[QUOTE="TehOverkill"]

[QUOTE="Buttons1990"]

Um... What? Son, ever heard of the Ottoman Empire...? What is this "western ploy to set up camp near their most valuable resource?"

Once WW1 ended France and England divided up the former Ottoman Empire and inserted puppet governments in those "new" countries (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan)... All of which are much closer to the resources you speak of (which weren't even important to either France or England in 1918-1920)... What was important was Egypt... And the Suez Canal... And England's access to India... The Middle East was just road for England to reach India on... That is all.

And what crime was committed against those who lived there? The Jews in the early 1900s through the 1920s-30s were BUYING land FROM PALESTINIANS and setting up settlements... In the "BRITISH MANDATE OF PALESTINE" as it wasn't even a Palestinian nation at that point either... Then by 1948, India had partitioned from Britain, they just lost millions of people in WW2, and didn't give two poops about the Middle East any more and left Palestine to fend for itself... Preparing for that for years, Israel established itself instantly... And every single neighboring Arab nation attacked that new state... And they defended themselves... And hundreds of thousands of Palestinians LEFT ON THEIR OWN TO GET AWAY FROM THE WAR... And the 1948 borders were established after the United Nations intervened (though Jordan actually stopped attacking once they occupied all of the West Bank) (and similarly Egypt with Gaza) - Two places they (ARAB NATIONS) would continue to occupy until the 1967 war...

Buttons1990

Don't be a condescending smarta**, son. Your high-school formation in history doesn't give you enough ground to afford it.

That was during WW I, oil wasn't at the uproar it was during and after the second great war. The governments they established (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan) weren't nearly as tied to them as Israel is to the USA. Israel depends directly on USA's power to veto and military prowess to maintain their dominion over a politically unstable middle-east. Do you think England even *cared* about a road to India post-World War II? Not only did it not matter as much as it did in the 1910's, when transport was precarious, it wasn't nearly as important as establishing a strategical entry to the past century's most important resource, petroleum, and Israel afforded them that. The acquisition of the Suez Canal happened due to Israel's presence, which, with the aid of European super-powers Britain and France, managed to seize it from Egypt's hands.

Israel was only estabilished as an internationally recognized State in mid-1948, do your research. Prior to that, any entry by foreigners in the area was indeed due to purchases, not an invasion, and was MINIMAL (see image below) when compared to the post-UN resolution scenario. The arab nations RIGHTFULLY attacked Israel, since it had taken much more than was it's fair share (considering there even is a fair share above 0%), and once Israel won, their retaliation was to conquer the Gaza Strip and take the area bordering Lebanon for theirselves. Israel declared war on the Palestinian people when they seized their land: Israel was not defending itself in the Six-day war, the arab population was. They were trying to get what was rightfull theirs back.

What? Seeing as how those governments were actually created by Britain, they were pretty close bro... And what does Israel's relationship with the US have to do with anything? Prior to 1948 they had no diplomatic relations... (As it wasn't even a damn country yet)...

Did I not just say that?

Um... The Suez Canal was under British or French control almost entirely since it was built, and didn't change hands until the Suez Crisis... What the hell does Israel have to do with it?

Just going to ignore this as it is just anti-Israel spiel that has nothing to do with anything...

Yes, what does Israel's relation to the strongest country in the world have to do with anything, right? The only reason Israel managed to expand to it's bloated size, exceeding UN's stipulation, was because they were fully backed up politically, economically and militarily by the United States. What DOES that have to do with anything?

No, you said the European nations could care less about Israel.

The Suez Canal was owned by no one up to the Suez Crisis. Egypt announced that it was going to nationalize the canal during mid 50's, after the US and Britain withdrew their offer to fund the creation of a dam in the Nile river.

You're going to ignore the big green blot showing how compressed the palestinians got due to Israel's expansion? Why did you start this discussion if you're going to label anything I say against Israel's policies as "Anti-Israel spiel"? You expected me to support a nation that went from having no territory of their own, to creating a nation over the land of another people, to expanding to over twenty times its original territory, again, over another nation's land? Not only that, but they went over the amount of territory the UN stipulated. Thank you U.S, for supporting them in this decision.

But if you want to "ignore" this, be my guest. Just don't accept a historical/political debate if you're not willing to go through with it thoroughly, instead of giving half-a** answers because you don't know what to say.

Yes. I watch it every now and then, and I rooted for the Vancouver Canucks when I was staying at their town. The only game I ever went to was a Vancouver Giants match, though. At least I got to see a fight: one of the Giants' players took off the other team player's helmet off, put him in a sleeper hold and started punching his face. It was entertaining.

[QUOTE="TehOverkill"]

I like Collapsing of a Dream. Like is an amazing understatement. Hans Zimmer's soundtrack MADE Inception what it is.

On a side-note, I've been waking up to the Inception OST since Friday. Gives you an early jump and this misconception (in your case, not mine) of you being a bada**.

HaloReachGOTY

No, but you can misconcieve yourself as one.

I like Collapsing of a Dream. Like is an amazing understatement. Hans Zimmer's soundtrack MADE Inception what it is.

On a side-note, I've been waking up to the Inception OST since Friday. Gives you an early jump and this misconception (in your case, not mine) of you being a bada**.

[QUOTE="TehOverkill"]

[QUOTE="Buttons1990"]

Why do people always point out Israel when discussing war crimes and say they are committing them against Palestinians? If Israel wanted to destroy the Palestinians, they are MORE than capable of doing so, in fact if Israel wanted to kill every Muslim in the Middle East they are more than capable...

Israel has a massive stockpile of chemical and biological weapons as well as upwards of 250 nuclear devices... If they wanted to, they could destroy the Middle East. But they don't want to... They have those weapons for one thing and one thing only... Last resort defense... If one day Israel is on the verge of being utterly destroyed by their neighbors, you can bet your ass there will be war crimes committed, but not until then.

----

And before you say I am pro-Israel I hate Israel for what it is doing in it slow slow settlement of Palestinian territory, but there is nothing that can be done... Israel will not give up Jerusalem and thus no peace will ever be met unless the Palestinians are willing to give up Jerusalem, which will also not happen... And the settlement has almost reached the point of no return, you can move a couple hundred or thousand settlers somewhere else, but there are literally tens of thousands now... It must stop soon or it will be to late to stop.

Buttons1990

I dislike how your post implies that either a country isn't being criminal or it's going all-f***ing-out. Sure, it hasn't nuked the Middle East because they're not STUPID. Why would they nuke the largest reserve of oil in the world, risking the loss of support from the country that guarantees their military power, the US -- because, let's face it, Israel's USA's middle-east puppet.

The creation of the State of Israel was f***ed up since the beginning, a great ploy for the Western developped countries to set camp near their most valuable resource, petroleum, but a crime against the people who already lived there, and had to be moved out because a few million people said that that was their country A FEW THOUSAND YEARS AGO. While we're at it, let's give the U.S. back to England, Brazil to Portugal and the rest of Latin America to Spain.

--

I'm anti-Israel (and please don't misunderstand this and claim I'm an anti-Semite. You'd be making a fool of yourself), period. They invaded another peoples' country of residence and offer almost no flexibility, taking whatever they want for their own. The least they could do is share the territory with the palestinians, and offer an equalitarian political division. Instead, they destroy the means of living of their neighbours (grape vines take more than a dozen years to mature). I'm glad the number of palestines is rapidly increasing while the number of Israelites is going from steady to decreasing. Their nuclear bombs will never get deployed because North America, Europe and the UN would never allow it, and they'll be greatly outnumbered by the pallestinians in a few years. I'm not saying this would lead to a loss in the Israeli state: it has the best trained air force in the world, and one of the best military, but terrorist attacks and bombings will increase to the point that the Jewish people will start asking if living in Israel or Jerusalem is worth it.

Um... What? Son, ever heard of the Ottoman Empire...? What is this "western ploy to set up camp near their most valuable resource?"

Once WW1 ended France and England divided up the former Ottoman Empire and inserted puppet governments in those "new" countries (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan)... All of which are much closer to the resources you speak of (which weren't even important to either France or England in 1918-1920)... What was important was Egypt... And the Suez Canal... And England's access to India... The Middle East was just road for England to reach India on... That is all.

And what crime was committed against those who lived there? The Jews in the early 1900s through the 1920s-30s were BUYING land FROM PALESTINIANS and setting up settlements... In the "BRITISH MANDATE OF PALESTINE" as it wasn't even a Palestinian nation at that point either... Then by 1948, India had partitioned from Britain, they just lost millions of people in WW2, and didn't give two poops about the Middle East any more and left Palestine to fend for itself... Preparing for that for years, Israel established itself instantly... And every single neighboring Arab nation attacked that new state... And they defended themselves... And hundreds of thousands of Palestinians LEFT ON THEIR OWN TO GET AWAY FROM THE WAR... And the 1948 borders were established after the United Nations intervened (though Jordan actually stopped attacking once they occupied all of the West Bank) (and similarly Egypt with Gaza) - Two places they (ARAB NATIONS) would continue to occupy until the 1967 war...

Don't be a condescending smarta**, son. Your high-school formation in history doesn't give you enough ground to afford it.

That was during WW I, oil wasn't at the uproar it was during and after the second great war. The governments they established (Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan) weren't nearly as tied to them as Israel is to the USA. Israel depends directly on USA's power to veto and military prowess to maintain their dominion over a politically unstable middle-east. Do you think England even *cared* about a road to India post-World War II? Not only did it not matter as much as it did in the 1910's, when transport was precarious, it wasn't nearly as important as establishing a strategical entry to the past century's most important resource, petroleum, and Israel afforded them that. The acquisition of the Suez Canal happened due to Israel's presence, which, with the aid of European super-powers Britain and France, managed to seize it from Egypt's hands.

Israel was only estabilished as an internationally recognized State in mid-1948, do your research. Prior to that, any entry by foreigners in the area was indeed due to purchases, not an invasion, and was MINIMAL (see image below) when compared to the post-UN resolution scenario. The arab nations RIGHTFULLY attacked Israel, since it had taken much more than was it's fair share (considering there even is a fair share above 0%), and once Israel won, their retaliation was to conquer the Gaza Strip and take the area bordering Lebanon for theirselves. Israel declared war on the Palestinian people when they seized their land: Israel was not defending itself in the Six-day war, the arab population was. They were trying to get what was rightfull theirs back.

Xiang Qing Oh Hani And GumihoLonelynight

AKA: Unknown girl #1, Unknown girl #2 and Unknown girl #3.

[QUOTE="TehOverkill"]

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

We nuked Japan, twice. They didn't commit war crimes against the world. The Nazis did.

When every Nazi who served in WW2 is dead, the Germans have the right to be left alone.

Buttons1990

War crimes are an effin' joke. If everyone's doing it (yes, USA, you do it too), and no one's getting punished, WHY THE HELL IS IT A CRIME?

Look, several countries have done similar things to what Germany did in WW II, mostly at smaller proportions. Israel, with the palestines; the US, with every other country in the world; the UK, England notably, with its neo-colonialism policies at the beginning of the past century; Netherlands; France; Spain... the list goes on and on, and Europe is certainly the worst portion of the world as far as international crimes go.

Why do people always point out Israel when discussing war crimes and say they are committing them against Palestinians? If Israel wanted to destroy the Palestinians, they are MORE than capable of doing so, in fact if Israel wanted to kill every Muslim in the Middle East they are more than capable...

Israel has a massive stockpile of chemical and biological weapons as well as upwards of 250 nuclear devices... If they wanted to, they could destroy the Middle East. But they don't want to... They have those weapons for one thing and one thing only... Last resort defense... If one day Israel is on the verge of being utterly destroyed by their neighbors, you can bet your ass there will be war crimes committed, but not until then.

----

And before you say I am pro-Israel I hate Israel for what it is doing in it slow slow settlement of Palestinian territory, but there is nothing that can be done... Israel will not give up Jerusalem and thus no peace will ever be met unless the Palestinians are willing to give up Jerusalem, which will also not happen... And the settlement has almost reached the point of no return, you can move a couple hundred or thousand settlers somewhere else, but there are literally tens of thousands now... It must stop soon or it will be to late to stop.

I dislike how your post implies that either a country isn't being criminal or it's going all-f***ing-out. Sure, it hasn't nuked the Middle East because they're not STUPID. Why would they nuke the largest reserve of oil in the world, risking the loss of support from the country that guarantees their military power, the US -- because, let's face it, Israel's USA's middle-east puppet.

The creation of the State of Israel was f***ed up since the beginning, a great ploy for the Western developped countries to set camp near their most valuable resource, petroleum, but a crime against the people who already lived there, and had to be moved out because a few million people said that that was their country A FEW THOUSAND YEARS AGO. While we're at it, let's give the U.S. back to England, Brazil to Portugal and the rest of Latin America to Spain.

--

I'm anti-Israel (and please don't misunderstand this and claim I'm an anti-Semite. You'd be making a fool of yourself), period. They invaded another peoples' country of residence and offer almost no flexibility, taking whatever they want for their own. The least they could do is share the territory with the palestinians, and offer an equalitarian political division. Instead, they destroy the means of living of their neighbours (grape vines take more than a dozen years to mature). I'm glad the number of palestines is rapidly increasing while the number of Israelites is going from steady to decreasing. Their nuclear bombs will never get deployed because North America, Europe and the UN would never allow it, and they'll be greatly outnumbered by the pallestinians in a few years. I'm not saying this would lead to a loss in the Israeli state: it has the best trained air force in the world, and one of the best military, but terrorist attacks and bombings will increase to the point that the Jewish people will start asking if living in Israel or Jerusalem is worth it.

Vanille, from FFXIII. She's adorable.

[spoiler] [/spoiler]

[QUOTE="Lonelynight"]Elaborate please.airshocker

We nuked Japan, twice. They didn't commit war crimes against the world. The Nazis did.

When every Nazi who served in WW2 is dead, the Germans have the right to be left alone.

War crimes are an effin' joke. If everyone's doing it (yes, USA, you do it too), and no one's getting punished, WHY THE HELL IS IT A CRIME?

Look, several countries have done similar things to what Germany did in WW II, mostly at smaller proportions. Israel, with the palestines; the US, with every other country in the world; the UK, England notably, with its neo-colonialism policies at the beginning of the past century; Netherlands; France; Spain... the list goes on and on, and Europe is certainly the worst portion of the world as far as international crimes go.

This was sixty years ago. What had (or not) to be done, was done. Drop the bone already.