I said Israel would be willing to do this...NOT necessarily their current regime.

I think a majority of Israelis want this to be over and support a Palestinian state (albeit somewhat out of a self-interested "If we give them a state we'll stop getting rocketed" ethos, but hey, in that region of the world, I'll take what I can get.)

I think the problem right now is their current leadership regime is too sympathetic to the Orthodox Right...which, like most Orthodox Right movements, are a lot quicker to clutch their Psalms and bombs than to extend the olive branch.

That being said, given the youth movement in Israel and the fact the Orthodoxy becomes more and more unpopular by the year--due in no small part to the fact plenty of Israelis are sick of the special exemptions they get--I think there's hope for a FUTURE Israeli leader/regime making this sort of deal down the road.

Also, wasn't this about the Ukraine, Europe and Russia initially?

"Also, wasn't this about the Ukraine, Europe and Russia initially?"

No, you moron. This has been about the Congo the entire time. Obviously you know shit about that though.

Every foreign policy discussion on the internet turns to Israel-Palestine if it lasts long enough.

"Or are you really suggesting that they'll need (or want) more encouragement to leave places like Gaza when--again--they hate and HAVE hated such a place for DECADES?"

But we weren't talking about Gaza. We were talking about Israel. So stop being disingenuous. You want Arabs living in Israel to vacate Israel and move to the hypothetical 'Palestinian state'.

"1. Never said that,
2. Wanting it to be a Jewish state =/= as wanting no Arabs there,
3. A large population of the Arab population doesn't LIKE IT THERE,"

You said Israel was declaring itself Jewish so Arabs living within Israel would move out. You said it. It's quoted for all to see. A large number of Arabs living in Israel are perfectly loyal and content citizens, which you care nothing about because they aren't Jewish.

""Hey, Palestinians! You've just won the Super Bowl, I mean, a brand new sovereign nation! Whaddya gonna do next!" "

Why would Arabs living in a wealthy developed country move to the impoverished West Bank or Gaza? That makes no sense.

"Why would Arabs living in a wealthy developed country move to the impoverished West Bank or Gaza?"

I'm pushing for Palestinians to move OUT of Gaza...? O.o

And the West Bank can be developed (if the Israelis would stop encroaching on the area like idiots, but I've already said as much.)

"A large number of Arabs living in Israel are perfectly loyal and content citizens, which you care nothing about because they aren't Jewish."

You're right, I don't care...because if they're CONTENT, they're not the ones bombing us and rocketing us and screaming for a state, now, are they?

The minority that's happy and wants to stay--let ;em stay! 110%!

The majority that wants out of Israeli rule, however?

Give them a state.

"But we weren't talking about Gaza. We were talking about Israel."

Oh, please...talking about Gaza/the West Bank/the Golan Heights/the Israeli mainland involves and implies the others, give me a break, Putin...

That's part of the very intricate and complicated nature of this conflict, that one region invariably affects the others.

"You want Arabs living in Israel to vacate Israel and move to the hypothetical 'Palestinian state'."

I want the Arabic population that hates Israeli rule and is bombing and rocketing about it to move to their own state, yes...the ones that are happy and NOT committing murder by blowing up school buses and rocketing towns can and SHOULD stay...are you really that incapable of seeing a grey area and proposing different outcomes for different people, or do you really think all Arabs just think with a hive mind?

(Or were you just selectively blind when I said the MAJORITY of discontented Palestinians about half a dozen times above...remind me how you're going to have a good academic career when you have the reading comprehension and critical thinking skills of a goldfish?)

Keep it decent please. No need to insult goldfish.

Now you're offending Putin...

Oh wait, this is about Putin33!

"I'm pushing for Palestinians to move OUT of Gaza...? O.o"

No, my god, this is why it's so difficult to communicate with you, because you can't even remember what you just said. You said you wanted *Israel* to be a Jewish state, so the Arabs living in *Israel* would move out and into the West Bank and Gaza. That's what you said. No amount of feigning stupidity changes that.

"The minority that's happy and wants to stay--let ;em stay! 110%!"

That is *not what you said*! You said you were enthusiastically supporting Israel calling itself Jewish so Arabs would pick up and move out of the country.

"Oh, please...talking about Gaza/the West Bank/the Golan Heights/the Israeli mainland involves and implies the others, give me a break, Putin..."

You're being ridiculous. You said you wanted *Israel to declare itself Jewish*. *Israel meaning Israel proper*. We're not talking about Gaza and the West Bank, presumably you don't want those territories declared Jewish right? You want Israel proper to be declared Jewish, and you said it was to encourage Arabs living there to leave to the new hypothetical state.

I've had to repeat this multiple times now because you're pretending to be completely illiterate.

"I want the Arabic population that hates Israeli rule and is bombing and rocketing about it to move to their own state"

The Arabic population that is 'bombing you and rocketing you' *doesn't live in Israel proper you windbag!*. The Arabic population that is doing so lives in Gaza, which wasn't the population you were referring to when you said you wanted them to move, because *they're already in Gaza to begin with* you knucklehead.

Good grief just stop talking about this issue if you're going to be this asinine.

Seriously though, can't we just discuss Ukraine here?

Maybe Putin and obiwanobiwan should do another debate similar to the Great Debate about Israel. Just not in this thread...

Back to this thread: Putin33, out of curiosity, do you still believe Russian troops did not enter Ukraine and capture several buildings.

I'm asking because I try to keep an open mind about it, but if even you agree on that, it feels quite safe to assume that case. In fact, it seems pretty obvious now, but I want your point of view, if you would.

The question to Putin33 had to end with a question mark, naturalky.

Russian troops did not capture any buildings. The people who captured those buildings did not have any Russian uniforms on. Crimea have their own self-defense forces. Russian troops engaged in black sea fleet unit maneuvers as part of standard military drills and security measures.

Russia approved the deployment of troops into Crimea to protect Russian citizens. They did not take over any buildings, that was done by Crimeans themselves.

I see. So you believe that Ukraine knows the troops are their own but lie about it or something? Because they claim it's the Russians, right?

I really care about your opinion, but I don't understand how you can be so certain they are not Russian troops. Just because they didn't have a Russian sign on their uniform? I saw no Ukrainian sign either.
So how can you know for certain it's not some special Russian unit, Spetznaz-ish perhaps?

Care to define "security measures"? Is locking down the Krim (or how do you want to call it?) just a security measure, when opposed by Ukraine? Are they not completely undermining Ukraine according to you? When exactly would Russia cross the line according to you?

PROSECUTOR
Mr. Chappelle, what would it take to convince you that R. Kelly is guilty?

DAVE CHAPPELLE
Okay, I'd have to see a video of him singing "Pee On You," two forms of government ID, a police officer there to verify the whole thing, four or five of my buddies and Neal taking notes, and R. Kelly's grandma to confirm his identity.

R. KELLY'S GRANDMA
That's my Robert, always peeing on people.

http://news.yahoo.com/russian-troops-over-ukraines-crimea-region-200052097.html

"Russian troops took over Crimea as the parliament in Moscow gave President Vladimir Putin a green light Saturday to use the military to protect Russian interests in Ukraine. The newly installed government in Kiev was powerless to react to the action by Russian troops based in the strategic region and more flown in, aided by pro-Russian Ukrainian groups.

To protect Russian citizens...sure...

Looks like a nice little power-grab to me...never mind the fact Kiev isn't pleased with this, no no, as long as Putin and Real Putin get what they want...

Because Obi would sit by if Americans were being beaten in the streets, right? Because with the moves the Rada has already made, like de-listing Russian as an official language, and vandalizing Russian memorials, the ethnic Russians should feel perfectly secure?

"So you believe that Ukraine knows the troops are their own but lie about it or something? Because they claim it's the Russians, right?"

Opponents to the putsch also tried to take over Donestk and Kharkhiv. Was that done by Russian troops too? Crimea, the Tartar population excepted, opposes the putsch in Kiev. The forces which took over the buildings were loyal to Sergei Aksyonov and have remained in place as pro-putsch elements tried to retake the Ministry of Interior this morning. Their uniforms do not look at all like Russian army uniforms. Now, you can believe this is all a ruse if you want, but barring some concrete evidence that these are actually secret Russian army commandos pretending to be self-defense forces, why should we take the Rada's word for it?

"Is locking down the Krim (or how do you want to call it?) just a security measure"

Yes.

"Are they not completely undermining Ukraine according to you?"

The putschists themselves undermined Ukraine when they violently took over the Rada, tried to abduct the democratically elected President, and when on a spree of violence against Russian speakers and other minorities in Ukraine. They had to figure before engaging in this violence that they did not have popular support from all the people of Ukraine, so this is on them.

Back to the point of the matter

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26400035

Putin has just authorized troop deployments to Crimea. Annexation.

No not annexation. Why must you be hysterical?

I'm sorry, pseudo-annexation, like Russia did with South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

If CIS countries would stop abusing and attacking minorities there wouldn't be Russian troops there. Why is this pseudo-annexation but US support for color revolutions isn't divide et impera?

^Ding ding ding ding ding!

+1 goldfinger for using the word on everyone's minds...except Putin's, of course...

ANNEXATION!

"But it's not annexation when my hero does it!"

Yes it is.

"Because Obi would sit by if Americans were being beaten in the streets, right? Because with the moves the Rada has already made, like de-listing Russian as an official language, and vandalizing Russian memorials, the ethnic Russians should feel perfectly secure?"

Obi would recognize there's a difference between intervention and annexation...

BUT then again Obi--for all his Thousand and One Faults--is able to at least see shades of grey in the world, whereas Putin's still living in a world of absolutes.

The US supports the democratization of nations, which is what many of the color revolutions were.

And I personally think that yes, the interim government in Ukraine is fucking up by stoking fear in the Russian populations (removing Russian as an official language in some regions) but there have been no outright attacks on Russian Ukrainians. Just symbols of Russian authority.

If they support the 'democratization of nations' why are they support a violent coup in Ukraine? Why did they support the 2004 coup as well? None of these color revolutions represent democratization in the slightest. The only common thread is that they are replacing governments on good terms with Russia with governments on hostile terms with Russia.

"Obi would recognize there's a difference between intervention and annexation.."

Where is the annexation? Shouting annexation doesn't mean it's annexation. But I guess we can see what the propaganda/narrative coming out of the west is going to be. Any other country that uses their military is annexationist, whereas American "interventions" are benign and benevolent.

"BUT then again Obi--for all his Thousand and One Faults--is able to at least see shades of grey in the world"

Shouting annexation when clearly nothing of the sort has taking place simply because of your rage-hate of everything Russian is seeing shades of grey? Yeah, buddy, you're Mr. Nuance.

Putin - we'll have to see about the Annexation, obviously. But if Crimea becomes the Ukrainian equivalent with South Ossetia, would you call that close enough to annexation?

No.