Jimmy Carter announces he has cancer

[jj1000]

Vast empty desert...filled with enough oil to give it energy independence...
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/149448#.Vc4ftvlVhBc

Sounds like Texas, but the war was with the Mexicans, not the Germans...

It's good an entire country pays 40% of it's gas bill to Egypt for something they could of owned, but it was no cost.

[ShlockDoc]

Vast empty desert...filled with enough oil to give it energy independence...
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/149448#.Vc4ftvlVhBc

Sounds like Texas, but the war was with the Mexicans, not the Germans...

Fair point.  So the question is if the benefit was worth the cost or not, right?  A valid argument can be made on either side.   But it comes down to a judgment call.  You can agree or disagree with Israel on whether they made the right call but to hate the guy for brokering it?

[Dan]

Fair point.  So the question is if the benefit was worth the cost or not, right?  A valid argument can be made on either side.   But it comes down to a judgment call.  You can agree or disagree with Israel on whether they made the right call but to hate the guy for brokering it?

I've lost loved ones to cancer. I wouldn't rejoice/wish it on anyone aside from Hitler or someone on his level of evil incarnate.
Then again with some of the quacks we have here, Hitler caliber people are a dime a dozen.

[yos9694]

My memory is not what it use to be. Is this the same territory they captured during the 6 day war?

Yes. Was that supposed to be your point? Forgive me for not recognizing your passive aggressive style of discussion. Normally when people ask a question it is because they didn't know the answer, and when they want to make a point they say it.

[ADG]

Fair point.  So the question is if the benefit was worth the cost or not, right?  A valid argument can be made on either side.   But it comes down to a judgment call.  You can agree or disagree with Israel on whether they made the right call but to hate the guy for brokering it?

Your are not looking at the broader picture . He is an anti-semite you can look at his book at his recorded statements and his presidential record them fit this deal in that contexts 

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Yes. Was that supposed to be your point? Forgive me for not recognizing your passive aggressive style of discussion. Normally when people ask a question it is because they didn't know the answer, and when they want to make a point they say it.

It was a rhetorical question. My point was that they really didn't give anything up.

[Dan]

It was a rhetorical question. My point was that they really didn't give anything up.

Would you say the same had the US given Texas back to Mexico?

[Achas Veachas]

It was a rhetorical question. My point was that they really didn't give anything up.

Does that mean that they wouldn't be giving anything up by giving away the West Bank and the Golan Heights? Those were also captured in the same war.

[ShlockDoc]

I've lost loved ones to cancer. I wouldn't rejoice/wish it on anyone aside from Hitler or someone on his level of evil incarnate.
Then again with some of the quacks we have here, Hitler caliber people are a dime a dozen.

I agree.  Carter was not a friend of the Israeli government and policies  and said very harsh things against it.  But he's not evil and shouldn't have illness wished upon him.

[Dan]

I agree.  Carter was not a friend of the Israeli government and policies  and said very harsh things against it.  But he's not evil and shouldn't have illness wished upon him.

Perhaps he is evil, but not evil enough that I'm going to rejoice like some groups (that he advocates for) did on 9/11.

[ShlockDoc]

Perhaps he is evil, but not evil enough that I'm going to rejoice like some groups that he advocates for did on 9/11.

I think making a case for him being evil is hard but it's subjective I guess.  I respect your moderation...

[yos9694]

It was a rhetorical question. My point was that they really didn't give anything up.

So in your opinion does Israel have any land to give up?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

So in your opinion does Israel have any land to give up?

Very good question that I am not able to answer. Do go back to what was given to them in 1948 or further back?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Would you say the same had the US given Texas back to Mexico?

I would give them CA if the illegals would stop. 

To answer your question I would say no but I it would be an extremely biased answer.

[yos9694]

Very good question that I am not able to answer. Do go back to what was given to them in 1948 or further back?

Not able to answer, yet you dismiss the return of Sinai by means of a rhetorical question, and dodge the question of whether Israel actually has any land to give. And here I thought your stance was in support of Israel. Seems very much like you don't believe Israel has any land - i.e. it does not have a right exist. So why pretend otherwise?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Not able to answer, yet you dismiss the return of Sinai by means of a rhetorical question, and dodge the question of whether Israel actually has any land to give. And here I thought your stance was in support of Israel. Seems very much like you don't believe Israel has any land - i.e. it does not have a right exist. So why pretend otherwise?

That is one h*ll of a twist to what I said.
Unlike most here I will answer questions when I can.
Israel has a right to exist and defend themselves with out asking or receiving approval from any other country including the US.
The part I am not able to answer is what land is rightful theirs. You assume this to mean that no land is rightful theirs. Big mistake.

[yos9694]

That is one h*ll of a twist to what I said.
Unlike most here I will answer questions when I can.
Israel has a right to exist and defend themselves with out asking or receiving approval from any other country including the US.
The part I am not able to answer is what land is rightful theirs. You assume this to mean that no land is rightful theirs. Big mistake.

Well thanks for making it plain, because I for one find it hard to understand how one can believe a country has a right to exist and yet that same country has no land. I think by definition land is a prerequisite to being a country. I am glad that you do in fact support Israel, despite my inability to resolve the dissonance.

[Yehuda57]

Very good question that I am not able to answer. Do go back to what was given to them in 1948 or further back?

And if you go back to 1948 - do you mean back to what was agreed to be given to them but refused by the Arab nations? Or what was won and lost in the war of 1948? And why is land won in the 1967 war (started by the Arab nations) not considered "losing anything?" Is it not Israel's land?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Well thanks for making it plain, because I for one find it hard to understand how one can believe a country has a right to exist and yet that same country has no land. I think by definition land is a prerequisite to being a country. I am glad that you do in fact support Israel, despite my inability to resolve the dissonance.

THEY HAVE LAND!

[Yehuda57]

Well thanks for making it plain, because I for one find it hard to understand how one can believe a country has a right to exist and yet that same country has no land. I think by definition land is a prerequisite to being a country. I am glad that you do in fact support Israel, despite my inability to resolve the dissonance.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Where did he say they have no land? He *did* imply that giving land conquered in a war is not considered "losing anything" which implies that Israel *is* subject to different laws than any other nation in history. Take him up on what he says, not what you imagined him to say.