Strength of alliance between India-Isreal

[Developereo]

sir y did u bring islam in israel india thread???
it was going well before this.
this could be done in other thread

Actually, the issue of Islam and Indian Muslims was brought in by none other than your friend Kathric. Posts #24 and, especially, #27.

 

[Vinod2070]

Actually, the issue of Islam and Indian Muslims was brought in by none other than your friend Kathric. Posts #24 and, especially, #27.

He just quoted an article! It covered several issues about the relationship.

You made it an Islamic issue.

 

[Developereo]

He just quoted an article! It covered several issues about the relationship.

You made it an Islamic issue.

The bolded lines talk about the impact this relationship may have on Indian Muslims.

 

[KS]

The bolded lines talk about the impact this relationship may have on Indian Muslims.

May have on SOME Indian Muslims - the religious mullah type that believes in Ummah not the ordinary Indian Muslim whose priorities lie in Roti, Kapda aur Makaan.

From my post :

Fears also exist within India's political and military establishments that some of India's Muslim population may be drawn to Muslim fundamentalism coming from outside India.

 

[Vinod2070]

I don't want anyone forced out and I gave the history to provide context of why the Palestinians refugees should be allowed to return. In fact, of all the solutions, including the unworkable two-state solution, mine is the only one that doesn't make anyone leave their homes -- Jews or Arabs.

It is not acceptable to the stronger party and hence not workable.

Palestinians will need to get used to the two state solution. Demanding too much may result in getting too less.

Arafat was getting a state and 97% of his demands. He could have accepted it and much misery and pain could have been avoided.

Well, you won't get any apologies because there is no one today responsible for whatever happened centuries ago. Do you honestly think the Arabs are waiting for an apology from the Mongols, or the Germans and Brits from the Italians (Romans)?

I know that already.

We have moved on. Just like the Germans and Brits are proudly Christian and don't really hold a grudge against whatever invaders brought Christianity to their shores. The names of ancient invaders are commonplace in Britain and Germany.

I don't think so.

As long as you keep demanding an apology for centuries old events, you are holding the present hostage to the ancient past.

It is a debate here. India has not demanded any apology from anyone.

We are not holding anything hostage. As I said, for me it is about not letting that barbarism repeat and make a glass bowl of anyone who tries it again.

A thorough glass bowl!

The idea of an Islamic Caliphate similar to the Zionists' dream of reestablishing ancient Israel. Both groups should not be allowed to displace or damage people currently living on the land.

OK.

So does the Akhand Bharat crowd. People can dream. It's not going to happen.

But that crowd is not coveting Arabia! It is more analogous to you wanting to evict Israelis from Palestine.

It's a poll about Muslims in general. There is evidence, from Indians, that innocent Indian Muslims get rounded up every time there is a terrorism scare, even if the culprits later turned out to be Hindu.

Don't you just love India and Indian Muslims!

I can bring up any number of polls that show Israel is one of the most distrusted countries on the planet. The point of these polls is not to justify anything, but to dispel your claim that most people in the world approve of Israel (per the diplomatic relations graphic you showed). Most governments have (cursory) relations with Israel, mostly so they don't appear anti-semitic, but most actual people believe Israel is the cause of trouble.

Try a poll data for Pakistan. USA. Any country.

Most people are not so anti Israeli as you think (except may be most Muslim). Every country may have its detractors but the vast majority of the world keeps relations with them as they do with many Arab and Islamic countries they may not like.

They may have been mainstream long time ago, but are now used only by extremists on both sides.

I see them used quite often by your religious scholars and also posters here. Even today.

Simple math. Let's say that Muslims represented 10% of the population in the Hindu-majority states and vice versa.

For Pakitan with population 30 million, 10% is 3 million.
For India with population 300 million, 10% is 30 million.
So, if each country loses 3 million as refugees, Paksitan will lose most of the Hindus, while India will still retain 27 million Muslims.

You guys keep on repeating the same thing!

It would mean that India didn't indulge in ethnic cleansing to the same extent as Pakistan. Too hard to understand this?

Again, the situation is not analogous. In the subcontinent, both Hindus and Muslims had agreed to separate. There was no such agreement by the Palestinians. They were simply forced out of their houses by Jewish terror groups. This is not propaganda; the chief of the Haganah himself admits it and modern Israeli historians agree.

Not as simple. Ethnic cleansing was not agreed to.

Of course, but we are not holding people in refugee camps against their will to this day. That is the point.

Already replied in an earlier post.

Not good enough. We are not talking about restricting new immigration -- every country has the right to form whatever policies.
These are people who were forced out of their homes by Jewish terror groups to create this Jewish character in the first place.

Like there were people forced out from Pakistan to maintain its 97% Muslim character. More people forced out to make it more Muslim than Israel is Jewish!

They were relatively humane in the context of their times. The standard fare was to decimate your victims; the Muslims instead levied a tax on them, like Romans did.

Now if I expand on this "humane" business, will you accuse me of Islamophobia again?

Either don't make such claims. Or be ready for rebuttal with facts.

Already explained above the situation in Britain and Germany. People move on.

Not you. At least not the vast majority of you.

Many of you want to go back to the 7th century, not forward.

Exactly. If someone is justifting their hatred of apartheid, you will bring in black crimes elsewhere?
What's the point, other than to justify apartheid?

I have explained this already. I have not justified anything. I don't need to.

No other countries, Islamic or otherwise, have such refugee camps except Israel and Sudan.

Which refugee camps in Israel are you talking of?

We are not talking historical, but current, events. Nothing else compares in the current world. Sanctimony justified.

You mention this not for Israel but for even India and Western countries.

Sanctimony rejected!

The events of early 20th century were to give context of why the current refugees deserve to return.

I know that. But you won't agree for the same for Pakistan. Would you?

Different times; different standards of conduct. Unfortunate but that's the story of the world. Whatever happened in the past was not pretty, but that was standard fare across the world at the time.

I can expose this as well. I don't care if you accuse me of Islamophobia for that.

Tell me, was what happened "final and perfect" or not? Did the "but shikan par excellence" do the right thing? Were the kaffir genocides by Mahmud Gazani, Timur Lane and Nadir Shah wrong?

Why? They were all justified using Islam!

This is not about Sudan. I brought it in as another case, although I am pretty sure we are not supplying weapons and training to the government militias.

OK. No point in laboring over it.

I didn't open the thread about Isreal.

You brought Islam into it.

The point is it shouldn't have come to that in the first place.

As the Islamic invaders had no business coming in India or anywhere outside their desert.

Regarding the part about Israel kicking Pakistan'as $, I was being sarcastic. There is even a crazy icon next to it. Meaning "yeah right".

So that would mean Israel couldn't be the reason for India kicking out the intruders.

You can believe me or not. I am not the least bit jealous. Trust me.

I do. Not.

 

[LaBong]

May have on SOME Indian Muslims - the religious mullah type that believes in Ummah not the ordinary Indian Muslim whose priorities lie in Roti, Kapda aur Makaan.

From my post :

Indian Musims are not a deciding factor to India's relationship with Palestine/Israel because in general most of them simply don't care. They might have personal opinion against Israel/Palestine just as I also have, but I don't see Palestine/Israel to be factor in election; like you said, Roti, Kapda and Makan matter more than middle-east politics.

India's historical support for Palestine is because of her involvement in NAM, Gandhis opinion vis-a-vis Palestine/Israel and Lefts vehemently supporting Palestine. Well, welcome to 21st century, India no more involved in NAM, we outgrown Gandhi and Communists failed miserably.

 

[Vinod2070]

OK. So you have opened some new interesting points.

You claim "You have moved on".

You claim "They were relatively humane in the context of their times.".

A related claim. "Whatever happened in the past was not pretty, but that was standard fare across the world at the time."

I don't agree with any of any of these premises and they are basic premises on which you build your superstructure.

So, would you like to discuss these? Which ones? All of them?

Without accusing me of being anti-Pakistan or Islamophobe? (You know I give a damn to these labels anyway).

You have raised these issue, not me.

 

[JayAtl]

^^ you know you own him on the debate- to a point where I'm feeling bad for him now...

 

[Vinod2070]

BTW, on another thread here.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/96824-bbc-country-rating-poll.html

So Israel seems to be doing better than your own country?

 

[Developereo]

^^ you know you own him on the debate- to a point where I'm feeling bad for him now...

Delusion runs wild in the Indian troll brigade.

(Did you get chewed out by Chinese members for trolling their threads? )

I have achieved my objective to expose the Islamophobic segment of Indian society that supports Israel because they are obsessed with the ancient Islamic conquest and hold all Muslims -- including Indian Muslims -- hostage to the past. These people live vicariously through Israel and revel in its oppression of Muslims.

I don't agree with any of any of these premises and they are basic premises on which you build your superstructure.

Only in your delusional mind. The subject of this thread concerns the history and present situation of Palestinians living in refugee camps. Address the specific issue.

Once again, there is no other situation on the planet, other than Sudan, where millions of peope are forced to live as refugees purely because of their religion or ethnicity.

May have on SOME Indian Muslims - the religious mullah type that believes in Ummah not the ordinary Indian Muslim whose priorities lie in Roti, Kapda aur Makaan.

Some, many or most. Doesn't matter; it's only a matter of degree.

The point is you brought up the issue of how/if this relationship has any impact on Indian Muslims.

BTW, on another thread here. So Israel seems to be doing better than your own country?

Certainly, we never denied that we have an image problem, partly due to past mistakes.
But it refutes your claim that most people in the world like Israel.

Not that it matters: I already made it clear polls don't matter. It was only in response to your guys' graphic about diplomatic relations around the world.

 

[Vinod2070]

Delusion runs wild in the Indian troll brigade.

(Did you get chewed out by Chinese members for trolling their threads? )

Some other delusions seem to have been exposed here. Quite well at that.

I have achieved my objective to expose the Islamophobic segment of Indian society that supports Israel because they are obsessed with the ancient Islamic conquest and hold all Muslims -- including Indian Muslims -- hostage to the past. These people live vicariously through Israel and revel in its oppression of Muslims.

On the other hand, what has been exposed is the real nature of the opposition to the mutually beneficial ties and the shallow ground below all claims of moral superiority.

Only in your delusional mind. The subject of this thread concerns the history and present situation of Palestinians living in refugee camps. Address the specific issue.

You have nothing new to add to that issue. So I have nothing to rebut there.

BTW, the subject is just Indo-Israel ties. Nothing else.

Again, do you want to discuss the premises or not? You brought them up and you perhaps know how hollow they really are.

BTW, I knew you will avoid this. People like you throw some claims thinking you won't be challenged by facts.

Once again, there is no other situation on the planet, other than Sudan, where millions of peope are forced to live as refugees purely because of their religion or ethnicity.

We have gone through it already. No point in repeating the same thing over and over.

Some, many or most. Doesn't matter; it's only a matter of degree.

The point is you brought up the issue of how/if this relationship has any impact on Indian Muslims.

So now suddenly the scale doesn't matter!

Just on the line above that, scale was the only thing that mattered? You have repeatedly said that on this very thread.

Another flip flop?

Certainly, we never denied that we have an image problem, partly due to past mistakes.

In your case it is just the "image problem". Not so for Israel though?

But it refutes your claim that most people in the world like Israel

Who said that ever? Someone just showed that the vast majority of countries have relations with them. You presumed to define the reason for those relations.

Again!

Not that it matters: I already made it clear polls don't matter. It was only in response to your guys' graphic about diplomatic relations around the world.

When?

You made it sound like a proof of your whole position. Now it doesn't matter suddenly?

 

[Vinod2070]

Even the worst criminal will always find allies. It doesn't mean the criminal is right or justified.
As for my view on Israel, look at the bottom of this post...



Just parroting Islamophobic propaganda from your Indian friends will not cut mustard. Many countries have committed crimes, but Israel stands in a league all its own. Again, world opinion agrees with me.



It is entirely on topic -- to explain why Israel deserves the kind of treatment advocated.



I don't expect you to be.
You have rationalized it away by donating money to Palestinians. Oh my...

Thank God people didn't have that attitude towards the Nazis or apartheid regimes.



My earlier post #415 summarizes it:




I don't need to becasue I know the answer. Chinese-Dragon partially answered it.
The Chinese know that sometimes you have to make a pact with the devil.



My view is shared by most of the world (see below).



No, you chose to sell your soul. And you are rationalizing it by giving blood money to the Palestinians.



Yes, we saw such examples of your humanitarian view in Sikkim and support for LTTE.



Bullcrap. All it shows is that a majority of governments pay lip service to Israel so as not to appear anti-semitic.

Here's the reality of how the world (as in people) see Israel:

Israel and Iran Share Most Negative Ratings in Global Poll - World Public Opinion

Israel is viewed quite negatively in the world, possibly because the poll was conducted less than six months following the Israel/Hezbollah war in Lebanon. On average, 56 percent have a mainly negative view of the country, and just 17 percent have a positive view, the least positive rating for any country evaluated. In 23 countries the most common view is negative, with only two leaning towards a positive view and two divided.

Unsurprisingly, the most negative views of Israel are found in the predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East, with very large majorities in Lebanon (85%), Egypt (78%), Turkey (76%), and the UAE (73%) having negative views.

Large majorities also have negative views in Europe, including Germany (77%), Greece (68%) and France (66%). Indonesia (71%), Australia (68%) and South Korea (62%) are the most negative countries in the Asia/Pacific region. Brazilians (72%) are the most negative in Latin America.

The two countries that tend to view Israel positively do so in modest numbers. Forty-five percent of Nigerians and 41 percent of Americans have positive views of Israel's influence in the world, while nearly one-third in each country has negative views. The Kenyan and Indian populations have divided views of Israel.

This post is totally based on some poll.

Which you now say "I already made it clear polls don't matter."!

Let's see where did you make that clear?

 

[Vinod2070]

The subject of this thread concerns the history and present situation of Palestinians living in refugee camps.

Which refugee camps withing Israel do you keep talking about?

 

[Developereo]

Which you now say "I already made it clear polls don't matter."!

Let's see where did you make that clear?

By showing you a reverse poll. That post was in response to your guys' graphic that said the world accepts Israel. I showed an opposite poll to show that you can find statistics to the contrary also. Conclusion being that poll data can be manipulated either way.

Which refugee camps withing Israel do you keep talking about?

Refugee camps in Gaza and West Bank where people evicted from present-day Israel for being non-Jewish are living.

Some other delusions seem to have been exposed here. Quite well at that.



On the other hand, what has been exposed is the real nature of the opposition to the mutually beneficial ties and the shallow ground below all claims of moral superiority.



You have nothing new to add to that issue. So I have nothing to rebut there.

BTW, the subject is just Indo-Israel ties. Nothing else.

Again, do you want to discuss the premises or not? You brought them up and you perhaps know how hollow they really are.

BTW, I knew you will avoid this. People like you throw some claims thinking you won't be challenged by facts.



We have gone through it already. No point in repeating the same thing over and over.



So now suddenly the scale doesn't matter!

Just on the line above that, scale was the only thing that mattered? You have repeatedly said that on this very thread.

Another flip flop?



In your case it is just the "image problem". Not so for Israel though?



Who said that ever? Someone just showed that the vast majority of countries have relations with them. You presumed to define the reason for those relations.

Again!



When?

You made it sound like a proof of your whole position. Now it doesn't matter suddenly?

Rather than respond to points which have already been covered over and over in this thread, and which anyone can read by going through the posts, I will just end with this observation:

It is fine to use bold font or underline judiciously in a post for emphasis, but when (almost) the entire post is in bold, it is considered shouting. I notice you have been writing significant parts of your post in bold, which brings to mind the Chinese proverb:

"He who strikes the first blow admits he's lost the argument"

In our case, we can amend it to:

"He who raises his voice or strikes the first blow admits he's lost the argument"

Q.E.D.

 

[Vinod2070]

By showing you a reverse poll. That post was in response to your guys' graphic that said the world accepts Israel. I showed an opposite poll to show that you can find statistics to the contrary also. Conclusion being that poll data can be manipulated either way.

That is not how your post#455 was presented. You changed your tune after some other polls were presented.

BTW, that graphic is much more solid fact than the polls. It just shows how many countries have relations with Israel, not people's opinions that are more volatile.

Refugee camps in Gaza and West Bank where people evicted from present-day Israel for being non-Jewish are living.

That part is not Israel proper. BTW, I thought they are living in proper houses there, not refugee camps.

May be you consider the whole territory a large refugee camp. Fine.

Rather than respond to points which have already been covered over and over in this thread, and which anyone can read by going through the posts, I will just end with this observation:

It is fine to use bold font or underline judiciously in a post for emphasis, but when (almost) the entire post is in bold, it is considered shouting. I notice you have been writing significant parts of your post in bold, which brings to mind the Chinese proverb:

"He who strikes the first blow admits he's lost the argument"

In our case, we can amend it to:

"He who raises his voice or strikes the first blow admits he's lost the argument"

The bold was for emphasis. You got that right.

The points I raised now have not been covered. It was a small post and deserved emphasis on the specific issues.

Q.E.D.

Yet again.