Post by quickplay on Jan 2, 2017 17:56:50 GMT -5
Jerry -
Your Question: "Where in any of my posts have I said that the settlements are legal?"
The answer:
"Illegal actions--nonsense. Israel took the West Bank after they were attacked by a group of people who wanted to drive them all into the sea. We stole tens of millions of acres from the Indians, and states from Mexico. Of course that is fine. No one cares about China's current occupation of Tibet, or Turkey's current occupation of Cyprus, or that the Palestinians of Yarmouk are being exterminated (that is fine because it is other Arabs who are doing it). Arabs and Palestinians can and do own land in Israel, but of course Israelis cannot own land on the West Bank."
"Basically the settlements are expanding due to natural population growth. the population of the Settlers have children, they have to expand. The Settlements are not an obstacle to peace. Olmert offered Arafat 95% offered of the West Bank, and was turned down. Also, the Oslo Accords didn't even mention the Settlements. The problem of the settlements are recent."
"4. The stance of the US government is "no more settlements." So that makes it right??"
"Quick-We can argue about the legality of those settlements forever. My concern is that the US is not demanding the Palestinians recognize Israel..."
"Everyone else does not believe the settlements are illegal. Please explain how they are illegal in the context of history."
"2. Why are the settlements any more illegal than San Antonio, Los Angeles, or San Francisco. And remember, Mexico has never threatened to wipe out the US and drive the inhabitants into the sea."
"The reason I bring this up is this overwhelming obsession with settlements. Why can't Jews live in the West Bank?? Arabs live in Israel."
"I have given legal arguments in that Israel was attacked and invaded in 1967 with the aim of taking over Israel and pushing the Israeli population into the sea. Why is this any different from the US' grab of California, Texas et al. Why can't Israeli's live on the West Bank. Palestinians are can and do own property in Israel. The Settlements are not built on private land.
Please explain:
1. Why the settlements are illegal, but San Antonio is not??"
"I have brought these points up before. On the contrary, you have provided no analysis except to attack me rather than discussing the issues. I explained why Israel doesn't want to give back East Jerusalem and used several examples one of which was using the wailing Wall as a urinal. Go tell an Israeli that he is whining about that. Tell him not to whine that all of the Jewish sites in East Jersulem were destroyed.
It is YOU who has not provided any analysis."
Literally all of those are copied and pasted quotes from you on this very discussion thread that you created yourself. I was going to respond to your entire post, but I think this sums up why you always seem to end up in a position whining about people treating you unfairly. You start threads and then lecture people and constantly shift goalposts instead of engaging in discussion. Even your follow up sentence to the one I quoted is then equivocating. You jump on third rail topics with admirable certainty, but your abject lack of respect for other perspectives combined with a victim complex is really tiresome.
I don't mean this to be personal, it's not. I don't know anything about you as a person - I'm sure you are a good man and I completely sincerely hope you have an incredible and blessed 2017. This is about a manner of discussion that is intellectually dishonest. In fact, the last few sentences I quoted from you here are you bragging about how consistent you've been with your perspective on the settlements and how you've backed up that perspective with facts and analysis, unlike other people. How on earth do you then turn around and think some pedantic "Technically I never said the settlements are legal" slide isn't going to make people roll their eyes?
Your Question: "Where in any of my posts have I said that the settlements are legal?"
The answer:
"Illegal actions--nonsense. Israel took the West Bank after they were attacked by a group of people who wanted to drive them all into the sea. We stole tens of millions of acres from the Indians, and states from Mexico. Of course that is fine. No one cares about China's current occupation of Tibet, or Turkey's current occupation of Cyprus, or that the Palestinians of Yarmouk are being exterminated (that is fine because it is other Arabs who are doing it). Arabs and Palestinians can and do own land in Israel, but of course Israelis cannot own land on the West Bank."
"Basically the settlements are expanding due to natural population growth. the population of the Settlers have children, they have to expand. The Settlements are not an obstacle to peace. Olmert offered Arafat 95% offered of the West Bank, and was turned down. Also, the Oslo Accords didn't even mention the Settlements. The problem of the settlements are recent."
"4. The stance of the US government is "no more settlements." So that makes it right??"
"Quick-We can argue about the legality of those settlements forever. My concern is that the US is not demanding the Palestinians recognize Israel..."
"Everyone else does not believe the settlements are illegal. Please explain how they are illegal in the context of history."
"2. Why are the settlements any more illegal than San Antonio, Los Angeles, or San Francisco. And remember, Mexico has never threatened to wipe out the US and drive the inhabitants into the sea."
"The reason I bring this up is this overwhelming obsession with settlements. Why can't Jews live in the West Bank?? Arabs live in Israel."
"I have given legal arguments in that Israel was attacked and invaded in 1967 with the aim of taking over Israel and pushing the Israeli population into the sea. Why is this any different from the US' grab of California, Texas et al. Why can't Israeli's live on the West Bank. Palestinians are can and do own property in Israel. The Settlements are not built on private land.
Please explain:
1. Why the settlements are illegal, but San Antonio is not??"
"I have brought these points up before. On the contrary, you have provided no analysis except to attack me rather than discussing the issues. I explained why Israel doesn't want to give back East Jerusalem and used several examples one of which was using the wailing Wall as a urinal. Go tell an Israeli that he is whining about that. Tell him not to whine that all of the Jewish sites in East Jersulem were destroyed.
It is YOU who has not provided any analysis."
Literally all of those are copied and pasted quotes from you on this very discussion thread that you created yourself. I was going to respond to your entire post, but I think this sums up why you always seem to end up in a position whining about people treating you unfairly. You start threads and then lecture people and constantly shift goalposts instead of engaging in discussion. Even your follow up sentence to the one I quoted is then equivocating. You jump on third rail topics with admirable certainty, but your abject lack of respect for other perspectives combined with a victim complex is really tiresome.
I don't mean this to be personal, it's not. I don't know anything about you as a person - I'm sure you are a good man and I completely sincerely hope you have an incredible and blessed 2017. This is about a manner of discussion that is intellectually dishonest. In fact, the last few sentences I quoted from you here are you bragging about how consistent you've been with your perspective on the settlements and how you've backed up that perspective with facts and analysis, unlike other people. How on earth do you then turn around and think some pedantic "Technically I never said the settlements are legal" slide isn't going to make people roll their eyes?
