Yup. The Palestinians are Hamas. Hamas are the Palestinians.
Except for a few specific examples I mentioned in another post? Fuck 'em all.
Hamas Launches Offensive Against Southern Israel
- Thread starter Marduk
- Start date
Yup. The Palestinians are Hamas. Hamas are the Palestinians.
Except for a few specific examples I mentioned in another post? Fuck 'em all.
Pro-Hamas rally cancelled reportedly due to a forecast of Maori counterprotestors.
www.rebelnews.com
WATCH: Why so many Māoris are standing for Israel
Rebel reporter Avi Yemini asks supporters the questions the mainstream media refuse to ask in Brisbane.
www.rebelnews.com
Based Maori.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
No, it is relevant considering you are shilling for an alignment of governments that despise and your culture erased.
Yes it is relevant considering one of the biggest concentration of the US forces and allies invaded or allowed to ruin their own countries.It is not imperialism for third world, not having first world imperialism or any kind of imperialism.
You consider anyone a third world terrorist or commies.
They lied then, they lie now. That is what has to do with the subject at hand.
The only one that owns us is Washington and it's lobbyists.
Sure, because it is not like you spew dumb bullcrap that gets disproven by others and even other mods.
Marduk the only who scrapes the bottom of the barrel is you with arguments and article that are from notorious paid propagandists like Reuters.
No, i'm not shilling for leftists. You are shilling for leftist's idols. And when it comes to foreign policy and global power contests, you stand on the same side as the globalists, if not even more extreme - remember, Obama, managed decline, apology tour?
Would you like a pony with that?
There is always a hegemon. A lot of people are fucking spoiled by USA being the hegemon and not realizing how the other options for a hegemon would normally act towards their shenanigans.
Funny you would say that in a discussion about fucking Iran with its Islamic revolution.
So? Journos are shit, i know, but how the fuck is it a reason to shil for interests of third world wannabe rising powers over own countries and allies.
So worry about that bloody spot, not whether the guys there fuck up the wannabes in Tehran.
A good option to sit in Washington would, among other things, own the wannabes in Tehran a long time ago.
>disproven
Me? Where? You say journos are shits, yet go full "it was deboooonked!!!" on me.
LMAO.
>Rejectionist says Iran is not a threat
>I link a Reuters article describing proxy warfare of Iran against US bases in ME
>Rejectionist says its all propaganda and Reuters lies and brings in pharma bullshit into it
Dude, do you read the fucking news, even as they come out right now, or are just doing a Baghdad Bob routine for Shia Islamists without caring if you are right or not?
Sorry, you may live in the alternate universe you live in where the ayatollahs are good boys and never do anything mean if that helps you cope with reality, but i don't.
Last edited:
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
As always you demonstrate the ability to reason and intellect of a pigeon playing chess showing you are exactly like an actual Iran cheerleader, only thing that is different is the team, but it is still crap and bloodthirsty.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
Some of which you invaded without actual provocation.
I thankfully don't live near a US base but if I actually did I would remind them there is a valid reason they are not welcome there and they have their last ten governments to thank for that. And that they will be probably be unwelcome soon enough in my country as well.
Nice word jujitsu you have there, shame its just bullshit.
It is obvious that you subscribe to a certain variation of the common "America bad, West bad!" foreign policy theory, adherents of which are the useful idiots of many of world's actual oppressive regimes. Sadly said regimes do not tolerate mirror activism in their own countries, it would be hilarious if they did.
And yes, i do support my own team in this, only self-hating leftists think there's something wrong with being on own side in international politics (at least with westerners being on own side, they would never say that to rival powers), as opposed to assorted victimhood groups, whining dictators who want to build empires but nasty westerners get in the way, the commie team, or assorted idealists with their pet fables that they demand others believe and mostly boil down to supporting one of the commie factions in a roundabout way or something like that.
King Arts
Well-known member
Failure at letting Christianity live in the place of it's birth. Yes being a Christian can be tough sometimes, but if it's possible to live in some place they should try to stick it out. I don't mind sending help like aid to make it easier. But I don't want the few Christians left to lose many of their numbers.
Also just because some people are able to immigrate does not mean ALL people are able to. There are some Meican immigrants to the U.S. does that mean all of them could come here?
As for humanitarian workers those don't count as immigration or emigration. They don't live there they will eventually leave, and they went there knowing it was dangerous and could die or be hurt but they chose that they were not born into it.
Pro-Hamas rally cancelled reportedly due to a forecast of Maori counterprotestors.
WATCH: Why so many Māoris are standing for Israel
Rebel reporter Avi Yemini asks supporters the questions the mainstream media refuse to ask in Brisbane.
More like cucked Maori.
There are degrees of "possible".
From the moment Muslims managed to establish a demographic and power advantage as massive as they have now, they are on a timer.
Unless you have an army of settlers willing to go and live there and tell the local Muslims to go fuck themselves if they don't like it, or an army of crusaders willing to tell them "convert, submit, die or leave" like ISIL, or the aid you want to send is an army of autonomous killbots who will fight for them, there isn't much that can be done about that.
I don't see what's so good about those communities there staying, slowly dying out, while acting as pawns, scapegoats and human shields for local Muslim rulers, and being prevented from leaving such miserable circumstances while at it.
It does mean that they probably could if they had the means and the will to try, if they don't think its worth it, that's their choice. And that's ignoring the inaccurate comparison, Mexicans are numerous enough to crash any immigration system in the world, so someone would have to stop them if too many of them tried, meanwhile Christians remaining in Gaza would struggle to fill 2 large passenger planes, let that sink in.
If they are staying there for 5 or 20 years and have their families there they are in effect living there.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
Shame you are an heartless warhound.
I mean you clearly stated the contrary multiple times, when in actuality I simply don't want to the bullshit to happen anyone, regardless who comes from.
As proven, if it is your side doing bullshit you are perfectly ok with that, I am instead arguing for no one doing bullshit. Your own "team" tried to poison you, make you a minority in your own country and tell your kids it is okay to be a transexual cuck.
King Arts
Well-known member
I mean Christians have managed it so far for 1400 years haven't they? That's not really a slow death. Christians don't NEED to be in power in the Holy Land to survive and possibly thrive(though it would be nice)
What would be great for Christians living there is stability, they need the power whoever it is Israel or whoever to take control of the territory and actually administrate it and kill off criminals and thugs like Hamas.
Of course this would go against other interests because Israel put itself in a bind by proclaiming itself a Jewish democratic state. Israel wants all of the Palestinian lands, wants to be Jewish, and wants to be democratic. It can only pick two of those. World won't let it just do genocide. It could get away with conquest but then it has to deal with the Palestinian population, that means they either have to be second class citizens(Christians could deal with that) so that the state remains Jewish. Or it would have to give citizenship to the Palestinians(eventually at least, obviously it would be foolish to give a group you just conqured forcefully political power. But there would have to be some roadmap to bringing the people of the new territories into political life eventually)
I mean it would be a great loss, we do have historic church's there. I mean land is not just territory, it has a history Christians abandoning a place they have lived for 2000 years and has unbroken tradition it would be a tragedy. While Hamas are brutal killers, it's pretty disgusting how people can dehumanize countless children for living in a certain piece of land.
A five year stint isn't that long for these type of things though? But if it's 20 years or they marry into the community then yes they have basically immigrated to live with the locals.
I don't have an opinion on Palestinian origins. I just want to know where the two thousand year old households are. If they've been there that long and not supporting terrorism they probably should be given some more consideration. My opinion on the matter is inapplicable to this hypothetical anyways. I support Israel withdrawing its settlements from Gaza back in 2005 and support Gaza being part of the Palestinian state in a two state solution that doesn't have a stated goal of wiping out its neighbor(s).
King Arts
Well-known member
Oh that's actually pretty reasonable(after Hamas is dealt with of course)
As for famillies that lived for 2000 years it's hard again the Nusaybah clan MAY(hard to tell and get proof that they had people there from the time of the Ptolomey's but it is possible.
Nusaybah family - Wikipedia
Well the reason I asked is because the most common thing is that while what the Arabs did in their conquest is cultural genocide it was not "real genocide" ala Hitler's plan. You can see the same with how modern Arab Egyptians are the same as the Ancient Egyptians they just gave up their ancestors traditions.(Islam is an arab supremacist religions)
Sorry for digressing but in regards to Palestine/Israel/Holy Land when the Arabs took over in 600's most of the Roman citizens were not killed many joined with the conquerors to improve their lot in life. So we have to look before the 600's and the earlier big demographic change was the Jewish Roman wars(ironically the Jews back then were acting a lot like the Palestinians are now)
There was the destruction of the Temple, and Jerusalem and large parts of Judea had the Jews kicked out(a few still remained there has always been a Jewish presence just like there was a Christian presence in the area) but it's not like at the time the Jews were the only population that lived in Judea/Syria-Palestinia province these other people could have been Cainites descendants who predate the Jews(but that's speculation on my part) But let's assume that the Palestinians start here and are made up of stock of Roman veterans and other Romans who were taken from other parts of the Empire to settle after the Jews the Jewish revolts happened 1887 years ago if you count from the end at 136 AD. That's not actually 2000 years but it's close in these kinds of historical debates you can usually round up 100 years or so. But if you like I will retract the 2000 year claim because they are 136 years away.
Jewish–Roman wars - Wikipedia
Bar Kokhba revolt - Wikipedia
First Jewish–Roman War - Wikipedia
Wouldn't want to be anything else.
That's the only thing that's taken seriously on the international arena.
Yeah, sure, and as i said, would you like a pony with that?
This bullshit is as old as tribes and civilizations, and it will stay with them.
Yeah, our team has shit leadership who wants us to decline in a slow and managed way.
I want our team to prosper, not decline.
Hence, i will complain at our leadership like you do, but that's where our similarities end. I complain at them for not fighting the decline, i refuse to support anyone who complains at our leadership for the managed decline being too slow and not going far enough, those who want a rapid mass surrender of global influence and retreat into ideologically driven isolationism, leaving a power void to be snatched by rival powers, that's a classic example of "enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend".
Technically we both don't like that leadership, but it seems like in the end our conflicts with that leadership go in opposite directions.
The tradition lives in the people, not the land. Think of all the Christian communities that did in fact got more or less wiped out by Muslims through history.
If you want to keep the land and non-movable historical/religious artifacts too, well then, actually controlling the land, alone or with some allies nicer than Islamists, is the only way. Even the medieval leaders understood that.
Consider how much of the map of MENA was Christian around the time Mohammad launching his campaign of conquest, and how much is now, with increasingly small and isolated communities of Christian being ever rarer and more scattered with time.
Wait, what? What are referring to here specifically?
Nope. The term for what you are asking is multiculturalism, and if we know anything now, is that it doesn't work, too many countries tired. If the "new people" are sufficiently bent on being hostile and not assunukatubg, which this is a textbook case of, there are irreconcilable differences, you have to kill, exile or forcibly indoctrinate the people for this to work out in long term, and by the standards of western liberal culture and international law, all of these options are not ok, i would say different degrees, but some more liberal people would say they are all unacceptable absolutely.
Also Israel would be willing to leave some land to Arabs, however only on the condition of getting guarantees that this land won't be used as a staging area for further invasions or rocket/terror raid bullshit in the future (like Gaza is since their withdrawal), guarantees which in current paradigm no one on the other side is willing, or even able to give in good faith. Hence the status quo.
Iraq is the only one without provocation.
Kuwait wanted us there.
Syria was because we are supporting a useful group. Still not without provocation.
The service members would probably agree about thier last ten governments. But we would laugh when you say they arnt welcome.
Ppenty of people love us because of our money alone.
in Korea for instance, there are some disagreements, but they love us around the bases because we spend so much money.
They won't be unwelcome in Italy anytime soon.
Because you would destroy any local economy around thise bases.
Ask Korea how it went when they closed Camp Stanley fir all but Drone use.
Bases bring about business.
Also the fact Italy is apart of NATO, and is very close with the US military, and the fact that the US tax dollars going to these bases goes back into the Italian economy.
Contractors, local workers.
Everything.
King Arts
Well-known member
I mean you are both right the Turks are worse than Arabs. But Islam is an Arab supremacist ideology. Unlike Christianity which allows local diversity (except neo Protestants) you can see that the Christians when they made new disciples the locals could still continue to wear their traditional clothes and keep their customs, that’s why in eastern Christianity you’ll see church’s with different architectural styles. Not so with Islam they make more Arabs with their converts.
I mean yes the people are more important than the land but the land does shape the people no?
Oh that wasn’t at you that was others like Skallgrim, Bacle and I forgot who else who were cheering for dead Palestinians. Like you can believe that Israeli air strikes are valid and the best option for the Israelis yet recognize it’s sad when children die but such is war. That’s different from thinking of the other group as rats who it’s good to wipe out.
Again that means a two state solution or Israel takes over everything but does not give equal rights to the Palestinians. I’m not that liberal, where I say that new people in a territory must be given equal rights straight away. But while your arguments about self determination would normally work because of Jerusalems history the Jews aren’t the only ones with a claim so some form of multiculturalism or sharing is needed. That does not mean equality simply that you can’t kick out the other groups to make it Muslim and Christian free. Again the land can either be split with security guarantees, or one state can rule all of it. If one state does rule all of it it can’t be both Jewish and democratic. It could be a democratic state or a Jewish state that has Christians as Muslims as full residents but not voting rights or whatever.
Again it’s mostly the Muslims who are at fault for keeping this up instead of just accepting defeat and working from there.
Well this environment is about to shape them into Muslims or corpses, so better if they go elsewhere.
That's how wars work. If Palestinians care about their children, they should surrender instead of waging total war they can't win counting on "international community" to stay the other side's hand. Israelis have no duty to care more about Palestinian children than Palestinians themselves do. It's not like Israelis can take away their children for safety and stop them from making more, if they did that would be an actual genocide legally.
Again, theoretical solutions.
2 state non-solution - one day, be it a week or a decade from implementing it, Palestinians decide to let their terror orgs make another go at "from river to the sea".
Israel has to occupy them again while everyone does pikachu face.
Back to square one.
The only way to even try that with hope of success is to first somehow indoctrinate the very idea of either modern style terrorism or owning all of Palestine out of their whole culture.
Which fuses into the other option already:
Not giving equal rights to them - are you familiar with how much effort goes into keeping prisoners in prisons from shanking the staff?
Imagine trying to do that on the scale of a country, not a max security prison.
Besides the international whining about apartheid state going into overdrive, Israel won't turn itself into China on crack for a probably futile attempt to integrate Palestinians.
They would basically need to do what the Chinese do with Uyghurs, and i don't know if even that would be enough, nor if they would have the resources considering the different number balance.
I'm pretty sure Jerusalem's history in fact included a lot of kicking out of groups or parts of groups that are too much trouble or just merely for being the wrong group, including a lot of kicking out straight to afterlife.
Israel also has some Muslims and Christians with full citizen rights, but they are not as many as Palestinians, and weren't subject to intense enemy propaganda for last few decades.
But with the normalization of modern style terrorism combined with citizen's rights, the viable options to prevent conflict get much fewer and harsher.
That we can agree on, and that's the intent with what they are doing, keep it up no matter the cost, in hope that the other side will back down because they have no stomach to deal with the implications of combining guerilla warfare and completely unrestricted total warfare.
