Peace possible in 6 months if Israel freezes all settlements ?

Discussion in 'The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr' started by the morning light, Dec 17, 2009.

  1. the morning light

    the morning light New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    288
  2. rentalguy1

    rentalguy1 Former Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    884
    Location:
    The mountains of NE TN.
    I'm just wondering if it will hurt when the monkeys fly out of my butt...
  3. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    8,198
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    The way that guy looked in Bruce Almighty, I believe it does hurt.
  4. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest

    And if Obomba quit destroying our country, in 6 months we could start over.:rolleyes:

    I'm sure Hamas will agree to the terms as well.:eek:
  5. jim summers

    jim summers Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,179
    Location:
    I reside in southern Indiana, you can almost step
    There will be no peace over there in 6 months, they haven't had since the dawn of time so why is it going to happen in 6 months. Those Arabs and Jews have never had peace or gotten along so there is no reason to believe that they will now. It just ain't going to happen.
  6. gaowlpoop

    gaowlpoop New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2007
    Messages:
    167
    Location:
    Middle Georgia
    Seems to me Jimmy Carter (what an embarrassment) received a Nobel Peace Prize for the same thing.

    But then Nobel Peace Prizes come on a roll and hang in the bathroom.
  7. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    8,198
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    Very well put!
  8. Trouble 45-70

    Trouble 45-70 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,703
    Location:
    NE Ar. W. of Black River
    The only way there will be peace is if all Israelis slit their own throats. Sort of like happened the night before the fall of Masada. Hamas and Hezbollah will see to that. Then again there is the scripture that says I will make Jerusalem a stumbling block to all nations.
  9. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    Uh huh sure:rolleyes: The Palestinians never keep their side of any peace agreement. Never. Hamas ALWAYS breaks the ceasefires by launching rockets. Everytime Israel makes concessions in order to "further peace," Hamas launches rockets. Everytime Israel tries to show restraint, Hamas launches rockets. Everytime Israel abides by the internationally brokered peace deals, Hamas launches rockets.

    Gee, I'm starting to notice a pattern here:rolleyes:
  10. Marlin T

    Marlin T Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,876
    Location:
    New Mexico
    Peace can and will be attained when the terrorist attacks stop.

    Pretty simple to me and I don't think I'm wrong either.
  11. obxned

    obxned New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,342
    Peace is possible in three months if all Isrealis commit suicide within the next 90 days.
  12. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    8,198
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    There will also be peace when Israel is surrounded by a glass paved self lighting parking lot.
  13. Trouble 45-70

    Trouble 45-70 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,703
    Location:
    NE Ar. W. of Black River
    Hamas does reduce rocket launches when Israel goes on the offensive.
  14. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest

    Because they are too busy running away.:rolleyes:
    Cowards.:mad:

    Hide your face, launch rockets from a residential neighborhood, run away, and claim how evil the Jews are for bombing the launch sight.:mad:

    When the dust settles, move back in and repeat.:mad:
  15. DWARREN123

    DWARREN123 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2003
    Messages:
    764
    Location:
    BETWEEN TN & KY
    I do not believe peace is possible there at all!:mad:
  16. bcj1755

    bcj1755 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Messages:
    4,357
    Location:
    A wretched hive of scum and villiany
    Yep, because Hamas is too busy running and hiding like the worthless, spineless cowards that they are.
  17. sabashimon

    sabashimon New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2007
    Messages:
    672
    Location:
    PNW/Israel
    Take it from me gents, there will never be peace in the land of my birth.
    As difficult as it is for me to say it, with three kids and 8 grandkids in Israel, it simply is not possible for Islam to ever accept a sovereign Jewish Nation, no matter the size, in the middle of the Moslem crescent.
    Any and all "peace treaties" will simply be a ruse, a delaying tactic, until the day comes when they feel strong enough to finally destroy Israel.
    Every Israeli father (and thus a veteran), at the birth of a child, either thinks to himself or says out loud "may he/she never need to put on a uniform in defense of our Nation".
    But alas, that will always be a wish destined to be unfulfilled.
  18. sabashimon

    sabashimon New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2007
    Messages:
    672
    Location:
    PNW/Israel
    December 19, 2009

    Arab honour and the peace process

    By Ted Belman

    Arab honour is at the root of Arab rejectionism and intransigence. It prevents Arabs from accepting blame or compromising. It also prevents Arabs from losing land to Israel or ending the conflict.

    Arab honour is closely linked to Islamic concepts of jihad and dhimmitude. Arab honour impells them to seek domination. Failure to dominate, dishonours them. Accepting responsibility is an anathema to their honour..

    Muslim violence against the publication in Denmark of cartoons featuring Mohammed is a prime example of their refusal to accept the rule of law or western norms that are at odds with what their honour demands. The same goes for their reaction to Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses.

    Prof Richard Landes covers this phenomenon in Part III of “Paradigms and the Middle East Conflict.” titled HJP: Honour Jihad paradigm

    “The HJP understands the Arab-Israeli conflict through the prism of honor-shame culture and Islamic jihad. These elements of Arab culture are the main factors that have made it impossible to reach a solution to the conflict. Arab leaders view any compromise with Israel as “losing face,” since such an agreement would mean recognizing as a “worthy foe” an inferior group that should be subject. Such a blow to Arab honor cannot be tolerated for cultural and political reasons: losing face means to feel utter humiliation, to lose public credibility, and to lose power.[..]
    “According to HSJP, the Arab-Israeli conflict is fueled by wounded Arab honor and frustrated religious imperialism.”

    Denis Schulz on Honor and Islam writes

    “The less honor reposing in a person or a group, the more angry and violent the response to any challenge, real or imagined, by said person or group.”and “[..]
    ..those who have the least of it spend the most time defending it”.

    The peace process, if not the existence of Israel itself, is closely tied to the necessitudes of Arab honour. The Arabs simply refuse to accept responsibility for the problem and therein lies the problem.
    Using Shulz’s insight, the bigger the defeat, the greater the need to be fully vindicated.

    In The refugees, still essential to peace, Rami G. Khouri* claims the Arabs wish to achieve a negotiated, peaceful end to their conflict. I beg to differ. If the Arabs were so willing, why aren’t they willing to compromise by agreeing to accept 95% of the land. The truth is, they are willing to end the conflict, if at all, only on their terms.

    For Khouri, “Israel’s refusal to come to grips with the core issue that matters for the Palestinians, which is their status as refugees.” is what is preventing peace.

    While he acknowledges “half the people were forced into exile, either by deliberate Zionist ethnic cleansing or by the normal dynamics of war that caused civilians to flee temporarily to safer areas.” he fails to mention that the Arabs started the ‘48 war or that the invading Arab armies counseled the Arabs to leave. He makes the ahistorical claim that “the national community of Palestinians was shattered” whereas no such community existed at the time.

    He demands that

    “Israel acknowledges its role in the refugeehood of the Palestinians and takes steps to end that problem. The Arabs have all accepted the demand that they coexist in peace and normal relations with an Israeli state that is predominantly Jewish, as it is now, with Jews comprising around 80 percent of the population. The Israelis in return have not moved at all toward coming to terms with the legal, political and moral decisions they must take to play their central role in resolving Palestinian refugeehood – since they were the principal party in bringing it about. “
    I would argue that but for Arab aggression against Israel, there would be no refugee problem, I would further argue that but for Arab refusal to resettle the refugees as Israel did Jewish refugees from Arab countries, there would be no such problem.

    But he does make an interesting analogy,

    The current Israeli superiority in military power will not bring it lasting peace and security because the Palestinians will not simply disappear into history – no more than the exiled Jews in Babylon went away to never return. [..]
    The Palestinians have passed through the same experience, two and a half millennia later, of seeking to end our exile through nationalist self-assertion and reaffirmation, along with patience and hard work.

    He shamelessly takes from the Palestine Mandate which called for the “reconstituting their (Jews) national home in that country (Palestine)” by arguing for “the eventual return and national reconstitution in the ancestral homeland.”

    Then he returns to the solution.

    For now, the Palestinians and all Arabs have expressed a willingness to coexist with Zionism – if the Israelis in turn come to terms with how critical it is to acknowledge and resolve the refugee issue in a reasonable and fair manner that does not negate the idea of a predominantly Jewish state.
    Why should such “willingness to co-exist” be considered a concession. And why is it only “for now”? Israel was legally created and recognized by most states in the world in 1948. Yet the Arabs refuse to abide by the rule of law and accept it. Their honour demands that they not. Their honour demands that they destroy, or at least, dominate Israel.

    Reading between the lines is the thought that Israel can accept some refugees back into Israel, because it is 80% Jewish, and still remain “predominantly Jewish”, i.e. one hundred thousand, or even two hundred thousand, barely alters the percentage.

    If this was so important to the Arabs why don’t they agree to Israel retaining 10% of the disputed lands in exchange?

    Nowhere does he ascribe to the Arabs, responsibility for causing the problem or for maintaining the problem, not just by refusing to allow refugees to be settled but also by inculcating in them the desire to return. But for this inculcation, there would not have been a national consensus or desire to return.

    The analogy above noted is really a false one. Prior to the Jewish expulsion to Babylonia, Jews had a nation and a country. Prior to the ‘48 war, the “Palestinians” had neither.

    Furthermore, to fight for only 5% of the 4.5 million “refugees” to be returned, is to fight to get Israel to take responsibility for the problem. That would exculpate the Arabs. But, accepting less than every inch of land back is something they will not do. And that assumes that the Arabs are prepared to end the conflict rather than to just coexist for now.

    If that weren’t enough,, their honour doesn’t permit them to end the conflict. Islam requires all lands over which Islam is supreme to be retained or recovered, if lost. It would be an enormous loss of honour to end the conflict without destroying Israel.

    Jonathan Dohoah-Halevi comments on the matter in a JCPA article,

    “Osama bin Laden has written: “We request of Allah…that the [Islamic] nation should regain its honor and prestige, should raise again the unique flag of Allah on all stolen Islamic land, from Palestine to Andalus.” Bin Laden’s mentor, Abdullah Azzam, established that the Islamic obligation to wage jihad in order to recover lost Islamic territories applies to Andalusia.
    “Accepting the Arabs’ terms for a Middle East settlement, or even going so far as “liberating” Palestine from Israeli rule, will not be the last stop in the radical Islamic journey being led by the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda, which share the vision of spreading Islam all over the world”.

    Abbas is not returning to negotiations because he is not prepared to accept President Obama’s terms that the Arabs recognize Israel as a Jewish state and end the conflict.

    Professor Barry Rubin, in his latest article on why Obama’s offer was rejected, referred to Arafat’s rejection of Barak’s offer at Camp David because it didn’t contain the “Right of Return”.

    “As for the Right of Return demand, it was in line with something Qaddumi had said in March 2002: “The Right of Return of the refugees to Haifa and Jaffa is more important than statehood.” [..]
    Gaining total victory and destroying Israel was more important than getting a Palestinian state, ending the “occupation” and all the real or alleged terrible suffering of Palestinians we constantly hear about. So it was, so it remains.”

    Nothing has changed for the better. Nothing will change.

    http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=19133#more-19133
  19. Bobitis

    Bobitis Guest

    There will be no peace until Islam condones it.

    And that will never happen.

    Not for Isreal, not for the rest of the planet.

    Can someone tell me what's so attractive to Islam?

    America is not the great Satan. Islam is.

    No other religion on earth is filled with so much hate.
    No other religion condones sacrificing their children in the name of their god.
    And the Parents rejoice!:eek:

    Pretty sick if you ask me.
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Ahhh...the religion of peace................. Apr 10, 2014
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Department of PeaceKeeping? Feb 27, 2013
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Imposing Peace? Feb 24, 2013
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr todays news on the peace negotiations with islam Oct 2, 2012
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Attack on Sinai base of Aust peacekeepers Sep 15, 2012

Share This Page