Results 1 to 40 of 41

Thread: A new mini Israel in Asia

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    There is no comparison to Blacks and Latinos in the US to Israeli oppresion of Palestinians..America is not officially a WHITE state, there may be some racism in America, but Blacks and Latinos are citizens and the US and have equal rights protection, they vote they are represented in the government.. Israel is an aphartied state, even that million arabs that have israeli citizenship- they are not allowed in the cabinet, and their parties are always in the opposition because the jewish parties don't invite them into the government, they wind up with no influence.. and the issue is that other 4 million that are in the bantustans- not the ones with israeli citizenship.

    and it's not an issue that muslims will get the whole of the philipines, the Philippines has a big mechanized army, so does Thailand..these muslim separatists are a small guerrilla force attempting to get a small southern part or island..there is no major population center down there or city, just some jungle with scattered villages..there is no real threat there, just a disenfranchised minority. so cut the crap that they're going to take over the world.
    Last edited by eliteforce; 05-10-2009 at 09:11 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    34,255
    Quote Originally Posted by eliteforce View Post
    There is no comparison to Blacks and Latinos in the US to Israeli oppresion of Palestinians..America is not officially a WHITE state, there may be some racism in America, but Blacks and Latinos are citizens and the US and have equal rights protection.
    So you agree that if Israel is a Jewish state and a democracy they are opressive. But, a majority Arab democracy is not . And all the muslim states around the world as well as this future one are not .

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    34,255
    Quote Originally Posted by eliteforce View Post
    This is some little guerila group in the Philippines, the Philippine army can come and clear them out anytime., that whole country is a Philippine sovereignty.
    .
    Quote Originally Posted by eliteforce View Post
    and it's not an issue that muslims will get the whole of the philipines, the Philippines has a big mechanized army, so does Thailand..these muslim separatists are a small guerrilla force attempting to get a small southern part or island..there is no major population center down there or city, just some jungle with scattered villages..there is no real threat there, just a disenfranchised minority. so cut the crap that they're going to take over the world.
    Your view on the subject of the thread itself, is it's insignificat and irrelivent...radical Islam is not causing a major problem to the Philippines and they could deal with it easily any time they want with their big mechanized army....the people are oppressed there no people who live there anyway except the oppressed...noted, thankyou for your participation, although I think most reasonable people would disagree. I think if you reviewed any of the relivent facts, you'd find yourself wrong.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    G.B.G
    Posts
    510
    Quote Originally Posted by eliteforce View Post
    and it's not an issue that muslims will get the whole of the philipines, the Philippines has a big mechanized army, so does Thailand..these muslim separatists are a small guerrilla force attempting to get a small southern part or island..there is no major population center down there or city, just some jungle with scattered villages..there is no real threat there, just a disenfranchised minority. so cut the crap that they're going to take over the world.
    Are u really blind to every fault a muslim does? this comment
    by you has to be the most idiotic thing i have ever read.

    Oh so the muslims only want a small southern part of the Philippines,
    not the whole country. Well i guess that makes sense, and its not
    that big of a deal

    Why should the Philippines just hand over a part of there country?
    Even if it was only a toxic wasteland, its still the Philippines gov that
    owns it, not some muslim military group that is trying to claim it with
    violence and killing.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by eliteforce View Post
    There is no comparison to Blacks and Latinos in the US to Israeli oppresion of Palestinians..America is not officially a WHITE state, there may be some racism in America, but Blacks and Latinos are citizens and the US and have equal rights protectionas do muslims in israel....,
    they vote they are represented in the government.. Israel is an aphartied state, even that million arabs that have israeli citizenship- they are not allowed in the cabinetwanna bet on that?, and their parties are always in the opposition because the jewish parties don't invite them into the government invite them into the government? its a ****ing democracy, they get elected to government, its not 'an invite only affair',
    they wind up with no influence.. and the issue is that other 4 million that are in the bantustans-well if the strategy wasnt kill everyone, they may very well have had a legitimate state/cause by now
    not the ones with israeli citizenship.

    and it's not an issue that muslims will get the whole of the philipines, the Philippines has a big mechanized army, so does Thailand..these muslim separatists are a small guerrilla force attempting to get a small southern part or island..there is no major population center down there or city, just some jungle with scattered villages..ok well im going to have native americans start launching katyushas into new york for you...
    there is no real threat there, just a disenfranchised minority.do they have no rights? please, evidence. i would like some
    so cut the crap that they're going to take over the world.agreed
    go again, shall we?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Front toward enemy
    Posts
    6,265
    Quote Originally Posted by eliteforce View Post
    There is no comparison to Blacks and Latinos in the US to Israeli oppresion of Palestinians..America is not officially a WHITE state, there may be some racism in America, but Blacks and Latinos are citizens and the US and have equal rights protection, they vote they are represented in the government.. Israel is an aphartied state, even that million arabs that have israeli citizenship- they are not allowed in the cabinet, and their parties are always in the opposition because the jewish parties don't invite them into the government, they wind up with no influence.. and the issue is that other 4 million that are in the bantustans- not the ones with israeli citizenship.

    and it's not an issue that muslims will get the whole of the philipines, the Philippines has a big mechanized army, so does Thailand..these muslim separatists are a small guerrilla force attempting to get a small southern part or island..there is no major population center down there or city, just some jungle with scattered villages..there is no real threat there, just a disenfranchised minority. so cut the crap that they're going to take over the world.

    I beg to differ. Why the Hell should the Philippine government give this Guerilla Force (your words) any part of the Philippines? Because they demanded it? And from the sounds of it, why would one region be good enough? It wouldn't. They would not be happy until they had control of the entire country. And the Philippines would be out of their mind to allow this group, who are in their own rights terrorists, one of the islands to do christ knows what on.

    If you lived next door to an over bearing bullying neighbour who said "give me your house or i'll burn it down" would you give him a room to appease him?

  7. #7
    muslims in "Israel" do not have equal rights protection; they have no civil rights laws there, in otherwords it's prefectly legal to discriminate there based on race or religion..it's a "jewish state" , all the laws there reflect that, best example is when land was confiscated from the Arab citizens of Israel and not the Jewish citizens, it was then given to "kibutzis" or given to jews, land that stays in arab hands is taxed at a much higher rate because it's not a kibutz.. the education system there is segregated, there are arab schools and jewish scools (except for a small number that is mixed) and the arab sector always receives less funding, the city of nazareth with a population growth rate higher than nazareth 'eliat'-a jewish town israel built next door to it, is given much less room for expansion, in short the crowd arab area's and public companies like water and power discriminate in employment..and we're only talking about the Palestinian Israelis here not the ones in the bantustans which have it far worse..in short if this was done in in the US (like in the south) it would be called a KuKluxKlan state or neonazi state..

    native americans or blacks do not fire katushas because there is no oppression there, there is no comparison to Palestinians.. and the blacks in america rioted and burned down half of LA once just because a black motorist was beaten! the Palestinians on the other hand are routinly tortured, being beaten is a minor incident over there..

    and i'm not saying muslims should be given any part of the philipines , i'm just saying they are not "taking over" the place by force, like a marching army .. the soverignty there is the Philipines and it's just a guerilla group hidden in the jungle like in burma or south america.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    34,255
    Quote Originally Posted by eliteforce View Post
    muslims in "Israel" do not have equal rights protection; they have no civil rights laws there, in otherwords it's prefectly legal to discriminate there based on race or religion..it's a "jewish state" , all the laws there reflect that, best example is when land was confiscated from the Arab citizens of Israel and not the Jewish citizens, it was then given to "kibutzis" or given to jews, land that stays in arab hands is taxed at a much higher rate because it's not a kibutz.. the education system there is segregated, there are arab schools and jewish scools (except for a small number that is mixed) and the arab sector always receives less funding, the city of nazareth with a population growth rate higher than nazareth 'eliat'-a jewish town israel built next door to it, is given much less room for expansion, in short the crowd arab area's and public companies like water and power discriminate in employment..and we're only talking about the Palestinian Israelis here not the ones in the bantustans which have it far worse..in short if this was done in in the US (like in the south) it would be called a KuKluxKlan state or neonazi state..

    native americans or blacks do not fire katushas because there is no oppression there, there is no comparison to Palestinians.. and the blacks in america rioted and burned down half of LA once just because a black motorist was beaten! the Palestinians on the other hand are routinly tortured, being beaten is a minor incident over there..

    and i'm not saying muslims should be given any part of the philipines , i'm just saying they are not "taking over" the place by force, like a marching army .. the soverignty there is the Philipines and it's just a guerilla group hidden in the jungle like in burma or south america.
    As I stated in another thread:
    When it comes to the 1948 partition in Palestine Muslims rejected it totally and any possibility of living in peace alongside a tiny Jewish state. Instead they aided in the invasion of the country by the regular armies of six Arab states sending their homeland into war and ending as defeated refugees. Had they accepted it, Palestinian Arabs would today be enjoying the rights of their own independent homeland without the bloodshed of the last sixty years a minority of them would be citizens of a moretolerant Israel, free from threat of warfare and terrorism.

    Even today, the refugee camps can't be given statehood, because they won't agree to be at peace with Israel.
    No Islamic state wants to take on or help the refugees because they create a power postion, and the more reugees the more powerful the propaganda message.

    I'm still waiting for my sources I asked for above.
    It may not be an army, but it's very efficent warefare...MILF numbers over 13k people. Look at all the stories I posted above from this year alone at all the trouble they are causing.
    Last edited by Kratos; 05-11-2009 at 11:02 AM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Middle East
    Posts
    3,511
    Quote Originally Posted by Kratos View Post
    As I stated in another thread:
    When it comes to the 1948 partition in Palestine Muslims rejected it totally and any possibility of living in peace alongside a tiny Jewish state. Instead they aided in the invasion of the country by the regular armies of six Arab states sending their homeland into war and ending as defeated refugees. Had they accepted it, Palestinian Arabs would today be enjoying the rights of their own independent homeland without the bloodshed of the last sixty years a minority of them would be citizens of a moretolerant Israel, free from threat of warfare and terrorism.

    Even today, the refugee camps can't be given statehood, because they won't agree to be at peace with Israel.
    No Islamic state wants to take on or help the refugees because they create a power postion, and the more reugees the more powerful the propaganda message.

    I'm still waiting for my sources I asked for above.
    It may not be an army, but it's very efficent warefare...MILF numbers over 13k people. Look at all the stories I posted above from this year alone at all the trouble they are causing.

    I think this is an obfuscation of the issue. The Palestinian people should not have had to choose whether they wanted an independent state or not. Britain had no right to invade the area and impose this "choice" onto the people who inhabited the area. Just because at one point in history a thousand years ago you once occupied a territory, does not give you a right to displace the current inhabitants and give them a "choice" of an independent state. Jews for one reason or another felt "entitled" to this land and used a perverted sense of 'history' as a justification for the invasion and displacement of millions of people. The Balfour Declaration in our present day would be viewed as completely illegal under international law.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    34,255
    Quote Originally Posted by thegodfather View Post
    I think this is an obfuscation of the issue. The Palestinian people should not have had to choose whether they wanted an independent state or not. Britain had no right to invade the area and impose this "choice" onto the people who inhabited the area. Just because at one point in history a thousand years ago you once occupied a territory, does not give you a right to displace the current inhabitants and give them a "choice" of an independent state. Jews for one reason or another felt "entitled" to this land and used a perverted sense of 'history' as a justification for the invasion and displacement of millions of people. The Balfour Declaration in our present day would be viewed as completely illegal under international law.
    What are you talking about?
    First of all Britian didn't invade the area...they were attacked in WWI by the Ottoman Empire, and took control as part of a peace treaty to end the war and their presence was to be temporary.
    A good number of the Jews (about 250,000) moved there to escape Europe durring WWII and none of them moved there to take over or as part of an invasion and plot to displace millions of people. Prior to that they trickled in from all over at the rate of about 10k a year or less for quite a while back.
    The Balfour Declaration in 1917 was almost totally invalid only a few years later. Once the British had controled Palestine post 1922 they realized it wasn't a good policy. Furthermore In 1939, Great Britain officially reneged on the Balfour Declaration by issuing the White Paper, which stated that creating a Jewish state was no longer a British policy. It was also Great Britain's change in policy toward Palestine, especially the White Paper, that prevented many many more of European Jews escape from Nazi-occupied Europe to Palestine.

    For one reason or another Jews immigrated to Palestine, and as there became more jews, arab conflicts became more frequent.

    Britian did little to encourage this immigration, and durring the few years they did, there weren't many immigrants.
    immigration was inprired by the same thing it always is, persuit of a better life

    If anything the British slowed immigration
    the UN did almost nothing except draw lines on a map in 1947 and say this is the part Jews should get because this is the part where mostly jews live.
    But in 1948 when they got control were invaded within days, and won their independence without any help from the UN. They had to smuggle their own weapons, they had no financial support...nothing

    I think you've only taken enough time to learn about the conflict to justify your political position that we should have a more isolationist forgein policy. And maybe we should, idk, I think we get a pretty shitty deal out of helping Israel.
    Last edited by Kratos; 05-11-2009 at 09:16 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •