History repeats in Gaza

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Israel has been always considered as a Holy Land, through the history several different peoples captured this land or migrated there, what we know for sure is that both the original and current people of Israel are Jews, "Native” means someone born within a particular country, so the majority of natives of Israel are also Jews. The problem is that you talk about racist things, like those who have more blood and etc!

The problem is that you seem to misunderstand me every time I write a post so I think I will no longer comment on this topic because I have made my opinion very clear. I am not talking about anything ''racist'' I just mentioned that Palestinians have more blood relation to the Israelites than Jews. I never intended to make this statement in order to impune the Jew's rights to have a share in the land. It was said simply to make a point, namely that Palestinians were native to the land and that they deserve to live in this land just as much as the Jews, not ''more''.


Palestinians are native, Jews are native, let's get over this simple issue please.

You are seriously citing a Pat Condell rant? Seriously? Suddenly a professional comedian is an expert on the Middle East, I think not. 

Originally posted by Challenger2 Israel didn't exist before 1948 CE, prior to that, the jury is still out on the actual existance of any such entity. Neither is it accurate to describe the native peoples as "Jews";  calling "Hebraic" or "Israelite" people "Jews" is like calling all Iranians, "Muslims". both statements contain elements of truth, but discount the fact that  large sections of the population did not follow Judaism but worshipped other gods. A "Jew" is a follower of a religion, not an ethnic group, despite the Zionist propaganda to the contrary.

Edited by Cyrus Shahmiri - 29-Nov-2012 at 02:56

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Originally posted by Challenger2 Israel didn't exist before 1948 CE, prior to that, the jury is still out on the actual existance of any such entity. Neither is it accurate to describe the native peoples as "Jews";  calling "Hebraic" or "Israelite" people "Jews" is like calling all Iranians, "Muslims". both statements contain elements of truth, but discount the fact that  large sections of the population did not follow Judaism but worshipped other gods. A "Jew" is a follower of a religion, not an ethnic group, despite the Zionist propaganda to the contrary.      If you consider the modern conception of a nation state as a "country", it can be said most of countries didn't exist before that date, anyway the country which already exists is Israel, the majority people of this country can be called Jew, Israelite, Hebraic or Zionist, what I say is that they themselves should decide about their country. Time never turns back, many things could be different 60 years ago, it is not possibe to goes back to that date.

I can agree with most of what you say, the borders of modern Europe were decided at Yalta, and have only recently reached some form of equilibrium with native peoples exercising their right of self determination. Unfortunately some native populations, such as the Kurds and Palestinians have been denied that right of self determination. Zionist Israel is a post war colonial enterprise which denied the native population their fundamental human rights.

Let me put the question to you, if the Kurdish diaspora, supported by a major superpower  returned to Iran and slaughtered and expelled the native Iranians, seized their homes and lands and told the survivors they could never return, how would Iranians react?

Originally posted by Nick1986 The Arabs were aggressors in 1948, 1967 and 1973 and Israel was within her rights to defend herself. In Gaza, however, it is Israel who is the aggressor. Imagine if, in response to the Troubles, the British expelled all Catholics from Northern Ireland and sent a punitive expedition down south. Such a strategy may have been effective in Cromwell's time, but these days we have the UN which is supposed to protect human rights and would, quite rightly, recognise such acts as an atrocity

Edited by Rocky - 28-Nov-2012 at 19:43

Originally posted by Challenger2 You are seriously citing a Pat Condell rant? Seriously? Suddenly a professional comedian is an expert on the Middle East, I think not.

Ad hominem. If he is comedian, this doesn't impede him to have some good points and for that reason I put that video (I think it really worth be listened to the end). He also says that you can't make an agreement with hamas or other fascist nutcases (hamas also are opressors and exterminators of their own people) because they have in their 'principles' the extermination of Jews.

Pat Condell used to be a stand up comedian, however there's more comedy in that video above than one of his comedy performances.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Originally posted by Challenger2  I can agree with most of what you say, the borders of modern Europe were decided at Yalta, and have only recently reached some form of equilibrium with native peoples exercising their right of self determination. Unfortunately some native populations, such as the Kurds and Palestinians have been denied that right of self determination. Zionist Israel is a post war colonial enterprise which denied the native population their fundamental human rights. Let me put the question to you, if the Kurdish diaspora, supported by a major superpower  returned to Iran and slaughtered and expelled the native Iranians, seized their homes and lands and told the survivors they could never return, how would Iranians react?   These things have happened several times in Iran, about 1.7 million Kurds already live in the northeast of Iran, we still hear that there are some conflicts between Turkmen and Kurds in this region, in the northwest of Iran and the north of Iraq, Kurds have several times fought against Assyrians and Armenians and displaced them, of course the same things have happened several times for Kurds themsevles too and we see in some regions where Kurds lived for a long time, there is already almost no Kurd, like Shahrekord (City of Kurds).   Lets compare Israel to Faridan region in Iran, in the west of Isfahan in the central Iran, there is a region named Faridan where several thousands Georgians (a Caucasian people) live, there is a major Gerogian ciy named Fereydunshahr and numerous Georgian villages, about 300 years ago the Persian king Karim Khan Zand (of the Zand clan of the Lur tribe), claimed Faridan is the ancestral land of his tribe, he could be true because we know Lurs lived there for a long time, so he fought against Georigans, destroyed several villages and killed almost the one half of the Georgian population, for Lurs, he is certainly a hero and for Georgians, he is a cruel, but both of these people already live there peacefully and it is meaningless to say this one is native and this one is not.   If you kill one half of Israelis, you can be sure that another half of them will never leave their land, the situation of Jews in Israel is similar to the situation of Georgians in Faridan, they just bought some lands and gradually became the majority, it is not a crime.   Anyway we should believe in change, talking about the past can't solve any problem, a land belong to those people who have been born there.

Well you've answered a question, but not the one I asked. I put forward a hypothetical case. Put simply, what would Iranians do if a foreign people with, at best, a tenuous connection to Iran came and drove the Iranians out of their homes and off their lands where they and their families had lived for centuries, called their country "Babylonia"  and told them that they could never return?

Presumably,  from your comments, 60 years later the Iranians woul quietly accept that those now born in "Babylonia", the "Babylonians", had a better claim to the land than the disposessed Iranians and they'd quiently just abandon their culture and heritage and assimilate with their surrounding neighbours to become Iraqis, Afghans, Pakistanis, Turkmenis, etc.

In the real world, the Zionists legally bought about 5% of the land of Palestine and ethically cleansed  or exterminated the people living there to artificially create a Zionist "majority" in their new state, THAT is the crime. 


Edited by Challenger2 - 29-Nov-2012 at 05:23

Originally posted by Menumorut I don't consider Jews saints, but hamas is agressing them and if you don't answer in an intimidating way, the agressors will intensify their attacks. Imagine someone would fire that sort of rockets on Britain, do you think UK would answer with more "understanding"?

Thank you, we've had 30 years of our own brand of "terrorism" so we know exactly how to handle that sort of situation. We dealt with the problem and the RAF never once had to bomb Belfast into the stone age.

IRA, PIRA, RIRA, UFF, UVF, take your pick.