Not every Jew is a Zionist, and not every Zionist is a Jew. Stop reaching.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Imagine being angry with a post in a football forum while actually supporting genocide.
What do you mean by "infiltrated?"
Imagine pretending to be an expert (and broken record) on international law on football forum who knows better than all judges of ICJ.
I cannot comprehend why you havent already replaced all those judges.
Oh, wait. I know. Because judges decide on merit. You decide on your feelings and hatred.
Would you agree that they have a HUGE influence over media and politics?
No. That's your own stereotype and conspiracy that you want to peddle
for what it's worth. I don't agree with Israeli policy and I think Netanyahu is deplorable.
A Zionist is someone who strives for a Jewish state and that the Jewish people should have the right to self-determination.
So by being a self-declared "Anti Zionist" you admit that you do not believe Jews are entitled to a state for themselves. Even though every single other major religion can self determine in a country of their own.
No
They are two different words.
Folkmord... Means genocide
Självförsvar.. Means self defense.
Sikhs can't.
Imagine at this point still pretending this is not genocide.
It would be a great argument if zionists wanted to determine the borders of said state. But they don't because it allows them to deny palestinians rights to a state.
despite being the only country in the Middle East to offer the Palestinians a state. 7x times. All rejected
I kinda miss fearless, at least he was more honest.
Can you remind the terms of said offers?
False, and you still did not answer my question I asked you 3 months ago, where is the command center under alshifa hospital?
Just imagine what they HAVEN'T documented. Scary though that is.
I don't know. I'm not the IDF.
Better than any offer they would get now or likely ever get. A missed opportunity
I don’t have to pretend anything. There is ICJ rulling on the other hand you pretend doesnt exist.
This.
The ICJ did not rule that Israel is not committing a genocide.
Yeah, and OJ is innocent I guess.
Your guesses are irrelevant. Thats not how court of law works.
Technically you are right. The same applies Vice versa.
However there is a reason why it didnt rule in favor of ceasefire proposition.
I guess discussing semantics is all you have left. If I was supporting genocide I'd also clutch to all available straws.
This is an incredible strategy.
They were never going to rule either way. It will take years for them to reach a conclusion on the matter of genocide, and even then I wouldn't need the ICJ to tell me.
Is this bluemoon?
If you have a problem with the rule of law concept, be my guest.
Repeating the same lies again and again only makes you look insecure. But please continue, hand out accusations, you the jury.
You didn't answer. Is it because you don't know what the actual offers are or is it because the offers are close to shameful?
Do you think that any accord that includes executive powers being given(remaining) to IDF in a foreign territory including the control of water and power infrastructures but also settlements remaining in your country while giving unilateral policing powers to IDF when it comes to israelis and settlements that are in your country, is an acceptable accord?
Something like the Oslo Accord is disgraceful, the fact that people are championing it is shameful. As an example this is what the (not actual) withdrawal of IDF was legally planned, only a fool would agree to this:
In other word the legal plan was for IDF to not withdraw but also keep policing and border powers. The other thing is that the things IDF would give up were education and culture, health, social welfare, direct taxation and tourism. As you can see it didn't include things like power and water infrastructures, it doesn't actually include policing(of palestinians) or industries those were supposed to be negotiated by future committees and that was only true for palestinian territories, palestinian would obviously have no say on how and whom should manage Israeli territories.
And there is a reason it will take years. Think about why.
Of course, you are entitled to your opinion to think whatever you want. But to use it in discussion as you are the judge, this is the truth and nothing else…and who has different opinion…you label him genocide supporter. That is just wrong. (This is not aimed at you personally, I dont remember if you did so).
Of course. I also don't really think the genocide label is all-important. It's not like the ICJ will come back in three years and say "No genocide", and everyone will go "Alright, fair enough. Let's move on". The important thing is that Israel is clearly (in my opinion) killing indiscriminately and exhibiting absolutely abhorrent, despicable, disgusting behavior, and they are backing it up with their vile rhetoric. The evidence is sadly plentiful. They are also lying and propagandizing publicly. Just earlier today I saw an interview, where Netanyahu said that the Hamas fighter to civilian death ratio was 1:1. Absolute horseshit. Meanwhile the US and European nations are either supporting it or looking on impotently.
The ruling on a cease-fire is unlikely as the initiation of the conflict falls within Israel's rights. However, the conduct of the war is another question and under investigation.
Comparisons of this situation to Russia's are not accurate; Russia invaded a sovereign country without provocation. (Not saying you are comparing it to it, but many are)
There is no ruling, the case is ongoing. Do you guys not know that, or are you lying?
Did you miss the following posts, or are you just lying?
No, I didn't miss the following posts, I know that you said it's "technically right" that it hasn't been a ruling, which is a weird way to say that there hasn't been a ruling.
You said that there is an ICJ ruling, which is wrong. Did you think that at the time, and attempt to correct yourself later, or did you know there had been no ruling when you said it had?
The ICJ said, in the interim ruling, that the genocide case is plausible. That is why it's continuing, rather than being thrown out. They did not rule on the matter, which is why the case is going on as planned.