russia/georgia

[a_person]

Quote from destroyer:

<del>Lebanese civilian casualties:</del> Lebanese death toll
1191 killed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War

Of course you conveniently skipped the key phrase: "...published figures do not distinguish between civilians and Hezbollah combatants, including those released by the Lebanese government."

And of course you lied and misquoted the article, it does not say: "Lebanese civilian casualties: 1191 killed" as you claim

The article says:
"The Lebanon Higher Relief Council (HRC) put the Lebanese death toll at 1,191"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War#Casualties

Lebanese death toll not distinguishing between civilians and Hezbollah combatants and Lebanese civilian casualties are two completely different things. Do you understand that, you stinking liar!!! And if the Lebanese death toll is 1,191 then the number of Lebanese civilian casualties is way below 1,000 (500-600 or less) which is exactly what I told you earlier.

 

[a_person]

Quote from destroyer:

Hezbollah enjoys a great deal of support amongst Lebanese Shiites, so getting rid of them is no simple task.

You called Hezbollah "rogue militants" in your previous posts. If these rogue militants enjoy a great deal of support (and they do) those supporters are not innocent victims in the conflict by any stretch of imagination. You can't have it both ways buddy, if the Lebanese refuse to get rid of Hezbollah, stop whining when Israel tries.

 

[destroyer]

Quote from a_person:
And of course you lied and misquoted the article, it does not say: "Lebanese civilian casualties: 1191 killed" as you claim

I'll admit I did a mistake here, I only added one wikipedia article, while I was using two. Here's the other one I was using: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_2006_Lebanon_War

As you can see, the numbers are listed under civilian casualties. In other words, my word is, as always, only worth as much as the claims of the sources of wikipedia. This is really not debatable, whether the total number is 1191 or 1191+500 doesn't matter, what remains clear is that the larger portion of the victims where indeed innocent civilian humans.

What's more, the fact that it has been widely reported that the majority of the Lebanese killed were civilians, and UNICEF estimated that 30% of those killed were children under the age of 13., gives us a fairly good clue as to how Israel conducted its war.

Nice try though.

Quote from a_person:
Lebanese death toll not distinguishing between civilians and Hezbollah combatants and Lebanese civilian casualties are two completely different things. Do you understand that, you stinking liar!!!

Your claim is that "Israel killed more than a thousand people but most of them were Hezbollah militants". Not only is this wrong, as documented, it's a disgrace to the innocent victims of the War. Being labeled terrorists just because it makes Israel look better, after one is dead - you're no better than those who claim the victims of the holocaust where guilty and had it coming.

Quote from a_person:
You called Hezbollah "rogue militants" in your previous posts. If these rogue militants enjoy a great deal of support (and they do) those supporters are not innocent victims in the conflict by any stretch of imagination. You can't have it both ways buddy, if the Lebanese refuse to get rid of Hezbollah, stop whining when Israel tries.

By this logic, one can deduce that you support all terrorist attacks against Israel, if we ignore the fact that you are fundamentally a hypocrite, that is.

Israel is also a democratic nation, and the IDF enjoys far greater support amongst Israeli citizens than Hezbollah does amongst Lebanese citizens. This logic right here is used by both Hezbollah and Palestinian militants to justify attacks on Israeli civilians. This, and of course the fact that virtually all Israelis take part in the IDF.

To actually claim that 300 dead children under the age of 13, by the hands of IDF soldiers had it coming, deserved it and where not innocent, is outrageous. You're as mentally deranged as the terrorists are, you sick freak.

 

[a_person]

Quote from destroyer:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_2006_Lebanon_War

As you can see, the numbers are listed under civilian casualties.

Here is the original article that your wikipedia link is referring to (reference#11 in your wikipedia article):

"More than 1,000 Lebanese civilians and combatants died during the summer war between Israel's army and Hezbollah guerrillas, according to tallies by government agencies, humanitarian groups and The Associated Press...The Lebanese and AP counts of Lebanon's war dead range from 1,035 to 1,191."
http://news.usti.net/home/news/cn/?/world.mideast.misc/1/wed/bq/Alebanon-war-deaths.RYBR_GDS.html

What part of "civilians and combatants" don't you understand? How more unambiguous do you want it to be to finally admit that you fucked up? And given the consensus that about 500-600 of them were militants you can calculate the actual number of civilian casualties - which given 34 days of heavy fighting was about 15-18 civilians per day - more than reasonable during any war.

Quote from destroyer:

To actually claim that 300 dead children under the age of 13, by the hands of IDF soldiers had it coming

No buddy, this is not what I am claiming. I am claiming that their blood is on the hands of their Hezbollah supporting parents. The IDF is not targeting children, the parents of these children support Hezbollah and let Hezbollah hide behind their children. Get off that high horse already, what I am saying is not that hard to understand.

 

[destroyer]

Quote from a_person:
Here is the original article that your wikipedia link is referring to (reference#11 in your wikipedia article):

No it's not, [11] is the reference for the IDF numbers, as well as the claim that the Lebanese doesn't differentiate between civilians and combatants in death toll figures. The references for the Lebanese civilian casualties are [21] and [22]. That's page 26 on http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/specialsession/A.HRC.3.2.pdf

Which in turn sites "Information available on the website of the Presidency of the Council of Ministers - Higher
Relief Council, http://www.lebanonundersiege.gov.lb (retrieved on 7 November 2006).

And for the claim that 1/3 of all casualties where children:

UNICEF Situation Report, Lebanon, 1-8 September 2006.

On top of this, six Brazilians, eight Canadians, four Germans and a bunch of other none-Lebanese civilians where killed, virtually all in Israeli air strikes and bombings. 30 000 homes destroyed.

Try to use your head. The notion that Israel killed more Hezbollah fighters than civilians would require magic. It is simply not possible when one bombs entire cities that way.

Quote from a_person:
What part of "civilians and combatants" don't you understand? How more unambiguous do you want it to be to finally admit that you fucked up? And given the consensus that about 500-600 of them were militants you can calculate the actual number of civilian casualties - which given 34 days of heavy fighting was about 15-18 civilians per day - more than reasonable during any war.

If it is true that the number 1191 is the entire number of total casualties and that all Hezbollah fighters are included in this number, I have no problem admitting that I did misunderstand the article. Although I am not convinced, because if that was the case, if a total of 1191 died, of which 600 were Hezbollah fighters and 400 were children, it would mean that only about 200 civilian adults were killed. This doesn't make any sense at all, unless the IDF consciously targeted Hezbollah fighters and children.

Quote from a_person:
No buddy, this is not what I am claiming. I am claiming that their blood is on the hands of their Hezbollah supporting parents. The IDF is not targeting children, the parents of these children support Hezbollah and let Hezbollah hide behind their children. Get off that high horse already, what I am saying is not that hard to understand. [/B]

First of all, this too is what Palestinian terrorists are saying. They're saying that it's not their fault that Israeli children die, they say it's their parents fault for placing them on other peoples land, for supporting a government that kills Palestinians and for participating in the military forces of that government them self.

And second, I never said the IDF targeted children. The IDF simply don't give a rats ass about non-Israeli human lives. Take a look at this last case that just was up about the Reuters photographer who was brutally murdered by the IDF; after conducting an investigation, the IDF found that no wrongs had taken place, despite the fact that the soldiers who fired admitted they could not identify the target. This certainly explains why Israeli victims always are mostly civilians.

If Israel regarded Lebanese human lives as valuable as Israeli human lives, they would have fought Hezbollah the same way as they would have fought militants in Israeli cities. Imagine F-16s bombing Tel Aviv randomly because some of the buildings might contain terrorists. Would never happen.

 

[a_person]

Quote from destroyer:

That's page 26 on http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/specialsession/A.HRC.3.2.pdf
Page 26 says: "The conflict resulted in 1,191 deaths"
UNICEF report says: IMPACT OF CONFLICT - Deaths - 1,187 (an estimated 1/3 of them children)

What's so fucking hard to understand? Both reports talk about the total number of casualties, just like all other links (wikipedia etc) we discussed before. They all say absolutely the same unambiguous thing. What's so fucking hard to understand? Did you freeze your fucking brain or something in Oslo?

If it is true that the number 1191 is the entire number of total casualties and that all Hezbollah fighters are included in this number, I have no problem admitting that I did misunderstand the article.
You have misunderstood the number and so far you have not admitted that.

Although I am not convinced, because if that was the case, if a total of 1191 died, of which 600 were Hezbollah fighters and 400 were children, it would mean that only about 200 civilian adults were killed.
Is it possible that the UNICEF report is a bit off, is there a reason why they say "an estimated 1/3 of them children" instead of using exact numbers?

Or even more likely, is it possible that this is what's confusing you? They are children for UNICEF, they are militants and martyrs for Hezbollah.

First of all, this too is what Palestinian terrorists are saying. They're saying that it's not their fault that Israeli children die, they say it's their parents fault
And just because two sides say similar things does not mean what they say is equally applicable in completely different situations. The "fault" of the Israeli parents is that they and their families live in their country, the fault of the arab parents is that they let rogue militants like Hezbollah (as you called them) run around in their neighborhoods, help them, support them (as you admitted) and let them use their children as human shields. When the children get killed their parents have no one to blame but themselves and if you don't understand this you're hopeless (which I am sure is the case).

And second, I never said the IDF targeted children. The IDF simply don't give a rats ass about non-Israeli human lives.
Cut this fucking crap - there were on average 15-18 civilian casualties during each day of extremely heavy fighting. This is more than reasonable for any war. If the Israelis did not give a rats ass about non-Israeli lives as you claim the number of civilian casualties would be in hundreds or more likely in thousands (and the number of Israeli casualties civilian and military would be zero). So please cut the crap and stick to skiing, not politics, wars and the Middle East - things that you have absolutely no idea about on your fucking North Pole.

 

[destroyer]

Quote from a_person:
What's so fucking hard to understand? Both reports talk about the total number of casualties, just like all other links (wikipedia etc) we discussed before. They all say absolutely the same unambiguous thing. What's so fucking hard to understand? Did you freeze your fucking brain or something in Oslo?

Calm down a little. I see your points, but I'm still having problems working out how some people can estimate as much as 750 of the 1191 dead was Hezbollah while others are estimating 400 of those same 1191 are children under the age of 13.

It was also widely reported that the majority of victims were indeed civilians and not combatants. Which certainly makes sense, considering the fact that Israel bombed civilian buildings to an extreme extent. 30 000 homes destroyed, they can't have had intel saying all these homes held terrorists.

Quote from a_person:
If it is true that the number 1191 is the entire number of total casualties and that all Hezbollah fighters are included in this number, I have no problem admitting that I did misunderstand the article.
You have misunderstood the number and so far you have not admitted that.

Because the wikipedia article still lists civilian casualties and Hezbollah fighters separately, and they add them separately in the summaries. Yes, the numbers are complemented with the claim that these figures doesn't differentiate between civilians and Hezbollah, but it still seems like a separate count. That would also make more sense - that the number 1191 is the total number of random victims, mostly by airstrikes. Obviously some of these victims would probably be Hezbollah fighters, but certainly not more than half.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targeting_of_civilian_areas_in_the_2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict

I'll take a closer look into this, and if it turns out the number 1191 is the total number of casualties, of which 400-750 were Hezbollah fighters, I'll admit I made a mistake. However, you have still left to either provide evidence for the claim that most of Israels victims were Hezbollah fighters (something that is widely disputed), or admit that you lied (or made a mistake).

Again,

The Lebanese Higher Relief Council (HRC),[1] UNICEF,[1] and various press agencies and news organizations have stated that most of those killed were Lebanese civilians,[2][3][4][5][6],

2 ^ Washington Post (September 15, 2006). "Rights Group Accuses Hezbollah of 'Indiscriminate' Killing"Retrieved Augsut 4, 2007.
3 ^ International Herald Tribune (August 7, 2006). "Lebanese PM admits death toll was incorrect". Retrieved August 4, 2007.
4 ^ BBC News (January 17, 2007). "Israeli PM faces calls to resign". Retrieved August 4, 2007.
5 ^ BBC News (July 18, 2007). "Timeline: Lebanon". Retrieved August 4, 2007.
6 ^ Reuters (July 9, 2007). "Factbox - Costs of war and recovery in Lebanon and Israel". Retrieved August 4, 2007.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_2006_Lebanon_War

Intended targeting aside, approximately one-quarter of the Israelis killed by Hezbollah and the vast majority of the Lebanese killed by Israeli forces were widely reported to be civilians.[1][2][3] The Boston-based Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America, a media watchdog group focused on monitoring any coverage it considers unfair to Israel, suggested that nearly half, or even most, of Lebanese casualties were combatants.[4]

2 ^ "Timeline of the July War 2006", The Daily Star, Lebanon.
4 ^ "Questioning the number of civilian casualties in Lebanon", Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targeting_of_civilian_areas_in_the_2006_Israel-Lebanon_conflict

Even the ultra-pro-Israeli media watchdog is in disagreement with you. By stretching and pulling their imagination to the very limit, they manage to say that maybe as many as half of the killed ones are Hezbollah. That's the estimate of our most biased source.

Quote from a_person:
Or even more likely, is it possible that this is what's confusing you? They are children for UNICEF, they are militants and martyrs for Hezbollah.

Trying to play a picture of a school play or something for a real picture of Hezbollah warriors is just cheap.

Quote from a_person:
First of all, this too is what Palestinian terrorists are saying. They're saying that it's not their fault that Israeli children die, they say it's their parents fault
And just because two sides say similar things does not mean what they say is equally applicable in completely different situations. The "fault" of the Israeli parents is that they and their families live in their country, the fault of the arab parents is that they let rogue militants like Hezbollah (as you called them) run around in their neighborhoods, help them, support them (as you admitted) and let them use their children as human shields. When the children get killed their parents have no one to blame but themselves and if you don't understand this you're hopeless (which I am sure is the case).

Israelis let IDF run around in their neighborhoods, help them, support them, even work for them. And they chose a country for their children that was already settled by hundreds of thousands - a population which they removed by force, and are still keeping out by force. It's not just "similar things", it's the exact same logic.

Seriously, answer this question. Forget about nationality, forget about patriotism, etc. Imagine a people coming from abroad to settle in America, and imagine they decide to live in your state and turn it into their exclusive homeland. Are you telling me that you would just pack your bag and leave?

Quote from a_person:
And second, I never said the IDF targeted children. The IDF simply don't give a rats ass about non-Israeli human lives.
Cut this fucking crap - there were on average 15-18 civilian casualties during each day of extremely heavy fighting. This is more than reasonable for any war. If the Israelis did not give a rats ass about non-Israeli lives as you claim the number of civilian casualties would be in hundreds or more likely in thousands (and the number of Israeli casualties civilian and military would be zero). So please cut the crap and stick to skiing, not politics, wars and the Middle East - things that you have absolutely no idea about on your fucking North Pole.

The Israeli leaders are not stupid at all, and I would never suggest that they would consider nuking Lebanon back to the stone age. This is because the international community is watching, and Israel has got very much to lose by alienating their friends. The US has a hard time as it is backing up Israel in everything they do.

Just take a look at Israels record. Forget about Amnesty International, forget about Human Right Watch, just listen to what B'Tselem says. http://www.btselem.org

Here's a tiny tiny sample:
The IDF is allowed to assassinate Palestinians suspected of having committed attacks against Israelis.
http://www.btselem.org/English/Firearms/

They're actually allowed to take your life if you're a) a Palestinian and b) suspected of having committed attacks against Israelis. In other words, they're allowed to murder you if they feel like it, and by stating they actually did suspect you of being a terrorist in the report, they go clean. This is what happened with the Reuters photographer, and it has happened with thousands of innocent Palestinians.

If the Israelis regarded all human life as invaluable, they would have conducted their operations amongst Palestinians as they would amongst Israelis. In return, the Palestinians would not have been as eager to support attacks against Israel and join militias, and the job of the PA of restraining terrorists would have been far easier.

But no, they choose to harm the civilian population. It sometimes seems like they not only regard none-Israeli lives as expendable, they actually consciously decide to harm them in order to maintain a certain level of hostility which they in turn can use to justify expansion of settlements, etc. It's also worth noting that if the Palestinians tried to claim justice peacefully, it would be a mayor problem for Israel, with the demographic problems and all.

There's not much snow here in the summers, so skiing might be a little hard right now. Winter is coming up though, so I'm looking forward to take you up on that!

 

[destroyer]

Let's try to get this back to the actual topic.

Point is, by condemning this Russian invasion of sovereign undisputed Georgian land, the Bush administration reveals its hypocrisy, as they supported the Israeli invasion of sovereign undisputed Lebanese land only two years ago. In both cases, the invading forces and the bombings was taken way past the conflict zone. There's really not much more to it, either it's acceptable to invade a sovereign country if one feels it has to be done to protect ones citizens, or it is absolutely unacceptable unless one self is invaded by another county's army. You can't have different rules for each nation if you want to be a responsible and fair superpower. That's what we can deduce from a comparison between these to conflicts. Obviously, comparing this to the Iraq war would reveal much more about US hypocrisy, but let's leave that to another thread.

On the other hand, letting Georgia be run over by the Russians (as the US indeed has done), does not make a good promise for other allies of the US.
Did you catch the Condi Rice/Saakasvhili press conference yesterday? Saakasvhili was condemning the West for allowing it to happen while condi was standing next to him in silence.

 

[a_person]

Quote from destroyer:

Point is, by condemning this Russian invasion of sovereign undisputed Georgian land, the Bush administration reveals its hypocrisy, as they supported the Israeli invasion of sovereign undisputed Lebanese land only two years ago.
1. Israel and Lebanon were technically in a state of war (since 1948), Georgia and Russia were not.

2. Israel had been shelled by Katyusha rockets from Lebanon for years and the Lebanese government was doing absolutely nothing to stop those attacks. Georgia has never fired a rocket into Russia.

3. Hizbollah (a legitimate Lebanese party, part of the Lebanese government) launched cross-border raid into Israel, killed a number of Israelis and took two of them hostage. No Georgian organization, party, gang or even individual launched a cross-border raid into Russia, no Russian citizen was killed or kidnapped by Georgians within Russian borders.

4. Two Israelis were captured and taken to Lebanon, the Lebanese government was doing absolutely nothing to secure their release. There were no Russian hostages/prisoners in Georgia.

These distinctions make all the difference in the world. You can perhaps compare the invasion of Georgia with the invasion of Iraq, but certainly not with the 2006 Lebanon war. The second Lebanon war is comparable to the UN sanctioned invasion of Afghanistan in retaliation for the 9/11 attack and with the objective of destroying Al-Qaeda but it can't possibly be compared to this Russian aggression.

On the other hand, letting Georgia be run over by the Russians (as the US indeed has done), does not make a good promise for other allies of the US.
The US never promised to defend Georgia from an invasion, we wanted to and that's why we lobbied NATO to extend its membership to Georgia (and Ukraine). Our spineless european "allies" rejected the proposal and the invasion of Georgia is therefore 100% their fault.

It was also widely reported that the majority of victims were indeed civilians and not combatants
That's what I've been telling you all along, you've been fucking brain-washed by your anti-israel european media. Too bad you euro-idiots never learn and keep falling for every new lie and smear. These reports you are talking about is just one example, Israel was wrongly accused of using chemical weapons during that war which was proven wrong, it was accused of the Jenin massacre during the second intifada - never happened either, it was accused of killing Muhammad al-Durrah which started the 2nd intifada, the boy was in fact killed by Palestinian militants.
I can give you hundreds of similar lies that smear Israel and whitewash crimes committed by arabs and muslims. But something tells me that you'll happily fall for the next one anyway.

 

[destroyer]

Quote from a_person:
Point is, by condemning this Russian invasion of sovereign undisputed Georgian land, the Bush administration reveals its hypocrisy, as they supported the Israeli invasion of sovereign undisputed Lebanese land only two years ago.

[...]

These distinctions make all the difference in the world. You can perhaps compare the invasion of Georgia with the invasion of Iraq, but certainly not with the 2006 Lebanon war. The second Lebanon war is comparable to the UN sanctioned invasion of Afghanistan in retaliation for the 9/11 attack and with the objective of destroying Al-Qaeda but it can't possibly be compared to this Russian aggression.

I don't think the differences are huge enough to dismiss the comparison. In fact, the differences only makes it more absurd to support the invasion of Lebanon while condemning the invasion of Georgia. We've already established the similarities. A couple of differences beside the ones you mention needs to be noted as well:

1. The Georgian government planned and conducted the actions that lead to the Russian invasion them self. The Lebanese government did not even sanction the Hezbollah attack, they were screwed over by rogue militants.

2. Georgia lead a large military campaign in disputed land against a people who wants independence. Hezbollah, not Lebanon, conducted a minor operation against Israeli fighters (also on disputed land) - the sort of operation that Israel has done countless of times all over the world, including all the way up here on the north pole.

3. The Georgian people supported their government and were willing to fight the Ossetians for their land. The Lebanese people had nothing to do, whatsoever, with the Hezbollah attacks.

Nobody disputes the offended part's right to do something to secure its citizens, in any of the cases. In both cases, the offended part conducted a large scale invasion stretching far outside the conflict zone and causing massive destruction to a whole lot of none-military infrastructure. Disrespecting innocent lives like that ought to be unacceptable no matter where your from.

Quote from a_person:
On the other hand, letting Georgia be run over by the Russians (as the US indeed has done), does not make a good promise for other allies of the US.
The US never promised to defend Georgia from an invasion, we wanted to and that's why we lobbied NATO to extend its membership to Georgia (and Ukraine). Our spineless european "allies" rejected the proposal and the invasion of Georgia is therefore 100% their fault.

Why, so we can fight and die for Saakasvhilis right to fulfill his political promises instead of you? When did US power become dependent on "spineless Europeans" anyhow? Why couldn't the US just have given Georgia the same US-only guarantee, as they've given to Israel? Imagine what would happen if Russia invaded Israel; the US would have been all over Russia, giving everything in a split second. But Georgia doesn't have as powerful friends in Washington and in the US media as the Israelis do, so the true wishes of the US is allowed to emerge. Certainly, Americans doesn't feel like dying for Saakashvilis right to rule over a people that doesn't want to be ruled by him either. "Spineless" as us, it seems.

Quote from a_person:
It was also widely reported that the majority of victims were indeed civilians and not combatants
That's what I've been telling you all along, you've been fucking brain-washed by your anti-israel european media.

There's a war of information going on, and you're buying into every single piece of pro-Israeli propaganda out there. I'm not going to buy into your baseless bullshit, I'd rather remain skeptical to all disputed claims from both sides. This right here - the claim that Israel killed more civilians than combatants is not even disputed, even CAMERA, the most advanced propaganda instrument in modern history is stretching it's imagination to the very limit in order to suggest that it's possible that as many combatants where killed as civilians. Your claim is not merely biased, it is off the charts-biased.

Quote from a_person:
These reports you are talking about is just one example, Israel was wrongly accused of using chemical weapons during that war which was proven wrong, it was accused of the Jenin massacre during the second intifada - never happened either, it was accused of killing Muhammad al-Durrah which started the 2nd intifada, the boy was in fact killed by Palestinian militants.

I didn't know anything about chemical weapons, though I've heard a whole lot about cluster bombs. I don't recall any massacre in Jenin either, I remember reading about the battle, and as always, a whole lot of innocent civilians killed by IDF (nothing new there). And the killing of Muhammed al-Durrah is still disputed, you can't just claim it's not without providing any evidence. Anyway, it is beyond dispute that IDF has killed countless 12-year old boys and girls, before and after this, so it really doesn't make any difference where this particular bullet came from.

Unless you're ready to call all the parents of these children and tell them they all died as part of a Palestinian media-conspiracy against Israel: http://www.rememberthesechildren.org/remember2008.html

Quote from a_person:
I can give you hundreds of similar lies that smear Israel and whitewash crimes committed by arabs and muslims. But something tells me that you'll happily fall for the next one anyway.

If you can give me any real evidence for any of your claims, I'll have no problem believing it. I guarantee you that. Your problem is that this evidence doesn't exist, because you're buying into anything and everything pro-Israeli, and sometimes you even go further than the most extreme pro-Israeli sources.

By the way, you forgot to respond to this question:

Forget about nationality, forget about patriotism, etc. Imagine a people coming from abroad to settle in America, and imagine they decide to live in your state and turn it into their exclusive homeland. Are you telling me that you would just pack your bag and leave?

Judging from your view on the Palestinians, it would seem like you'd be glad to let immigrants take your private land and your neighbors private land. Europeans are spineless, you say?