US declines to veto UN resolution on Israeli settlements...

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Oh yeah it was vetoed by China and Russia:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-38216969

Remind me again why anyone cares about a few crazy orthodox jews building houses in the middle of a desert that no one actually gave a rat's ass about before the crazy jews started buidling houses there.

I find it interesting that two Arab cities have been under attack by the legal governments of the country in which the cities are located. Civilians are being killed in both cities. In one, the US is actually participating in the fighting and is probably responsible for civilian deaths. Yet, all we hear about is Aleppo and nothing about Mosul. Moreover, I wonder how many of those concerned about Aleppo have ever previously shown any concern about Arabs? It seems that Aleppo's main purpose is to be a useful deflection for those who ordinarily don't mind Arabs being killed.

As for your second point, you seem to have no understanding of the occupied territories. If crazy Jews want to build houses in the desert, they have the entire Negev to keep them busy. I'm sorry that your education included nothing about the long history of people caring about such places as Jerusalem, Jericho, or Hebron. The idea that nobody cared about such places until Israel started building settlements is truly astonishing.

[Anonymous]

Looks you can not say you are against the settlements, but support Israel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks you can not say you are against the settlements, but support Israel.

Looks like George Mitchell disagrees.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh yeah it was vetoed by China and Russia:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-38216969

Remind me again why anyone cares about a few crazy orthodox jews building houses in the middle of a desert that no one actually gave a rat's ass about before the crazy jews started buidling houses there.

I find it interesting that two Arab cities have been under attack by the legal governments of the country in which the cities are located. Civilians are being killed in both cities. In one, the US is actually participating in the fighting and is probably responsible for civilian deaths. Yet, all we hear about is Aleppo and nothing about Mosul. Moreover, I wonder how many of those concerned about Aleppo have ever previously shown any concern about Arabs? It seems that Aleppo's main purpose is to be a useful deflection for those who ordinarily don't mind Arabs being killed.

As for your second point, you seem to have no understanding of the occupied territories. If crazy Jews want to build houses in the desert, they have the entire Negev to keep them busy. I'm sorry that your education included nothing about the long history of people caring about such places as Jerusalem, Jericho, or Hebron. The idea that nobody cared about such places until Israel started building settlements is truly astonishing.

Obviously the Jews building settlements there have always cared about those places. The people who want to wipe Israel off the face of the map didn't. Until now. Because pretending to care is a pretext for wiping Israel off the face of the map.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh yeah it was vetoed by China and Russia:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-38216969

Remind me again why anyone cares about a few crazy orthodox jews building houses in the middle of a desert that no one actually gave a rat's ass about before the crazy jews started buidling houses there.

I find it interesting that two Arab cities have been under attack by the legal governments of the country in which the cities are located. Civilians are being killed in both cities. In one, the US is actually participating in the fighting and is probably responsible for civilian deaths. Yet, all we hear about is Aleppo and nothing about Mosul. Moreover, I wonder how many of those concerned about Aleppo have ever previously shown any concern about Arabs? It seems that Aleppo's main purpose is to be a useful deflection for those who ordinarily don't mind Arabs being killed.

As for your second point, you seem to have no understanding of the occupied territories. If crazy Jews want to build houses in the desert, they have the entire Negev to keep them busy. I'm sorry that your education included nothing about the long history of people caring about such places as Jerusalem, Jericho, or Hebron. The idea that nobody cared about such places until Israel started building settlements is truly astonishing.

Obviously the Jews building settlements there have always cared about those places. The people who want to wipe Israel off the face of the map didn't. Until now. Because pretending to care is a pretext for wiping Israel off the face of the map.

I am not sure who you believe wants to wipe Israel off the face of the map, but it is a small minority of those who oppose settlements. Again, your education fails you if you think no one other than Jews cared about the occupied territories before now. I assume that inventing a false reality is easier than dealing with the facts that Israel is essentially an apartheid state isolated from nearly the entire world. If you really care about Israel, you would stop fooling yourself with your mythical reality and support a peaceful solution that addresses the aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh yeah it was vetoed by China and Russia:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-38216969

Remind me again why anyone cares about a few crazy orthodox jews building houses in the middle of a desert that no one actually gave a rat's ass about before the crazy jews started buidling houses there.

I find it interesting that two Arab cities have been under attack by the legal governments of the country in which the cities are located. Civilians are being killed in both cities. In one, the US is actually participating in the fighting and is probably responsible for civilian deaths. Yet, all we hear about is Aleppo and nothing about Mosul. Moreover, I wonder how many of those concerned about Aleppo have ever previously shown any concern about Arabs? It seems that Aleppo's main purpose is to be a useful deflection for those who ordinarily don't mind Arabs being killed.

As for your second point, you seem to have no understanding of the occupied territories. If crazy Jews want to build houses in the desert, they have the entire Negev to keep them busy. I'm sorry that your education included nothing about the long history of people caring about such places as Jerusalem, Jericho, or Hebron. The idea that nobody cared about such places until Israel started building settlements is truly astonishing.

Obviously the Jews building settlements there have always cared about those places. The people who want to wipe Israel off the face of the map didn't. Until now. Because pretending to care is a pretext for wiping Israel off the face of the map.

Land for peace. I think? Bill Clinton came close. Obama was useless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even New Zealand thinks it is wrong.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/24/world/middleeast/israel-benjamin-netanyahu-united-nations.html?ribbon-ad-idx=8&rref=world/middleeast&module=Ribbon&version=context®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Middle%20East&pgtype=article

Israel needs to be eliminated. It is a blight on the world. Middle class 50 year old white man with insomnia from PA. I grew up with lots of Jewish friends. no one supports these expansions.

Israel needs to be eliminated you say? Adolf would be so proud of you. And Hillary thanks you for your vote.

Yes.

Have you not looked at maps before Israel was artificially created

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even New Zealand thinks it is wrong.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/24/world/middleeast/israel-benjamin-netanyahu-united-nations.html?ribbon-ad-idx=8&rref=world/middleeast&module=Ribbon&version=context®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Middle%20East&pgtype=article

Israel needs to be eliminated. It is a blight on the world. Middle class 50 year old white man with insomnia from PA. I grew up with lots of Jewish friends. no one supports these expansions.

Israel needs to be eliminated you say? Adolf would be so proud of you. And Hillary thanks you for your vote.

Yes.

Have you not looked at maps before Israel was artificially created

Here is one source. Pro Jewish and pro Israel

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/worldviews/wp/2014/12/22/map-the-spread-of-israeli-settlements-in-the-west-bank/?client=safari

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks you can not say you are against the settlements, but support Israel.

Looks like George Mitchell disagrees.

If you disagree with the settlement policy but support Israel as they continue to expand their settlements you are supporter the settlements. There is no grey area.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks you can not say you are against the settlements, but support Israel.

Looks like George Mitchell disagrees.

If you disagree with the settlement policy but support Israel as they continue to expand their settlements you are supporter the settlements. There is no grey area.

That is a bit extreme. Many of us opposed the US invasion of Iraq while still supporting the US. One can support Israel while opposing any number of its policies. There is really no contradiction.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks you can not say you are against the settlements, but support Israel.

Looks like George Mitchell disagrees.

If you disagree with the settlement policy but support Israel as they continue to expand their settlements you are supporter the settlements. There is no grey area.

That is a bit extreme. Many of us opposed the US invasion of Iraq while still supporting the US. One can support Israel while opposing any number of its policies. There is really no contradiction.

no because the opposition to the US invasion if iraq was not something central to the existence or nature of the US.

The settlements are tied much closer to the notion of zionism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks you can not say you are against the settlements, but support Israel.

Looks like George Mitchell disagrees.

If you disagree with the settlement policy but support Israel as they continue to expand their settlements you are supporter the settlements. There is no grey area.

That is a bit extreme. Many of us opposed the US invasion of Iraq while still supporting the US. One can support Israel while opposing any number of its policies. There is really no contradiction.

no because the opposition to the US invasion if iraq was not something central to the existence or nature of the US.

The settlements are tied much closer to the notion of zionism.

Opposition to settlements is central to the existence of the US or the nature of the US? Say what, bro?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh yeah it was vetoed by China and Russia:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-38216969

Remind me again why anyone cares about a few crazy orthodox jews building houses in the middle of a desert that no one actually gave a rat's ass about before the crazy jews started buidling houses there.

I find it interesting that two Arab cities have been under attack by the legal governments of the country in which the cities are located. Civilians are being killed in both cities. In one, the US is actually participating in the fighting and is probably responsible for civilian deaths. Yet, all we hear about is Aleppo and nothing about Mosul. Moreover, I wonder how many of those concerned about Aleppo have ever previously shown any concern about Arabs? It seems that Aleppo's main purpose is to be a useful deflection for those who ordinarily don't mind Arabs being killed.

As for your second point, you seem to have no understanding of the occupied territories. If crazy Jews want to build houses in the desert, they have the entire Negev to keep them busy. I'm sorry that your education included nothing about the long history of people caring about such places as Jerusalem, Jericho, or Hebron. The idea that nobody cared about such places until Israel started building settlements is truly astonishing.

Obviously the Jews building settlements there have always cared about those places. The people who want to wipe Israel off the face of the map didn't. Until now. Because pretending to care is a pretext for wiping Israel off the face of the map.

Uh what? Many Palestinians have been forced off their ancestral farms to make way for new settlements. Or Israeli troops force them off lands that are "too close" to new settlements for security purposes. Or, as many settlements do, they dump their waste water and garbage onto surrounding Palestinian land and thus making their land unsuitable for agricultural production. Or settlements confiscate previously drilled water wells, thus forcing Palestinians to leave since they have no source of water.

You're engaged in a lot of revisionist history. Palestinians have been living on land stolen by illegal settlers for generations. There's a multitude of tragic human interest stories in the media about poor Palestinian farmers losing everything.

[Anonymous]

Hey, if Israelis want to put homes in the desert, the Negev is the other way.

[Anonymous]

naftali bennet keeps droning about how jews have been in judea and samaria for 3300 years.

If we ever clone dinosaurs, we should stick them all in israel - since it is clear bennet's logic dictates who was there first should get the land.

send some t-rexes and velociraptors to chase zionists around the levant.