Originally posted by Sandwich
Huh? I'm not following you here...
Lets see, why are you, US born with no descendants of middle eastern origin living in Israel fighting the natives of the area? You talked about playing the blame game, well thats where it ends, right at the feet of the zionist immigrants who declared Israel a country and drove the natives off their land.
Originally posted by Sandwich
The Jews came from the Land of Israel, period. That land was divided amongst the 12 tribes. One of those tribes was the tribe of Judea, which is the southern half of the modern-day West Bank, which is also known as Judea and Samaria.
Uh-huh and which of these tribes are you descended from? We've been down this road before so I shouldnt have to remind you most jews in Israel come from european stock and are descended from the Kazars, a central asian tribe which converted to Judaism arond 13 century. Their claims to a homeland in the middle east are based solely on religion.
Originally posted by Sandwich
Yes, I would. But the point is that those soldiers, by the very fact of them lying on the floor, were not in that house in order to to anything inside - they were not holding the family hostage, they were hiding from external enemy fire. But with the family inside with them, they had no choice but to be prepared for a possible assault from that direction as well.
All I'm saying is that it's a matter of cause and effect. The soldiers were most likely being shot at (cause), so they took cover inside a building (effect). There were possible hostiles in that building (cause), so the soldiers covered them with their rifles (effect).
That scenario is, in my professional opinion based upon a small amount of experience and large amounts of training for such situations, most likely. It is highly unlikely that the soldiers were being shot at (cause), so they searched for a building with a Palestinian family inside to use as human shields (effect).
It doesnt matter if they deliberatly looked for people to use as human shields or not, if they were under fire and they kept enemy non-combatants right beside them at rifle point they were effectivly using them as human shields. End of story.
Originally posted by Sandwich
Such as the multiple times the Koran states that Allah has no son - a point which directly contradicts the fundamental tennet of Christianity that Jesus is the Son of God.
Jews say the same thing but they worship the same god? I think youre letting racial biases cloud your judgement here
Originally posted by Sandwich
1967. 37 years ago. You want to base land "ownership" on a mere 37 years. Your grandpa - heck, most likely even your dad (don't know how old he is) could have been born on this land, but nope, it's the "Palestinians" land now. And they've only been around for what - 35 years? 50 years?
Bull**** the lands been called palestine since the romans. Jesus would have been a palestinian.
Originally posted by Sandwich
I'm not saying shove them into the sea and be done with it, don't get me wrong. But there is a nice country next door called The HaShemite Kingdom of Jordan.
Why cant they live where they always lived? Oh yeah, God said you could have it
Jordan is not the palestinian homeland, its part of it, the rest is occupied by Israel.
Originally posted by Sandwich
Jenin and Warsaw? Pfft - hardly! Let's see, did Warsaw spawn armed terrorists, hell-bent on blowing the heads off every German mother and child they could see? 
Warsaw uprising, learn some history.
Originally posted by Ghostavo
Israel-Palestine has everything to do with religion as the Ireland-UK had... actually, they are both very similar cases. Maybe a nuke wouldn't be so bad... (just joking Sand 
)
Slightly similar not very. Religion was just another tool in the british arsenal to use against the Irish after Henry VIII invented his own sect in the 16th century. It wasnt a major factor prior to this nor was it the underlying reason. The Israeli conflict is based solely on religion, with people like sandwich here believing they have a right to live in that country because a 2000 year old book they worship says so. At least the brits, bastards that they were, had valid reasons for their nastiness like economics and power and didnt base it all on a book which has a tenuuos grasp on reality at the best of times.
