Quote (Elyran @ 8 Oct 2023 14:05)
You are completely blind and clueless of what's happening.
If responding to a terrorist invasion involving the murder and kidnapping of CIVILIANS, women, children, elderly is what you call a "genocidal answer" then lets fuckin go - time for Israel to wipe out Hamas and the PIJ once and for all.
You being in France, and after all France has been through with terrorism, it's hard to understand how one such as yourself can still be so blind and quite frankly, fucking stupid.
Sounds like ignorance to me. France has been cautious regarding Israel since 60 years and i think it was a good decision
https://fresques.ina.fr/de-gaulle/fiche-media/Gaulle00139/conference-de-presse-du-27-novembre-1967.htmlDo not count on me to defend anyone in this story, terrorism has no reason to exists, along with what Israeli far right governement did.
'
The establishment between the two world wars, because we have to go back that far, the establishment of a Zionist home in Palestine, and then after the Second World War, the establishment of a State of Israel raised concerns at the time a certain number of apprehensions. We could wonder, in fact, and we wondered, even among many Jews, whether the establishment of this community on lands which had been acquired under more or less justifiable conditions and among the Arab peoples who are fundamentally hostile, were not going to lead to incessant, endless friction and conflict. And some even feared that the Jews, until then dispersed, and who had remained what they had always been, that is to say an elite people, sure of themselves and dominating, would not come once they would be gathered in the sites of its former grandeur, come to change into ardent and conquering ambition the very moving wishes which they had formed for 19 centuries: "next year in Jerusalem". Despite the flow, sometimes rising, sometimes falling, of the malevolence which provoked it, which aroused it more precisely, in certain countries at certain periods, a considerable capital of interest and even of sympathy had been formed in their favor and above all it must be said in Christianity. A capital which came from the immense memory of the will, nourished from all the sources of a magnificent liturgy, maintained by the commiseration inspired by their ancient value and which was poeticized among us by the legend of the wandering Jew, increased by the abominable persecutions that they had suffered during the Second World War and had grown since it had found a homeland, through the work, their constructive work and the courage of their soldiers. This is why, independently of the vast support in money, in influence, in propaganda that the Israelis received from Jewish circles, from America and Europe, many countries, including France, viewed with satisfaction the establishment of their State on the territory that the powers had recognized to them, that the powers had recognized to them, while desiring that they manage, by using a little modesty, to find a peaceful modus vivendi with their neighbors. It must be said that these psychological data had changed somewhat since 1956. Thanks to the Franco-British Suez expedition, we had seen the emergence of a warlike state of Israel determined to expand, and then the The action he was taking to double his population through the immigration of new elements suggested that the territory he had acquired would not last him for long and that he would be inclined to use any opportunity that presented itself to enlarge it. . This is why, moreover, the Fifth Republic had freed itself, vis-à-vis Israel, from the special and very close links that the previous regime had established with and State and the Fifth Republic had applied itself, to on the contrary, to promote détente in the Middle East. Of course, we maintained cordial relations with the Israeli government and even provided it for its possible defense with the armaments it requested to purchase, but at the same time we provided it with advice for moderation.
Particularly regarding the disputes which concerned the waters of the Jordan, the skirmishes which periodically opposed the forces of the two sides. Finally, we did not give our approval to his installation in a district of Jerusalem which he had seized, and we maintained our embassy in Tel Aviv. On the other hand, once the Algerian affair was put to an end, we resumed with the Arab peoples of the East, the same policy of friendship and cooperation which had been that of France for centuries in this part of the world and whose reason and feeling mean that it must today be one of the fundamental bases of our external action. Of course, we did not let the Arabs ignore that for us the State of Israel was an accomplished fact and that we would not admit that it was destroyed. So all things considered, one could imagine that a day would come when our country could directly help ensure that a real peace was concluded and guaranteed in the East provided that no new drama came to tear it apart. Alas! the drama came, it had been prepared by a very serious and constant tension which resulted from the scandalous fate of the refugees in Jordan, and also from a threat of destruction lavished against Israel. On May 22, the Aqaba affair, unfortunately created by Egypt, would provide a pretext for those who dreamed of fighting over it. To avoid hostilities, on May 24, France proposed to the three other great powers to jointly prohibit each of the two parties from starting combat. On June 2, the French government officially declared that it would eventually rule out whoever was the first to take armed action. And this is what he repeated in complete clarity to all the States involved. This is what I myself declared on May 24 to Mr. Ebban, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Israel, whom I saw in Paris. If Israel is attacked, I told him in substance, we will not let it be destroyed, but if you attack, we will condemn your initiative. Certainly, despite the numerical inferiority of your population, given that you are much better organized, much more united, much better armed than the Arabs, I have no doubt that if necessary, you would achieve military success. But then, you would find yourself engaged on the ground, and from an international point of view, in growing difficulties, especially since the war in the East cannot fail to increase deplorable tension in the world and to have very serious consequences. unfortunate for many countries. So much so that it is to you, having become conquerors, that we would gradually attribute the disadvantages. We know that France's voice was not heard, Israel having attacked, seized in six days of combat the objectives it wanted to achieve. Now he is organizing, on the territories he has taken, the occupation which cannot go without oppression, repression, expulsion and if he manifests resistance against him which in turn he describes as terrorism, it is true that both belligerents are observing for the moment in a more or less precarious and irregular manner the ceasefire prescribed by the United Nations but it is quite obvious that the conflict is only suspended and that there can be no solution unless by international route. But a settlement along this path, unless the United Nations itself tears up its own charter, a settlement must have as its basis, the evacuation of the territories which have been taken by force, the end of all belligerence , and the recognition of each of the Eats in question by all the others.
'
This post was edited by Meanwhile on Oct 8 2023 06:52am