Palestine vs Israel

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 15:39

According to demographic stats by the ottomans and other sources the population of this region was lower than 100,000 at the start of the 19th century. Before the Egyptian invasion in 1831 there was close to 105,000 people inhabiting  this region. After the invasion many more Arabs came in. The Jews meanwhile bought legally lands from Arabs who owned those lands during ottoman times and started agricultural resolution in this godforsaken deserted region. The Jews preferred to pay for Arabs than to Jews because they worked for cheaper wage. This triggered hundreds of thousands Arabs to immigrate to Israel in search for a job to have better quality of life.
They continued to emigrate in mass, until 1920. When Britain did a demographic stats for 1920 there were 650,000 Muslims on the entire region of British Palestine and it includes Jordan before it was separated.

This misinformation that Jews stole those lands was originally promoted by a Bosnian Muslim cleric, to agitate the Arabs against the Jews. That Bosnian Muslim cleric came to Palestine to escape a death penalty that he received for participating in the Great Syrian Revolt during the 20s.
I forgot his name but his militant views and jihadist speeches encouraged the Arabs who lived in this area to go with violence. The grand mufti of Jerusalem at that time, Hajj Amin el Husseini, have said he was his role model. And he continued his legacy which lives to this day.

Fast forward to today, there's 12,000,000 to 14,000,000 Arabs (Muslims, Christians, etc) who call them themselves the natives of this land but in reality, from the 105,000 Arabs that lived prior to 1831 Egyptian invasion only 600,000 are their descendants. Approximately 3% to 4% of the people who call themselves Palestinians.

I support this jew

लिखा द्वारा klevis, 25.01.2017 at 16:10

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 15:39

लिखा द्वारा klevis, 25.01.2017 at 14:45

लिखा द्वारा Rock Lee, 24.01.2017 at 04:42

लिखा द्वारा brianwl, 23.01.2017 at 14:36

I was a little surprised when i first heard this. However, after some reading over the week-end, it seems it was ambiguity in the way British worded the agreements granting statehood to a number of Arab nations about a hundred years ago that lead to present situation. (British like doing that.) As best as i can tell, Arab nations were under the impression that following the first world war, in exchange for assisting the British in defeating the Ottoman's, the region would be granted Arab independence. There was no mention of a non-Arab state in these documents, until the Balfour Declaration, where suddenly a Jewish state would be created in the midst of the Arab states. Naturally, the Arabs kept citing the earlier agreements, rejected the offer of statehood if it included a Jewish state. However, other Arab states that weren't immediately affected, accepted independence from the British. It gets even messier by the second world war, when the Allies (or the British at least) presumed any Palestinian state would simply be absorbed by other Arab nations, and so you get a situation where the Arabs are agreeing, because they have secondary agendas, the Palestinians are refusing, because they are holding on to earlier agreements which they view as accepted in good faith, and then you have Israel, who is just happy to finally have a state, naturally agreeing.

I know this is a rather crude simplification, but i think it captures the essence of why they reject the later offers of statehood... it's not so much Palestinians rejecting their own statehood.. they are holding on to the original agreements where they didn't have a Jewish state in their borders.

[As an aside, i was trying to keep the post short, but i totally agree with your example of the Kurds... i would support them having a state as well, and even in Canada, where the French want their own state, i support Quebec having their own identity if statehood will satisfy this need.]

you have to remember, before the british mandate and the zinoist movment the region was barely populated and certainly not developed, for sure they did'nt have any national identity, in fact most of the palestinains arrived to "palestine" after balfur-delcration. i really don't understand the logic behind your argument, but i will try.

so if i get i understand that correctly, you want to suppurt anti-western anti-life anti-logic anti-peace anti-anythingbutradicalislaminsummarise terrorist movments of people who started populating the region only after it was worth something thanks to the jews and the british, because they got the impression that land gonna be theirs? you realize that by that logic they can just keep doing whatever they want until the destrtuction of the other side? what's the point crying for them if it's obvious that they will never agree to anything else but gonicding the other side?

unregarded to brianwl, it's rather amazing that everytime some jerk pops up with idiot anti western claim (like in the last sadaam hussein thread) it's the same people to upvote it, some of them never manage to back their claims up the others never try.

lol really ....people who stole their lands call for peace now?that land was populated by many population(based religions) after ottoman period 85% were muslims, 11% were christians and 4% Jews but after the persecutions in russia the movement of the Jews to Palestine assumed larger proportions and they started agricultural colonies and there starts the conflict they were taking alot of lands and their population had risen to 30%. As about other arabs who came to palestine that was after zionist was made.after brithish mandate jews started to buy more lands and steal some more and dislodge palestinians with force...how can they make peace?

According to demographic stats by the ottomans and other sources the population of this region was lower than 100,000 at the start of the 19th century. Before the Egyptian invasion in 1831 there was close to 105,000 people inhabiting  this region. After the invasion many more Arabs came in. The Jews meanwhile bought legally lands from Arabs who owned those lands during ottoman times and started agricultural resolution in this godforsaken deserted region. The Jews preferred to pay for Arabs than to Jews because they worked for cheaper wage. This triggered hundreds of thousands Arabs to immigrate to Israel in search for a job to have better quality of life.
They continued to emigrate in mass, until 1920. When Britain did a demographic stats for 1920 there were 650,000 Muslims on the entire region of British Palestine and it includes Jordan before it was separated.

This misinformation that Jews stole those lands was originally promoted by a Bosnian Muslim cleric, to agitate the Arabs against the Jews. That Bosnian Muslim cleric came to Palestine to escape a death penalty that he received for participating in the Great Syrian Revolt during the 20s.
I forgot his name but his militant views and jihadist speeches encouraged the Arabs who lived in this area to go with violence. The grand mufti of Jerusalem at that time, Hajj Amin el Husseini, have said he was his role model. And he continued his legacy which lives to this day.

Fast forward to today, there's 12,000,000 to 14,000,000 Arabs (Muslims, Christians, etc) who call them themselves the natives of this land but in reality, from the 105,000 Arabs that lived prior to 1831 Egyptian invasion only 600,000 are their descendants. Approximately 3% to 4% of the people who call themselves Palestinians.

at some point i agree with u but you cant make a state if you go buy land in india ex or russia and after 100years claim it as new state and say' we want independence'

When you buy a land it's yours and you can do anything you want with it even declare it as a new state, problem is finding enough states to recognise it to make it legitimate.  The situation here with Israel though is quite different. The Arabs wanted this region to be another Arab state. They did everything in their power to achieve it. But they failed. The UN passed a resolution to separate this region for both of the sides, one side (Jews) accepted the other didn't, the Arabs were against it even lunched a war upon Israel declaration of independence to destroy it, fortunately they failed. And less of a year later a lot of countries recognised Israel and it official became a lawful state.

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 23.01.2017 at 04:47

mate, you're using a 2600 year old map to justify your claim on a region, thats like as if i claimed the holy roman empire, because it used to belong to us germans

लिखा द्वारा Metyu, 25.01.2017 at 16:16

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 15:39

According to demographic stats by the ottomans and other sources the population of this region was lower than 100,000 at the start of the 19th century. Before the Egyptian invasion in 1831 there was close to 105,000 people inhabiting  this region. After the invasion many more Arabs came in. The Jews meanwhile bought legally lands from Arabs who owned those lands during ottoman times and started agricultural resolution in this godforsaken deserted region. The Jews preferred to pay for Arabs than to Jews because they worked for cheaper wage. This triggered hundreds of thousands Arabs to immigrate to Israel in search for a job to have better quality of life.
They continued to emigrate in mass, until 1920. When Britain did a demographic stats for 1920 there were 650,000 Muslims on the entire region of British Palestine and it includes Jordan before it was separated.

This misinformation that Jews stole those lands was originally promoted by a Bosnian Muslim cleric, to agitate the Arabs against the Jews. That Bosnian Muslim cleric came to Palestine to escape a death penalty that he received for participating in the Great Syrian Revolt during the 20s.
I forgot his name but his militant views and jihadist speeches encouraged the Arabs who lived in this area to go with violence. The grand mufti of Jerusalem at that time, Hajj Amin el Husseini, have said he was his role model. And he continued his legacy which lives to this day.

Fast forward to today, there's 12,000,000 to 14,000,000 Arabs (Muslims, Christians, etc) who call them themselves the natives of this land but in reality, from the 105,000 Arabs that lived prior to 1831 Egyptian invasion only 600,000 are their descendants. Approximately 3% to 4% of the people who call themselves Palestinians.

I support this jew

I like this Muslim

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 16:20

लिखा द्वारा Metyu, 25.01.2017 at 16:16

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 15:39

According to demographic stats by the ottomans and other sources the population of this region was lower than 100,000 at the start of the 19th century. Before the Egyptian invasion in 1831 there was close to 105,000 people inhabiting  this region. After the invasion many more Arabs came in. The Jews meanwhile bought legally lands from Arabs who owned those lands during ottoman times and started agricultural resolution in this godforsaken deserted region. The Jews preferred to pay for Arabs than to Jews because they worked for cheaper wage. This triggered hundreds of thousands Arabs to immigrate to Israel in search for a job to have better quality of life.
They continued to emigrate in mass, until 1920. When Britain did a demographic stats for 1920 there were 650,000 Muslims on the entire region of British Palestine and it includes Jordan before it was separated.

This misinformation that Jews stole those lands was originally promoted by a Bosnian Muslim cleric, to agitate the Arabs against the Jews. That Bosnian Muslim cleric came to Palestine to escape a death penalty that he received for participating in the Great Syrian Revolt during the 20s.
I forgot his name but his militant views and jihadist speeches encouraged the Arabs who lived in this area to go with violence. The grand mufti of Jerusalem at that time, Hajj Amin el Husseini, have said he was his role model. And he continued his legacy which lives to this day.

Fast forward to today, there's 12,000,000 to 14,000,000 Arabs (Muslims, Christians, etc) who call them themselves the natives of this land but in reality, from the 105,000 Arabs that lived prior to 1831 Egyptian invasion only 600,000 are their descendants. Approximately 3% to 4% of the people who call themselves Palestinians.

I support this jew

I like this Muslim

Who tell you I'm a Muslim? I never tell someone to my religion...

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 25.01.2017 at 09:57

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 24.01.2017 at 19:34

No state was there before.

Before english arrived, it was Turkish.

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 24.01.2017 at 19:34

Never attacked another country.

Israel attacked Egypt in the 50's, took Sinai. Israeli invasion of Egypt, better known in the West as 'Suez Crisis', because you know, when West and allies attack then it's 'crisis', but when non-West fight then it's 'Russian invasion', 'Chinese threat', 'unstable Iran'.

Fck off troll scumbag. Stop lying and maybe ill respond to you again next year.

लिखा द्वारा Metyu, 25.01.2017 at 16:53

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 16:20

लिखा द्वारा Metyu, 25.01.2017 at 16:16

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 15:39

According to demographic stats by the ottomans and other sources the population of this region was lower than 100,000 at the start of the 19th century. Before the Egyptian invasion in 1831 there was close to 105,000 people inhabiting  this region. After the invasion many more Arabs came in. The Jews meanwhile bought legally lands from Arabs who owned those lands during ottoman times and started agricultural resolution in this godforsaken deserted region. The Jews preferred to pay for Arabs than to Jews because they worked for cheaper wage. This triggered hundreds of thousands Arabs to immigrate to Israel in search for a job to have better quality of life.
They continued to emigrate in mass, until 1920. When Britain did a demographic stats for 1920 there were 650,000 Muslims on the entire region of British Palestine and it includes Jordan before it was separated.

This misinformation that Jews stole those lands was originally promoted by a Bosnian Muslim cleric, to agitate the Arabs against the Jews. That Bosnian Muslim cleric came to Palestine to escape a death penalty that he received for participating in the Great Syrian Revolt during the 20s.
I forgot his name but his militant views and jihadist speeches encouraged the Arabs who lived in this area to go with violence. The grand mufti of Jerusalem at that time, Hajj Amin el Husseini, have said he was his role model. And he continued his legacy which lives to this day.

Fast forward to today, there's 12,000,000 to 14,000,000 Arabs (Muslims, Christians, etc) who call them themselves the natives of this land but in reality, from the 105,000 Arabs that lived prior to 1831 Egyptian invasion only 600,000 are their descendants. Approximately 3% to 4% of the people who call themselves Palestinians.

I support this jew

I like this Muslim

Who tell you I'm a Muslim? I never tell someone to my religion...

I assumed you're because you're from Turkey

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 16:17

लिखा द्वारा klevis, 25.01.2017 at 16:10

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 15:39

लिखा द्वारा klevis, 25.01.2017 at 14:45

लिखा द्वारा Rock Lee, 24.01.2017 at 04:42

लिखा द्वारा brianwl, 23.01.2017 at 14:36

I know this is a rather crude simplification, but i think it captures the essence of why they reject the later offers of statehood... it's not so much Palestinians rejecting their own statehood.. they are holding on to the original agreements where they didn't have a Jewish state in their borders.

[As an aside, i was trying to keep the post short, but i totally agree with your example of the Kurds... i would support them having a state as well, and even in Canada, where the French want their own state, i support Quebec having their own identity if statehood will satisfy this need.]

you have to remember, before the british mandate and the zinoist movment the region was barely populated and certainly not developed, for sure they did'nt have any national identity, in fact most of the palestinains arrived to "palestine" after balfur-delcration. i really don't understand the logic behind your argument, but i will try.

so if i get i understand that correctly, you want to suppurt anti-western anti-life anti-logic anti-peace anti-anythingbutradicalislaminsummarise terrorist movments of people who started populating the region only after it was worth something thanks to the jews and the british, because they got the impression that land gonna be theirs? you realize that by that logic they can just keep doing whatever they want until the destrtuction of the other side? what's the point crying for them if it's obvious that they will never agree to anything else but gonicding the other side?

unregarded to brianwl, it's rather amazing that everytime some jerk pops up with idiot anti western claim (like in the last sadaam hussein thread) it's the same people to upvote it, some of them never manage to back their claims up the others never try.

lol really ....people who stole their lands call for peace now?that land was populated by many population(based religions) after ottoman period 85% were muslims, 11% were christians and 4% Jews but after the persecutions in russia the movement of the Jews to Palestine assumed larger proportions and they started agricultural colonies and there starts the conflict they were taking alot of lands and their population had risen to 30%. As about other arabs who came to palestine that was after zionist was made.after brithish mandate jews started to buy more lands and steal some more and dislodge palestinians with force...how can they make peace?

Fast forward to today, there's 12,000,000 to 14,000,000 Arabs (Muslims, Christians, etc) who call them themselves the natives of this land but in reality, from the 105,000 Arabs that lived prior to 1831 Egyptian invasion only 600,000 are their descendants. Approximately 3% to 4% of the people who call themselves Palestinians.

at some point i agree with u but you cant make a state if you go buy land in india ex or russia and after 100years claim it as new state and say' we want independence'

When you buy a land it's yours and you can do anything you want with it even declare it as a new state, problem is finding enough states to recognise it to make it legitimate.  The situation here with Israel though is quite different. The Arabs wanted this region to be another Arab state. They did everything in their power to achieve it. But they failed. The UN passed a resolution to separate this region for both of the sides, one side (Jews) accepted the other didn't, the Arabs were against it even lunched a war upon Israel declaration of independence to destroy it, fortunately they failed. And less of a year later a lot of countries recognised Israel and it official became a lawful state.

thats not true u can buy a land but u cant do anything u want on it,they separated them and gave 30% of the population most of the land so fair politics indeed... but even after that israel keept force evictions of the arabs and build and civilize other lands and you cant claim a state the land that was civilized by force.

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 23.01.2017 at 17:52

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 21.01.2017 at 08:08

i would just love it if any of you Palestinian supporters answer some simple questions, like why Palestinians always declined the peace offers and two state solution and how can you "seek recognition" and to "let you build a state" when you officially announce that you will fight for Israel destruction until the end of times.

Do you accept Cyprus two state solution? What about Serbia-Kosovo two state solution? Are Ukrainians willing to accept two state solution with Donbass? What about China-Taiwan two state solution? Why didn't United States propose two state solution to American natives? What about Turkey-Kurds two state solution? Would that work?

What about the 200 or so steppe tribes in Siberia where is there independence! Only cause your braught up american natives.

लिखा द्वारा RaulPB, 22.01.2017 at 19:28

Why should she? Are you implying that every piece of land aquired through war and imperialism should be given back? If so, keep in mind colonialist European countries like Uk, Spain, France, Portugal etc gave back most of their colonies and land aquisitions. You know who didnt? Arabs and Turks, they still control almost all the Middle East, North Africa and Anatolia, all of those lands aquired by war.

Muslim empire started from Arabia and Turks started from nothing. But you mean to say that Uk has to give everything back but Arabs and Turks not? Why the double standard? Why racism against whites?

wow,you dont know shit dont you?
the real ppl of egypt,libya,etc,etc none give there lands back as you said,they fighted for it,you need to reed more and talk less.

लिखा द्वारा klevis, 25.01.2017 at 17:15

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 16:17

लिखा द्वारा klevis, 25.01.2017 at 16:10

लिखा द्वारा Netzer, 25.01.2017 at 15:39

लिखा द्वारा klevis, 25.01.2017 at 14:45

लिखा द्वारा Rock Lee, 24.01.2017 at 04:42

लिखा द्वारा brianwl, 23.01.2017 at 14:36

I know this is a rather crude simplification, but i think it captures the essence of why they reject the later offers of statehood... it's not so much Palestinians rejecting their own statehood.. they are holding on to the original agreements where they didn't have a Jewish state in their borders.

[As an aside, i was trying to keep the post short, but i totally agree with your example of the Kurds... i would support them having a state as well, and even in Canada, where the French want their own state, i support Quebec having their own identity if statehood will satisfy this need.]

you have to remember, before the british mandate and the zinoist movment the region was barely populated and certainly not developed, for sure they did'nt have any national identity, in fact most of the palestinains arrived to "palestine" after balfur-delcration. i really don't understand the logic behind your argument, but i will try.

so if i get i understand that correctly, you want to suppurt anti-western anti-life anti-logic anti-peace anti-anythingbutradicalislaminsummarise terrorist movments of people who started populating the region only after it was worth something thanks to the jews and the british, because they got the impression that land gonna be theirs? you realize that by that logic they can just keep doing whatever they want until the destrtuction of the other side? what's the point crying for them if it's obvious that they will never agree to anything else but gonicding the other side?

unregarded to brianwl, it's rather amazing that everytime some jerk pops up with idiot anti western claim (like in the last sadaam hussein thread) it's the same people to upvote it, some of them never manage to back their claims up the others never try.

lol really ....people who stole their lands call for peace now?that land was populated by many population(based religions) after ottoman period 85% were muslims, 11% were christians and 4% Jews but after the persecutions in russia the movement of the Jews to Palestine assumed larger proportions and they started agricultural colonies and there starts the conflict they were taking alot of lands and their population had risen to 30%. As about other arabs who came to palestine that was after zionist was made.after brithish mandate jews started to buy more lands and steal some more and dislodge palestinians with force...how can they make peace?

Fast forward to today, there's 12,000,000 to 14,000,000 Arabs (Muslims, Christians, etc) who call them themselves the natives of this land but in reality, from the 105,000 Arabs that lived prior to 1831 Egyptian invasion only 600,000 are their descendants. Approximately 3% to 4% of the people who call themselves Palestinians.

at some point i agree with u but you cant make a state if you go buy land in india ex or russia and after 100years claim it as new state and say' we want independence'

When you buy a land it's yours and you can do anything you want with it even declare it as a new state, problem is finding enough states to recognise it to make it legitimate.  The situation here with Israel though is quite different. The Arabs wanted this region to be another Arab state. They did everything in their power to achieve it. But they failed. The UN passed a resolution to separate this region for both of the sides, one side (Jews) accepted the other didn't, the Arabs were against it even lunched a war upon Israel declaration of independence to destroy it, fortunately they failed. And less of a year later a lot of countries recognised Israel and it official became a lawful state.

thats not true u can buy a land but u cant do anything u want on it,they separated them and gave 30% of the population most of the land so fair politics indeed... but even after that israel keept force evictions of the arabs and build and civilize other lands and you cant claim a state the land that was civilized by force.

How empires became empires? by conquering and building their civilization. Though Israel didn't advanced at the expense of Palestinians. Palestinians, if they had accepted UN's resulotion and had a country, it wouldn't have been any different from today's Lebanon, Egypt, Algeria, Oman and the other Arab countries without oil that struggle with extreme poverty and frustration.

You know that Jordan was part of the British Mandate of Palestine, until Britain decided to split the region in the 20s to Arabs and Jews, giving 70% of the land of Palestine to Jordan? The British administration even forcefully transferred Jews that bought lands and lived on the Jordanian side to Palestine, while ignoring the fact that there are still Arabs in in the western (Jewish side) of Palestine. Which led to another land split 20 years later. Which in total shows 85% of Palestine was given to Arabs. And it might be true that some Israeli soldiers forced evacuation of few Arabs during the war but I believe it doesn't reach 1000 - 500 people but it wasn't ordered by the high command, plus there's no documentations on that. However there's many documentations on the Arab world when the urge the Arabs to flee from the Jews by telling horror stories about us, promising them they will return after they defeat us. While our prime minister at that time urge them to stay.
And lots of documentations about the force deportation of 1,500,000 Arab Jews from their countries.

At the end it's their fault. They had their chance to establish a state, they decided they want the entire region for themselves, foolishly declared war and lost. They have no right to ask anything. If Syria have 11 million refugees, all the Palestinains can be refugees and live in Europe or America, wherever they want but not here.

This cancer is still active..

लिखा द्वारा Goblin, 26.01.2017 at 11:05

लिखा द्वारा Viruslegion, 22.01.2017 at 22:23

Kosovo is Serbian

Texas is Mexican

East Prussia is German

लिखा द्वारा Helly, 26.01.2017 at 04:32

What about the 200 or so steppe tribes in Siberia where is there independence! Only cause your braught up american natives.

wait i was argueing tito? for a second i wondered why he keeps chaning nicks and avatars all the time but then it all came clear

लिखा द्वारा Rock Lee, 24.01.2017 at 04:42

लिखा द्वारा brianwl, 23.01.2017 at 14:36

I was a little surprised when i first heard this. However, after some reading over the week-end, it seems it was ambiguity in the way British worded the agreements granting statehood to a number of Arab nations about a hundred years ago that lead to present situation. (British like doing that.) As best as i can tell, Arab nations were under the impression that following the first world war, in exchange for assisting the British in defeating the Ottoman's, the region would be granted Arab independence. There was no mention of a non-Arab state in these documents, until the Balfour Declaration, where suddenly a Jewish state would be created in the midst of the Arab states. Naturally, the Arabs kept citing the earlier agreements, rejected the offer of statehood if it included a Jewish state. However, other Arab states that weren't immediately affected, accepted independence from the British. It gets even messier by the second world war, when the Allies (or the British at least) presumed any Palestinian state would simply be absorbed by other Arab nations, and so you get a situation where the Arabs are agreeing, because they have secondary agendas, the Palestinians are refusing, because they are holding on to earlier agreements which they view as accepted in good faith, and then you have Israel, who is just happy to finally have a state, naturally agreeing.

I know this is a rather crude simplification, but i think it captures the essence of why they reject the later offers of statehood... it's not so much Palestinians rejecting their own statehood.. they are holding on to the original agreements where they didn't have a Jewish state in their borders.

[As an aside, i was trying to keep the post short, but i totally agree with your example of the Kurds... i would support them having a state as well, and even in Canada, where the French want their own state, i support Quebec having their own identity if statehood will satisfy this need.]

you have to remember, before the british mandate and the zinoist movment the region was barely populated and certainly not developed, for sure they did'nt have any national identity, in fact most of the palestinains arrived to "palestine" after balfur-delcration. i really don't understand the logic behind your argument, but i will try.

so if i get i understand that correctly, you want to suppurt anti-western anti-life anti-logic anti-peace anti-anythingbutradicalislaminsummarise terrorist movments of people who started populating the region only after it was worth something thanks to the jews and the british, because they got the impression that land gonna be theirs? you realize that by that logic they can just keep doing whatever they want until the destrtuction of the other side? what's the point crying for them if it's obvious that they will never agree to anything else but gonicding the other side?

unregarded to brianwl, it's rather amazing that everytime some jerk pops up with idiot anti western claim (like in the last sadaam hussein thread) it's the same people to upvote it, some of them never manage to back their claims up the others never try.

I was just answering a question... it wasn't meant to be interpreted as 'argument'. I'll repeat that what i support is a people having a homeland.

लिखा द्वारा brianwl, 26.01.2017 at 12:33

I was just answering a question... it wasn't meant to be interpreted as 'argument'. I'll repeat that what i support is a people having a homeland.

marry me

लिखा द्वारा Rock Lee, 26.01.2017 at 12:34

लिखा द्वारा brianwl, 26.01.2017 at 12:33

I was just answering a question... it wasn't meant to be interpreted as 'argument'. I'll repeat that what i support is a people having a homeland.

marry me

♥

लिखा द्वारा Viruslegion, 25.01.2017 at 13:32

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 25.01.2017 at 09:57

Before english arrived, it was Turkish.

And before that it belonged various other backwards muslim caliphates, and before that the Christians, and before that more muslims, and then the Byzantines, and then the Romans, and then the Greeks, and who owned it before all of these people? The Jews, just like they do now

But we are not talking about history that far, only about country which owned the region before English - Turks, because he claim there was nothing before English there, as English brought everything and created life or something, weird people view Europeans as creators or something.

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 25.01.2017 at 16:54

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 25.01.2017 at 09:57

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 24.01.2017 at 19:34

No state was there before.

Before english arrived, it was Turkish.

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 24.01.2017 at 19:34

Never attacked another country.

Israel attacked Egypt in the 50's, took Sinai. Israeli invasion of Egypt, better known in the West as 'Suez Crisis', because you know, when West and allies attack then it's 'crisis', but when non-West fight then it's 'Russian invasion', 'Chinese threat', 'unstable Iran'.

Fck off troll scumbag. Stop lying and maybe ill respond to you again next year.

Hahaha how stupid is this guy, poor soul think im lying because he doesn't know history. Ah sweet young indebted greek.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutasarrifate_of_Jerusalem

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis



Orwellian totalitarianism not necessary in Khalesi case, he's dumb as a night, reminds me of Julia.

लिखा द्वारा Helly, 26.01.2017 at 04:32

What about the 200 or so steppe tribes in Siberia where is there independence! Only cause your braught up american natives.

I have nothing against non-Russians getting their states, my whole country fell apart creating some 15 republics, i don't care if few more separate. It won't make a change or advantage for West in fight against Russia.

It's not the same when Russians started journey eastward to establish contact with Russians and unite the country. Some of those Russians were minority in the regions, surrounded by non-Russians. And when Europeans landed in North America, butchering their way through land and creating new states.
Russia didn't change minority way of life, just imposed tax and call to war, and even then they were just scouts on horses, almost never in combat unless they wished, like Kalmyk cavalry or Cossack(Kazak) regiments, while Europeans/Americans systematically and with a plan deported, resettled, ethnically cleansed and genocided Native Americans to pave way for white settlements and distribution of land for farms.

Everyone think Russia is incapable and retarded for having low living standard and every look toward America for comparison, but creating such a lifestyle is easy: just kill natives, give their land to your people and create massive debt, use that money to build infrastructure, military, economy and you will have high living standard in shortest amount of time. But that's not moral, and we are different so we can't do that, we are not the same like those people (english, spanish, french, germans) who colonized 3/4 of the world. Our 'expansion' was to unite all Russians, and non-russians were inbetween, that expansion was not necessary but it happened, and Russians have no problem of giving up there, as proven in 1991 when USSR fell apart. We were never extremists or radical to use force to solve differences or problems.

Our priority is to save people now, regardless of color, origin or faith. We don't care for ideologies or philosophy anymore. We fought for Ossetians and Abkhazians in 2008 Georgian War, we fought for Dargins, Kumyks, Avars, Laks, Azeris, Nogais, Rutuls, Tsakhurs and Aghuls in Dagestan War 1999 and for Gagauz, Ukrainians and Russians in Transnistrian War 1992

Now we are fighting for Syrians, Arabs, Yazidis, Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites in Middle East for 1 year now. America created such a mess for 20 years that we are on the brink of extinction, there is no room for playing ideologies anymore, it's time to save what we can save.

लिखा द्वारा Rock Lee, 26.01.2017 at 12:27

लिखा द्वारा Helly, 26.01.2017 at 04:32

What about the 200 or so steppe tribes in Siberia where is there independence! Only cause your braught up american natives.

wait i was argueing tito? for a second i wondered why he keeps chaning nicks and avatars all the time but then it all came clear

Yes lol you where battling a shape shifter next week is Finnish week be prepared.

Free palestine

लिखा द्वारा Helly, 26.01.2017 at 13:08

लिखा द्वारा Rock Lee, 26.01.2017 at 12:27

लिखा द्वारा Helly, 26.01.2017 at 04:32

What about the 200 or so steppe tribes in Siberia where is there independence! Only cause your braught up american natives.

wait i was argueing tito? for a second i wondered why he keeps chaning nicks and avatars all the time but then it all came clear

Yes lol you where battling a shape shifter next week is Finnish week be prepared.

nah, at my times before he was persistent, i guess it's another technique of trolling, if everyone will recnoise him it will be boring

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 26.01.2017 at 12:56

लिखा द्वारा Helly, 26.01.2017 at 04:32

What about the 200 or so steppe tribes in Siberia where is there independence! Only cause your braught up american natives.

I have nothing against non-Russians getting their states, my whole country fell apart creating some 15 republics, i don't care if few more separate. It won't make a change or advantage for West in fight against Russia.

It's not the same when Russians started journey eastward to establish contact with Russians and unite the country. Some of those Russians were minority in the regions, surrounded by non-Russians. And when Europeans landed in North America, butchering their way through land and creating new states.
Russia didn't change minority way of life, just imposed tax and call to war, and even then they were just scouts on horses, almost never in combat unless they wished, like Kalmyk cavalry or Cossack(Kazak) regiments, while Europeans/Americans systematically and with a plan deported, resettled, ethnically cleansed and genocided Native Americans to pave way for white settlements and distribution of land for farms.

Everyone think Russia is incapable and retarded for having low living standard and every look toward America for comparison, but creating such a lifestyle is easy: just kill natives, give their land to your people and create massive debt, use that money to build infrastructure, military, economy and you will have high living standard in shortest amount of time. But that's not moral, and we are different so we can't do that, we are not the same like those people (english, spanish, french, germans) who colonized 3/4 of the world. Our 'expansion' was to unite all Russians, and non-russians were inbetween, that expansion was not necessary but it happened, and Russians have no problem of giving up there, as proven in 1991 when USSR fell apart. We were never extremists or radical to use force to solve differences or problems.

Our priority is to save people now, regardless of color, origin or faith. We don't care for ideologies or philosophy anymore. We fought for Ossetians and Abkhazians in 2008 Georgian War, we fought for Dargins, Kumyks, Avars, Laks, Azeris, Nogais, Rutuls, Tsakhurs and Aghuls in Dagestan War 1999 and for Gagauz, Ukrainians and Russians in Transnistrian War 1992

Now we are fighting for Syrians, Arabs, Yazidis, Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites in Middle East for 1 year now. America created such a mess for 20 years that we are on the brink of extinction, there is no room for playing ideologies anymore, it's time to save what we can save.

Well this is not correct at all, the way the United states got rich was production power. When wars came we got rich, when wars ended we got even richer rebuilding europe, the debt age is a modern construct to delay the inevitable collapse giving the rich time to adjust and allocate as many resources as possible before economic collapse. I'm not talking about paper bank notes either I mean natural resources and sufficient off the grid infrestructure to remain unscathed in the total economic collapse. Then they'll show up with there wealth after the common people destroy there own country and establish a oligarchy. Yes I believe globalist hijacked my country in the beginning of the 20th century, I do not support there nefarious plots as they scheme in the shadows, I only try to sway the opinions of others from diferent countries about the common people of my nation, they are either in complete denial and ignorance, or blindly following a shell government in hopes there promises come true one day. Those of us who are enlightened are oppressed. The government is evil i do not dispute that. But you seem to be in ignorance of the diference between state and it's people. It is two separate entities.

लिखा द्वारा Helly, 26.01.2017 at 13:21

Well this is not correct at all, the way the United states got rich was production power. When wars came we got rich, when wars ended we got even richer rebuilding europe, the debt age is a modern construct to delay the inevitable collapse giving the rich time to adjust and allocate as many resources as possible before economic collapse. I'm not talking about paper bank notes either I mean natural resources and sufficient off the grid infrestructure to remain unscathed in the total economic collapse. Then they'll show up with there wealth after the common people destroy there own country and establish a oligarchy. Yes I believe globalist hijacked my country in the beginning of the 20th century, I do not support there nefarious plots as they scheme in the shadows, I only try to sway the opinions of others from diferent countries about the common people of my nation, they are either in complete denial and ignorance, or blindly following a shell government in hopes there promises come true one day. Those of us who are enlightened are oppressed. The government is evil i do not dispute that. But you seem to be in ignorance of the diference between state and it's people. It is two separate entities.

I am aware of difference and line between the American regime and American people.

Oh i forgot to mention slavery, as you mention production; sure production skyrocketed, was very efficient, but because slaves worked 20 hours and recieved no paycheck, Russia didn't do that, so how can compete with such thing? Russians had to develop economy on existing free land and pay for usage, had to pay workers it had in production.

1. large spaces to farm animals, taken from the native people
2. slaves who in industry

You killed two flies with one hit; you developed agriculture and developed indudustry, only service sector and financials are left to be developed, and you did that with money you profited from industry or agriculture, or bank loan, that's why only white people were bankers and and industrialists, only white people were owners, and politicians, and they were backed by industrialists and their money, it was a perfect circle (white bankers, industrialists and politicians).


EDIT:

Then i can talk about cheap prices because of US interventions in South America, regime changes and creating instability, forcing South American people to sell their products cheaper so US raise its living standard (by lowering everyone else). Coffee, cocoa, sugar, bananas, everything strategic. Instead to have South American companies producing coffee, US bought coffee for cheap and them selling it expensive in the home market as a brand, making exponential profit.

That is one of the reason Russia and China are sanctioned, partially atleast for now. Because some countries can offer same products for less money, thus making America and Europe less competitive, and that is impossible to imagine. West got used to monopoly it had on capitalist markets for 50 years during Cold War, when USSR and China were closed countries and didn't compete for consumer goods. US and EU have to fight to preserve their high position in the hierarchy.

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 26.01.2017 at 12:45

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 25.01.2017 at 16:54

लिखा द्वारा Skanderbeg, 25.01.2017 at 09:57

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 24.01.2017 at 19:34

No state was there before.

Before english arrived, it was Turkish.

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 24.01.2017 at 19:34

Never attacked another country.

Israel attacked Egypt in the 50's, took Sinai. Israeli invasion of Egypt, better known in the West as 'Suez Crisis', because you know, when West and allies attack then it's 'crisis', but when non-West fight then it's 'Russian invasion', 'Chinese threat', 'unstable Iran'.

Fck off troll scumbag. Stop lying and maybe ill respond to you again next year.

Hahaha how stupid is this guy, poor soul think im lying because he doesn't know history. Ah sweet young indebted greek.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutasarrifate_of_Jerusalem

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis



Orwellian totalitarianism not necessary in Khalesi case, he's dumb as a night, reminds me of Julia.

1. Turks invaded and occuied Cyprus same as they did with Serbia. It was never Turkish. You want to call Serbia and other countries that got invaded by ottomans turkish now?

2. Egypt illigally closed the suez canal and the gulf of aquaba and was organizing hundreds of attacks against Israelis with the fedayeens. They are not even hiding it, if you search for quotes of Egyptian president, he calls for the destruction of Israel even then.

Its obvious who knows shit about history, proven over and over and its you. And stop using orwellian already, ok you saw the movie great, we are happy for you.

लिखा द्वारा Khal.eesi, 26.01.2017 at 16:23

1. Turks invaded and occuied Cyprus same as they did with Serbia. It was never Turkish. You want to call Serbia and other countries that got invaded by ottomans turkish now?

2. Egypt illigally closed the suez canal and the gulf of aquaba and was organizing hundreds of attacks against Israelis with the fedayeens. They are not even hiding it, if you search for quotes of Egyptian president, he calls for the destruction of Israel even then.

Its obvious who knows shit about history, proven over and over and its you. And stop using orwellian already, ok you saw the movie great, we are happy for you.

Haha we are talking for Israel and Egypt and he start talking about Cyprus to change the topic so he can claim how he knows anything. Poor soul

It's ok khalsi, we already know you are weak in history, we don't mind, not every is expert in it, it's a job after all, so you stick to yours mate, bartender.

Who gives a fuck?

लिखा द्वारा Tik-Tok, 30.01.2017 at 17:42

Who gives a fuck?

82 players and 140 comments?

लिखा द्वारा Viruslegion, 22.01.2017 at 21:18

If Ducal Prussia is restored to Germany so I can go back to the land of my ancestors then I'm on board!

Then why not giving Prussia back to Germany or USA to the natives but giving Israel to jews?