Moderator: Community Team
AIPAC is one of the largest lobbying groups in the US, providing funding to both parties. Also, the US media is controlled by Zionists. So the parties get money and media. Since its both parties getting it, you could say they dont get trashed in the media or lose out in donations.mrswdk wrote:What does the US actually gain from supporting Israel? Is it arms sales, or something else? I was under the impression that they give Israel a lot of its munitions at little or no cost (i.e. it's not a profitable enterprise) but I may be mistaken.
shickingbrits wrote:AIPAC is one of the largest lobbying groups in the US, providing funding to both parties. Also, the US media is controlled by Zionists. So the parties get money and media. Since its both parties getting it, you could say they dont get trashed in the media or lose out in donations.mrswdk wrote:What does the US actually gain from supporting Israel? Is it arms sales, or something else? I was under the impression that they give Israel a lot of its munitions at little or no cost (i.e. it's not a profitable enterprise) but I may be mistaken.
The US itself gets nothing.
I hear u Adolph.a6mzero wrote:shickingbrits wrote:AIPAC is one of the largest lobbying groups in the US, providing funding to both parties. Also, the US media is controlled by Zionists. So the parties get money and media. Since its both parties getting it, you could say they dont get trashed in the media or lose out in donations.mrswdk wrote:What does the US actually gain from supporting Israel? Is it arms sales, or something else? I was under the impression that they give Israel a lot of its munitions at little or no cost (i.e. it's not a profitable enterprise) but I may be mistaken.
The US itself gets nothing.
Tell that to Hamas.saxitoxin wrote:Territorial conflict. Zionists have been trying to drum up Islamaphobia to pretend it's an epic battle of civilizations, but it's just a zoning and land use dispute the US should stop funding.mrswdk wrote:Is Israel-Palestine a religious conflict, or is it a territorial conflict whose belligerents happen to be Jews and Muslims?
This map isn't even remotely accurate.nietzsche wrote:
Spazz Arcane wrote:If birds could swim and fish could fly I would awaken in the morning to the sturgeons cry. If fish could fly and birds could swim I'd still use worms to fish for them.
saxitoxin wrote:I'm on Team GabonX
1948: Palestinians were offered by the League of Nations a statehood and Israel a statehood. Israel accepted, Palestine & Egypt rejected, war broke out from Muslim attacks, Israel won.nietzsche wrote:
universalchiro wrote:1948: Palestinians were offered by the League of Nations a statehood and Israel a statehood. Israel accepted, Palestine & Egypt rejected, war broke out from Muslim attacks, Israel won.nietzsche wrote:
1967: Israel living in peace, attacked by Muslims, Israel defends itself and captures Jerusalem. Israel won.
Every time Muslims attack Israel, Israel gets more land and always wins. Muslims attack first and lose and complain, then stop attacking, put the rocks down, step away from throwing rocks and WW2 RPGs and Israel will stop pin point laser guided missle defense from drone plane with real time interaction and sophisticated state of the art Iron Dome Air defense and intelligence with night vision with infared and heat sensitive optics & soldiers equipped with top of the line armor piercing ammunition with Intel from satelites circling the globe.
Israel is a blessed nation and a blessed people, God has turned His face towards them and heard their cries and pleas. A warning to all who speak curses against Israel:
Genesis 12:3"I will bless them that bless you and curse them that curse you".
1.The unjust UN Partition Plan barely passed in the nascent General Assembly. The partition plan offered 67% of the population (Arab) 43% of the land (and the worst, most barren part of the land).universalchiro wrote:1948: Palestinians were offered by the League of Nations a statehood and Israel a statehood. Israel accepted, Palestine & Egypt rejected, war broke out from Muslim attacks, Israel won.
On June 5, 1967, Israel launched surprise air raids against all of its neighbors. This was the first military action in the 1967 war. Egypt, Syria, and Jordan responded with a defensive counter-attack.universalchiro wrote:1967: Israel living in peace, attacked by Muslims, Israel defends itself and captures Jerusalem. Israel won.
In the 1956 Suez War Israel attacked Egypt and had to retreat in humiliation and defeat (though engaged in mass rapes and the burning of civilian infrastructure on their way out).universalchiro wrote:Every time Muslims attack Israel, Israel gets more land and always wins.
That was history, not a prediction. Modern Israel is not recreated biblical Israel. The three promises the God made to Abraham were fulfilled; Israel existed and went away. The entity going by the name "State of Israel" is as much "Israel' as my 22-foot Boston Whaler I've named "Noah's Arc" is literally Noah's Arc from the Bible. This premillennialist version of Christian theology didn't exist in any mainstream form until late 1970s when Israel began paying American evangelical theologians to promote it in their congregations (preachers like Richard Roberts, who had to step-down as president of Oral Roberts University after he was found to be siphoning university funds and whose wife was "entertaining" teenage boys in the president's mansion). Even now it is limited largely to American Vengies and is almost universally rejected by every other Christian sect.universalchiro wrote:A warning to all who speak curses against Israel: Genesis 12:3"I will bless them that bless you and curse them that curse you".
I think "Cries and Pleas" is actually the name of an S&M Club in Tel Aviv.universalchiro wrote:Israel is a blessed nation and a blessed people, God has turned His face towards them and heard their cries and pleas.



Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 0#p5349880
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 0#p5349880
Okay, let's add some information so my comment will have reference: The good sir Nietzsche, wrote on my wall a valid point:"would America give up half it's land to Native Indians if you UN voted thus?" The answer is no. The inference is that scenario resembles what the scenario in 1946 Israel. However, the is not a similar scenario. For Britain owned the Land and Lord Belfour a Jew in England wrote to President Wilson in 1917 if America enters the Great War to help the allies, England will give the land for a Zionist state. So the land was Britain not Palestinian.nietzsche wrote:universalchiro wrote:1948: Palestinians were offered by the League of Nations a statehood and Israel a statehood. Israel accepted, Palestine & Egypt rejected, war broke out from Muslim attacks, Israel won.nietzsche wrote:
1967: Israel living in peace, attacked by Muslims, Israel defends itself and captures Jerusalem. Israel won.
Every time Muslims attack Israel, Israel gets more land and always wins. Muslims attack first and lose and complain, then stop attacking, put the rocks down, step away from throwing rocks and WW2 RPGs and Israel will stop pin point laser guided missle defense from drone plane with real time interaction and sophisticated state of the art Iron Dome Air defense and intelligence with night vision with infared and heat sensitive optics & soldiers equipped with top of the line armor piercing ammunition with Intel from satelites circling the globe.
Israel is a blessed nation and a blessed people, God has turned His face towards them and heard their cries and pleas. A warning to all who speak curses against Israel:
Genesis 12:3"I will bless them that bless you and curse them that curse you".
what was the status in 1945?
If I show up at your house with a rainbow flag and a shotgun, do I get to claim sovereignty over your property?universalchiro wrote: Okay, let's add some information so my comment will have reference: The good sir Nietzsche, wrote on my wall a valid point:"would America give up half it's land to Native Indians if you UN voted thus?" The answer is no. The inference is that scenario resembles what the scenario in 1946 Israel. However, the is not a similar scenario. For Britain owned the Land and Lord Belfour a Jew in England wrote to President Wilson in 1917 if America enters the Great War to help the allies, England will give the land for a Zionist state. So the land was Britain not Palestinian.
Depends on the size of your gun.Metsfanmax wrote:If I show up at your house with a rainbow flag and a shotgun, do I get to claim sovereignty over your property?universalchiro wrote: Okay, let's add some information so my comment will have reference: The good sir Nietzsche, wrote on my wall a valid point:"would America give up half it's land to Native Indians if you UN voted thus?" The answer is no. The inference is that scenario resembles what the scenario in 1946 Israel. However, the is not a similar scenario. For Britain owned the Land and Lord Belfour a Jew in England wrote to President Wilson in 1917 if America enters the Great War to help the allies, England will give the land for a Zionist state. So the land was Britain not Palestinian.
1. a7mzero never posts sources.GabonX wrote:No, he's right. Its all over the news. Currently the story is at the top of HuffingtonPost and its also the major headline on DrudgeReport. If you were trying to keep up with events you would have seen this by now...BigBallinStalin wrote:Who cares about saxitoxin? C'mon. If you got a source, post it. I'll address you seriously until then.a6mzero wrote:Not posting a source to be disparaged by the editor in chief of the Hamas Daily who runs this thread. Its public news so there should be multiple sources.
If you're not going to provide a source, then any reasonable person can easily dismiss your claims as unfounded. Sucks, doesn't it?
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 2-05-10-33
I think its funny that you apply this level of scrutiny to easily verifiable facts when someone who's pro Israel posts them but ignore all of the outrageously untrue things the other side posts, while still portraying yourself as being level headed and impartial.
The goal involves territory. One component of the means is religious. E.g. in general, Israel wants more land (goal) and uses religion as a justification for land grabs (means).mrswdk wrote:Is Israel-Palestine a religious conflict, or is it a territorial conflict whose belligerents happen to be Jews and Muslims?
I think I was happier going through life unaware of thissaxitoxin wrote:1.The unjust UN Partition Plan barely passed in the nascent General Assembly. The partition plan offered 67% of the population (Arab) 43% of the land (and the worst, most barren part of the land).universalchiro wrote:1948: Palestinians were offered by the League of Nations a statehood and Israel a statehood. Israel accepted, Palestine & Egypt rejected, war broke out from Muslim attacks, Israel won.
2. War did not break out from "Muslim attacks." An under-equipped coalition of Arab states - including Christian nations like Lebanon and Muslim nations like Egypt- immediately launched a military intervention after The Abomination started ethnic cleansing Palestinians following the UN vote. They were, unfortunately, defeated by the Czechoslovakian and Soviet-backed Israeli militia (the Warsaw Pact were early supporters of Israel due to Israel's historic and contemporary status as a socialist state, but eventually switched sides after the rise of Ba'athism in the Arab world appeared to offer better opportunities for political inroads).
- The Arab forces were commanded by John Glubb, a Companion of the Order of St. Michael and St. George and a confirmed member of the Anglican Church. The Israeli militia were commanded by Shimon Avidan, a member of the Communist Party rumored to have been a pedophile.
On June 5, 1967, Israel launched surprise air raids against all of its neighbors. This was the first military action in the 1967 war. Egypt, Syria, and Jordan responded with a defensive counter-attack.universalchiro wrote:1967: Israel living in peace, attacked by Muslims, Israel defends itself and captures Jerusalem. Israel won.
In the 1956 Suez War Israel attacked Egypt and had to retreat in humiliation and defeat (though engaged in mass rapes and the burning of civilian infrastructure on their way out).universalchiro wrote:Every time Muslims attack Israel, Israel gets more land and always wins.
That was history, not a prediction. Modern Israel is not recreated biblical Israel. The three promises the God made to Abraham were fulfilled; Israel existed and went away. The entity going by the name "State of Israel" is as much "Israel' as my 22-foot Boston Whaler I've named "Noah's Arc" is literally Noah's Arc from the Bible. This premillennialist version of Christian theology didn't exist in any mainstream form until late 1970s when Israel began paying American evangelical theologians to promote it in their congregations (preachers like Richard Roberts, who had to step-down as president of Oral Roberts University after he was found to be siphoning university funds and whose wife was "entertaining" teenage boys in the president's mansion). Even now it is limited largely to American Vengies and is almost universally rejected by every other Christian sect.universalchiro wrote:A warning to all who speak curses against Israel: Genesis 12:3"I will bless them that bless you and curse them that curse you".
I think "Cries and Pleas" is actually the name of an S&M Club in Tel Aviv.universalchiro wrote:Israel is a blessed nation and a blessed people, God has turned His face towards them and heard their cries and pleas.
But, anyway, it's good to know He has blessed the Israelis! Blessed Israel!
The organizers and participants of the world's largest Gay Pride parade (per capita) have been blessed!
The world's "most gay friendly army!" [Hauge Center] has been blessed
We've been blessed!
He's heard our cries and moans!
The US gives Israel roughly $1bn per year, so whoever produces those weapons makes that profit. Whichever bureaucracy which doles out that funding gets the expanded budget, prestige, career promotions, etc. (bureaucratic performance is usually measured by expenditures and hardly results; internal criticism is suppressed; and if you're a bureaucrat who has worked within a bureaucracy and have published a critical work, expect to get fired and ostracized).mrswdk wrote:What does the US actually gain from supporting Israel? Is it arms sales, or something else? I was under the impression that they give Israel a lot of its munitions at little or no cost (i.e. it's not a profitable enterprise) but I may be mistaken.
When one is making startling claims, one needs to provide sources.BigBallinStalin wrote:1. a7mzero never posts sources.GabonX wrote:No, he's right. Its all over the news. Currently the story is at the top of HuffingtonPost and its also the major headline on DrudgeReport. If you were trying to keep up with events you would have seen this by now...BigBallinStalin wrote:Who cares about saxitoxin? C'mon. If you got a source, post it. I'll address you seriously until then.a6mzero wrote:Not posting a source to be disparaged by the editor in chief of the Hamas Daily who runs this thread. Its public news so there should be multiple sources.
If you're not going to provide a source, then any reasonable person can easily dismiss your claims as unfounded. Sucks, doesn't it?
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 2-05-10-33
I think its funny that you apply this level of scrutiny to easily verifiable facts when someone who's pro Israel posts them but ignore all of the outrageously untrue things the other side posts, while still portraying yourself as being level headed and impartial.
2. saxi does.
3. Therefore, it shouldn't be surprising that I'll vary my criticism between the two.
Because the Department of Defense is increasing national security by funding the efforts of its ally, Israel. The DoD is making the US a safer place. Blah blah blah, US Foreign Policy and its self-serving theory, blah blah blah.mrswdk wrote:Why would they reward that department for sending funds to Israel?
I spend a negligible portion of my life following this event, so it's not like I'm constantly up to date. That's why I ask people to provide links; it helps me to easily ascertain the accuracy of their summaries. If they tend to present inaccurate summaries, then their interpretation becomes less credible. If they tend to make ridiculous claims while constantly posting ZERO sources (like a7mzero does throughout the fora), then duh I'll hardly take his alleged facts seriously, so I'll definitely ask for a source.Dukasaur wrote:When one is making startling claims, one needs to provide sources.BigBallinStalin wrote:1. a7mzero never posts sources.GabonX wrote:No, he's right. Its all over the news. Currently the story is at the top of HuffingtonPost and its also the major headline on DrudgeReport. If you were trying to keep up with events you would have seen this by now...BigBallinStalin wrote:Who cares about saxitoxin? C'mon. If you got a source, post it. I'll address you seriously until then.a6mzero wrote:Not posting a source to be disparaged by the editor in chief of the Hamas Daily who runs this thread. Its public news so there should be multiple sources.
If you're not going to provide a source, then any reasonable person can easily dismiss your claims as unfounded. Sucks, doesn't it?
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 2-05-10-33
I think its funny that you apply this level of scrutiny to easily verifiable facts when someone who's pro Israel posts them but ignore all of the outrageously untrue things the other side posts, while still portraying yourself as being level headed and impartial.
2. saxi does.
3. Therefore, it shouldn't be surprising that I'll vary my criticism between the two.
When one is dealing with commonly-known facts, one should not have to. I will never offer you a citation for the fact that the sky is blue, or that water is wet. A6m shouldn't have to, either.
1 - Again, this is not people involved in the latent exercise of freedoms, this is the government of Israel proactively paying for - and organizing - orgies. You support that because you are a good Christian who supports the actions of the government of Israel, correct? Or do you oppose the government of Israel on this issue?universalchiro wrote: @Saxi: cheap tactics. Israel is a democracy, which allows citizens certain freedoms, because 10+/- men use that freedom against the Word of God does not mean Israel adopts their freedom state wide on each citizen. Really this seems obvious and I'm disappointed you would stoop to try and force a connection to bolster your objection of Israel.
Pack Rat wrote:if it quacks like a duck and walk like a duck, it's still fascism
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewt ... 0#p5349880