Religion of peace?

First of all, the word you are attempting to spell is "relevance."

Second, your argument is circular; your statements prove the relevance of my question.

Third, if you knew the history of that area, you would understand that the land has belonged to Israel for almost 3,000 years and that at several times in history it was Israel who was REMOVED from the land, not the converse.

So either the land historically belongs to Israel or it belongs to whomever can occupy it by the sword. (I don't think we really want to go there).

Fourth, as to the relevance of who kept the land after that last two wars, I must remind you that Israel was attacked and fended off her attackers pushing them back into their territory, and yes, Israel occupied the territory it won in battle after being attacked.
 
Potomacduck, thanks for the spelling lesson. BTW we are not too picky about that around here anyways. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Your reply is intellectually dishonest since you fail to respond to any of the tough questions that I raised.

You categorically argue that the land belongs to Israel, but as anyone who knows the history of the middle east knows, (1) that is not the case, and (2) that is the root of the Arab/Israel conflict. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif First the Palistanians were forceably displaced by the UN after WW2 (and they have been fighting ever since for the return of thier land), and then Israel kept land after the last 2 wars despite international law and numerous UN resolutions calling for then to return it. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Your comments about "whomever can occupy it by the sword" and us not really wanting "to go there" directly contradict your last paragraph justifying them keeping it. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smiliesmack.gif

You still haven't answered the question that I put to you in regards to how many generations of people should / can legally occupy a peice of property before it becomes theirs? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gifAs noted in my previous post, some of the people that lost their lands had lived their not only for generations, but for hundreds of years. I answered your silly Temple Mount question, so answer this one!
 
I personally don't believe, that if the Jews returned all the land to the Muslim's they wouldn't be satisfied. If these people didn't have their hate they would have nothing. Killing is a way of life for the radicals and without it their reason for living would be totally gone . Killing in the Middle East is their only business and business is good. They will never stop regardless of any land deals the hatred is just to deep on both side . The only peace for these people is a pine box.
 
Quote:
Potomacduck, thanks for the spelling lesson. BTW we are not too picky about that around here anyways. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Your reply is intellectually dishonest since you fail to respond to any of the tough questions that I raised.

You categorically argue that the land belongs to Israel, but as anyone who knows the history of the middle east knows, (1) that is not the case, and (2) that is the root of the Arab/Israel conflict. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif First the Palistanians were forceably displaced by the UN after WW2 (and they have been fighting ever since for the return of thier land), and then Israel kept land after the last 2 wars despite international law and numerous UN resolutions calling for then to return it. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Your comments about "whomever can occupy it by the sword" and us not really wanting "to go there" directly contradict your last paragraph justifying them keeping it. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smiliesmack.gif

You still haven't answered the question that I put to you in regards to how many generations of people should / can legally occupy a peice of property before it becomes theirs? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gifAs noted in my previous post, some of the people that lost their lands had lived their not only for generations, but for hundreds of years. I answered your silly Temple Mount question, so answer this one!



First, you simply and gratuitously asserted that I do not know the history of the land, yet I do know the history of the land. The history of Israel in the land is the best recorded of any in ancient history and to argue otherwise is to make yourself sound foolish.

You need to study the history of Israel. ONE of my degrees is in Biblical Studies. I know what I am talking about. You sir are not only wrong, but ignorant of the history of Israel. A GOOGLE search education isn't going to cut it here; not on this subject at least.

Second, check your reading comprehension. I responded directly to your questions and answered them directly.

Third, your childish use of emoticons really detracts from taking your "argument" seriously. Emoticons are the last vestige of the inarticulate.

Now as to your points: You categorically argue that the land belongs to Israel, but as anyone who knows the history of the middle east knows, (1) that is not the case

Your entire argument is based on saying: "That's not the case." That is a gratuitous assertion which under the rules of logic can be equally gratuitously denied.

and (2) that is the root of the Arab/Israel conflict.

Wrong again. And again you need to study History before making such embarrassing statements. The Arab/ Israeli conflict can be traced back to a decision made by Abraham. The Arab/ Israeli conflict is 3,000 years old! Again history trumps ignorance. Do you want intellectual honesty, then learn of which you speak.

You still haven't answered the question that I put to you in regards to how many generations of people should / can legally occupy a piece of property before it becomes theirs?

I'm happy to answer the question, you just won't like the answer. How many generations? Well Israel has historically occupied the land far longer than the Palestinians, but to you that does not give them the right to possess it today.

So since Israel was kicked out, then reclaimed it and, in your reasoning this does not give them a claim to the land, then logically if the Palestinian occupied the land and were kicked out, then the Palestinians also have no right to the land USING YOUR reasoning.

So in the end, the land is held be whomever can hold it, and the land which Israel gained after being attacked is right fully theirs.

No please, begin your denial of the facts which have been presented to you................
 
Quote:
I personally don't believe, that if the Jews returned all the land to the Muslim's they wouldn't be satisfied. If these people didn't have their hate they would have nothing. Killing is a way of life for the radicals and without it their reason for living would be totally gone . Killing in the Middle East is their only business and business is good. They will never stop regardless of any land deals the hatred is just to deep on both side . The only peace for these people is a pine box.



Bea, you sir, are correct. Israel could walk away from the land tomorrow and the Arab/Israeli conflict would still go on. The former poster whom I corrected did not understand this.

This is a 3,000 year old conflict which began with Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael.
 
Quote:
First off you have no business asking me about my personal life. Secondly where/why i go to school is none of your [beeep] business.

Am i christian? No sir.
Is that against the law? Nope.

I'm not a seminary major.

Have a nice day. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif



Not exactly a quick study in "Moderator Arranged Vacations" are you?
 
Quote:
Quote:
First off you have no business asking me about my personal life. Secondly where/why i go to school is none of your [beeep] business.

Am i christian? No sir.
Is that against the law? Nope.

I'm not a seminary major.

Have a nice day. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif



Not exactly a quick study in "Moderator Arranged Vacations" are you?



Now that's funny!!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Potomacduck ... this is a very simple question, in fact you even refered to it above. How many generations hace to live there before it's theirs? 2, 5, 10, 20 Answer the question!

As for your degreee in Bible Studies, that hardly makes you an expert on middle east politics, bud. The conflict hardly goes back to Abraham, since it is well documented that for many periods of history they lived side by side in relative peace.

Posting a picture of William F. Buckley as your avatar hardly makes you an intellectual ..., Just a wana be.
 
Eastcoast, I soundly defeated your argument and now you are upset, I understand.

Your question is so relative that it cannot be answered. As of now, the land is occupied by whomever can hold it and they are the de facto rulers at this time. The answer could be 1,000 generations and it would not matter politically or militarily. Israel occupies the land now and will in the future. Denial is simply an attempt to obfuscate reality.

As for your denial of the genesis (pardon the pun) of the Arab/Israeli conflict you wrote:

The conflict hardly goes back to Abraham

This statement should be embarassing, but it's not. It is born of complete ignorance and I suspect was made out of stubborn refusal to accept history.

As for my degree in biblical studies, I have over 30 credits studying the history of Israel alone. If you study Islam which I have, you will find that the conflict absolutely goes back to Abraham.

If you chose to debate this any further, bring a little more to the table next time.
 
Quote:
Quote:
When i read this, i get the sense that the only reason they are going to these measures are because of the tactics of Israel....you know, the people who stole their homeland TWICE.




JWP,

Once again I'll ask this question since you seem to know SO much about Israel and you believe that someone's land was stolen twice.

Exactly what structure is the Dome Of The Rock built upon?



I am well aware that the dome of the rock is built on what is believed to be the site of the Hebrew Temple (yes all 3 of them). Which means ABSOLUTELY nothing.

Yes there is great debate whether or not Israelites were Canaanites themselves, whether the philistines occupied the land which became Israel first. So lets just say have always lived in the western levant.

With that said, they've only stolen the land ONCE. Well i guess they didnt steal it personally, they let the U.N. do it for them.

This thread started because of the actions of the palestinians. Well i cant blame them for hating the people that took the land of their grandfathers away from them. Personally i dont care what they do to get it back or if they even do get it back.
 
Last edited:
Potomacduck, you have certainly not soundly defeated my arguments. In fact, you displayed intellectual cowardice by refusing to confront the issues put to you. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gifNamely how many generations. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

We all know who currently occupies the land ... that was never at issue or question. Nor were politics or military solutions. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smiliesmack.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smiliesmack.gif I wasn't really even interested in you legal opinions on this issue since the UN Resolutions with respect to this issue are quite clear. I was more interested in your moral opinion (in the broadest sense and not the age old excuse that the land belongs to Israel because God promised it to them), but it seems that you are afraid to share it. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif

I never said that Arabs and Jews got along ALL throughout history and again your implication that this was what I was suggesting is both intellectually dishonest and completely wrong. I said that they got along fine through certain periods of time, and that the current conflict was started by the expulsion of the Palistanians from their land by the UN. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif

PS - Lots of us use the emoticons, so I guess we are all childish including the Mods. My your such a high brow ... Not! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-006.gif
 
While I do not attempt to make claims of erudition,as you two obviously possess(I guess you wouldn't count my 24 years of formal education,that being, I did two years in the 12th grade so I think that equals 24,huh?)I tend to base my assumptions of the superiority of Israel over the Arab nations on the fact that the Jewish people are God's chosen people.The rest of the world is required to earn the right to become chosen.History shows that the Muslims have been at war with the worlds infidels since before Christ.They avow to never stop until all are converted or killed.Thats enough for me.It is beyond my puerile reasoning ability to understand how any normal, reasonable person could defend the Muslims of the world.
Having said that I do enjoy the bombastic litany of two fervent orators being exchanged on this thread,and doing so without being vociferous.
 
Quote:

Having said that I do enjoy the bombastic litany of two fervent orators being exchanged on this thread,and doing so without being vociferous.



That is what it's all about. No yelling, screaming, name calling, just different points of view being expressed and discussed with civility. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif
 
Eastcoast:

Your question was:

How many generations hace to live there before it's theirs? 2, 5, 10, 20 Answer the question!

I actually answered the question quite well given the hypothetical nature of the question.

Frankly it's one of those silly questions like "how many fairies can dance on the head of a pin?" Would the correct answer for you be 2? Would it be 5, or maybe 20? See how stupid your question is?

It's a ruse of a question because you know that even the correct answer (which I provided) will be denied due to your ignorance of the history of the matter.

I wasn't really even interested in you legal opinions on this issue since the UN Resolutions with respect to this issue are quite clear. I was more interested in your moral opinion

Now you want my moral opinion? You didn't ask for that yet YOU chastise me for being "afraid to share it."

How dishonest is that, chastising someone for not providing an answer to a question that was NEVER asked!!!!!!!!!!!

I never said that Arabs and Jews got along ALL throughout history and again your implication that this was what I was suggesting is both intellectually dishonest and completely wrong.

Again, I never said that. What I said is that the Arab/Israeli conflict went back to Abraham. You interjected the rest.


In the end Eastcoast, I've discovered that you argue in a very interesting way. You accuse people of NOT answering questions that were not asked and when cornered you claim people said things that THEY NEVER SAID!!!!!

Dishonesty at that level cannot engage in civil debate. Good luck.
 
Azmastablasta ... Thanks for those kind words, I enjoy a good debate as well. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ooo.gif

Potomacduck, I didn't think clarifying what I was asking was out of line since you never provided a clear difinative answer in the first place! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused1.gif

The question about how long one must legally occupy land before they "own" it is not hypothetical. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif Your fairies on the head of a pit bit is funny, but sadly out of context. Seems that other learned men, such as those employed by the UN, were able to make a determination, and guess what ... it wasn't in favour of your arguement. Perhaps all these experts were wrong and you were right oooor, more likely, you just don't know as much as you think that you do. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smiliesmack.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smiliesmack.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-006.gif

Over and out. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif
 

P-Duck, ECH and AzMasta,

First, in the interest of full disclosure, though I am a "fundamentalist" Christian, I was married nearly 20 years to a Jew and my two boys, by Jewish tradition, are Jews--one of whom attends an orthodox Jewish day school and speaks fluent Hebrew. I also lead a Jewish Boy Scout Troop, so I know something of the Tribe and some of my fellow Scout vols are also former Israeli military vets...

Now, it is my understanding, as P-duck has shown, that the Jews have been there for ~3000 years. In fact, there have been various significant 'waves' of Jewish immigration to the Holy Land, including migrations in the 12th Cent. by European Jews escaping Roman Catholic persecution. In the 19th Century the formal, named movement 'Zionism' was created. As P-Duck as already shown, Jewish presence in the Holy Land goes back a long, long time. The suggestion that it is somehow a post-WWII phenomena is simply unfounded.

Now, ECH has several times referenced "international law" and referred to the "legality" of various Israeli acts.

I'm curious exactly what "international law' he thinks was broken. The law of Conquest perhaps? That's the one that lets nations expand by virtue of military action (in this case defensive by Israel).

Before we get into a bunch of UN gobbledygook, let's remember the UN's predecessor, the League of Nations, back in 1922 granted Britain a mandate over Palestine for the express purpose of "placing the country under such political, administrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish national home".

Now, Israel became a nation in 1948. Soon after, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq – attacked Israel (unprovoked by Israel), launching the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. After the cease fire was declared borders, known as the Green Line, were established. Jordan annexed the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and Egypt took control of the Gaza Strip. Israel was LATER admitted as a member of the United Nations, on May 11, 1949. (During the war ~711,000 Arabs or about 80% of the previous Arab population, fled the country as refugees--of their own accord).

Thus, I fail to see how the charge of "stealing" holds any weight. I also don't understand how it can be argued that the (very corrupt--'oil for food') UN can be assumed to have ANY authority over Israel when IT WASN'T EVEN A UN MEMBER YET! Is it me? Am I just crazy? Besides, if memory serves, didn't the Arabs boot the UN "peacekeepers" in '67, just prior to the Six-Day War--or did I imagine that?

Because they got their snouts rubbed in it in '67, the Arabs hit Israel again in the '73 sneak attack known as the Yom Kippur War. Again, tough little Israel kicked their behinds! Perhaps they were motivated by the then-recent barbaric slaughter of their Olympic athletes in Munich, in '72.

Finally, Israel GAVE the Gaza Strip back to the Arabs, and they are being repaid by the Arabs using the crappy little place to launch rockets at Israeli civillians. Nice guys huh? So much for the Arab promises of peace for lands...

So, after all this BS, how on EARTH is tiny little surrounded Israel the bad guy in all this? I'm kinda lost on that one...
 
Quote:
First off you have no business asking me about my personal life. Secondly where/why i go to school is none of your [beeep] business.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif



Wrong. This is a public forum. If you don't like what people ask, go shoot your mouth off someplace else. You're a crybaby.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quote:
Quote:
First off you have no business asking me about my personal life. Secondly where/why i go to school is none of your [beeep] business.

/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grinning-smiley-003.gif



Wrong. This is a public forum. If you don't like what people ask, go shoot your mouth off someplace else. You're a crybaby.





Express all of the ideas you wish, but do so civily, and without the "name calling"...
 
Potomacduck, I didn't think clarifying what I was asking was out of line since you never provided a clear difinative answer in the first place!

My answers were quite clear, cogiative and historically accurate.

BTW, the word is spelled, "definitive."

Oh yeah, excellent use of emoticons, really.
 
Back
Top