Who here unironically supports Israel? - Page 12 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Do you unironically support Israel?

Yes
16
39%
No
21
51%
No opinion
4
10%
#15023453
I will only be responding to the Israel thing because I do not have time for the others.

anasawad wrote:@Palmyrene
Not really, Israeli-Saudi relations are only the way they are due to their hostility to Iran.
If Lebanon became allied to Israel, Iran would soon follow due to the massive presence of the Lebanese tribes in the Iranian economy and their connection to the Iranian tribes.
Likewise, the US would be far less hostile.


An alliance with Israel will only benefit Israel.

I have, quite alot actually.
And Israelis do, in general, prefer peace with Lebanon.


On their terms. Israelis want everything on their terms.

Zionist Nationalist, before you spoke, hated Lebanon and didn't want to be allied with anyone.

He is specifically fine with destroying other Arab countries and thinks it's necessary for Israel's security.

The Palestinians have already displayed their full hostility to the Lebanese people, and the Palestinians in Jordan hate Lebanese people.


I've never met a Palestinian who hated Lebanese.

In which case, you shouldn't be making assumptions because you don't know for a fact that all Palestinians hate Lebanese.

If we managed to secure a deal with the Israelis on the expense of the Palestinians, then we'll gladly throw them under the buss.


I know for a fact that your opinion (specifically at the expense of Palestinians) is not popular with most Lebanese.

All peace deal ideas that Lebanese have talked about with me all include giving Palestinians the right to return and Israel withdrawing from the West Bank as well as peace with Palestine.

Neither will truely win, both sides of the conflict will be too weak to stand on its own, and either become fully subservient to the funder, or simply be killed off once the purpose of the support is achieved.
ISIS is a good example.


That's not sustainable at all.

:eh:
Iran is a clear victor in the conflict, it consolidated power in two countries, economic and political interests.


Oh no, it's because I'm going to tear all their work down.

I just responded to this quickly because I couldn't resist.

Lebanon's influence is mainly cultural, its interests however is what it shares with Israel.
Lebanese and Israeli interests are very similar and are interwind.


What do you think Israel's interests are?

I'm not agreeing with what you said, what you said is far short of reality.
The distinction lies not on the class, but on the extent of the uprisings. Protests get crushed easily.
Revolutions are, in effect, civil wars.
If uprisings are limited to the lower class, then they'll be crushed easily. For uprisings to grow into a fully-fledged revolution, the middle and working classes must join in.


Like I said this isn't the distinction nor how the definition works.

And no, there never were any "successful" revolutions without the middle class joining in.


The Russian and Chinese Revolution don't exist? The Zanj Rebellion doesn't exist.

European middle class came to be after the black death centuries earlier.


They didn't.

And the government cracked down on the protests. The only reason it turned into a revolution is because part of the army split off and joined in.
How hard is it to understand this?
It was called the FSA, read about it, you clearly didn't follow the war as it went along.


The army spliting off and joining the protesters isn't a coup.

And I know what the FSA is.

1- The comparison is idiotic.


It's correct though. Culture is akin to a force of nature.

2- You can, there is an entire field of study regarding it in fact.


What field of study?

No, it wasn't.
It's a simple balance of power that needs to be maintained. Culture and modernization are 2 entirely separate subjects.[/quote[

They are intertwined.




Revolution that got hijacked by Islamists*



In our current society it does but it doesn't have to be this way.



The fact that you think Europe has a middle class because of the Black Death is the hilarious part.



If you own the means of production you manage it. That's what owning is. It gives the power to manage it.

You've clearly misunderstood all the leftist theory you're reading.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... al_strikes



There were no upper classes in general strikes.



I didn't bring it up and it's irrelevant. You've completeky misunderstood what I meant by public discord.



You think it is to the workers who work in poor conditions?



I didn't bring it up.



Not with that attitude!



The communists were already active before the Vietnam war and fought against Japanese occupation beforehand.



Prove it.



Abolishing serfdom doesn't mean that their position changed. After slavery was abolished slaves went back to their plantation owners for work.



Don't get off track. The point is that people only have revolutions when things are bad.

Thus only the working or lower classes have any incentive to start a revolution. The middle class is content.

The rest I didn't read because I can't respond to it right now.
#15023454
anasawad wrote:@Palmyrene

I don't care.

Facts are facts, regardless of who states them.


You should.

Again, I don't care.
My views are not based on theirs nor on anyone else for that matter. I look at the facts on the grounds, and build my world view based on that.


Who do you think are the type of people are you allying with if not them?

It's only logical for Lebanon to be allied with Israel, as was supposed to be the case before the 80s (we were negotiating a peace treaty back then if you didn't know that BTW).
This peace, and potential alliance is great for my country, and if they support it, then so be it.


They didn't support it until you opened your mouth and they're still very racist towards Lebanese.

Israelis and other reactionaries are prone to mood swings and quick judgements. If Lebanon tries to make a deal that requires Israel to give something in return they won't support it.

In their eyes Israel is above Lebanon and they will treat you that way.

:lol: :lol:


Hey if like licking Israel's boot that's fine.

:lol:
Bullshit.


You think anything that goes against your narrative is bullshit.
#15023458
@Palmyrene
An alliance with Israel will only benefit Israel.

An alliance is a two way street.

On their terms. Israelis want everything on their terms.

No, there are things called negotiations.
It'd be on shared terms.

Zionist Nationalist, before you spoke, hated Lebanon and didn't want to be allied with anyone.

And?

I've never met a Palestinian who hated Lebanese.

Then you clearly haven't met many.
I've lived 3 years among Palestinians in various areas, and the one common trait is that they despise Lebanese people.
And you can easily see that through their social media and media in general.

In which case, you shouldn't be making assumptions because you don't know for a fact that all Palestinians hate Lebanese.

I know it's common enough to be part of politics.

I know for a fact that your opinion (specifically at the expense of Palestinians) is not popular with most Lebanese.

Dude, we had a war with the Palestinians.
The only groups who care about the Palestinians are either Sunnis in Lebanon, or in the case of Hezbollah, use them as a propaganda tool, and occasionally scapegoating them.
The rest, not much.

All peace deal ideas that Lebanese have talked about with me all include giving Palestinians the right to return and Israel withdrawing from the West Bank as well as peace with Palestine.

Yea, this was discussed, and the reason why they include it is because no one wants the Palestinians to remain in Lebanon.
But if a deal where they can be deported to Jordan or so can be reached, most political factions in Lebanon would agree.
Heck, they already agreed.

That's not sustainable at all.

It is, that's how cold wars are fought.

What do you think Israel's interests are?

We both have the same interests in our shared national waters, in our waters supplies and the rivers, in securing our borders, securing the red sea passing, and securing deepwater ports.
From a regional standpoint, we both benefit from Islamists being weak.
We both benefit from the turmoil in the region, and we both share most of our enemies.


Like I said this isn't the distinction nor how the definition works.

This is the distinction, and this is how it works.
According to pretty much everyone, except you apparently.

The Russian and Chinese Revolution don't exist? The Zanj Rebellion doesn't exist.

None of them were led or organized by the lower classes, all had working and middle classes leading and forming their main ranks.

They didn't.

https://www.science20.com/science_20/ho ... reat-29378
It's so common knowledge that even bill maher joked about it.

The army spliting off and joining the protesters isn't a coup.

It didn't "join" the protestors, it went directly to fighting the government and trying to replace it.

What field of study?

Sociology and anthropology, along with media studies, PR, Marketing, etc focus in great details on this subject, and this is called social engineering.

Revolution that got hijacked by Islamists*

It wasn't hijacked by Islamists.
The clerics of Qum were already an established imperial institution for several centuries by that stage, and already had power and influence.
A deal was made between them, the tribes, and the old dynasties, and it went along as planned.

The fact that you think Europe has a middle class because of the Black Death is the hilarious part.

The fact that you don't know that fact is sad, not hilarious.

If you own the means of production you manage it. That's what owning is. It gives the power to manage it.

You've clearly misunderstood all the leftist theory you're reading.

You can own something, but the process of managing it is an entirely different thing.

There were no upper classes in general strikes.

I didn't bring it up and it's irrelevant. You've completeky misunderstood what I meant by public discord.

You think it is to the workers who work in poor conditions?

I didn't bring it up.

Not with that attitude!

The communists were already active before the Vietnam war and fought against Japanese occupation beforehand.

Prove it.

What are these responses to?

Don't get off track. The point is that people only have revolutions when things are bad.

Nope, specific factors need to be in place.
Things are bad in many places, still no revolutions.

Who do you think are the type of people are you allying with if not them?

I've talked with Ter and ZN many times now, they're not what you claim them to be.


They didn't support it until you opened your mouth and they're still very racist towards Lebanese.

No they're not.

Israelis and other reactionaries are prone to mood swings and quick judgements. If Lebanon tries to make a deal that requires Israel to give something in return they won't support it.

In their eyes Israel is above Lebanon and they will treat you that way.

That didn't seem to be the case with their other deals.

Hey if like licking Israel's boot that's fine.

No one's licking anybody's boot except you and you Arab propaganda masters.

You think anything that goes against your narrative is bullshit.

1- When you make up random bullshit, I'll call it out.
2- Lebanon already has internet. Much freer and in most areas faster than most of the middle east.
3- I doubt you ever talked to a Lebanese girl that said anything near that, and I'm pretty much sure you never did.
4- No one in Lebanon want any type of foreign occupation.
#15023459
Zionist Nationalist, before you spoke, hated Lebanon and didn't want to be allied with anyone.


I dont hate Lebanon I hate Hezbollah and the shia scum in the south

Israel and Lebanon actually have no reason to fight both countries are similar and could benifit from each other alot
but I think the only way for that to happen is only if the mullahs in Iran will go or get thrown out
#15023462
anasawad wrote:@Palmyrene

An alliance is a two way street.


Tell that to Israel.

No, there are things called negotiations.
It'd be on shared terms.


You can't negotiate with Israel.

And?


He's an Israeli.

Then you clearly haven't met many.


I have.

I know it's common enough to be part of politics.


It isn't.

Dude, we had a war with the Palestinians.


You mean the PLO which only exists because of Israel?

Yea, this was discussed, and the reason why they include it is because no one wants the Palestinians to remain in Lebanon.
But if a deal where they can be deported to Jordan or so can be reached, most political factions in Lebanon would agree.


1. Jordan wouldn't want that.

2. When I asked Lebanese people why they wanted Palestinians to have the right to return they say it's because it's their [the Palestinians] country too.

It is, that's how cold wars are fought.


1. Cold wars are not sustainable.

2. War is not sustainable.

We both have the same interests in our shared national waters, in our waters supplies and the rivers, in securing our borders, securing the red sea passing, and securing deepwater ports.


Three of these are shared by other countries and the other two are competitive interests.

From a regional standpoint, we both benefit from Islamists being weak.


The same goes for everyone else.

We both benefit from the turmoil in the region, and we both share most of our enemies.


No you don't. Lebanon doesn't benefit from the stuff going on in Syria at all. In fact, what goes on in Syria effects Lebanon that's just the fact of the matter.

This is the distinction, and this is how it works.
According to pretty much everyone, except you apparently.


It isn't. Prove that this is how the distinction works.

None of them were led or organized by the lower classes, all had working and middle classes leading and forming their main ranks.


Prove it.

https://www.science20.com/science_20/ho ... reat-29378
It's so common knowledge that even bill maher joked about it.


I've read the references and within those works (specifically the New Penguin Atlas of Medieval History) the claims are not supported at all.

It didn't "join" the protestors, it went directly to fighting the government and trying to replace it.


No they didn't. There was period in-between the time that the regime mobilized to assault the citizens and the time that the soldiers joined the protests.

Sociology and anthropology


Anthropology discusses existing cultures to get a better perspective on human society while sociology discusses our relationships and how they work.

None discuss how to manipulate culture which is a nebulous field. We don't even understand how culture works let alone being capable of controlling it. Meddling with culture always has unintended side effects.

, along with media studies, PR, Marketing, etc focus in great details on this subject, and this is called social engineering.


Effecting the behavior of people is different from culture. It may have a profound effect on it but you can't predict that effect.

It wasn't hijacked by Islamists.
The clerics of Qum were already an established imperial institution for several centuries by that stage, and already had power and influence.
A deal was made between them, the tribes, and the old dynasties, and it went along as planned.


?

The fact that you don't know that fact is sad, not hilarious.


Says the guy who doesn't check his own sources.

You can own something, but the process of managing it is an entirely different thing.


The idea of ownership is that only you can manage. If you own something you are it's master. That is what property ownership is.

What are these responses to?


Oh I didn't format correctly it. It was in response to your claims that revolutions were started by the middle class.

[Quore]
Nope, specific factors need to be in place.
Things are bad in many places, still no revolutions.[/quote]

No things are just not bad enough. In Syria people were starving during the worst drought in 900 years.

I've talked with Ter and ZN many times now, they're not what you claim them to be.


I have too. They are exactly what I claim to be and just because they're temporarily agreeing with you because it fits with their narrative doesn't mean they aren't anti-intellectual tosh.

No they're not.


They are. Nuance for other people only goes as far as support for Israel.

That didn't seem to be the case with their other deals.


I mean with other Middle Eastern states.

No one's licking anybody's boot except you and you Arab propaganda masters.


Western academics, actual Lebanese people, and wikipedia is Arab propaganda.

You heard it here folks.

1- When you make up random bullshit, I'll call it out.


I've given proof for all of my claims.

2- Lebanon already has internet. Much freer and in most areas faster than most of the middle east.


No one is saying it doesn't have internet. She said Israel would give them faster internet and quite frankly, comparing internet speed to the rest of the Middle East isn't that impressive.

3- I doubt you ever talked to a Lebanese girl that said anything near that, and I'm pretty much sure you never did.


You don't have to believe me.

4- No one in Lebanon want any type of foreign occupation.


Except her of course.
#15023463
Zionist Nationalist wrote:I dont hate Lebanon I hate Hezbollah and the shia scum in the south

Israel and Lebanon actually have no reason to fight both countries are similar and could benifit from each other alot
but I think the only way for that to happen is only if the mullahs in Iran will go or get thrown out


Yeah well here it is @anasawad, "shia scum in the south" and "Iran will need to go".

They have about as much nuance as a third grader.
#15023467
@Palmyrene
You can't negotiate with Israel.

Apparently, you can.

He's an Israeli.

So?

It isn't.

Just read any book about the Lebanese civil war from a Palestinian perspective, or listen to Fatah dude.

You mean the PLO which only exists because of Israel?

It forming to fight Israel doesn't justify its war with us and its attempt to take over Lebanon.

1. Jordan wouldn't want that.

I was giving it as an example.

2. When I asked Lebanese people why they wanted Palestinians to have the right to return they say it's because it's their [the Palestinians] country too.

It is, the parts they haven't sold yet atleast.
But in overall, that's not my concern, nor is in my country's interests to care about it.
As far as I'm concerned, as well as most Christians and Shias are concerned, the minute Israel is gone, the Palestinians will point their guns at us, as has been the case before.
Which is why it's counter to Lebanese interests for Israel to be weakened, or worse, destroyed by the Arabs.

1. Cold wars are not sustainable.

2. War is not sustainable.

Again, it's not that simple.
War played a key role in forging human civilization.
Heck, most of the technologies we have today are the result of war.

Three of these are shared by other countries and the other two are competitive interests.

Not really, no.
Lebanon and Israel have significant gas deposits extending between the two's national waters.
We both rely on the same water resources and rivers.
We both rely on the red sea passing.
We both benefit from preventing countries like Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc from taking control of either of our deepwater ports.
And both of our borders' security rely on the other.
If Lebanon was to fall, Israel will be exposed from all sides. And if Israel was to fall, Lebanon would be exposed from both sides.

Now, sure, we're currently enemies, but the type of enemies matter.
Jews have no worries of genocides or so from Lebanese Christians or Lebanese tribes, nor do Lebanese Christians or Lebanese tribes worry about such scenarios from Israel.
We both, however, have these worries concerning other groups in the region.

The same goes for everyone else.

The difference is we are right next to each other.

No you don't. Lebanon doesn't benefit from the stuff going on in Syria at all. In fact, what goes on in Syria effects Lebanon that's just the fact of the matter.

Actually, the Syrian war has generated massive profits for Lebanon.
Ofcourse, just as in many other issues, it depends on the area in Lebanon.

If you go to Baalbek, Baalbek gained billions of dollars from the Syrian war.
Christians benefit because we keep this money in their banks and institutions, and spend much of it buying services and goods from them.
Areas, on the other hand, like the ones controlled by Hezbollah have indeed been drained by the war, first because of the cost of the war, and second because Hezbollah's involvement with the Baath have cost it tribal support.

Hezbollah was split into several groups in the years prior, each with its own authorities. The reason for this was primarily Nassrallahs dealings with the Baath party. So that wedge always existed, the war simply blew it up completely.
Prior, areas under Hezbollah's control enjoyed free health care, social welfare, low-interest loans for small businesses, free education, several social security nets that were paid for by the tribes. Now, it lost all of that which is why the economy in its areas essentially went into free fall.

Prove it.

You can easily just go read about these revolutions and how they were organized, who led them, and who formed their ranks.
It doesn't take much to search these historical documents.

I've read the references and within those works (specifically the New Penguin Atlas of Medieval History) the claims are not supported at all.

Type effects of the black death on european economy and civilization on google, and pick any of the pieces there.
They all agree on this because it is not only a fact, but it's basic economics.

No they didn't. There was period in-between the time that the regime mobilized to assault the citizens and the time that the soldiers joined the protests.

There are two threads on this forum, each several years of age by now.
The Syrian war thread, and the rise of the Islamic state.
They have tons and tons of sources to support my claim and dispute yours.
Enjoy reading.

Anthropology discusses existing cultures to get a better perspective on human society while sociology discusses our relationships and how they work.

None discuss how to manipulate culture which is a nebulous field. We don't even understand how culture works let alone being capable of controlling it. Meddling with culture always has unintended side effects.

Effecting the behavior of people is different from culture. It may have a profound effect on it but you can't predict that effect.

Anthropology and sociology also study the relationships in cultures and society, and how they form and behave, which is the basis of social engineering.
Media studies, PR, Marketing, etc are some of the tools for it.

Says the guy who doesn't check his own sources.

I just threw a random one from the top of the list.
The list of sources for my claim is endless since everyone (except you obviously) knows this.

The idea of ownership is that only you can manage. If you own something you are it's master. That is what property ownership is.

And the process of managing it is not something everyone can or know how to do.
How much will it take you to understand these very basic things.

Oh I didn't format correctly it. It was in response to your claims that revolutions were started by the middle class.

The lower class forms uprisings that are quelled shortly after.
It only becomes a revolution when those with the knowledge, expertise, and resources join in to turn it into a fully-fledged revolution.
Basic fact.

No things are just not bad enough. In Syria people were starving during the worst drought in 900 years.

Are the conditions in North Korea for example not bad enough?
How about the Congo?
Or the list goes on and on.

I have too. They are exactly what I claim to be and just because they're temporarily agreeing with you because it fits with their narrative doesn't mean they aren't anti-intellectual tosh.

You've only been around here for a short period of time, I've talked to them dozens of times over the years.

I mean with other Middle Eastern states.

Same applies.

Western academics, actual Lebanese people, and wikipedia is Arab propaganda.

You didn't bring any western academics in to the argument because they all disagree with you.
Lebanese people are actually supportive of a peace deal and are considering solutions.
Wikipedia doesn't support your claims; infact, if you go through it, it runs counter to them.
And almost everything you're saying about a possible peace deal between Lebanon and Israel is the exact same points every single Arab propaganda network and site has spewed countless times.

I've given proof for all of my claims.

You haven't.

No one is saying it doesn't have internet. She said Israel would give them faster internet and quite frankly, comparing internet speed to the rest of the Middle East isn't that impressive.

You did say that.
And in Lebanon, you can get up to 100 Mbps speed, you simply have to pay for it.
If you buy a 10$ monthly internet package, you get a 10$ monthly internet package.
Heck, I still use MTC's roaming package as one of my lines, and I get between 50-100 Mbps even when I'm not in Lebanon.

You don't have to believe me.

Except her of course.

You never talked to a Lebanese girl that said that to you.

Yeah well here it is @anasawad, "shia scum in the south" and "Iran will need to go".

They have about as much nuance as a third grader.

So?
What does this has to do with anything?

You do realize we're currently, officially, at war right?



@Zionist Nationalist
shias are ungrateful bastards Israel saved them from the "Palestinians" (which they now ironically support) and in return we get Hezbollah

Dude, we're literally trading with you and co-operating with your government on Syria.
Hezbollah is a minor faction that is on its way out by now.
#15023468
@anasawad

Dude, whatever. You don't control anything anyways. I have stuff to do like masturbate or start a revolution.

You can have your own opinions but don't say I didn't warn you.

EDIT: I just read the internet stuff you wrote and it's hilarious.

And where do you think I got my list of every single person in Lebanon who identified as Arab from? I think I'm going to have to repost it but that's meaningless. There's no point.
#15023500
Israel and Saudi Arabia are allies and have been for many years. Not sure why anyone doubts that's a thing.

anasawad wrote:Not hypotheticals, we're already there.
And if we were to look at history....


Whatever your mind is thinking, isn't clear on these pages. Saying random things like X is going to be like X in the coming years as if you know the future and when asked what you mean, changing your tune to 'we're already there' (where?) just shows to me that you either don't know what you're talking about or you don't feel comfortable talking about it.

So do we, that doesn't mean it can't be changed.


Wow, Lebanon quickly moved from being an Israeli ally in your mind to you admitting that you consider each other enemies. Why do you think that can change to you being ally with Israel? This seems pretty delusional to me considering how Israel feels about Hezbollah, its threats to invade Lebanon again, repeatedly violating its airspace, etc.

Israel didn't commit a "genocide" against Lebanese people.


If you Google the definition of 'genocide', you can see what Israel did in Lebanon falls under that definition. Israel today is genociding Palestinians. It's a thing Zionists are into, I'm surprising you haven't noticed or would try to defend it.

All the casualties from the hostilities with Israel over the past 40 years can be out shadowed by a single massacre the Syrians or PLO committed against Lebanese people.


Citation needed.

Syria is the one to commit the massacres, torture, random killings, etc.


Against who? Citation needed also.

I seem to have to repeat this over and over again, As bad as Israeli actions might have been, they're no where near as bad as those of others in the middle east.


You understand your opinion is only that?

The Israelis can be considered angels when compared to Baathists be they Syrian or Iraqi.


Your opinion again.

You talk about Israeli massacres with casualty count in the 10s.


What?

Syrian and Palestinian massacres in Lebanon counted in the thousands and 10s of thousands.


When you start posting things to support your position is when anything you post will be accepted or debated.

Israeli soldiers never raped


Tell that to this Zionist Historian:


Sabra and Shatila weren't done by the Israelis, they were done as retaliation against the Palestinians in those camps by Al-Kata'eb. And we, the Shia tribes, would also retaliate against the Palestinians in the war of the camps afterwards because of the massacres they committed against the "infidel" Shias.


Disgusting. And ahistorical. But disgusting, mainly.

I am being pragmatic; We need allies, and Israel is the best one around in the neighborhood since the other choices are Arab nationalists who want to erase our identity, Islamic nationalists who want to erase our culture and religious diversity, various factions of fascists who see us as nothing more than dogs because we don't agree with their ideologies (as clearly demonstrated by their actions and propaganda), or Islamists who want to, and attempted to multiple times, exterminate us because we're infidels and heretics and apostates.


Lebanon and Syria generally have good relations now so which sect are you from where this animosity continues?

We share water and gas with Israel.


Citation needed.

And you do realize we have a history in dealing with Israelis right? Both Christians and Shias, and especially Druze, were all friendly or outright allies with Israelis before.


No I don't realize that, citation needed.

Not hypotheticals. don't hide behind words, and start looking at the events in the wider region.


I was responding to you stating this:

It doesn't, but I can assure you, if you think what Israel is doing to the Palestinians is bad and horrible, you probably would want to stay clear of the news in the coming years.


This is not based on reality on the ground but guesswork on your part.

Well then that just described every other country or group in the entire region, and much of the world powers.
I guess we should just build walls around the country and keep everyone out with no exception. (edited; removed the "not")


No, it hasn't. Lebanese-Syrian relations have improved in recent years. Israel and Lebanon still considers each to be enemies and Israel continues to threaten to invade Lebanon, continues its acts of war by violating Lebanese airspace, etc. So I am correct, you're warped if you think Lebanon and Israel are likely to be buddies any time soon, especially with all the trauma from Lebanon as a result of Israeli occupation, torture and mass killings.

And no, I'm not pro walls. Your Zionist buddies on the other hand...

On further thoughts, I actually wouldn't mind that at all.


Yeah, it's pretty clear where you stand at this stage.

Also, kick the refugees out since both hold hostile views against us and already has attempted insurgencies inside the country to force their ideologies in the past few years, twice.


You hate Palestinians and Syrians too. Huh... :lol:

You can easily read about its history you know. Even wikipedia has it.


I have read about the history, it's mentioned in what you're responding to. But LOL at picking Wikipedia for a history course. This explains things.


Israel cleared the way for it to grow, using the same policy I've explained in the posts around this one. But it didn't found it, it's an offshoot of the Muslim brotherhood.


Yes, Israel supports Islamists, the ones you're complaining about. Thanks for stepping on my point.

Hezbollah was founded, funded, armed, and supported by the tribes, and is now on the decline because it lost that support.

And I'm talking about Sunni Islamists.


How is this in my response to your complaint that Iran supports militias? My response was, why shouldn't they?

Citation needed for Hezbollah being in decline.

Ooh look, the strawmans continue.

Baathism is Arab nationalism and Socilaism. It's literally in their manifesto.
Do you know what that means?


How's it a strawman to ask you for a citation that Syria is a fascist state if you make that claim? :eh:

Again, citation needed for that thing you've stated here twice and once before in the Syria war thread where you didn't prove your claim that time too.

And why not weaken them? Baathist are enemies, far worse enemies than Israel and committed far far more crimes against Lebanon than Israel would or could ever do.


Baathists are Lebanese government's allies at the moment. Lol at you thinking they're far worse than Israel, considering Israeli-Lebanese history.

Why not let Islamists and the fascist Baathist kill each other? 2 birds, one stone. Because fuck both.


Your view is really bizarre. You hate the Islamists (apparently) but support them against the Syrian army. What is going on here. :?:

No it doesn't.
Israel was invited in the first time in the 1980s, and there were going to be a peace treaty.
The peace treaty couldn't be signed because the president was assassinated, and Syria began a full-scale military invasion even larger than before to occupy the country, because it needs the ports.
The hostilities between Lebanon and Israel came from the actions of the South Lebanon army, not from the Israeli army itself.


Did you get this from Wikipedia too?

And the people in the Golan, primarily the Druze, are allied with Israel and most don't want to go back to Syria.


You really should quit reading Wikipedia for your news. The Druze in occupied-Golan have always opposed Israel's claims on the land, and were recently given an offer to vote with Israel's occupation of their land and as expected, rejected that, as well as rejected Trump's even more recent claims of Israeli ownership of Syria's Golan.


Ter wrote:International law only exists in your mind.


No, it's a thing in world politics. Just because Zionists don't care about it since Israel's history and status quo is in various violations of international law, doesn't stop it from being a thing.

The UN has lost all credibility.


I'd argue it never had much, but this is by the by. I agree with your point mainly because the UN does nothing to Israel even though it's violated more UN resolutions than the rest of the world combined. For perspective, Iraq violated 2 and got invaded. Granted, the latter was on false pretences, but that's besides my point.

Lebanese airspace needs to be invaded to see what Hezbolla is doing and Iranian and Hezbolla installations need to be attacked out of self defence.


It's not "self defence" when Israel is running around violating the airspace of countries it has occupied, repeatedly bombing Syria, etc. Lebanon is not threatening Israel. Neither is Syria. Neither is Iran. These are excuses in your warped mind to justify Israel's attacks on its neighbours. I really don't understand bloodthirsty people like you who claim to care about Israelis but support them being in a constant state of war with everyone. Do you think the future is bright for a state like Israel to repeatedly attack anyone and everyone nearby? It's people like you that want to accelerate the demise of Israel because the shit you support does not look like it means a bright future for Israelis.

Towards who else would those rockets and missiles be aimed but to Israel ?


What are you talking about?

Citation not needed : Nasrallah threatens Israel every time he broadcasts a speech from his deep bunker.


It's not really a threat when Nasrallah is stating this in response to Israeli attacks and threats. I know you're old, but sure you must know the difference between when someone is attacking and when someone is defending, surely...

The fighting that started because Hezbolla attacked was pretty inconclusive. But Arabs always say that they won even if their country lies in ruins.
Which is nothing like what will happen if Hezbolla attacks again. Israel is preparing its own rockets now and every day that passes there are more of them. Hezbolla already lost all its attack tunnels which took years to dig and build. Let's see what happens next time, no need to talk about it.


Not sure how this babbling was a response to me stating how Israel lost its war on Lebanon in 2006. And yes, I keep stating the ongoing Israeli threats to invade Lebanon again, but I doubt that's going to happen anytime soon because, thank the gods for Hezbollah huh, Zionist attacks made them formidable fighters and they're currently training alongside the Syrian army. 8)

Your propaganda outlets have no validity. Fake news.


Everything's propaganda when arguing with a Zionist. How about from the minutes of meetings during the attacks in the Israeli government archives? Will they suffice to show Israel's complicity on the vicious attacks on Sabra and Shatila?

And it wasn't just complicity. Ariel Sharon ordered the rape and massacre of those 3500+ refugees.

Never happened, see @anasawad post. The Arabs did that.


Didn't see any citations from him. I won't bother asking you for the same since everything you post comes from your warped mind by the looks of it.

Those Arabs would not be harmed if they would stop attacking the Israeli soldiers and trying to destroy the border fences. It is self defence.


No, again, you don't know what self defence is. Israeli snipers who shoot the disabled, children, women, medics, journalists etc., from a distance, are not acting in self defence. They are killers, committing war crimes (as usual) on a concentration camp.

I can't even start because 97% of everything you write is lies and propaganda.


Lol, projection.

Name calling ? Really ? I am tempted to reciprocate but I will refrain, it would be too easy to expose your motivation and your roots. :D


Calling you a rabid Zionist shouldn't be an insult to you, but :lol: that you consider it to be. Agreed matey! :D
#15023531
@anasawad

Please quote or respond to this post so I may save it for later. This is all the info I have on the Lebanese-Arab issue. If you would like, I can move this to it's own thread.

http://www.dailystar.com.lb//Opinion/Co ... elves.ashx

As to the identity of the Lebanese, about 21 percent of the students said that we are Arabs, 5 percent believe we are both Arab and Armenian, and 24 percent say Arab and Phoenician. 34 percent say the Lebanese are a combination of Arab, Phoenician and Armenian.

The answers varied between regions. The Phoenician component of the Lebanese identity figured prominently among respondents from Byblos (63 percent) while being totally non-existent among Tyre respondents, despite the rich Phoenician history of both cities.


***

Wikipedia article:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/King%E2 ... Commission

Full report:

https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/The_King-Crane_Report

I will be quoting from the full report for convenience.

No. Per Cent.
A -Territorial Limits
*1 For United Syria 1500 80.4
2 For Separate Palestine 6 0.32
3 For Separate Palestine under British if French have Syrian Mandate 2 0.1
4 For Autonomous Palestine within Syrian State 24 1.29
5 For Independent Greater Lebanon 203 10.9
6 Against Independent Greater Lebanon 1062 57.0
7 For Autonomous Lebanon within Syrian State 33 1.76
8 For Inclusion of Bokaa with Damascus 4 0.21
9 For Inclusion of Bokaa with Lebanon 11 0.59
10 For Inclusion of Cilicia within Armenian State 3 0.16
11 For Inclusion of Cilicia with Syrian State 2 0.1
B -Independence:
1 For Absolute Independence of Syria 1370 73.5
2 For Independence of Iraq (Mesopotamia) 1278 68.5
3 For Independence of ail Arab Countries 97 5.2
C -Form of Government
1 For Democratic Kingdom 1107 59.3
2 For Emir Feisal as King 1102 59
3 For Democratic Representative Government 34 1.82
4 For Guarding of Rights of Minorities 1023 54.9
5 Arabic to be Official Language 5 .27
6 For Abolition of Foreign Capitulations 10 53
7 For Autonomy of all Provinces of Syria 19 1.02
D -Choice of Mandate
1 British-
a For British Mandate 66 3.53
b For British Mandate if Mandate is obligatory 0
c For British "Assistance" 4 0.21
Total British First Choice 70 3.75
d For British Mandate as Second Choice 41 2.19
**e For British "Assistance" as Second Choice 1032 55.3
2 French-
For French Mandate 271 14.52
For French Mandate if Mandate is obligatory 1 0.05
For French "Assistance" 2 0.1
Total French First Choice 274 14.68
For French Mandate as Second Choice 3 0.15
For French "Assistance" as Second Choice 0
3 American-
For American Mandate 57 3.05
For American Mandate if Mandate is obligatory 8 0.4
For American "Assistance" 1064 57.0
Total American First Choice 1129 60.0
For American Mandate as Second Choice 8 0.4
For American "Assistance" as Second Choice 3 0.15
4 Choice of Mandate left to Damascus Conference 23 1.23
E -Zionist Program
1. For Complete Zionist Program (Jewish State and Immigration) 11 0.59
2. For Modified Zionist Program 8 0.4
3. Against Zionist Program 1350 72.3
F -Protests and Criticisms:
1 Anti-British-
General Anti-British Statements 3 0.15
Specific Criticisms of Administration 0
Protests against Interference with free access to Commission 0
2 Anti-French-
a General Anti-French Statements 1129 60.5
b Specific Criticisms of Administrations 24 1.29
c Protests against Interference with free access to Commission 11 0.59
3 Anti-Arab-
a General Anti-Arab Statements 35 1.87
b Specific Criticisms of Administration 4 0.2
c Protests against Interference with free access to Commission 0
4 *** Against 22d Article of League Covenant 1033 55.3
5 Against Secret Treaties, especially treaties dividing Syria 988 52.9


Since I'm on mobile, hopefully this table looks better for you than me.

The numbers I bolded are the number and percentage of people who voted for that plan. For more information the specifics of the plan, read the full report.

7. Thirty-three Lebanese delegations representing both Moslems and Christians, fearing the economic future of a separate Lebanon, asked for autonomy within a Syrian State. Others also regarded autonomy as implied in the request for independence and a non-centralized government.

8-9. The Valley of Bekaa is usually regarded as an integral part of Greater Lebanon. Eleven petitions, however make especial reference to its inclusion, while eight ask that the Valley remain in the Damascus area.


The King-Crane Commission was done by Americans. America at the time had no plans for imperialism in the Middle East and thus there is no way of it being propaganda at all let alone Arab propaganda. They are completely neutral.

***

Here is a survey of Arab countries done by the Doha Institute:

https://www.dohainstitute.org/ar/Resear ... eport.aspx

Let me summarize all relevant results. 25% of Lebanese responded that Arabs are one nation divided by artificial borders

27% of Lebanese responded that Arabs are one nation but each country has its own special characteristics

45% responded that Arabs are different nations and cultures with weak ties

Lebanon is clearly the least pan-Arab country of them all, but the majority is still pan-arabist. And this isn't even asking how many Lebanese consider themselves Arabs.

Qatar, while an Arab country, doesn't have an agenda it leads. The Doha Institute is also the best research facility in the Middle East and is far more immune to state interference.

***

For a historical perspective, here is a list of all Arabs living in Lebanon before the second century AD. Courtesy of Michael Macdonald's 'Arabs, Arabias and Arabic before Late Antiquity':

In the ancient sources which have come down to us, the term « Arab » was applied to a large number of different individuals and peoples with a wide range of ways-of-life 11 At various times before the second century AD, Arabs are found in :

– eastern Egypt, the Fayoum and the Delta 12, Sinai 13,
– southern Palestine 14, Samaria 15,
– northern Transjordan 16, southern Transjordan 17,
– the southern parts of the Lebanon, the Beqa̔ Valley and the Anti-Lebanon 18,
– Mount Hermon 19
– northern 20, central 21 and southern Syria 22,
– the Jezīrah 23,
– northern 24, central 25, southern 26 Mesopotamia,
– western Iran 27
– and central Iran 28,
– northern Arabia 29 and the eastern 30 and western 31 coasts of the Peninsula, including the Kamaran islands off the west coast of Yemen 32.

The term is applied to :

– prosperous merchants 33
– tax-collectors 34,
– a barber 35,
– a bird-augurer 36,
– peasant farmers and small landowners 37,
– market gardeners 38,
– a seller of baskets 39,
– brigands 40,
– a gymnasiarch 41,
– founders or restorers of towns and cities 42,
– city-dwellers 43 and rulers of cities 44,
– kings with large numbers of chariots 45,
– guards, policemen, soldiers and paramilitaries 46,
– breeders of sheep and owners of flocks of sheep and herds of goats 47,
– and camel-breeding nomads 48.

Who called themselves Arabs in Antiquity ?

From the ninth century BC, when we first find the term 49, up to, and including, the pre-Islamic poetry and prose of the sixth-seventh centuries AD 50, instances of individuals identifying themselves as « Arabs » are relatively infrequent, and in none of these is it clear what this label meant to the person concerned. I have so far found some sixteen instances in which it would seem safe to take it as a selfidentification, with an almost equal number about which there are uncertainties ; and there are no doubt others which I have missed. All but three of these are from Egypt 51.


Is Macdonald secretly an Arab propagandist? Is he payed by the Syrian government to lie?! Arabs rule the West!

My next post will detail arguments.
#15023533
@skinster

Whatever your mind is thinking, isn't clear on these pages. Saying random things like X is going to be like X in the coming years as if you know the future and when asked what you mean, changing your tune to 'we're already there' (where?) just shows to me that you either don't know what you're talking about or you don't feel comfortable talking about it.

The radical Hanbali school of thought with its various manifestation has been and is continuing to attempt genocides against all non-Sunni groups in the wider region, and they're growing.

Not Hypothetical.

Wow, Lebanon quickly moved from being an Israeli ally in your mind to you admitting that you consider each other enemies.

Did you even bother reading what I wrote?
I advocated for peace, and potential alliance with Israel. I did not say we're allies now.
Infact, I stated multiple times that "Although we're not hostile and at war, etc".
But don't worry, the strawman arguments are becoming the norm from the far left.

Why do you think that can change to you being ally with Israel? This seems pretty delusional to me considering how Israel feels about Hezbollah, its threats to invade Lebanon again, repeatedly violating its airspace, etc.
I

Ooh, you mean Israel is currently acting in the exact same way every country acts against other countries it's literally at war with?

Ooh no, Israel made bad rhetoric, everyone panic. :|

If you Google the definition of 'genocide', you can see what Israel did in Lebanon falls under that definition. Israel today is genociding Palestinians. It's a thing Zionists are into, I'm surprising you haven't noticed or would try to defend it.

What did it do in Lebanon?
Because the one massacre that you mentioned was one where it wasn't done by Israel, but rather by Al-Kata'eb.

There is one other massacre that Israel really did, more accurately through bombing. Can you guess which one?
Because you know, you're an expert on Lebanese history, so you must know.

Citation needed.

It's not actually.
A simple search on the death toll from the wars between Lebanon and Israel and comparison with any random massacre the Syrians did in Lebanon will show the difference.
No need to be specific BTW, just pick a random one.

Against who? Citation needed also.

Against Lebanese people.
And no, again, citation not needed. This isn't some weird unknown claim, this is something that is even recognized by the UN and has been the subject of many conflicts.
May I remind you that the UN is the one that intervened to end the conflict between Syria and Lebanon and caused Syria to withdraw its military occupation?

You understand your opinion is only that?

You understand we can actually compare numbers right?
I know this might sound as a surprise, but we, in the 21st century, actually have records and videos and all.
Either of the Baath wings have committed more crimes and massacres than Israel, with some of the massacres they committed can alone stand to have more casualties than all of Israeli casualties combined.

Or we can look at the gulf states, with their lovely little genocides, slavery, etc.

Your opinion again.

No, it's simply a fact.

When you start posting things to support your position is when anything you post will be accepted or debated.

Over a 100 thousand Lebanese people died in the war with Syria and the PLO.
This is an easily verifiable fact, and it wasn't very long ago, the occupation ended in 2005.
Check your facts before you start spewing shit.

Tell that to this Zionist Historian:

We're not discussing Palestinians, we're discussing Israel and Lebanon.
There are no recorded cases of any rapes done by Israeli soldiers.
There are 10s of thousands however recorded done by Syrian and Palestinian soliders and fighters.
That's something that anyone who knows anything about the history of the Levant knows full well.

Disgusting. And ahistorical. But disgusting, mainly.

I don't care about your false moral outrage. Trying to excuse the massacres done by the Syrian army and the PLO for the sake of ideology.
And no ahistorical, you can easily check who were the sides in each of these wars.

Lebanon and Syria generally have good relations now so which sect are you from where this animosity continues?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Lebanon and Syria have good relations now?
You really don't follow the news much do you?
The only people in Lebanon who have good relations with Syria are Hezbollah.

Citation needed.

You seem to think that you're looking smart when you say that, you don't.
You can simply look at a map and see why we share water sources with Israel.
And you can open the news for around 5-10 minutes to know that the main discussion between Lebanon and Israel right now is the rights to the gas fields in the sea.

No I don't realize that, citation needed.

Already mentioned and supported multiple times.
Israel intervened in Lebanon in the 1980s on the official request of President Bachir Jmail.
You can look hem up.
And if you every actually bothered looking up Lebanese politics for just once (you never did, I can tell), you'd see how important he was.

This is not based on reality on the ground but guesswork on your part.

Not based on reality? You serious?

Well, I mean there is only a refugee crisis, a region-wide drought, a couple of genocides going on here and there, slavery is back in the region, 7 civil wars, daily news of massacres and bombings and destruction.
But, in your eyes, it's all fine and dandy, all there really is just the Palestinians and Israel, everything else is just fine. Right?

No, it hasn't. Lebanese-Syrian relations have improved in recent years.

Lebanon has actively been boycotting Syria in recent years.
With the tensions regarding the Syrian refugees growing by the day.

So I am correct, you're warped if you think Lebanon and Israel are likely to be buddies any time soon, especially with all the trauma from Lebanon as a result of Israeli occupation, torture and mass killings.

Which trauma?
The Trauma came from the Syrians. The Syrians are the ones who held the fucking military occupation over the country. The Syrians are the ones who committed the massacres, torture, mass killings, rapes, etc.

But ofcourse, you're gonna defend the Syrians to blame all their actions on the Israelis.
How unexpected.

You hate Palestinians and Syrians too. Huh...

Since you obviously don't seem to know anything about the Levant.
Yes, Lebanese people don't like Syrians, nor Palestinians, because both have actively attempted to genocide us.
Palestinians don't like Lebanese people because they consider us to have betrayed the "Arab cause" against Israel when we invited Israel in the 1980s.

I have read about the history, it's mentioned in what you're responding to. But LOL at picking Wikipedia for a history course. This explains things.

There are tons and tons of records, books, news paper archives, etc that you can look up into.
You can also use wikipedia to check for available sources since you seem to have tons of reading on the history of the Levant left to do.

Yes, Israel supports Islamists, the ones you're complaining about. Thanks for stepping on my point.

I literally explained this in the post prior. You can go back and read.

How is this in my response to your complaint that Iran supports militias? My response was, why shouldn't they?

Where did I complain that Iran supports militias?
So, strawman basically.

Citation needed for Hezbollah being in decline.

It's called the news. Listen to it.

How's it a strawman to ask you for a citation that Syria is a fascist state if you make that claim?
Again, citation needed for that thing you've stated here twice and once before in the Syria war thread where you didn't prove your claim that time too.

It's in the name.
Baathism is a mixture of Arab nationalism and Socialism.
National socialism, which is a mixture of nationalism and socialism, is what we call fascism.
You can atleast bother looking up what the party you defend stands for.

Baathists are Lebanese government's allies at the moment.

No, they're not.

Lol at you thinking they're far worse than Israel, considering Israeli-Lebanese history.

Baathism in Iraq and Syria have killed 100s of thousands, and probably millions of people. Israel hasn't. So yes, they're far worse than Israel.

Your view is really bizarre. You hate the Islamists (apparently) but support them against the Syrian army. What is going on here. :?:

It's not bizzare, you just didn't bother reading before started defending your fascist friends.
You can go back and read what I wrote.

Did you get this from Wikipedia too?

Try reading history before posting.
Syria invaded in the 80s and maintained a military occupation until 2005.
I lived through the end of it.

And Israel was negotiating a peace treaty with president Bachir Jmail before he was assassinated.
#15023555
skinster wrote:What are you talking about?


So when Iranian forces and its terrorist allies including Hezbolla try to entrench themselves on the Israeli border from Syria and installing rockets and other niceties, this is not aimed at Israel ?

skinster wrote:Not sure how this babbling was a response to me stating how Israel lost its war on Lebanon in 2006.

Keep on repeating the Arab lies.
Lebanon was in ruins after the 2006 war but Arabs like to lie and say they won the war, lol. Like Sadam in Iraq. The mother of all wars lol.
skinster wrote:No, again, you don't know what self defence is. Israeli snipers who shoot the disabled, children, women, medics, journalists etc., from a distance, are not acting in self defence. They are killers, committing war crimes (as usual) on a concentration camp.

You persevere in your zealotry. The Arabs are running amok on the border, throwing grenades, molotov cocktails, stones with slings, trying to destroy the barrier, and amidst all this Hamas snipers shoot at Israeli soldiers. Surely the IDF has a right to defend the borders of their country and defend themselves. Although I surmise those facts cannot permeate in your brain.

skinster wrote:Calling you a rabid Zionist shouldn't be an insult to you, but :lol: that you consider it to be. Agreed matey! :D

The word Zionist is not an insult in my book but calling someone rabid is. It seems to me that the obsessed one is you.
Seventy years and counting :D
#15023609
Rabid just means you differ from other Zionists in your extremism. Granted, liberal Zionists are basically non-existent these days since how far right Israel has got, so it could be argued all Zionists today are rabid, but you're of the ilk that is so incredibly bloodthirsty that the term applies to you very well. English, get into it. 8)

I'll ignore the rest of your hasbara since that's all you have. I will note that you've made no response to Ariel Sharon / Israel's ordering of the vicious massacre in the refugee camps Sabra and Shatila in Lebanon, something you stated had nothing to do with Israel and then accused my original source of being "propaganda waaah". Now that I posted evidence of Israel's involvement/ordering of the massacre from Israeli military meetings from Israeli archives, now what? :lol: Just noting here how you are not a serious debater in any sense, you're only here attempting to polish that turd that is called Israel. I can see why you ignored that and a lot of other questions in my post to you, because you have nothing but hasbara to support your position. It makes me almost feel embarrassed for you. Almost. :D
#15023624
skinster wrote:Granted, liberal Zionists are basically non-existent these days since how far right Israel has got

Israel has veered to the right because of the terrorist attacks from Arabs and the unsuccesful attempt to de-legitimise the country itself. So that is on you and your terrorist friends.

Your babbling about hasbara has no effect whatsoever. You just spew propaganda and you attack anyone who has a different opinion, including several respected posters who have no connection to Israel. You are truly a zealot, and a fanatic one at that.

Sharon did not order the massacres in the refugee camps, that is just convenient propaganda. I know the truth and you can cite as many anti Israel texts as you like, you cannot change the truth.

skinster wrote:ust noting here how you are not a serious debater in any sense, you're only here attempting to polish that turd that is called Israel.

That is pretty dirty language but I will forgive you as I remember where you originally came from :D

skinster wrote: English, get into it

I find it remarkable that you think your English is better than mine. Wasn't Urdu your mother tongue ?
You do not even realise any more that you're just a propaganda bucket for the Arabs.

Seventy years and counting.
No wonder the Arabs and their friends are becoming desperate.
#15023639
Ter wrote:Israel has veered to the right because of blah blah blah


Israel has always been a rightwing project. It began when European Zionist terrorist gangs invaded the land and killed people all over the country or otherwise ethnically cleansed them. I only mentioned that it's objectively rightwing now since there was that delusion for a few decades before recent decades where liberal-Zionism was a thing, even though it's an oxymoron, and quite obviously so today.

Your babbling about hasbara has no effect whatsoever.


It seems to trigger you. But hasbara is a thing. It's an Israeli word for propaganda to justify/explain Israel's many and ongoing crimes.

Sharon did not order the massacres in the refugee camps, that is just convenient propaganda. I know the truth and you can cite as many anti Israel texts as you like, you cannot change the truth.


Your opinion - that's all I've seen so far - is more truthful than what's stated by the Israeli military in their own archives?

What about the Kahan Commission, an Israel 4-month-long inquiry into the attacks, that found Ariel Sharon to bear "personal responsibility" for the attacks and resulted in him resigning as Defence Minister? Are these facts to be believed over your opinion (dude who didn't even know that those refugee camps in Lebanon were under Israeli control)?

That is pretty dirty language but I will forgive you as I remember where you originally came from :D


It's an idiom. As I said before, English, get into it. It means you can't make something that is shit (Israel) look good, despite how much, in your case, you try to hasbara/lie about it. It is inherently shit because it was built on terrorism and the status quo involves much of the same with no end in sight.

I find it remarkable that you think your English is better than mine. Wasn't Urdu your mother tongue ?
You do not even realise any more that you're just a propaganda bucket for the Arabs.


English is my mother tongue, and since I had to explain an English word's definition to you as well as an English expression just now, I'd argue my English is better than yours. Not sure what a "propaganda bucket" is but ok :lol:
#15023859
anasawad wrote:https://youtu.be/0bFs6ZiynSU

The ignorance and lies of Liberals just beggars belief. The Vietcong were basically destroyed. Its basic historical knowledge, in the latter part of the war the Commies were almost completely dependant on NVA. The Commies lost multiple times, they're final victory only came from ever increasing support from their Defeatocrat allies in Congress.
  • 1
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
Capital Punishment

I wonder why you felt the need to inject race in[…]

The Next UK PM everybody...

What a crock of liberal minority appeasing left wi[…]

Most people learn basic psychology by experience,[…]

Trump's Dumb Economics

Counterpoint, Jeff Bezo is an asshole, and lots o[…]