they are terrorists.
They are both. Terrorists and resistance movements at the same time.
Menachem Begin have not beat about the bush and made a sincere peace treaty with Sadat Prime Minister of Egypt. Arafat on the other hand never meant to honor any treaty and he did not retired from terrorism.
Yes but he was a terrorist. You cannot deny that. The only difference is he was a terrorist who abandoned terrorism after he achieved his goal whereas Arafat didn't achieve hos goal. In principle they're not different.
PLO.
Which is m point. Israel occupied a country for two decades yet no Western nation objected.
part of Israel. I would consider to sacrifice it if the current regime in Syria vanish and replaced by truly sane and democratic regime.
Part of Israel my ass. Israel didn't need to occupy the Golan Height
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moshe_Dayan#Six_Day_War_.281967.29In 1997, years after Dayan died, an Israeli journalist, Rami Tal, published conversations he had with Dayan in 1976. In that conversation Dayan claimed that 80 percent of the cross-border clashes between Israel and Syria in the years before the war were a result of Israeli provocation (Dayan was not Defense minister at the time). He confessed[5][6]:
I know how at least 80 percent of the clashes there started. In my opinion, more than 80 percent, but let's talk about 80 percent. It went this way: We would send a tractor to plough someplace where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance farther, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was.
Also, later, he regretted it as:
I made a mistake in allowing the Israel conquest of the Golan Heights. As defense minister I should have stopped it because the Syrians were not threatening us at the time [fourth day of the war].
despite all these parts are also israel historically. just in the name of peace to waive them it only can be done by real sincere partner for peace.
we receive a different message and that is not peace. furthermore we realize it so not mainly geopolitical and has a lot to do with religious disposition.
we can manage with our own mold on that matter but we cannot deal with 1.4 billion also need to consider the Christian role as well.
This is incoherent gibberish. Tell me, how does the settlement of 460,000 Israelis. many of whom Jewish fanatics, in an illegally occupied territory how does that make Israel more secure?
And could you please stop it with the historical Israel argument. You might be secular but you're no different than the most fanatic religious Zionist.
schools and UN buildings in Gaza were used as missle launching sites. if that was the moral we would have practice in world war 2 Nazis would have won.
Amnesty International will disagree with you.
these were not humanitarians.
They were. They might have been religiously-motivated but they did bring much-needed aid with them.
Israel does not fight a regular army. I would be happy if hamas or any kind of terrorist body would be isolated from civilian population.
I heard this a million times. It doesn't justify Israel's policy of 100 Palestinian deaths for every Israeli death.
no country threatened Israel? academic boycott even withing Israel itself. Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua cut ties with israel.
Cutting ties is not the same as threatening.
probably it is within our imagination...
Only in your imagination.
Topic: Isrealis attack Aid Convoy ships