[Big Mac]

We're witnessing the calm before the coming storm - the disaster at Annapolis. The conference, now scheduled for the 27th, will not bring peace closer; like it's father conference at Oslo, it will bring only greater destruction. The only thing it will accomplish will be more of what we've seen before from the so-called Peace Process - more one-sided concessions from Israel and a reciprocal new round of Arab terrorism and warfare. Why does anyone think that doing more of the same as has been done for the last 14 years will bring anything but the same catastrophic results?

[BRussell]

You're probably right. But what do you suggest instead? The current situation isn't so great for either Israelis or Palestinians.

[Big Mac]

The conflict could be resolved tomorrow, but unfortunately it won't be.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Do you think the entire peace process should be scrapped and everybody jump straight to all-out warfare? It's quicker, easier, less foot-dragging and mumbo-jumbo debate, might will make right, and there will be no more conflicts around Israel's status within the Middle East.

Very attractive idea, I'd say.

greg

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

We're witnessing the calm before the coming storm - the disaster at Annapolis. The conference, now scheduled for the 27th, will not bring peace closer; like it's father conference at Oslo, it will bring only greater destruction. The only thing it will accomplish will be more of what we've seen before from the so-called Peace Process

I agree.

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

- more one-sided concessions from Israel and a reciprocal new round of Arab terrorism and warfare. Why does anyone think that doing more of the same as has been done for the last 14 years will bring anything but the same catastrophic results?

Onesided concessions from Israel? ROFL. Israel can't be trusted, it is as double-tongued as it can get. It talks about wanting peace, but in reality Israel is abusing every peace-negotiating-phases to build ever more settlements and create facts on the ground. I don't know if that evil behaviour is supported by the general israeli public or if it is merely the power-elite of Israel that is pressing for it.

If Israel were trustworthy it would relocate the wall onto israeli soil, remove all checkpoints in the Westbank, free all palestinian prisoners minus three that are held without charge immediately, ...
just as a goodwill-gesture, and if it were really interested in peace, it would be ready to remove all israeli settlements in the westbank and east-jerusalem, to release all prisoners of war, to give back Golan to Syria, and to grant a symbolic and voluntary return of 100,000 palestinians into Israel and pay reparations for the rest, that would relocate to the independent and souvereign palestinian state that would be created in all of the Westbank, Gaza with East-Jerusalem as its capital, and to share the water in the region in a just and fair way, all that within a signed and comprehensive peace-agreement with the palestinians and the arabic league, who would have to recognize Israel's right to exist within the 67-borders and stop supporting militant organizations as well as to stop antijewish and antiisraeli propaganda.

I don't think Israel is ready to make peace, it is still too powerful, to see an urgent need to make peace, and thanks to the US and its veto-power it is shielded from the consequences of international law.

Taliesin

[Def_ears]

Originally Posted by Taliesin 

I agree.



Onesided concessions from Israel? ROFL. Israel can't be trusted, it is as double-tongued as it can get. It talks about wanting peace, but in reality Israel is abusing every peace-negotiating-phases to build ever more settlements and create facts on the ground. I don't know if that evil behaviour is supported by the general israeli public or if it is merely the power-elite of Israel that is pressing for it.

If Israel were trustworthy it would relocate the wall onto israeli soil, remove all checkpoints in the Westbank, free all palestinian prisoners minus three that are held without charge immediately, ...
just as a goodwill-gesture, and if it were really interested in peace, it would be ready to remove all israeli settlements in the westbank and east-jerusalem, to release all prisoners of war, to give back Golan to Syria, and to grant a symbolic and voluntary return of 100,000 palestinians into Israel and pay reparations for the rest, that would relocate to the independent and souvereign palestinian state that would be created in all of the Westbank, Gaza with East-Jerusalem as its capital, and to share the water in the region in a just and fair way, all that within a signed and comprehensive peace-agreement with the palestinians and the arabic league, who would have to recognize Israel's right to exist within the 67-borders and stop supporting militant organizations as well as to stop antijewish and antiisraeli propaganda.

I don't think Israel is ready to make peace, it is still too powerful, to see an urgent need to make peace, and thanks to the US and its veto-power it is shielded from the consequences of international law.

Taliesin

You hit the nail on the head with that post. But seriously, I$rael pay reparations? LOL they're still not finished bleeding Germany dry for holocau$t™ reparations.

[PaperNotes]

What I learned is that it isn't good to step in and try to stop and husband and wife from fighting otherwise they turn on you. That's what Israel and Palestine are. They're an odd couple going through a rough patch in their relationship. Sit back and watch them throw the pots and pans at each other until they get divorced or fix their marriage for the sake of their kids.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The conflict could be resolved tomorrow, but unfortunately it won't be.

I've got to hear this.

Originally Posted by Taliesin

... and if it were really interested in peace, it would be ready to ... give back Golan to Syria

Sure, just give the high ground to Syria. It's not like they'll use it to fire rockets into Israel or anything.

..who would have to recognize Israel's right to exist within the 67-borders and stop supporting militant organizations as well as to stop antijewish and antiisraeli propaganda.

Are you kidding?

Certainly, the illegal settlements must end. But not for the sake of peace, but because they're wrong in the first place.

[Def_ears]

With a friend like I$rael, who needs enemies?

Secret Chinese-Israeli Arms Deal Reported - New York Times

China's Missile Imports and Assistance From Israel

US man allegedly spied for Israel, China | Jerusalem Post

Gateway Pundit: Hsu-nami News: Norman Hsu Linked to China Missile Trader

[Cold Warrior]

Israel and the status quo is better than Hamas and Palestinian terrorists under the banner of a Palestinian state.

People get the government they deserve. The Iraqis have also acted like they don't deserve much, but the Sunnis are getting their act together. Maybe the Shiites will follow. If not, it'll be a repeat of the British mandate all over again -- one side (Jews in Israel, Sunnis in Iraq) embracing unity and progress, while the other side (Palestinians and Shiites) stuck in a backwards mentality. The former progresses and builds a society, the other rejects it and hangs on to the past and to those who exploit them (ideology, Iran, neighboring Arab states, et al.).

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Def_ears 

You hit the nail on the head with that post. But seriously, I$rael pay reparations? LOL they're still not finished bleeding Germany dry for holocau$t™ reparations.

Are you trying to deny that Germany tried to exterminate the Jews?

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Are you trying to deny that Germany tried to exterminate the Jews?

Funny, I didn't get that impression. Paranoid? I can see why tho. No one seems to like you guys very much.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Oh, this'll brighten up relations I bet.

greg

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster 

Funny, I didn't get that impression. Paranoid? I can see why tho. No one seems to like you guys very much.

"you guys"? Which "guys" would that be?

I was just curious about his joke, since it seems he enjoys making fun of the near-extermination of an entire culture.

By your remarks, I can tell that you really don't think it was a bad thing either. That's interesting.

[Def_ears]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

"you guys"? Which "guys" would that be?

I was just curious about his joke, since it seems he enjoys making fun of the near-extermination of an entire culture.

By your remarks, I can tell that you really don't think it was a bad thing either. That's interesting.

There were no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq prior to the recent war–and, no Jews or gentiles were killed in gas chambers or gas vans by the Nazis. The “intelligence experts” and “scholars” were wrong. Whatever crimes the Nazis and Hitler did commit, they did not include gassings of Jews nor anyone else. The historians have blindly accepted the wildest, pseudo-scientific nonsense imaginable.

Hitler had superb gas chambers–but they were used only to keep people alive. Those gas chambers were in strategic locations throughout eastern Europe and fumigated entire railroad trains with cyanide and Zyklon-B. Other superb gaschambers were POW camps and concentration camps, including Auschwitz, and used to fumigate everything from clothing to furniture with cyanide and Zyklon-B. Those superb gas chambers certainly could have been used for mass murder as well. The great irony is that none of them have even been implicated in any of the holocaust gassing claims. Instead, the Nazis supposedly used diesel exhaust and Zyklon-B–but, here is where it gets really crazy, the Zyklon-B was simply dumped, supposedly, through small holes in the roofs of cellars–without the warmed, forced air and circulation that was routinely used in all of Germany's most highly-advanced gas chambers. There is not even a valid theory as to how the alleged homicidal, mass gassings could have happened. All of the alleged gassing methods are so technically absurd that they cannot withstand any serious scientific investigation – no doubt, that is precisely why the official defenders of the holocaust hoax must imprison critics instead whenever possible as in Germany, France, Austria and elsewhere. The defenders of the “holocaust” are ruthless, shameless bigots.

The gassing hoax has succeeded in part because of the widely held, but false, belief that murder with poison gas is almost childishly easy, and quick–and even painless. That false belief has actually been fostered by official practitioners of gas executions in the US, i.e.the government itself, in order to disarm critics of the death penalty. By American law, executions must not be cruel. Even the American execution expert and holocaust revisionist FRED LEUCHTER believed that “if I do my job properly, death will be quick and painless.” When he said that in 1988, he had never actually witnessed even one gas execution. He was a qualified expert in a field where gas executions had not been carried out for decades. It has only been in the last decade that an enormous body of evidence from actual gas executions has emerged (see the links at the bottom of this page, column left) which show that even where only one person is gassed to death, the killing process is far from easy, quick or painless. Death by gas is in fact slow, rather complicated technically and excruciatingly painful. The best results occur when the victims assist in their own executions by inhaling deeply after the poison gas enters the gas chamber. But such a claim, especially about Jews, is too absurd to be believed.
The simplest reason for rejecting the Holocaust story in general is that the vast majority of European Jews were still alive at the end of World War 2. Professor ARTHUR BUTZ, the author of The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, made this claim nearly thirty years ago–and he was absolutely correct as the following quote from a credible, recent Jewish source shows.
The Jewish Week 11-28-2003
Two new studies to determine the location of Jewish Holocaust survivors, for use in making future allocations to the most needy, differ widely on the number of survivors worldwide, The Jewish Week has learned. Sergio DellaPergola, a demographer for the Institute of Contemporary Jewry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, found 1,092,000 survivors worldwide. Jacob Ukeles, a policy researcher in Manhattan, found 688,000. The Ukeles survey, an update of one he prepared in 2000 for the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, found only minor differences from his previous effort. Lawrence Eagleburger, chairman of the International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims, commissioned both surveys. Eagleburger had hoped to use the figures in determining how to distribute $13.2 million annually in humanitarian funds for needy survivors worldwide.

[Cold Warrior]

wow

do you live a successful life, or did you post that from your room in your mom's apartment?

[Def_ears]

Originally Posted by Cold Warrior 

wow

do you live a successful life, or did you post that from your room in your mom's apartment?

I posted it from your moms apartment cool guy.

[lpkmckenna]

Sad.

[Cold Warrior]

beyond sad

I wonder how he got so brainwashed

[Def_ears]

Originally Posted by Cold Warrior 

beyond sad

I wonder how he got so brainwashed

"Brainwashed?" Okay COMMIE! lol

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Def_ears 

There were no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq prior to the recent war–and, no Jews or gentiles were killed in gas chambers or gas vans by the Nazis. The “intelligence experts” and “scholars” were wrong. Whatever crimes the Nazis and Hitler did commit, they did not include gassings of Jews nor anyone else. The historians have blindly accepted the wildest, pseudo-scientific nonsense imaginable.

I've been to Dachau and Auschwitz, I've seen the ovens and gas chambers, I know people who were in those camps, and watched their families being murdered. Did you know you, even 50 years after the camps were shut down, you could still smell the sweet odor of burnt human flesh, you can still see the "water nozzles" in the "showers" that connected to tanks that contained cyanide gas (which still held such gas when the Allies liberated the camps)? Almost 1.5 Million people died in Auschwitz, alone.

"Arbeit macht frei", but they never were.

When a man with a faded numeral tattoo on his arm tells you what he saw, you take it as fact. The man was forced to watch his wife being raped before she was gutted like a pig, while his son's skull was stomped in with jack-boots. He passed on 5 years ago, but I know part of him died with his family in 1942.

What kind of a sick bastard denies such things when you can still go to many of those camps and see those things with your own eyes? You're telling me you don't believe the crimes against the Jewish people during WW2?

You deny these places?

Dachau concentration camp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Auschwitz concentration camp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jasenovac concentration camp - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Majdanek - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tell me those places didn't exist, tell me that the millions of bodies unearthed in those sites were figments of mankind's imagination.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster 

Funny, I didn't get that impression. Paranoid? I can see why tho. No one seems to like you guys very much.

You still going to back him up?

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Def_ears 

There were no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq prior to the recent war

What does Iraq have to do with the topic of holocaust?
In fact, your citing of Iraq's case weakens your accusation that the holocaust were a propaganda-fabrication. If you had been right, the same propaganda-machinery would have worked to fake WMD'-programs in Iraq after the invasion.

Originally Posted by Def_ears 

–and, no Jews or gentiles were killed in gas chambers or gas vans by the Nazis. The “intelligence experts” and “scholars” were wrong. Whatever crimes the Nazis and Hitler did commit, they did not include gassings of Jews nor anyone else. The historians have blindly accepted the wildest, pseudo-scientific nonsense imaginable.

Why should the vast majority of historians do this?

Originally Posted by Def_ears 

Hitler had superb gas chambers–but they were used only to keep people alive. Those gas chambers were in strategic locations throughout eastern Europe and fumigated entire railroad trains with cyanide and Zyklon-B. Other superb gaschambers were POW camps and concentration camps, including Auschwitz, and used to fumigate everything from clothing to furniture with cyanide and Zyklon-B. Those superb gas chambers certainly could have been used for mass murder as well. The great irony is that none of them have even been implicated in any of the holocaust gassing claims. Instead, the Nazis supposedly used diesel exhaust and Zyklon-B–but, here is where it gets really crazy, the Zyklon-B was simply dumped, supposedly, through small holes in the roofs of cellars–without the warmed, forced air and circulation that was routinely used in all of Germany's most highly-advanced gas chambers. There is not even a valid theory as to how the alleged homicidal, mass gassings could have happened. All of the alleged gassing methods are so technically absurd that they cannot withstand any serious scientific investigation – no doubt, that is precisely why the official defenders of the holocaust hoax must imprison critics instead whenever possible as in Germany, France, Austria and elsewhere. The defenders of the “holocaust” are ruthless, shameless bigots.

The gassing hoax has succeeded in part because of the widely held, but false, belief that murder with poison gas is almost childishly easy, and quick–and even painless. That false belief has actually been fostered by official practitioners of gas executions in the US, i.e.the government itself, in order to disarm critics of the death penalty. By American law, executions must not be cruel. Even the American execution expert and holocaust revisionist FRED LEUCHTER believed that “if I do my job properly, death will be quick and painless.” When he said that in 1988, he had never actually witnessed even one gas execution. He was a qualified expert in a field where gas executions had not been carried out for decades. It has only been in the last decade that an enormous body of evidence from actual gas executions has emerged (see the links at the bottom of this page, column left) which show that even where only one person is gassed to death, the killing process is far from easy, quick or painless. Death by gas is in fact slow, rather complicated technically and excruciatingly painful. The best results occur when the victims assist in their own executions by inhaling deeply after the poison gas enters the gas chamber. But such a claim, especially about Jews, is too absurd to be believed.

Leuchter and the other deniers that relied on the chemical angle have already been debunked:
Chemistry is Not the Science: Rudolf, Rhetoric, and Reduction
and
The Chemistry of Auschwitz

Historical revisionism is something good as long as it is based on sound reasoning and evidence and stands the test of peer-review.

Originally Posted by Def_ears 

The simplest reason for rejecting the Holocaust story in general is that the vast majority of European Jews were still alive at the end of World War 2.

Show me the proof for that. As far as I know, there were about 9 million jews living in the european countries that came under the control of Hitler-Germany, and 3-4 million jews could escape alive, meaning 5-6 million jews died during the holocaust.

Originally Posted by Def_ears 

Professor ARTHUR BUTZ, the author of The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, made this claim nearly thirty years ago–and he was absolutely correct as the following quote from a credible, recent Jewish source shows.
The Jewish Week 11-28-2003
Two new studies to determine the location of Jewish Holocaust survivors, for use in making future allocations to the most needy, differ widely on the number of survivors worldwide, The Jewish Week has learned. Sergio DellaPergola, a demographer for the Institute of Contemporary Jewry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, found 1,092,000 survivors worldwide. Jacob Ukeles, a policy researcher in Manhattan, found 688,000. The Ukeles survey, an update of one he prepared in 2000 for the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany, found only minor differences from his previous effort. Lawrence Eagleburger, chairman of the International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims, commissioned both surveys. Eagleburger had hoped to use the figures in determining how to distribute $13.2 million annually in humanitarian funds for needy survivors worldwide.

How is that quote a proof for your idea? 688,000 or 1,092,000 jewish holocaust-survivors that still lived in 2003 doesn't prove your point, quite to the contrary.

Taliesin

[ThinkInsane]

Originally Posted by Def_ears 

*snip*

I've been wondering what to call you people. "Conspiracy theorist" sounds so... 80's. An updated title is called for. Something you lot will think sounds credible, while leaving the rest of the rational world to easily identify exactly what kind of gibberish is about to be spewed. I have decided on "Cryptohistorian". You wholeheartedly search for a history that you absolutely believe to be true without ever finding a shred of factual evidence. And it'll give you a bit of fraternity via name recognition with the cryptozoologists. You may be able to capitalize off of the wealth of respect they garner in the scientific community.

But in all seriousness, people have asked that you be banned. I'm not doing that. I'm not even going to edit your offensive to all but the wingnuts amongst us posts for one simple reason: I think it's important people know there are those that hold your views out there. Speak freely sir, that is your right. But you would do well to speak truth. Sadly those that present evidence that at best might be called circumstantial (and that would be a kindness) so they can turn a blind eye to genocide are no friends of the truth.

My $.02

[ebuddy]

^^ ^^

Someone has called for Def_ears' banning? I'm with you ThinkInsane. Let this person defend his ideology. Taliesin has come in and basically knocked away most of what Def_ears has said. Let Def_ears respond with something meaningful if he's got anything.

This is odd though. I've got a friend of mine who also believes the Holocaust was fabricated. When the conversation devolved into him stating he's not anti-semitic, but anti-Zionist; he quoted an article by the Serbian Defense League detailing how Jews have taken over all aspects of popular media and US culture. The article never made the connection between Jews and Zionists, but only mentioned Jews. Aside from believing the Holocaust is a myth and that the Bush Administration was behind 9/11, he's really a well-intentioned guy and his views on this issue frankly surprised me. We might all be surprised by how many wholesale buy into this stuff without firm evidence.

As it turns out, it may well have been a post-and-run anyway.

[BadKosh]

If the israeli's gave back the lands captured in '67, within weeks the arabs would claim the lands were never won in the first place. I'm sure the Iranian idiot would be first to make such a claim. Just think how much money would be saved if there were no problems involving muslims.(terrorists, oil gouging, political BS, and wars)

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Imagine how much more money would be saved if there were no problems involving people!

greg

[Ghoser777]

Imagine if there were no more people! That Will Smith guy might be on to something.

[badidea]

Originally Posted by Def_ears 

*snip*

And the names on all those memorial stones that are all over Germany in front of the houses where those people used to live are just plain fantasy???

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

If the israeli's gave back the lands captured in '67, within weeks the arabs would claim the lands were never won in the first place. I'm sure the Iranian idiot would be first to make such a claim. Just think how much money would be saved if there were no problems involving muslims.(terrorists, oil gouging, political BS, and wars)

Yeah, they'd probably bust out propaganda to that affect. But then Israel's emboldened enemies would be even more confident that more warfare would finally deliver the complete annihilation of the country (chas v'sholem).

[Big Mac]

Okay, so the corrupt Olmert goes back on his pledge to insist that any joint statement recognizes Israel as the Jewish state. Didn't expect anything more of him.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Okay, so the corrupt Olmert goes back on his pledge to insist that any joint statement recognizes Israel as the Jewish state. Didn't expect anything more of him.

It makes sense, as it would go against international law to call other states to recognize the nature of another state. That is Israel's own business and not the business of its neighbours.

Taliesin

[peeb]

Could you explain what you mean by that Taliesin?

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by peeb 

Could you explain what you mean by that Taliesin?

Yes, why not:

The longstanding demand of Israel, the US and the international communtiy was that its neighbours should recognize Israel, ie. normalize relations, develop economic trade with Israel, and stop the war-status, ie. stop attacking it either directly or through proxys, ie. militants and terrorgroups among the palestinians or other people.

The arabic league has after numerous decades of nonrecognition decided to offer a normalisation of relations, a full recognition of Israel as a state and territory, to stop military activity against it and to stop supporting militants against Israel... if Israel withdraws to the pre67-borders, ie. leaves all of the Westbank, Gaza, Golan and additionaly leaves East-Jerusalem, as required by international law, too.

Recently though, before the Annapolis-talks, some parts of the israeli side urged Olmert to demand not only the recognition of Israel as a state and the normalisation of relations, but additionaly to demand that the neighbours recognize Israel as a jewish state.

But that demand is not only unheard of in international relations, it would also mean to recognize a defacto discrimination of 20% of the israelis, that happen to be muslims.

How Israel defines itself, is the sole business of Israel and not the business of its neighbours.

Taliesin

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

I'm curious, does Israel recognize any of its neighbors as "Muslim states"?

It seems to me pretty much no one tries to argue that Muslim states aren't in fact, Muslim states- and yet there are Christians and Jews within those states as well. What's really that wrong with recognizing a Jewish state?

Maybe there's no legal basis, but how about some sort of "good faith" basis for Israel to be recognized as a Jewish state, in this case? You know, if people were really interested in peace, and not just bickering over labels.

[Big Mac]

The Arab leaders who spoke on the issue, saying Israel would be opening Pandora's box by having its religion be officially recognized as part of the country seem to conveniently forget that Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and Mauritania are all officially "Islamic Republics." I guess it's okay for Muslim countries to do it but not for the only Jewish country. However, Taliesin is technically right in this case - recognition of that type means essentially nothing, and Israel has the right to define itself.

[peeb]

Originally Posted by Taliesin 

Yes, why not:...

Thank you, I understand what you mean now.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

What's really that wrong with recognizing a Jewish state?

Maybe there's no legal basis, but how about some sort of "good faith" basis for Israel to be recognized as a Jewish state, in this case? You know, if people were really interested in peace, and not just bickering over labels.

Because if the Palestinians did so at this stage they would simultaneously be giving up the issue of the Palestinian right of return. The most likely general sequence of events in any final status agreement will be defining the borders, agreeing a fixed % of right of return for Palestinian refugees to Palestinian territory. Recognition of Israel as a Jewish state comes after these. At that point it will be a mute issue anyway, as has been said already it's up to Israel to define itself.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Do you think the entire peace process should be scrapped and everybody jump straight to all-out warfare? It's quicker, easier, less foot-dragging and mumbo-jumbo debate, might will make right, and there will be no more conflicts around Israel's status within the Middle East.

Very attractive idea, I'd say.

greg

Absolutely. Let all the parties involved have a full-scale regional war. As was shown in the recent attacks on Lebanon (Summer 2006) Israel is not quite as powerful militarily as it was presumed to be. I think an all-out war in the Middle East would force them eventually to use nuclear weapons. This would be good in that it would lead to an ever greater level of fighting. I would like to see the whole Middle East turn into a giant religio-cultural clash. Once the dust settles--and the radiation levels, too--I think the outcome will be a lasting peace among all those that remain or death to pretty much everyone in the Middle East. I don't care either way. Let those who want to fight over land fight over land until they don't want to fight any more.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Do you think the entire peace process should be scrapped and everybody jump straight to all-out warfare? It's quicker, easier, less foot-dragging and mumbo-jumbo debate, might will make right, and there will be no more conflicts around Israel's status within the Middle East.

Very attractive idea, I'd say.

greg

I'd agree, if one of the sides didn't have nuclear weapons.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

I think both sides would have the fast enough if that happened.

greg

[Atomic Rooster]

None of this would be happening if the Jews accepted Uganda that was offered by the zionists.

[Shaddim]

Sure, if Jerusalem were in Uganda.