Galway Advertiser Christmas Crossword,...
Crosswords0 min ago
Some Time Ago I Mentioned Here In Ab That The Israelis...
Would probably consider a ratio of 10:1 in deaths to settle their blood debt with the Palestinians. I thought about 20,000 deaths would satisfy them.
The latest figure stands at over 7,000. Will the massacre of the innocents continue until my prediction is fulfilled?
I fear it will as nobody is asking them to stay their hand.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sandyRoe. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//They can't leave. Let Israel allow them out and then we can see who's stopping them//
Wrong again and for the wrong reasons. Israel has advised and recommended that non combatants and civilians leave Gaza whilst it is engaged in eliminating the terrorists. Egypt and Jordan( bordering Arab Nations) have both insisted that no Palistineans will be tolerated in their Countries and have reinforced their borders. To the North of Gaza the Lebonon (under the control of a different muslim terrorist faction) is also preventing anyone fom jumping out of the fying pan into the fire. Egypt and Jordan want nothing whatsoever to do with hamas and the Iranian nut jobs. The cowards are leaving it up to Israel to do what they are not capable of, and too afraid, whilst reserving the bare faced cheek to criticise the Israelis. I wonder what the IRA considered to be acceptable collateral casualties when they were placing bombs in Pubs and Chip Shops.
Togo, you know that Gaza has been under Israeli military occupation since 1967, which means that ultimately Israel has the say about where its people can be moved.
> I wonder what the IRA considered to be acceptable collateral casualties when they were placing bombs in Pubs and Chip Shops.
I assume like me that the analogy is between the IRA and Hamas, not the IRA and Israel. But what I'm concerned about is the collateral damage inflicted by Israel, who is not supposed to be the terrorist organisation ...
When I was five I was playing in the back yard with the kids from the next flat and I found and picked up a half brick and decided it would be fun to throw it at the wall. But a lad was in my way and I told him to move because I really wanted to throw my brick. He wouldn't move so I told him again and said that if he didn't move I would throw it anyway and it would be his fault. He didn't move and so I threw it, happy because he'd had my warning so it was all his fault.
Fortunately, although he took it on the back of his head, it didn't do him serious injury.
What a little rotter I was in those days!
//Togo, you know that Gaza has been under Israeli military occupation since 1967//
Wrong again.
Israel unilaterally withdrew its military forces and dismantled its Israeli settlements in Gaza in 2005,and does not consider the territory held under military occupation. Why would it when there are no Israeli citizens or military personel there? It does however maintain control of the borders, (wisely it transpires) and a joint Israeli/Egyptian land, sea and air blockade has been maintained since 2007. This prevents people and goods from freely entering or leaving the territory. People and goods being a stage name for terrorists and weapons. This used io be a fact based site with a proud history of providing factual answers with research or knowledge based answers. You are polluting it with emotion driven points of view that are without basis when compared with factual evidence.
Togo. I thought that Israel had been encouraging/allowing illegal Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Land that was occupied (and where Palestinians were living and farming, but were then evicted by Jewish settlers) in accordance with the agreements in place. Settlements which are considered illegal under international law.
I don't know a lot about this subject, but that's what I have read. Perhaps you can explain.
> Israel ... does not consider the territory held under military occupation.
And the UN, International Committee of the Red Cross, and many human-rights organisations still considers Gaza to be occupied as Israel military controls Gaza's borders, airspace, and sea access.
But it's a moot point, because even if people can move freely within Gaza, and can get to Egypt and Jordan - how would that help? Egypt and Jordan won't just allow everyone in, so that Israel can raze Gaza to the ground - no more than Israel itself would. If Israel wants to destroy Gaza, then it has to deal with the consequences. And that is my concern for Israel. It is creating a bigger problem than the one it think it is solving.
How do you see this ending up? Israel carries on until ... when? And then ... what? Will they be in a better place from then on? I don't see how they could be, on this path.
in answer to atheist
https:/
According to a secret document dating to 1970, obtained by Haaretz, the settlement of Kiryat Arba was established by confiscating land by military order and falsely representing the project as being strictly for military use while in reality, Kiryat Arba was planned for settler use.
oh well liars on both sides
what a surprise. do you think this post will survive more than five minutes on AB? it isnt very mimsy ( rule 1)
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.