• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

International Hamas launches surprise attack on Israel; Israel has declared a state of war. Vol. VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've said this from the start - the end goal for many in Israel is the complete expulsion of all Palestinians. They want all the land. Whether it is in body bags or mass deportation or the slow bleed via settlements in the West Bank is the question.

I don't know how anyone can deny this wasn't the case for at least some in Israel.

The founder of Israel, Ben Gurion, stated their ultimate intentions so many times:

If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?”
David Ben-Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.

“Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country. … Behind the terrorism [by the Arabs] is a movement, which though primitive is not devoid of idealism and self sacrifice.”
— David Ben Gurion. Quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky’s Fateful Triangle, which appears in Simha Flapan’s “Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.

“We must do everything to insure they (the Palestinians) never do return.”
David Ben-Gurion, in his diary, 18 July 1948, quoted in Michael Bar Zohar’s Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.

“It’s not a matter of maintaining the status quo. We have to create a dynamic state, oriented towards expansion.” –Ben Gurion

“We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population? ‘Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said ‘ Drive them out! ‘
Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979.

Partition: “after the formation of a large army in the wake of the establishment of the state, we will abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine “
— Ben Gurion, p.22 “The Birth of Israel, 1987” Simha Flapan.


12 July 1937, Ben-Gurion entered in his diary: “The compulsory transfer of the Arabs from the valleys of the proposed Jewish state could give us something which we never had, even when we stood on our own feet during the days of the First and Second Temple”
– a Galilee free from Arab population.

27 July 1937, Ben-Gurion wrote in a letter to his 16 year old son Amos: “We have never wanted to dispossess the Arabs [but] because Britain is giving them part of the country which had been promised to us, it is fair that the Arabs in our state be transferred to the Arab portion”

Ben-Gurion in an address to the central committee of the Histadrut on 30 December 1947:
“In the area allocated to the Jewish State there are not more than 520,000 Jews and about 350,000 non-Jews, mostly Arabs. Together with the Jews of Jerusalem, the total population of the Jewish State at the time of its establishment will be about a million, including almost 40 percent non-Jews. Such a [population] composition does not provide a stable basis for a Jewish State. This [demographic] fact must be viewed in all its clarity and acuteness. With such a [population] composition, there cannot even be absolute certainty that control will remain in the hands of the Jewish majority…. There can be no stable and strong Jewish State so long as it has a Jewish majority of only 60 percent.”
again, intentionally taking the context away from the ben gurion quote:

tps://m.jpost.com/magazine/books/an-excerpt-from-benny-morriss-new-book-1948

David Ben-Gurion well understood these contradictory perspectives. As he told his colleagues, against the backdrop of the Arab Revolt of 1936-1939: "We must see the situation for what it is. On the security front, we are those attacked and who are on the defensive. But in the political field we are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending themselves. They are living in the country and own the land, the village. We live in the Diaspora and want only to immigrate [to Palestine] and gain possession of [lirkosh] the land from them."

Years later, after the establishment of Israel, he expatiated on the Arab perspective in a conversation with the Zionist leader Nahum Goldmann: "I don't understand your optimism... Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: We have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: We have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?"

To be sure, while mentioning "God," Ben-Gurion - a child of Eastern European social democracy and nationalism who knew no Arabic (though, as prime minister, he found time to study ancient Greek, to read Plato in the original, and Spanish, to read Don Quixote) - had failed fully to appreciate the depth of the Arabs' abhorrence of the Zionist-Jewish presence in Palestine, an abhorrence anchored in centuries of Islamic Judeophobia with deep religious and historical roots. The Jewish rejection of the Prophet Muhammad is embedded in the Qur'an and is etched in the psyche of those brought up on its suras.

As the Muslim Brotherhood put it in 1948: "Jews are the historic enemies of Muslims and carry the greatest hatred for the nation of Muhammad." Such thinking characterized the Arab world, where the overwhelming majority of the population were, and remain, believers.

In 1943, when President Franklin Roosevelt sent out feelers about a negotiated settlement of the Palestine problem, King Ibn Sa'ud of Saudi Arabia responded that he was "prepared to receive anyone of any religion except (repeat except) a Jew." A few weeks earlier, Ibn Sa'ud had explained, in a letter to Roosevelt: "Palestine... has been an Arab country since the dawn of history and... was never inhabited by the Jews for more than a period of time, during which their history in the land was full of murder and cruelty... [There is] religious hostility... between the Muslims and the Jews from the beginning of Islam... which arose from the treacherous conduct of the Jews towards Islam and the Muslims and their prophet."

Jews were seen as unclean; indeed, even those who had contact with them were seen as beyond the pale.
In late 1947 the Al-Azhar University 'ulema, major authorities in the Islamic world, issued a fatwa that anyone dealing with "the Jews," commercially or economically (such as by "buying their produce"), "is a sinner and criminal... who will be regarded as an apostate to Islam, he will be separated from his spouse. It is prohibited to be in contact with him." This anti-Semitic mindset was not restricted to Wahhabi chieftains or fundamentalist imams. Samir Rifahi, Jordan's prime minister, in 1947 told visiting newsmen, "The Jews are a people to be feared... Give them another 25 years and they will be all over the Middle East, in our country and Syria and Lebanon, in Iraq and Egypt... They were responsible for starting the two world wars... Yes, I have read and studied, and I know they were behind Hitler at the beginning of his movement."
 
I'll dig it up and send it.

Read the Telegram messages. Here's my take. You can't extrapolate the entire Palestinian Authority's position based on a Telegram channel allegedly associated with Palestinians. If I go by that standard, I can attribute all sorts of fucked up shit to the entirety of Israel as well - based on unhinged shit random Israeli extremists say.

But I don't do that because it would be incorrect.
 
Last edited:
Upenn wasn’t enough!


I want to start a petition to have some Sherdog mods removed. How can they let a thread titled hamas surprise attack (as supposed to terror attack- you terror sympathizers) get hijacked by so many people who don’t like genocide or ethnic Cleansing?!?

This level of antisemitism shouldn’t be allowed in a public forum.

Please tell genocide haters to Go start your own “I hate genocides” or “all lives are equal” thread else where please or moderate content in this better
 
Pro IDF posters won't adress that. At best they'll tell you that desecrating cemeteries is "an isolated mistake" when it's clearly coordinated and intentional
I'm well aware. I posted a bunch of stuff from ex IDF soldiers testimonies about how one of their main objectives was to disrupt the lives, demean and terrorise palestinian lives. Ex-IDF Avner Gvaryahu gave an interview stating that one of his immediate reactions to 10/7 was that he wondered if any of the people perpetrating the attack was someone that he had personally dealt with during his time with the IDF. No one says anything about that though. Because we all know Israel was just peacefully minding it's own business of course and this was just an isolated attack that came out of nowhere. Utter horseshit.
 
again, intentionally taking the context away from the ben gurion quote:

tps://m.jpost.com/magazine/books/an-excerpt-from-benny-morriss-new-book-1948

David Ben-Gurion well understood these contradictory perspectives. As he told his colleagues, against the backdrop of the Arab Revolt of 1936-1939: "We must see the situation for what it is. On the security front, we are those attacked and who are on the defensive. But in the political field we are the attackers and the Arabs are those defending themselves. They are living in the country and own the land, the village. We live in the Diaspora and want only to immigrate [to Palestine] and gain possession of [lirkosh] the land from them."

Your quotes that you just put up does not mitigate all the things Ben Gurion said. You're just doing your usual schtick trying to muddy the waters. You're just relying on people not actually reading.

But his words speak for themselves.
 
The very president of israel Isaac Hertzog does not believe that, as well as the minister of defense and knesset members, on what tangible basis should we ?

The President of Israel, Isaac Herzog, said: “It is an entire nation out there that is responsible. It’s not true this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved. It's absolutely not true.”

An Israeli Knesset member, Meirav Ben-Ari, said: “The children of Gaza brought it upon themselves.”

And the Israeli Minister of Defence, Yoav Gallant, described the current war: “We are fighting human animals.”
Nothing you wrote suggests I'm wrong in any way.
And I will not engage with you any further because you continuously try to change the basis of an argument.
 
Your quotes that you just put up does not mitigate all the things Ben Gurion said. You're just doing your usual schtick trying to muddy the waters. You're just relying on people not actually reading.

But his words speak for themselves.
those words were expatiated on the Arab perspective.

not that you care. you want to strip context so your narrative works better.
 
So? Idc, that doesn't give them the right to promise the land of the Arabs to others just like the Ottomans ruling their territory didn't have the right to cleanse Assyrians and give their land to Kurds. If Kurds want a Kurdistan it can't come at the expense of Assyrians the way the Zionist project has come at the expense of the Palestinians.

Did the Ottomans have the mandate of the League of Nations to develop a Kurdistan?

The primary focus was to not be cleansed off your ancestral land which as we can see Zionist control of Palestine inevitably leads to. Somehow this very primordial impulse is just a mystery to people like you.

How is declaring an official state with the UN and preventing yourself from being cleansed off your land mutually exclusive? What was preventing them from applying for statehood during that time?
 
who said it was tho ? Is it difficult for a minister to be precise ? In all civilized countries in the world government representative pick their words because a word can have disastrous consequences.

Why should I believe that he wasn't talking about civilians when if I put it into context with what his president and Knesset members say as well as the slaughtering campaign that killed 20K+, paralyzed hospitals and is restricting even food, it becomes then obvious that he's talking about all Palestinian not just Hamas ?

Also wouldn't he have corrected it since if it was the case ? It's the most infamous quote of the war and the most visible, if it was so misinterpreted you'd think he'd come forward and say it. He's not.
Because later on he said this
Asked about the difficulty of the evacuation order, Gallant said it was essential to avoid civilian casualties as Israel retaliates against Hamas, which he characterized as similar in its brutality to the terror group ISIS.


“The camouflage of the terrorists is the civil population,” he said, according to a transcript provided by the Pentagon. “Therefore, we need to separate them. So those who want to save their life, please go south. We are going to destroy Hamas infrastructures, Hamas headquarters, Hamas military establishment, and take these phenomena out of Gaza and out of the Earth. They cannot live among human civilized people.”


Israel does not target civilians, he added.
The siege he ordered is still a cruel thing to inflict on the Gazan population and I'm thankful the US pressured Israel into lifting it but I do think that in context he was talking about Hamas.
 
Last edited:
those words were expatiated on the Arab perspective.

not that you care. you want to strip context so your narrative works better.

Do you even know what expatiated means? Just means he spoke at length on the Arab perspective.

That does not mitigate what he said immediately afterwards. So your point doesn't make sense.

Now stop replying to me with your nonsense. You don't have any arguments that make actual sense.

Ben Gurion's words SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.
 
Last edited:
Read the Telegram messages. Here's my take. You can't extrapolate the entire Palestinian Authority's position based on a Telegram channel allegedly associated with Palestinians. If I go by that standard, I can attribute all sorts of fucked up shit to the entirety of Israel as well - based on unhinged shit random Israeli extremists say.

But I don't do that because it would be incorrect.

Just to be clear, the Telegram channel in question is run by a military branch of the PA. It's not loosely associated with "Palestinians", rather a channel directly under governmental (PA) control.

The original claim that I made was that the PA has mixed messaging, internally in Arabic vs. externally in English on the diplomatic front. This is just one example of that.
 

UN Human Rights Office - OPT: Unlawful killings in Gaza City​

OHCHR OPT has received disturbing information alleging that Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) summarily killed at least 11 unarmed Palestinian men in front of their family members in Al Remal neighbourhood, Gaza City, which raises alarm about the possible commission of a war crime. This comes in the wake of earlier allegations concerning the deliberate targeting and killing of civilians at the hands of Israeli forces.

 
Did the Ottomans have the mandate of the League of Nations with Kurdistan?
Who cares? Completely irrelevant. Its not like the Zionists and their patrons care what the UN says today.
How is declaring an official state with the UN and preventing yourself from being cleansed off your land mutually exclusive? What was preventing them from applying for statehood during that time?
Because the Palestinians were weak in the aftermath of the 1948 war while the Jordanians were thought to have the best trained Arab Army. Not to mention the Jordanians gave the Palestinians citizenship and were okay with them living on the West Bank unlike the Zionists who wanted the land for themselves. Why bite the hand that feeds you by pushing for independence only to leave yourself vulnerable to your arch enemy that is waiting to take your land?
Do you even know what expatiated means? Just means he spoke at length on the Arab perspective.

That does not mitigate what he said immediately afterwards. So your point does not make sense.

Now stop replying to me with your nonsense. You don't actually have arguments that make any sense.
All he knows how to do is nitpick, dodge questions, and lie by omission. Not an honest or informed poster.
 

UN Human Rights Office - OPT: Unlawful killings in Gaza City​

OHCHR OPT has received disturbing information alleging that Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) summarily killed at least 11 unarmed Palestinian men in front of their family members in Al Remal neighbourhood, Gaza City, which raises alarm about the possible commission of a war crime. This comes in the wake of earlier allegations concerning the deliberate targeting and killing of civilians at the hands of Israeli forces.

Read some details of that and it sounds absolutely horrific.
 

UN Human Rights Office - OPT: Unlawful killings in Gaza City​

OHCHR OPT has received disturbing information alleging that Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) summarily killed at least 11 unarmed Palestinian men in front of their family members in Al Remal neighbourhood, Gaza City, which raises alarm about the possible commission of a war crime. This comes in the wake of earlier allegations concerning the deliberate targeting and killing of civilians at the hands of Israeli forces.


Soon: 'Why should we not be able to unlawfully kill?'
 
So let's put the pieces together and see what we get in Israel: we have an extreme right government that was voted in by the Israeli population, we have politicians openly expressing their genocidal and murderous view of Gaza on TV, they openly dehumanise Palestinians and state in clear terms that they want them gone, Jewish children express their desire to kill Arabs and to expel them from the land, these children end up joining the IDF terrorist organisation and later become politicians too, we have reports of IDF crimes almost daily, etc., etc.,

It's doesn't reveal a nice picture does it?

Imagine calling me a bad person and anti semitrick for merely pointing out this stuff when you support terrorists. The irony.
 


The premise of the video rests on the assumption that there will be a "left wave" in the next israeli elections (when?) that will lead to a stop to the heavy pro-settlement policy in the west bank and hence q more appeased climate for peace talk with Arab nations.

I don't see it. If anything israeli public opinion is shifting more and more to the right, and the settlers are increasingly more violent and also almost a million already. Just by demography, given that they're know to have a very high birth rate level for israeli standards, it doesn't seem realistic.

Now feel all free not to read as I'll be a bit long and push the analysis a little further. To play devil's advocate, I've got no doubt that the saudis (and UAE) will still push for the Abraham accords. You need to understand that they originally do not share anyt if he Pan-Arabic ideas of other countries from Morocco to Irak, and only considere gulf citizen as "true Arabs".

(Also you could say that political Pan-Arabism effectively died with Saddam Hussein and Khadafi but that's another discussion entirely)

They're in power because they have infinite money, a strong alliance with the US and put billions to popularize their wahabbism islamic ideology to have a foot on other sunni nations neck.

They also want the eradication of hamas because it has roots in the Muslim brotherhood, which has always been a threat for the monarchies in the region due to their electoral islamism (I mean using democracy and elections to establish an islamic regime). They just can't say it loudly, not because of their streets like Egypt or Jordan, but because they'd lose footing as regional powers with all the sunni countries if they do. And they need that because they can't afford any Arab country to get even closer to Iran.

I predict that it will be the slow downfall of MBS. I wouldn't say as much for MBZ (Muhammad Ben Zayed, leader of UAE) because the context is different. He has less political pressure and less threats to deal with.

You need to understand that the Saud tribe has been in power for what, 200 year on and off ? Solidly since a little bit more than a century.

The opinion is very divided in the country, between age groups and regions.

The young generation likes MBS and supports his decisions including the normalization with israel, at least before the war.

The older generation is more neutral towards him, as neither king Abdallah nor Fahd and even less Faisal for the very old did have such a brazen style of ruling. But they never supported the Abraham accords

Now in term of region, all of the Najd region from which the Saud come from is pro MBS without fail. They have the best jobs in the government and are the most taken care of in terms of infrastructure and facilities (excepted Mekkah and Madinah of course because of their holy cities special status).

But the shia tribes in the east, and the Arab tribes from the south like in Ta'if have been discriminated against for a long time, and hate the Saud to the core and MBS even more.

MBS also has ennemies in his own clan because again, his brazen attitude led
him to put in prison some of his cousins, which the Saud never did before.

Last thing, the Saud clan power lies heavily on his religious clergy. After all the fprototype of what would become Saudi Arabia was first established by an alliance between Muhammad Ibn Saud, a local leader, and Muhammad Ibn Abdelwahab, the founder of the Wahabi doctrine. The wahhabi clergy are hence fundamentalists in all the ways it's possible except one : they'll always issue "fatawas" (religious decrees) that will favor the Saudi ruler's politic. That's why lately the religious leaders that have given the mildest condemnations of israel are the Saudi religious cast. Because of that the wahabbism which is a pillar of Saudi soft power in the muslim world has been very weakened and is not seen seriously anymore. It's seen as a puppet for the Saudi government, which it is (not only but it's one of its functions)

So MBS pushing for normalization after this war - if he does - could very well be the straw that breaks the camel back. I don't think there will be a revolution because Saudis does not have that culture at all (contrary to Egyptians for example), but it could undermine his power regionally. What will be the consequences I don't know. But Iran is there to take advantage of the Saudi mistakes... I don't know for the rest that's the extent of my analysis...
 
Last edited:
Nothing you wrote suggests I'm wrong in any way.
And I will not engage with you any further because you continuously try to change the basis of an argument.

Except I didn't. You said that if anyone believes that israel deliberately targets civilians it's out of hatred and I showed you statements from Israeli officials who say they either that there is no civilian in Gaza, or that gazans are animals or that Gaza children brought it upon themselves. Others have said the focus in on damage not accuracy. How people saying that would not voluntarily target civilians ? How the fact that 2/3 of the killed are civilians by Israeli accounts does not proves that further ?

What basis of the argument did I change ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top