Gaza Strip withdrawal

Why would Palestinians view this negatively?

P: "We want our land back."
I: "k"
P: "...You're giving us dessert and mountains."
I: "k"
P: "Wtf we want land by the sea."
I: "k"
P: "Wtf is this shit.  Gaza is the ghetto of Palestine.  Wtf is this shit?"

Ha, that's the most skewed view on the Isreali-Palestinian conflict I've ever heard.

P: "We want our land back."
I: "Fuck you."
P: "Can you at least stop the random military attacks?  I know Palestinians keep suicide bombing Isrealis, but we're trying to stop that.  It's not like we have an actual state."
I: "Fuck you."
P: "Can you at least stop the Isreali settlers from invading Palestinian settlements, killing our people, and stealing our homes?"
I: "Fuck you."
P: "Look, this conflict isn't going to stop unless both of us are committed to peace."
P: "Fine, have the Gaza Strip."

Well Gaza is supposed to be not really land you can have substantial development in. That was why Israel gave it up I was guessing cos I seriously surprised when they announced Israel was withdrawing troops.

>> Gaza is supposed to be not really land you can have substantial development in.

i've been living in israel since 2002. the whole place is a shithole. gaza sucks, but i swear to god there's not a single photogenic spot in this whole country. no natural resources either. unless you like sea salt... got shit loads of that.

there is nothing here worth fighting over, i swear up and down. it's like watching two hobos fight over a moldy hot dog they found in a trash can... you just want to throw them a buck and tell them to buy a fucking hamburger. unfortunately there are no hamburgers left: the world is occupied, and has been for a long time, and since noone in this orbiting-apocalypse-waiting-to-happen can remember to fucking share, people are going to kill each other for their shitty slice of the burnt and disgusting pie.

I took great satisfaction in seeing the pained visiges of the extremist settlers being carried out of their stolen land.

Wasn't half a shame they didn't use guns.

I felt sorry for them. They have been living in the land for decades and then they are thrown out of their land by their own government.

I don't see the difference between throwing them out of their home and forcing all the non-indians to leave America.

>>6
A CNN story actually said that half those people with from Brooklyn and just came to Gaza to be angry and abuse soldiers.

>>8
We didn't force them to leave America, many died from disease, and many more died from tribal wars. (the rest the Spanish killed) We just pushed them west, and sometimes not even that. As for this land scuffle, it comes down to this: the land is not Israel's. It hadn't been Israel's for a long time up until Hitler. Hitler caused all this. If it weren't for him I bet there would be many less Jews alive today.

Why can't all the Jews just move to America and visit their Holyland as tourists? There's only like 40 of them left. We need more Jews here. Jews are vital to America, because they have this very colored foreign morality but still find their way into high levels of management yet strangely they're white. Haha, Jews, gotta love em they keep me young.

>>9
What. the. hell.

Europeans deliberately used biological warfare and other means to defeat the indians. This is very well known.

How exactly is that different from pushing the Palestanians to the east?

>>10
Well known by morons who take shit they learned on Saved by the Bell as historical evidence.

http://hnn.us/articles/7302.html

Another well-known fact is that Saddam Hussein had direct links to Al Quaeda. LOL O RLY ITS TRUE!!!

If it weren't for him I bet there would be many less Jews alive today.

Trolls take note: the best way to troll is to state something and imply that it had the opposite effect as was expected. In this case, the holocaust which killed million's of jews and convinced hundreds of thousands to convert to other religions, *increased* the number of Jews relative to what it would have been *had it not happened* (which, by the way, is a counter-factual statement with no objective reality or predictive force).

|a counter-factual statement with no objective reality or predictive force

Troll-blowers take note: the best way to call out a troll is to take their most vague statements which happen not to overly elaborate for fear of attracting arguments against an unproveable theory and wasting people's time and label them unaccountable while also ignoring any and all reasoning you could have drew upon yourself (also theoretical considering their reasoning skills shown thusfar.)

while also ignoring any and all reasoning you could have drew upon yourself

Are you saying I ought to argue someone else's point for them? Why would I do that? If someone has an extaordinary claim like the idea that Hitler was responsible for increasing the Jewish population, then they should be expected to go to extraordinary lengths to support it.

Perhaps my reasoning skills are vastly inferior to yours, perhaps they are exemplary; no matter which is the case, I can't imagine a reason, even theoretically, why I would ever seek to employ them to help convince myself that a point of view I don't share is correct.

Like Hume said, passions are the impetus for every action, without them reason is impotent... my passions not being aligned, I shall not employ my faculty of reason. That's for others to do, if their passions incline them to.

YOUR HEAD A SPLODE

| help convince myself that a point of view I don't share is correct

So you're lazy and think without considering other people's opinions and expect them to spoon-feed you their philosophy so you can ridicule it. You should be able to be given a viewpoint and branch upon it whether you agree or not, that's the strength of an educated human being. I try to make backless out-there statements as much as I can in the hopes of exercising people's minds. Anyway, this is why America has issues, because that skill has been lost by us.

My statement about Hitler was a joke above all else, and a damn good one. Of course, all jokes are half-truths. Hitler's genocide upon the Jewish population led to the world recognizing the plight of the Jews and the fact that a once great civilization had devolved into scattered millions of gypsises living out their dead cultures in melting-pots between other pale-nosed slavs.

The world felt bad, so they stole some land, threw them on it, and called it retribution. If this had not happened the Jews would be no more than another nobody slavic group except with a little black hatred directed towards them. Hitler made the Jews a world superpower and revived their culture, and that's a fact. If what happened to the Jews happened to the American Indians I wonder if they would be a world superpower as well.. But oh wait, they're not white.

16

As to the last 2 paragraphs of your most recent post: maybe, maybe not. I believe otherwise, but without the possibility of traveling back in time and preventing the holocaust, we'll never know which of us is right.

As to "You should be able to be given a viewpoint and branch upon it whether you agree or not", that's your point of view and myself and David Hume disagree. I suppose it's merely a matter of personal preference, so you can call me lazy and any other insult you can come up with, and that's fine. From my perspective though, I think making "backless out-there statements" is actually the intellectually lazy approach: it's supremely easy to spout nonsense, the *only* part of any discussion which requires *any* work is backing it up.

>>9
Did you just fail at reading? 8 doesn't see the difference between  making isrealis move off Gaza and making WHITES move off America, Not WHITES pushing Indians west.

>>11
To summarize that articles (I only skimmed through it), it says that whites did not commit purposeful genocide against the indians and the population of indians who died are vastly exploded. I don't know whether it is true or not but for the sake of moving on, let's just say it is true.

The Jews do not want to cause genocide against the Palestanians now either. They wanted land and so they pushed the Palestanians east (and even that is debatable, because one could say that they are just reacting to aggression from the countries around them; but because of their superior military force, they gained land (legally)).

They wanted land; which was the same as what the frontier whites wanted. I do not see a difference between the Jews now and the whites then even if you put them in the worst light possible. If anything the Jews are in a better moral position that the whites then because for the most part they were reacting to aggressions from neighbouring countries while the whites had a Manifest Destiny to follow.

Therefore I do not see what the difference is between throwing the Gaza settlers out of their homes they have been living for decades in and forcing someone living in Virgnia to go to Europe.

ranting about who was where first and thus supposedly has a right  to call the place his own forever is RETARDED beyond believe and generally just resorts in btrick throwing and NO U calling.
if you really wanted to move people where they all lived thousands of years ago you'd be left with one hell of a blood shedding to perform on millions of people.

fucking idiots.

>> 20

uhhh... I concur.

In the end, no-one "owns" land, no-one has a birthright to it... national borders have changed continuously for most nations throughout their history... the whole idea of geographical heredity is a ludicrous counter-factual daydream...

So basically it just comes down to who has more guns, more soldiers, and wants it more. :P You want to talk about ethics? Well I think from an ethical perspective no-one involved, not the Jews nor the Muslims nor the Christians are ethical. They're all being total bastards. But sometimes you have to be when you want something badly enough. :P