Which will it be Iran? Off the Map/back to

[darkboong]

However, war means war - not hiding behind women and children or sending out 13 year olds with explosive belts or hiding behind a school full of children as we saw in Beslan.

1) Beslan is thousands of miles away with Palestine. No Palestinians were involved in that incident.
2) The IDF are the ones hiding behind children (see the Supreme Court judgement).
3) It is the IDF snipers who are shooting the kids in schools.
4) There are no reported incidents of 13 year olds being 'used' either.

Regardless of all that War is War, rules are flouted left right and centre in every conflict. Besides, neither side appear to be obeying the rules so there appears to be little disadvantage.

The Palestinians and other Arabs should try putting on a uniform for change and actually fighting instead of running and hiding.

The majority of them do fight in uniform. Ignorance is no excuse for your lies and hatred.

"With respect to Israel my position is that the Jews don't have the right to take land from Gentiles by force, and vice versa. The same goes for any other ethnic or religious group. Asking them to share and share alike strikes me as being fair rather than selfish."

They have every right to take land by force. The said land is filled with archeological sites relating to Jewish history and this is the land where Jews belong and have their roots same as Africans have roots in Africa.

Same goes for other civilisations, and the modern day Palestinians. They are of the same genetic line as the native Jews, they have been there just as long. The Jews simply don't have an exclusive claim to that land. It doesn't matter how many times you lie and attempt to reframe the issue by ignoring all the evidence that Gentiles have ever existed in Israel, the fact remains that Gentiles *do* exist in Israel and they have been there even longer than Jews (because Judaism was certainly not the first practiced in that region).

However, the modern Palestinians are the offspring of Arab invaders who stole land from the Jews thousands of years ago so there was always a case for war. Israel won that war fair and square.

They murdered women and children to do it. They massacred unarmed farmers. That is not war.

The Linguistic, Cultural and Genetic evidence squarely contradicts that assertion, saying it is so does not make it so Crappy.

Or they should take the opportunity to live in their own state - an opportunity they will lose if they keep attacking U.N. personnel and burning their own bridges.

ROTFL. Attacking UN personnel and installations has not stopped the Zionists getting their own state.

More seriously there is no viable opportunity for the Palestinians to have their own state. You haven't addressed the issue of sovereignity at all yet, and that simply will not be allowed (see Dov Weisglas '04). You are betraying your profound racist ignorance of the situation. It doesn't make you look big or clever, it makes you small minded, stupid and racist.

You really need a taste of the West Bank from the other side of the wall.

I have addressed all your lies, you are not bringing up anything new or better evidence to support your lies, zero tolerance from here on for you mate.

 

[FredC]

David, I'd be happy for someone to take over my role.It seems to me that some of the American posters are being a bit lazy and allowing all this wishy-washy, bleeding-heart, do-gooder sentiment to remain unchallenged.
My girlfriend told me off for getting so wrapped up in it. She says she would prefer me to devote more time to my boat.
However, I did compose a song I shall now share:

"It was 20 years ago today,
Sgt Boogers taught the band to pray,
They've been going in and out of style,
But they're guaranteed to raise a smile,

So, let me introduce to you,
The act you've known for all these years,
Sgt Boogers Bleeding Hearts Club band

(Chorus for Fred to join in)
We're Sgt Boogers' Bleeding Hearts Club Band,
Sit back and let the terrorists go,
Sgt Boogers Bleeding Hearts Club Band,
Bin Laden is the way to go!

Very good Crappy.

 

[FredC]

I like how you keep producing these summaries of what I'm supposed to have stated. For instance:
"Clearly you grasp the essential goal of Zionism, because you claim that they have the right to an Ethnically pure Israel. To achieve that goal here in the real world they have to either Exterminate every last Gentile in Israel or displace them."
The former view you attribute to me is baloney.
There have always been foreigners in Israel. Canaanites lived with Hebrews thousands of years ago and Jews worshipped the same gods (not just Yahweh). Under Solomon, Jerusalem was as diverse as imperial Athens and very prosperous.
The difference is that the people who resided with Jews during that period weren't religious fanatics who sought complete control over religious sites or were willing to blow themselves up in a crowd full of people. What you're advocating is a back door entrance into Jerusalem for a percentage of people who envy Israel's democracy, loathe its culture and are unwilling to assimilate or show any form of tolerance.
It ain't gonna happen.
"Academics who support your position (AFAICT you quoted from some Zionist historians. Gee do you think they might be a smidgeon biased ?)."
Michael Grant did an excellent history of Israel that's freely available. He's a world-respected classical scholar.
"The Palestinians appear to feel just as connected with their ancient land. By your logic now they are dispossed of it they have every right to come back and take it by force."
Absolutely, that ties in with my logic. If the Palestinians believe they have a case, the normal scenario is to go to war. After all, the Israelis originally conquered Jerusalem under King David thousands of years ago and displaced the Jebusites. War has always shaped borders which is why your country occupies the Falklands.
However, war means war - not hiding behind women and children or sending out 13 year olds with explosive belts or hiding behind a school full of children as we saw in Beslan. The Palestinians and other Arabs should try putting on a uniform for change and actually fighting instead of running and hiding.
"With respect to Israel my position is that the Jews don't have the right to take land from Gentiles by force, and vice versa. The same goes for any other ethnic or religious group. Asking them to share and share alike strikes me as being fair rather than selfish."
They have every right to take land by force. The said land is filled with archeological sites relating to Jewish history and this is the land where Jews belong and have their roots same as Africans have roots in Africa. However, the modern Palestinians are the offspring of Arab invaders who stole land from the Jews thousands of years ago so there was always a case for war. Israel won that war fair and square.
This first process of Arabs stealing land first began when Assyria deported 10 tribes of Israel and colonists moved into Jerusalem to fill the void. The Palestinians likewise arrived late in history as colonists from Turkey, Iraq, Syria and Iran. By rights they should be offered residence in other Arab countries where they originated from. Or they should take the opportunity to live in their own state - an opportunity they will lose if they keep attacking U.N. personnel and burning their own bridges.

Again you wrongly attribute the Falklands as being the divine right of Argentina, and the UK have hijacked the islands. I say that Argentina NEVER had sovereignty of those islands. So get on the site I did for you and prove me wrong.

 

[EoinC]

...Now, if that's true it doesn't say a whole lot for the education system in this country does it?...

That's the most accurate thing I've seen you state, Carrera. I must admit, I did have some suspicions, but your existence seems to point to, at least, the existence of a QA / QC problem, even if the sample pool is small.

 

[FredC]

I have an degree in classical history as well as stuff I had published. That includes work on ancient languages as well. I also contributed to one classics department where we have a number of qualified teachers or lecturers.
The things I heard about Israel never having existed would be strongly denied by my teachers. You based that on something you've possibly misunderstood about the original settlements of the tribes prior to the Patriarch period.
I'm possibly the only forum member who has read authors such as Michael Grant or even Gibbon and actual source material apart from the Torah e.t.c. That doesn't make me right in absolutely everyting I say but it does put me in RicSterns category of being qualified in a department (in Ric's case that's sports science and he's higher up the scale in his field than I am, admittedly).
The facts speak for themselves, though.
If you maintain Israel never existed or that the Palestinians are direct descendents of the Philistines or that the Palestinian idea they preceded Jews in the Holy Land is correct, you should make these views known in wider circles and in writing to be challenged. These are views that tend to contradict known history and have already been tackled.
It seems to me you're not getting a balanced view of the history of the Middle East and this is a problem. Myself I don't read materials published by Jewish or Arab writers but read standard history books. You need to resist the tendency to forcefully dismiss anything that doesn't fit in with what you might want to believe and concentrate on what the actual archeologists and historians tell us about Hebrews and Canaanites.

If you're a classical historian of such great standing and magnitude, why do you work as an overnight parking lot attendant?
The Torah wasn't written until the 6th century AD. It was written in Hebrew square block style, which indeed was Aramaic in root and branch. Just a different style of 'font'.
If Ric Stern's (good jewish surname) your guru, how come your training method defies all the experience of my lot, and you're still useless?
BTW The IDF don't allow history to be dug up, they just blow it up.

 

[FredC]

Here is some more information I know will be simply ignored:
The Canaanite language is a semitic language spoken by ancient Canaanites, Hebrews, Phoenicians and proto-Greek-speaking Philistines who came from Crete as a sea-people.
We got written and spoken Greek thanks to the Phoenicians.
Hebrew is the only language today that survived from the Canaanite root. It had always remained as a literary language till it was revived by Eliezer Ben Yehuda 2 centuries ago. Hebrew language is the only surviving language related to the disputed land.
Remember Korean never had a script so was restored a bit like modern Hebrew from the old liturgical formula (or compare ancient Greek with the later koine).
Arabic never existed as a language during the Canaanite period or even in Roman times. Arabic has no similar cultural root in the Holy Land as does Hebrew. Linguistically speaking, you can counter some of the Palestinians claims.
Hence:
Punic language - extinct
Hebrew languages
Ammonite language - extinct
Moabite language - extinct
Edomite language - extinct
Biblical Hebrew language - Israelites, liturgical
Samaritan Hebrew language - liturgical
Mishnaic Hebrew language - Jews, liturgical

Even more trash. The Hebrews spoke Aramaic, the principle language of the region. But you seemed to have missed out on the biggy, bad form for a classic ancient languages expert.

 

[davidmc]

Crappy didn't have much to say about Iran.

Good point

 

[davidmc]

The problem here is that, on the one hand-some poster's see the dilemma thru a prism based on a mid-20th cenf. agreement. On the other hand Carrera & I are stating that the Israeli's have inhabited the land since time memorial. The christian text & all of its sects attest to this.
Both stipulations have merit. I simply beleive that the Israeli's will not be given any quarter by any country in the region regardless of thier actions so they might as well stand up and make thier intentions well known-the occupation of a land formerly known as "Judea" (jew/israel [modern day equivalent). In the end, it doesn't matter to me because I have no vested interest in the region & don't cater to any religious orthodoxy. Either the parties will adhere to civil obedience or they will not.

 

[FredC]

The problem here is that, on the one hand-some poster's see the dilemma thru a prism based on a mid-20th cenf. agreement. On the other hand Carrera & I are stating that the Israeli's have inhabited the land since time memorial. The christian text & all of its sects attest to this.
Both stipulations have merit. I simply beleive that the Israeli's will not be given any quarter by any country in the region regardless of thier actions so they might as well stand up and make thier intentions well known-the occupation of a land formerly known as "Judea" (jew/israel [modern day equivalent). In the end, it doesn't matter to me because I have no vested interest in the region & don't cater to any religious orthodoxy. Either the parties will adhere to civil obedience or they will not.

A load of bollocks Dave, if I may respectfully suggest. Methinks that your intention is to bolster Crappy to greater lunacy than he has already achieved. This week he's an Erudite professor of ancient languages, along with arseology(sp). This week he's got a girlfriend, and last week he had a wife. Is there no limit to Walter Mitty?
Pipe him aboard men.

 

[EoinC]

...On the other hand Carrera & I are stating that the Israeli's have inhabited the land since time memorial...

If historic occupation is to be the sole deciding factor, hadn't the non-indigenous Americans had better "git the hell outta Dodge"? I hear that Plymouth can be very nice in the Spring. If it's a principle, let's make it universal.
By the way, David, looks like you've joined the thread hijack.

 

[ptlwp]

If historic occupation is to be the sole deciding factor, hadn't the non-indigenous Americans had better "git the hell outta Dodge"? I hear that Plymouth can be very nice in the Spring. If it's a principle, let's make it universal.
By the way, David, looks like you've joined the thread hijack.

I have mentioned the same argument and have asked where in Lancashire can we possibly go; the three of us. Certainly, going back to Belarus (Russia) isn't appealing, but there probably is more land available.

In Britian, however, we'd at least speak the language. So far as Native Americans go, I am only a second generation born here in the USA. If those who preceeded us had not been able to bring about manifest destiny (ahem), lots of places would be rather crowded with whities; not to say that what was done to the indigenous people of the USA was in any way decent, moral or ethical...it was genocide.

 

[davidmc]

If historic occupation is to be the sole deciding factor, hadn't the non-indigenous Americans had better "git the hell outta Dodge"? I hear that Plymouth can be very nice in the Spring. If it's a principle, let's make it universal.

You do have a point however, not all of the emigrants who came here were seeking fame and fortune. Many came here for issues relating to non-recognition rights/hostility in their home country. Besides, the settlers were merely an extension of the British empire at the outset not conquistadors of sorts.

By the way, David, looks like you've joined the thread hijack.

My knowledge of the "Iran situation" has been lacking. I have heard recently that the security council may call a special session to review Iran's new non-compliance w/ [previous agreements inre: production of enriched uranium. Economic penalties were floated in this announcement by a knowledgeable participant. The thread may very well be on the brink of addressing the question posed. It is worth noting that the same speaker mentioned the fact that Israel had previously bombed an Iraqi facility for violating similiar IAEA Policies.

 

[darkboong]

Besides, the settlers were merely an extension of the British empire at the outset not conquistadors of sorts.

Pretty much one and the same thing I'm afraid. There's no way the British Empire would have existed without 'Private Enterprise', specifically : Making tons of cash out of the natives and the resources the natives sat on. Sure there were moderating influences (I'm sure all Empires have them), but the primary goal of Empire is domination and possession, not education, healthcare and protection.

My knowledge of the "Iran situation" has been lacking. I have heard recently that the security council may call a special session to review Iran's new non-compliance w/ [previous agreements inre: production of enriched uranium. Economic penalties were floated in this announcement by a knowledgeable participant. The thread may very well be on the brink of addressing the question posed. It is worth noting that the same speaker mentioned the fact that Israel had previously bombed an Iraqi facility for violating similiar IAEA Policies.

Israel wasn't acting on behalf of the IAEA. Plus Israel was standing foursquare in a glass house when it lobbed that particular rock.

As I understand it the original infringement was actually due to inspection rather than the Uranium enrichment, the resolution of which was more inspection (since which they have actually exceeded their NPT committments). The constraint on U enrichment appears to be an additional step that has been unilaterally imposed by the US with support of the EU. Various nuclear industry bods have pointed out that every NPT signatory performs the exact same research and activity - without censure or inspection.

The problem that Iran faces here is that the US has done it's trick of asking Iran to "prove X doesn't exist", which is *far* harder than proving that X *does* exist. The same trick worked long enough convince enough of it's public to invade Iraq, I expect something similar will happen again with Iran. So far the build up is following the exact same pattern as the Iraq invasion, right down to Jack Straw denying that military action will be taken.

 

[limerickman]

I disagree DB : after the debacle over Iraq, I do not believe that the USA has any intention of trying to tackle Iran militarily.

The USA is too busy sinking in the quicksand that is now Iraq to consider any action against Iran.

Which compounds the wickedness of the intent to invade Iraq.
Now that it has been established that Bush lied through his teeth over Iraq,
no one, least of all his fellow Americans, will support any further action.

As a side issue I see that Sir General Michael Rose has called for the impeachment of Bliar.
Another gerneral has also stated that the British Armed Forced faced the real possibility of mutiny after it was proven that Bliar also lied about Iraq.

 

[darkboong]

I disagree DB : after the debacle over Iraq, I do not believe that the USA has any intention of trying to tackle Iran militarily.

They appear to already be working with the Israels to put together an air-strike... The goal of the Iraq style build up is to legitimise military action in the eyes of the great unwashed. I doubt that they will do a full scale invasion, but they can certainly do airstrikes with relative impunity.

 

[Carrera]

So, the Jews were practising a belief system in 1000 A.D. that never materialised in written form till the 6th century A.D.?
I think maybe all these classical scholars and archeologists need to revise their thinking seeing as you have these new discoveries.
It's also odd you seem to know what job I do and what level of cycling I've accomplished.
As for Ric and Michael, I was just pointing out they do a lot of research in the field which ought to carry some weight. You don't have to agree with everything they say but some qualification in a field ought to carry some weight.
To be honest, my own qualifications are fairly basic but I do have a degree in classical history and I have contributed articles to departments.
Now, after seeing the news last night, I'm going straight back to Iran.

If you're a classical historian of such great standing and magnitude, why do you work as an overnight parking lot attendant?
The Torah wasn't written until the 6th century AD. It was written in Hebrew square block style, which indeed was Aramaic in root and branch. Just a different style of 'font'.
If Ric Stern's (good jewish surname) your guru, how come your training method defies all the experience of my lot, and you're still useless?
BTW The IDF don't allow history to be dug up, they just blow it up.

 

[Carrera]

You also seem to be confusing the Greek text Bible with something else. It was the Greek New Testament that was written later (some time around Constantine's reign). Jewish scripture was fully available at that time, as were texts by Plato or Zenophon or Herodotus. There were Jewish texts at that period that have now been lost.
Hebrew is the oldest surviving language of the Middle East. Arabic came very late and Palestinians base their claim to Jerusalem on the alleged fact their culture is older than Jewish or Canaanite culture. So where were the Arabic texts in 1000 A.D.?
In actual fact, the oldest civilization in the Middle East is Canaanite and the Amorites were also in the region before Hebrews.
Modern Palestinians arrived late, have no connection with the non-semitic Philistines (a sea-people) and are made up of Turks, Iranians, Egyptians, Algerians and other Arabic races who settled at the expense of Jews who had been ethnically displaced.
Boogers can go on and on about Palestinians representing some kind of ancient culture but this is a lot of twaddle somebody's been feeding him in that house he shares. I'm pretty sure he shows my posts to those housemates of his and they supply him with more fantastic distortions to post in response.
He should go on Big Brother where he would fit in nicely.

If you're a classical historian of such great standing and magnitude, why do you work as an overnight parking lot attendant?
The Torah wasn't written until the 6th century AD. It was written in Hebrew square block style, which indeed was Aramaic in root and branch. Just a different style of 'font'.
If Ric Stern's (good jewish surname) your guru, how come your training method defies all the experience of my lot, and you're still useless?
BTW The IDF don't allow history to be dug up, they just blow it up.

 

[Carrera]

This stuff is so basic I'm amazed you don't seem to grasp it.
Jews speak Hebrew and have one set of beliefs. Most practise Judaism and a smaller number are Christian. Liturgical Hebrew (and its branches) is the only surviving Canaanite root language in the region and also reflects a far more ancient culture.
Palestinians speak Arabic and are moslems. Arabic and Arab culture is a modern phenomenon. There is ample territory in the Middle East for Arabs to live, without them seeking to impose their ideals on either Israel, France or Holland and Europe as a whole.
If you don't like bullfighting don't go to Spain. If you hate pizza don't visit Italy.
The history of Jerusalem is tied in with Judaism and, prior to that, Canaanite religion which was polytheistic.
Not all Jews are what we might call 100 per cent Jewish as semitic people intermarried over the centuries. Now here is the simple point you seem unable to grasp:
Jews don't exclude gentiles from Israel at all. They exclude Islamic fundamentalists because these people envy the indigenous culture and seek to change it via terrorism and that behaviour isn't welcome in Holland, Australia, France or anywhere else.
Your suggestion that Arabs and Jews are the same is baloney as you might as well argue Estonians and Russians in Estonia are identical on the basis both groups sometimes have a relative living in either country.
Having lived there I know Estonians speak Estonian and Russians in Estonia speak Russian and both cultures are totally distinct.
When are you going to stop swallowing everything they tell you in that shared house of yours?

1) Beslan is thousands of miles away with Palestine. No Palestinians were involved in that incident.
2) The IDF are the ones hiding behind children (see the Supreme Court judgement).
3) It is the IDF snipers who are shooting the kids in schools.
4) There are no reported incidents of 13 year olds being 'used' either.

Regardless of all that War is War, rules are flouted left right and centre in every conflict. Besides, neither side appear to be obeying the rules so there appears to be little disadvantage.



The majority of them do fight in uniform. Ignorance is no excuse for your lies and hatred.



Same goes for other civilisations, and the modern day Palestinians. They are of the same genetic line as the native Jews, they have been there just as long. The Jews simply don't have an exclusive claim to that land. It doesn't matter how many times you lie and attempt to reframe the issue by ignoring all the evidence that Gentiles have ever existed in Israel, the fact remains that Gentiles *do* exist in Israel and they have been there even longer than Jews (because Judaism was certainly not the first practiced in that region).



They murdered women and children to do it. They massacred unarmed farmers. That is not war.

The Linguistic, Cultural and Genetic evidence squarely contradicts that assertion, saying it is so does not make it so Crappy.



ROTFL. Attacking UN personnel and installations has not stopped the Zionists getting their own state.

More seriously there is no viable opportunity for the Palestinians to have their own state. You haven't addressed the issue of sovereignity at all yet, and that simply will not be allowed (see Dov Weisglas '04). You are betraying your profound racist ignorance of the situation. It doesn't make you look big or clever, it makes you small minded, stupid and racist.

You really need a taste of the West Bank from the other side of the wall.

I have addressed all your lies, you are not bringing up anything new or better evidence to support your lies, zero tolerance from here on for you mate.

 

[Carrera]

Well, yes I am guilty of that I'm afraid. We really ought to be sticking to the thread.
I was watching the news last night where some folks were saying military action against Iran is out of the question.
But in reality it isn't. I firmly believe Israel is going to hit Iran and damned hard at that. Russia is apparently getting a little nervous about what it might have sparked off and backtracking, now the Kremlin has become aware the Iranians are too unstable to be equipped with WMD.
The U.S. now has to choose its side (I think it already has done). There is no neutral ground. Iran preaches death to Americans and calls America the great Satan. Iran denies the hollocaust and expresses a desire to destroy Israel.
I don't see Israel sitting around waiting to be protected by the U.S. or anyone else. I think they're getting ready to rumble.

Good point

 

[limerickman]

Jews speak Hebrew and have one set of beliefs. Most practise Judaism and a smaller number are Christian. Liturgical Hebrew (and its branches) is the only surviving Canaanite root

Canaanite and the Jews were separate tribes.
Read the OT : it states that the Jews and Canaanites were separate tribes.

Palestinians speak Arabic and are moslems.

This is at best a generalisation : not all Palestinians are Muslims.
In fact, Palestine (and Palestines) were regarded as being secular.
You generalise a lot - to try to support your revisionism.

There is ample territory in the Middle East for Arabs to live......

this is irrelevant.

The people who lived in the territory now called Israel, were/are entitled to that land from which they were ethnically cleansed by Jewish terrorists.

To ignore this is revisionism.
Then again, you're revisionist.

Not all Jews are what we might call 100 per cent Jewish as semitic people intermarried over the centuries.

That's correct - but you suggested earlier that Jews are 100% genetically "pure".

Jews don't exclude gentiles from Israel at all. They exclude Islamic fundamentalists..........

This is another lie.

All non-Jews are regarded as referred to as gentiles by Jews.

A substantial amount of the non-Jewish population of Israel are effectively excluded from the rights enjoyed by Israeli Jews.

Your suggestion that Arabs and Jews are the same is baloney

No one suggested that they were the same in absolute terms.
What has been suggested and what is correct is that neither grouping is mutually exclusive in genetic terms.
A point that you fail to understand and a point which you choose to ignore.