Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Even as an atheist, I would still have Jerusalem.
I always quite like the Italian anthem. Quite a jaunty little number.
Come on England! :D
:-s Tennis? I suppose it’s ok to be warped in that way in the brain since you are a chapette. Such a comment from a chap, though, would lead me to the inevitable conclusion that they were not right in the head, like PB and Tomster.
I feel another football fever frenzy coming on for tomorrow. I feel my sinews stiffening as I type and, yes, I’m pretty sure that is my blood being summoned up. :D
@slayer wrote:
I take issue with Drivel (and Pikey) with reference to the “modern” creation of Palestine as a state.
History clearly lays down the existence of Palestine as part of the Ottoman empire however one of the most famous documents in any nation states history is the “Balfour Declaration” in 1917 which clearly references a Palestinian state in which a jewish home should exist.
Anyone who wishes can google Balfour but the British “controlled” a region known as Palestine and the occupants of that region long before the state of Israel came into being
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/balfour_declaration_of_1917.htm
You’ve missed the point there, I think, Slayer. I reckon the key words in your reply are: state, part of the Ottoman Empire, should and region.
PB’s posts might have been a touch on the sarky side, but they still illustrate their point quite clearly.
As for 1967, Egypt especially had already committed acts of war on the Israelis. Their response was entirely predictable and quite warranted, I would say. Were they supposed to sit and wait to get buggered?
As for the question of who was there first, it seems entirely immaterial to me. Otherwise we would have to concede Great Britain to the Welsh, being the oldest clearly identifiable group. The Scots and the English moved in a long time after there were Jews eating matzoh in Jerusalem and would be honour bound to sod off, according to that logic. A silly diversion, I reckon.
The refugee nature of a large proportion of the modern Israelis is still ignored, I notice. Why is it these people are given less respect in many arguments here than Palestinian refugees? It’s quite right that these people are treated awfully by their hosts, but to say their treatment is done for their own good is surely sophistry.
I think we need to restate our positions, as we are in danger of losing track, I reckon. My ideal solution would be the creation of a proper Palestinian state that recognises the existence of Israel. By electing Hamas, an organisation that has the goal of completely destroying the state of Israel, the Palestinians cannot be surprised that the Israelis will have no truck with their political leaders. Thus, if the Palestinians literally stick to their guns, fighting about it is the only possible outcome. Judging by my reading of modern history, I reckon that course of action will not serve their purpose. Simply put, the Israelis will continue to kick their arses up and down the Negev desert. They’re better soldiers and they have bigger sticks.
A campaign of non-violent civil disobedience and non-cooperation with Israel would be the best way of achieving a stable and prosperous outcome for all parties, I reckon.
:-s What a load of Grandma guff. We’ve as much right to wave our flag and be optimistic about our team as any other nation. There is nothing wrong with a bit of tub thumping faith.
Come on England!
:-s It is the custom in your strange, sun blasted land to set up dragons before you settle? What do you set them up for? Hilarious practical japes or middling crimes and the like?
In my company, it is a custom not to be so beastly. Instead, like civilised people everywhere, we prepare a strange drink that to you, used only to the filthy, turbid concoctions of your dusty home, would appear like the magical soma of elves or angels. We call it tea.
Farquarson’s, by the way, is pronounced Puddleduck’s. It’s done, like Magdalen college being pronounced Maudlin, to allow general sniggering at common people. :D
:D I’ll cut out the middle bit and just start wishing you’d shut up now, then. Smelly.
@Bad Manners wrote:
It looks like it’s shaping up to be Germany-England in the Quarters now. Unless I misread my super free World Cup wallchart.
Free with the Daily Record. It allows you to mark in the scores, which I’ve been dutifully doing. Man I’ve really gotta get a life. :oops::lol: Nothing wrong with a manly wall chart. My especially posh, Farquarson’s of Mayfair wallchart, gives someone from the Portugal, Holland, Argentina side of the draw for the Quarterfinals.
:lol: He is a touch tubby. No worries for them, though. They’ve got attacking talent coming out of their arse. I’d fear for them more if some of their defensive bunch start misfiring. Not an awful amount of cover there. The Arsenal fellow Gilberto should get some games when that big lump they’ve got playing in front of their back four gets himself suspended.
I agree. Which is why I’m not worried about England just yet. Teams with aspirations have got to be looking to peak at about the quarter finals, when the real clash of the titans stuff happens.
