it will only lead them to doom. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

thank you, but i could live without this job... A leader of a nation that publicly declares that another country should be wiped out of the map has no place in a civilized world. Iran is already the number one sponsor of terror which is a huge threat to Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the stability of the region. such a country, which is (together with syria) the hand behind all terror that prevents real peace talks, with nukes, is nothing less than scary... and not only to Israel. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

not restrictive, simply safe. actually a F-16 pilot, but the mentality is not miletaristic at all. some of the instructors were also army JM, but that was only their entry point to the sport. safety is a priority there and they do look after you a bit more than you would find in some other DZs. just come and have fun. and you can bring the family, most of us do at some point... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

Thank you

I'm not going to start an argument about it here, but your post is full of errors and a few unfair accusations... not true, they will be in both DZ on different days. and as far as i know, they will be at the boogie too. because its the holidays, more people can jump and thats the time period in which they were free. and to accuse the organizers of favoritism, is simply unfair. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

and that's exactly the "everything or nothing" attitude that prevents peace. i can say (again) that its not "their" land any more than it is mine but at least i'm being realistic that both of us are here to stay. and if you have any new arguement on why this land is more palestinian than jewish besides the ones that have been debated to death here, bring it on... Mr Goldstein was a terrorist. sadly we have few of those too. but (beside minor radical circles) he is considered to be a low life and a terrorist and not a hero like most palestinian terrorists. there was terror before , during, and after this sad incident. even in the link you've provided there is a long (yet not complete) list of terror acts carried by palestinians in the 70's and 80's, only then they were into airplane hijacking and killing teenagers in schools. i by no means support or justify the shooting in hebron, but to say that is the cause of all terror acts that followed is absurd. no, i can't deny but it seems you do. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

can we apply this logic to the same land stolen by the babylonians and then the Romans from the jews? or does this logic has an expiration date? I don't want to live among them, i want them to have their own state. work? that another story. free commerce and employment is essential. but its problematic when with every group of innocent workers there might be a terrorist hiding as well. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

no need. instead, pack a bag, cross the border and come jump here... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

thats ok, there are worse people to be mixed with... i kinda like the guy O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

Darius? i think you've mixed an Iranian with an Israeli... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

that depends on your definition of "ownership". if it is indeed set by who was here as a nation or even as a people, so yes. but that wasn't the point i was trying to make. the only point i was making is that the jews have as much claim in this lands as the palestinians if not more. people can say jews "own" this land as much as they want and in some context they might have a valid point. but in the current situation "owning" a piece of land which is populated 99% by palestinians doesn't mean much. and the same goes for palestinian claim over other parts. exactly my point. one sided research based on one sided testimonies. you'll be amazed how different the other side of this coin sounds. but i doubt you'll be very popular and welcomed as a visiting proffesor again, you actually do. a one state solution is a terrible idea that is doomed to fail. artificially creating a state for two completely different cultures is not a good idea. and there are many many examples with even less drastic differences in recent years (czechoslovakia, Yoguslavia, and even the french and flems in belgium hate eachother.) the only solution is two seperated states with economical cooperation. O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

its not your facts which are the problem. its the analysis and conclusions you derrive from them (in my opinion...) a) no one is forcing you. b) let me borrow your own words: "Perhaps you can point specifically to evidence of this and indicate flip floping? " O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

so let me rephrase: the jewish existance as a sovereign entity before there was anything resembling palestinians in this region. and please, dont tell me what i am able or unable to grasp because i don't see things the way you do. thats funny... it didnt seem to stop you from naming numerous events in your eralier posts, have you been there to witness all of them? I am. claiming that everything i say is not true will not make it so. and no, the example i had in mind was of Joseph's tomb that was given to the PA and was pretty much destroyed within hours, but i guess yours is also a good example. and no, i never said there are no deserted and destroyed mosques. the difference between us is that i accept that the only solution is compromise while you (pretty much like the palestinian leadership until now) go with "its all mine and i will not settle for any less". O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

Israel being the promised land in the bible could be regarded as one base for claims, but its by far not the only one. there is a bit more than biblical words that prove the jewish existance in this land. what is said to have been there?!?!?! now the jewish temple is nothing but a myth? maybe you should go check in the dark places where the Waqf keeps expanding the mosques there and by that ruining any chance of archeological research. but hey, respect for other's religious structures doesnt seem to be the palestinians strong side anyway O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

no, but if you go by "who was there first", they were. you chose to go by "who was there 300 years ago. as i've said before neither will lead to a solution. no where in my post have i relied on "god's word" the presence of a jewish state/kingdom here is a fact based on much more than the bible. "god's word" is used by people who have never heard it too often... and here you pull the "historical" claim again. correct me if i'm wrong, it was still called Hebron first... you do know that some Israeli settlements and vilages were also destroyed in that war, dont you? there was a war and it was a war on land. so stop describing it as "hey, lets go wipe out a village today" concept. the palestinians did get the shorter side of the stick as a result, but as i said i dont think there would have been a single jew in these lands had the war been lost. and we all know what would be a fair and just solution in your opinion... can you show me one country/people on this planet which is legal according to this concept? and besides, a lot of the lands you speak of were bought legally from their arab owners using donations money during the 19th and early 20th centaury. no, you don't. they are still equal citizens by law. does it mean they get a fair chance at everything? not really. but thats understandable considering the situation. the important thing is that they have every democratic right that i have including voting and getting elected to the parlament. its a delicate relationship between israeli jews and israeli arabs, but still most if not all prefer staying in israel than being under palestinian rule. a well founded speculation. and i'm sorry we weren't killed enough. and if you want numbers, i'm sure the precentage of dead israeli (out of the total israelis) is by far larger than the total of the arabs (those countries who took part in wars agains israel) numbers have no point here, more killed doesnt make you right. it was more than "attacks" it was transfer of an entire population while the local government took all of their property. the only difference between them and palestinians refugees is that Israel took care of its refugees while the arabs did not. its always backed up with modern arms, modern for the time. you say the most important thing is to end this cycle, but you still want it to turn once more until your get what you want and destroy Israel. i don't speak of jews as rising from the stones, but if you keep saying its Palestinian land because there were more arabs here 200 or 2000 years ago, all i'm saying is that there were jews here (which are strongly connected to today's jews by culture and religion) long before anything like today's palestinians ever existed. i told you "who was here first" will not lead to a solution, but you keep going back to that point. i wasn't refering to Theology. i dont go by the "god promised us" arguement. but the existance of Israel as a nation here is a fact backed by much more the theology. not due to lack of trying and because Israel has kept a close watch on things, something the PA and egypt has failed in (although egypt has signed an explicit agreement regarding the border crossings. Qasams and morter shells constantly fly out of Gaza and have killed several Israelis. yes, they are not top of the line, but its still rockets. and RPGs and anti tank missiles were smuggled recently (shall i list everything that was caught on the Karin A arms shipment for you?) i wish other armies in the world would have half of the IDFs moral backbone. i'm pretty sure any other country would have caused a lot more civilian damage under the same conditions. but when you tell your story don't forget the part about the terrorists firing Qasam rockets from the back yard in that neighbourhood. and when u tell stories about children being victims, don't forget the part where they are often used to carry explosives across checkpoints, etc. stop acting as if an apache fires a missile randomly into civilian crowds. so we agree that the first step the PA has to make is making sure there is one legitimate armed force and not 7 militias, each with its own agenda. when Israel was formed we've faced a similar situation where there was another militia group that wanted to stay independant. the founders back then had the sense and the courage to disarm them and absorb them into the newly formed IDF, and there was an actual risk of civil war (look up "Altalena") didnt read all of it (too long) but i got the point. there will be no peace if people ar unhappy with the situation. i don't want to control any palestinian but as long as they stick to the everything or nothing concept like Arafat did in Camp David, ther will be no peace either... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

there was almost an identicle jewish "disapora" who was kicked out by arab countries like Iran/Iraq/Morocco/Egypt etc. the only difference between the two is that Israel took care of its refugees while the arabs chose to let them rot in refugee camps (not that the palestinians had it any better under Jordanian and egyptian rule before 67) i think both palestinians and israelis have some base to clain ownership on all of this land (yes, including the west bank which was part of the historic land of israel) but like it or not. we're both here and we'll have to share. and it almost happened in camp david but someone chose to back off and start yet another violent round... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

unkind, maybe. but still true. true. after 2000 years in exile, under constant oppression, there was in fact a national movement which called for the rerurn to land from which they were driven out. based on your logic, thats a good thing. yes and no. as i said before, in this perios almost all of the jews lived in new settlements on the shore line which before them was only swamps or in mixed cities like Haifa and Akka (and even Hebron where my family lived for centuries until they were forced out in 1936.) and yes, in 1948 (after the local arabs refused the partition plan and invaded) they lost more land. and israel was by far weaker than its neighbours bcak then. again you're ignoring the fact that Israel was not the one to refuse the peaceful partition plan. and i don't call a U.N backed decision unilateral. permitted? sure. but don't go whining if u start a war and lose. and what makes it "their land" more than its mine? but we'll get to whos land is it in a moment... no its not. the majority of israelis live on the shore line where there was no massive arab presence. was it completely empty? no. and those who chose to stay and not run away at 1948 became israeli citizens, equal by law. i doubt any of the jewish population would have been treated any better had the 1948 war been lost... and since we're on the subject of stolen property, how about all arab countries return all of the property of the arab jews they've taken when the arab jews where kicked out of their lands (in which they've lived for centuries.) hunderds of thousands arab jews were thrown out and they were not allowed to take anything with them. simple. if u consider today's definition of palestinians. there wasn't such entity until 67, or 48 if u insist. if you want to expand it and say muslims who lived in these lands, i'll take u back 2000 years before there was even Islam while there was a well documented Jewish kingdom here (until Babylonians and then Romans exiled most of them). then you might say its not about being arab or muslim and these people still have roots in this region. good. the best you can do is go back to the book of genesis when it is believed we all had a single father and even then our claim to this land is equal. oh really? based on what? no, it would have ran out of bullets (at least you admit its not rocks anymore...) when the funds going to the PA will be used to help its citizens instead of funding terrorism. do you really doubt Israel's capability to wipe out the whole Gaza strip or any other palestinian city? sure it can, but it doesn't because our war is not with all palestinians, its with those who seek to destroy us. sadly they are operating from within the civil population. and before you pull the "citizens get hurt" card. let me remind you that one of the basic rules of war states that all comatant forces must be clearly marked and distinguished from citizens. again i'll say that i hope the PA will do its part and prove it can take care of its own business. "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

i'd rather it was 2:2 and we'd be one step closer to peace. lets hope the Gaza experiment will prove there is a partner on the other side... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

your post is so full of crap it's almost too easy... what country? the area was called "palestine" since somewhere around Roman times. the land itself had both jews and muslims (and several others) peacefully? check again. start with the riots of 36-39. this violent conflict goes way before the creation of israel. yes it was. and one side accepted it while the other (with at least 5 neighbouring countries) declared war. guess who? the nice bits? let me tell you a simple fact. before the jews settled mainly on the shore line, the area was nothing than swamps. they mainly settled there because that was mostly empty land. outsiders? well that depends on how back you want to go since these "outsiders" were driven out of the same land. that will lead us to the "who was here first" arguement which i could easily win but it will not lead to any solution. as for the original post about the free passage between Gaza and egypt, i have no problem with family reunions and free passage but... 1) in the past few days where there was no control, a huge amount of arms, rockets and explosives got into Gaza. guess where we'll see it next? 2) the more problematic thing is that terrorists cross into egypt, and then they can easily penetrate Israel through the relatively open (and long) border between egypt and israel. that is why Israel has signed an agreement with the egyptians regarding the border between egypt and Gaza. sadly, this agreement doesnt seem to be worth the paper its written on... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

its seems funny to me that you try to measure history. every place on earth has its own history, some parts are better documented and known to us today. it doesnt mean a deserted vilage on the egde of the map has any less... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

nice comeback... O "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."