World Politics/Global Events


World Politics/Global Events

Author
Message
quickflick
quickflick
World Class
World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K, Visits: 0
BETHFC wrote:
Israel-Palestine discussions always seem to neglect the fact that the Arabs did try and wipe out Israel and were humiliated. Israel took the west bank and gave it back.

Could have kept it and saved themselves a hassle.

It annoys me when people whinge about the aggressive stance taken by Israel against Palestine. How the hell would you act if you didn't know if a random rocket was going to kill you tomorrow?

Both sides are just as bad as each other but Israel cops it worse for being more advanced and organised. Palestine attacking Israel is like trying kill a lion with a stick. The common sense though is if you don't want the lion to bite, don't poke it!

This obviously doesn't take into account forced resettlement which is of course wrong on every level.


We haven't even got that far yet. We're talking about the establishment of Israel in the first place.

The way in which the place was created was horrific. I recommend viewing a dramatisation called The Promise (from Channel 4 in the UK).

Don't take it as Gospel. Watch it because it's great drama. Then when you see something particularly brutal, look it up to see if that actually did happen (or if similar happened).

Edited by quickflick: 20/5/2016 11:39:47 PM
Edited
9 Years Ago by quickflick
socceroo_06
socceroo_06
Pro
Pro (2.7K reputation)Pro (2.7K reputation)Pro (2.7K reputation)Pro (2.7K reputation)Pro (2.7K reputation)Pro (2.7K reputation)Pro (2.7K reputation)Pro (2.7K reputation)Pro (2.7K reputation)Pro (2.7K reputation)Pro (2.7K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.6K, Visits: 0
quickflick wrote:
socceroo_06 wrote:
quickflick wrote:
This is massively oversimplified. But I reckon that the British giving Palestine to the Jewish screwed up the whole region (arguably the whole world) big time and is the source of the majority of problems the West has with Islam today.

After the war, the British and Americans were absolutely exhausted. They didn't want to fight anymore. There was, with good reason, lots of sympathy for the Jews after the world saw pictures of Birkenau.

The Jews, understandably, became resolved to ensure that never again would they be exterminated. They wanted a homeland. They went, en masse, to Palestine and agitated, through brutal terrorist means, for the British to relinquish control of that territory.

If the Second World War hadn't occurred, it's almost impossible that the British would have given up Palestine to the Jews only.

....

Edited by quickflick: 19/5/2016 10:23:14 PM

Edited by quickflick: 19/5/2016 10:24:07 PM


Stopped reading after this...not sure if you are just getting all of this information anecdotally, but you need to dig a little deeper and look at the historical facts.

1882 - 1939 - Mass immigration of Jews to Palestine, firstly due to a rise in anti-Semitism in Russia and then following the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party in Germany.

1897 - World Zionist Organisation is created to advocate for a Jewish Homeland in Palestine, which at that time was under the Ottoman Empire and following the First World War, The British Mandate of Palestine.

1917 - Balfour Declaration - British Foreign Secretary Sir James Balfour approves the creation of a national homeland for the Jews in Palestine stating: "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people..."

These three significant events happened long before WWII and set in motion the establishment of a nation-state for the Jews in The British Mandate of Palestine.

So yes, a massive oversimplification of the history.


I'm not getting my information anecdotally, I'm familiar with the events to which you have alluded. I simply attach less importance to them.

Yes, so many Jewish people always wanted Palestine to be their homeland. Yes, boatloads of Jewish people emigrated to Palestine before 1933. It doesn't change the fact that however many Arabs were already living in the areas they coveted. What the hell were they going to do about it?

There were other issues influencing the Balfour Declaration. Don't forget it was smack bang in the middle of the First World War. Kaiser Wilhelm II's drew upon a huge amount of support from the Jews in Germany. The Balfour Declaration could be counted upon to sow division in his ranks. Additionally, Britain was trying to draw the United States into the war. A number of those who advised Woodrow Wilson were big time Zionists.

Have you heard of the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence? It offered similar things to Arabs.

Anyway, this is all irrelevant. Supposing the British had been intending to give Palestine to the Jews (which has not been established and is a dubious proposition). How is it fair to dispossess people of their land and homes and replace others there?

What I'm saying is that the Second World War (British fatigue and sympathy for the plight of the Jewish people in the wake of the Holocaust) was the straw that broke the camel's back.

It led to a deeply iniquitous outcome and has subsequently caused lasting damage.


How has it not been established or is dubious? I'll let Norman Finkelstein take this one:
Quote:
When Britain issued the Balfour Declaration the official explanation was that they wanted to support the right of a suffering people to self-determination. But the fact is that British internal records show that the British were hoping to use a Jewish state in Palestine entirely to rely on it to protect British interests in the Middle East, especially the Suez Canal and the land route to India.


So the real intention was strategic and less so sympathetic to the plight of the Jews during that time. Is that so surprising? There are many examples of sovereign nations strategically supporting nation-states. Still doesn't take away from the fact the British strongly supported a homeland for the Jews in Palestine.

The establishment of the state of Israel is legally binding. You can't get passed that fact and you will get nowhere in any discussion about Israel until you move on from there.

The question is how can a 2-state solution be resolved today. That is where the real debate is taking place.


Edited
9 Years Ago by socceroo_06
Vanlassen
Vanlassen
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.4K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K, Visits: 0
I've started watching television again after what seems like years. Is there a single person on the ABC that supports Donald Trump?

There alot of people on this forum who keep saying that the ABC is balanced and unbiased but I really don't see that as the case. How can you say that the ABC represents all sides of politics when all they seem to say is that Donald Trump is a misogynist, a joke, a racist yada yada yada?
Edited
9 Years Ago by vanlassen
aussie scott21
aussie scott21
Legend
Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K, Visits: 0
vanlassen wrote:
I've started watching television again after what seems like years. Is there a single person on the ABC that supports Donald Trump?

There alot of people on this forum who keep saying that the ABC is balanced and unbiased but I really don't see that as the case. How can you say that the ABC represents all sides of politics when all they seem to say is that Donald Trump is a misogynist, a joke, a racist yada yada yada?

It's because if you are on the right you would be labelled the same thing if you were in the media by the leftards. So people don't bother anymore.
Edited
9 Years Ago by scott21
Aikhme
Aikhme
Pro
Pro (2.5K reputation)Pro (2.5K reputation)Pro (2.5K reputation)Pro (2.5K reputation)Pro (2.5K reputation)Pro (2.5K reputation)Pro (2.5K reputation)Pro (2.5K reputation)Pro (2.5K reputation)Pro (2.5K reputation)Pro (2.5K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.4K, Visits: 0
scott21 wrote:
vanlassen wrote:
I've started watching television again after what seems like years. Is there a single person on the ABC that supports Donald Trump?

There alot of people on this forum who keep saying that the ABC is balanced and unbiased but I really don't see that as the case. How can you say that the ABC represents all sides of politics when all they seem to say is that Donald Trump is a misogynist, a joke, a racist yada yada yada?

It's because if you are on the right you would be labelled the same thing if you were in the media by the leftards. So people don't bother anymore.


I have written posts about this on many occasions concerning Gay Marriage, safe Schools, and Gender Issues.

The new tactic by the left seems to be to try and silence their opposition whether that be religious groups, conservatives, those opposing Marriage Equality and Safe Schools.

Even the AFP investigations into the Labor leaks is a big conspiracy.

Our rights to free speech are being eroded because as you say, most people don't bother anymore as they will be accused of everything under the sun.
Edited
9 Years Ago by Aikhme
quickflick
quickflick
World Class
World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)World Class (6.3K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K, Visits: 0
socceroo_06 wrote:
quickflick wrote:
socceroo_06 wrote:
quickflick wrote:
This is massively oversimplified. But I reckon that the British giving Palestine to the Jewish screwed up the whole region (arguably the whole world) big time and is the source of the majority of problems the West has with Islam today.

After the war, the British and Americans were absolutely exhausted. They didn't want to fight anymore. There was, with good reason, lots of sympathy for the Jews after the world saw pictures of Birkenau.

The Jews, understandably, became resolved to ensure that never again would they be exterminated. They wanted a homeland. They went, en masse, to Palestine and agitated, through brutal terrorist means, for the British to relinquish control of that territory.

If the Second World War hadn't occurred, it's almost impossible that the British would have given up Palestine to the Jews only.

....

Edited by quickflick: 19/5/2016 10:23:14 PM

Edited by quickflick: 19/5/2016 10:24:07 PM


Stopped reading after this...not sure if you are just getting all of this information anecdotally, but you need to dig a little deeper and look at the historical facts.

1882 - 1939 - Mass immigration of Jews to Palestine, firstly due to a rise in anti-Semitism in Russia and then following the rise of Hitler and the Nazi party in Germany.

1897 - World Zionist Organisation is created to advocate for a Jewish Homeland in Palestine, which at that time was under the Ottoman Empire and following the First World War, The British Mandate of Palestine.

1917 - Balfour Declaration - British Foreign Secretary Sir James Balfour approves the creation of a national homeland for the Jews in Palestine stating: "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people..."

These three significant events happened long before WWII and set in motion the establishment of a nation-state for the Jews in The British Mandate of Palestine.

So yes, a massive oversimplification of the history.


I'm not getting my information anecdotally, I'm familiar with the events to which you have alluded. I simply attach less importance to them.

Yes, so many Jewish people always wanted Palestine to be their homeland. Yes, boatloads of Jewish people emigrated to Palestine before 1933. It doesn't change the fact that however many Arabs were already living in the areas they coveted. What the hell were they going to do about it?

There were other issues influencing the Balfour Declaration. Don't forget it was smack bang in the middle of the First World War. Kaiser Wilhelm II's drew upon a huge amount of support from the Jews in Germany. The Balfour Declaration could be counted upon to sow division in his ranks. Additionally, Britain was trying to draw the United States into the war. A number of those who advised Woodrow Wilson were big time Zionists.

Have you heard of the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence? It offered similar things to Arabs.

Anyway, this is all irrelevant. Supposing the British had been intending to give Palestine to the Jews (which has not been established and is a dubious proposition). How is it fair to dispossess people of their land and homes and replace others there?

What I'm saying is that the Second World War (British fatigue and sympathy for the plight of the Jewish people in the wake of the Holocaust) was the straw that broke the camel's back.

It led to a deeply iniquitous outcome and has subsequently caused lasting damage.


How has it not been established or is dubious? I'll let Norman Finkelstein take this one:
Quote:
When Britain issued the Balfour Declaration the official explanation was that they wanted to support the right of a suffering people to self-determination. But the fact is that British internal records show that the British were hoping to use a Jewish state in Palestine entirely to rely on it to protect British interests in the Middle East, especially the Suez Canal and the land route to India.


So the real intention was strategic and less so sympathetic to the plight of the Jews during that time. Is that so surprising? There are many examples of sovereign nations strategically supporting nation-states. Still doesn't take away from the fact the British strongly supported a homeland for the Jews in Palestine.



I should clarify my position. I'm saying Britain wouldn't have agreed to relinquish the amount of Palestine that they did to the Jews in the manner that they relinquished it to the Jews.

Are you saying that Britain wanted a Jewish homeland established but not Arab self-determination?

Pre Second World War, such an assertion doesn't stand up to scrutiny when you look at the all sources.

I'm not saying the British were opposed to self-determination, full stop. I'm saying that they wouldn't have gifted the Jews large chunks of land inhabited by Arabs (for Christ knows how long) and in such a way that the new Israelis could embark on a campaign of ethnic cleansing.

But the Second World War was the straw that broke the camel's back. After that, they were too tired and too sympathetic to the cause of the Jewish people.

Please tell me you're not trying to defend the ethnic cleansing that took place.

socceroo_06 wrote:

The establishment of the state of Israel is legally binding. You can't get passed that fact and you will get nowhere in any discussion about Israel until you move on from there.


De facto, yes.

I don't think any attempt should be made to undo Israel's existence. Political Zionism is innately wrong, as Sir Isaac Isaacs said, and the state of Israel shouldn't have been created in the manner that it was created. But it is what it is. The entire indigenous population in Tasmania shouldn't have been exterminated. But that happened.

The world just needs to do the best it can to make peace.

I think apologies, damages and undertakings not to engage in "protecting Jewish settlements" are required on the part of Israel. Israel ought to apologise for the way in which the state was created.

Queen Margaret in William Shakespeare's Richard III wrote:

As it was won with blood, lost be it so!

-I.iii. 276



Shakespeare tended to get it right.

I don't think attempts should be made to get rid of Israel. But I think its existence is made incredibly precarious by virtue of its beginnings. It will carry on being besieged and will continue to invoke the wrath of many in the region and throughout the work.

Until the state can turn full circle (as it nearly did a couple of decades ago before ultra-nationalist thugs killed a brilliant man), its existence will continue to be precarious.

socceroo_06 wrote:
The question is how can a 2-state solution be resolved today. That is where the real debate is taking place.



Agreed. The trouble is successive Israeli governments have regarded the concept of a two-state solution as anathema. They want to continue to oppress the Palestinians.

The quality of propaganda they spread, especially in Israel, but in Jewish communities in the States, the UK, Australia, etc., is first-rate.

Meanwhile Iran is run by madmen. The surrounding Arab states have been anything but stable in recent times.

I see very little possibility of things getting better in the short term.

Edited by quickflick: 21/5/2016 07:21:19 PM

Edited by quickflick: 21/5/2016 07:24:35 PM
Edited
9 Years Ago by quickflick
BETHFC
BETHFC
World Class
World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.2K, Visits: 0
quickflick wrote:
BETHFC wrote:
Israel-Palestine discussions always seem to neglect the fact that the Arabs did try and wipe out Israel and were humiliated. Israel took the west bank and gave it back.

Could have kept it and saved themselves a hassle.

It annoys me when people whinge about the aggressive stance taken by Israel against Palestine. How the hell would you act if you didn't know if a random rocket was going to kill you tomorrow?

Both sides are just as bad as each other but Israel cops it worse for being more advanced and organised. Palestine attacking Israel is like trying kill a lion with a stick. The common sense though is if you don't want the lion to bite, don't poke it!

This obviously doesn't take into account forced resettlement which is of course wrong on every level.


We haven't even got that far yet. We're talking about the establishment of Israel in the first place.

The way in which the place was created was horrific. I recommend viewing a dramatisation called The Promise (from Channel 4 in the UK).

Don't take it as Gospel. Watch it because it's great drama. Then when you see something particularly brutal, look it up to see if that actually did happen (or if similar happened).

Edited by quickflick: 20/5/2016 11:39:47 PM


Oh no doubt, the creation of the state of Israel wasn't done with even remotely enough care for the effects on the Palestinians amongst others.

However, how can you blame this on the jewish people? Are they meant to feel sorry for it?That's like us Australians born in the last 40 years having to feel sorry for being born on aboriginal land.
Edited
9 Years Ago by BETHFC
elf.II
elf.II
Weekender
Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 30, Visits: 0
BETHFC wrote:
quickflick wrote:
BETHFC wrote:
Israel-Palestine discussions always seem to neglect the fact that the Arabs did try and wipe out Israel and were humiliated. Israel took the west bank and gave it back.

Could have kept it and saved themselves a hassle.

It annoys me when people whinge about the aggressive stance taken by Israel against Palestine. How the hell would you act if you didn't know if a random rocket was going to kill you tomorrow?

Both sides are just as bad as each other but Israel cops it worse for being more advanced and organised. Palestine attacking Israel is like trying kill a lion with a stick. The common sense though is if you don't want the lion to bite, don't poke it!

This obviously doesn't take into account forced resettlement which is of course wrong on every level.


We haven't even got that far yet. We're talking about the establishment of Israel in the first place.

The way in which the place was created was horrific. I recommend viewing a dramatisation called The Promise (from Channel 4 in the UK).

Don't take it as Gospel. Watch it because it's great drama. Then when you see something particularly brutal, look it up to see if that actually did happen (or if similar happened).

Edited by quickflick: 20/5/2016 11:39:47 PM


Oh no doubt, the creation of the state of Israel wasn't done with even remotely enough care for the effects on the Palestinians amongst others.

However, how can you blame this on the jewish people? Are they meant to feel sorry for it?That's like us Australians born in the last 40 years having to feel sorry for being born on aboriginal land.


The role of the Anglo male in this country is to forever apologise for the wrongs and rights of the past


Edited by elf.II: 22/5/2016 03:16:29 PM
Edited
9 Years Ago by elf.II
aussie scott21
aussie scott21
Legend
Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K, Visits: 0
[youtube]KL1O4pUYJ2w[/youtube]

Quote:
A police car was set on fire while officers were still inside as Paris police protesting against public “anti-cop hate” clashed with opponents.

Three officers escaped the vehicle before it burst into flames and were said to be shocked but not seriously injured. The public prosecutor’s office has opened an inquiry into attempted murder in relation to the incident in Paris on Wednesday.

The attack on the police car was a sign of the level of animosity French police claim they are subjected to by the youth-led protest movements sweeping the country.

Police unions had called on officers, past and present, to attend a lunchtime protest in about 60 towns and cities following two months of often violent protests against controversial legislation introduced by the Socialist government.

The unions claim that about 350 of their members have been injured since demonstrations, mainly focused on fiercely contested employment law reforms, began in March.

The biggest police protest on Wednesday was at the symbolic Place de la République in Paris, the hub of the Nuit Debout movement, which has set up camp there most nights for the last six weeks. The movement has been particularly outspoken in denouncing alleged police violence in the French capital and several of the 60 other towns and cities across France where it has spread.

As officers gathered in the square, which had been cleared and sealed off, about 300 counter-demonstrators from a group called Emergency, Our Police Are Killers, which had been banned from staging its protest, arrived shouting: “Cops, pigs, assassins,” and: “Everyone detests the police.”

They were pushed back by riot police using teargas.

Helicopters flew over the central square after a group of people reportedly wearing motorcycle helmets and brandishing sticks attacked a police car parked behind the square along the Saint Martin canal.

After smashing the windows, another group allegedly set fire to the vehicle, with television footage appearing to show smoke coming from the car before it became engulfed in flames.

Christophe Rouget, an officer with the Interior Security union, said he was not surprised by Wednesday’s attacks and said police were facing “gangs of urban guerrillas”.

“There have been some serious attacks … all the groups of urban guerrillas want to destroy city and town centres and attack the police,” Rouget told BFMTV. “There’s a silent majority in favour of the police. The authorities must arrest the vandals … and [then] we can return to a normal situation in society.”

On Monday morning, Jean-Marc Falcone, director general of the Police Nationale, told Europe 1 he was happy a survey in Le Parisien newspaper had shown 80% of French people had a good opinion of the police.

Asked about police violence towards the Nuit Debout demonstrators, Falcone added there were 150,000 police and 100,000 gendarmes in France and “there could be a few who might commit reprehensible acts”.

“If it is proved they are out of order, and they are disciplined by the law, the authorities will take the necessary measures,” he said.

The government has used emergency constitutional powers to push through controversial labour law reforms, including a loosening of the maximum 35-hour working week and a cap on redundancy payments, avoiding a parliamentary vote it would almost certainly have lost – a move that has sparked even greater opposition.

On Wednesday, the country’s rail network was severely disrupted by a train drivers’ strike while lorry drivers continued to block major roads in the north and west of the country, and airlines were forced to cancel 15% of flights from Paris Orly airport.

Edited
9 Years Ago by scott21
aussie scott21
aussie scott21
Legend
Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K, Visits: 0
Oh the peaceful left strikes again...... .. something something something peace
Edited
9 Years Ago by scott21
BETHFC
BETHFC
World Class
World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.2K, Visits: 0
I have to say that people who complain about police really shit me. They're humans with one of the worst jobs imaginable. They have to deal with scum on a daily basis and bleeding hearts make it illegal for them to shoot first ask questions later. They're held to a ridiculous and unreasonable standard of behaviour which means they have to act super-human when confronted with violence.

Like FFS a bloke runs at a cop with a knife and gets shot and there's always some c*nt whinging about over-zealous cops.

If you don't want police violence, don't make them notice you for being a c*nt. Simple stuff.
Edited
9 Years Ago by BETHFC
AzzaMarch
AzzaMarch
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K, Visits: 0
socceroo_06 wrote:
AzzaMarch wrote:
socceroo_06 wrote:

Israel is actually supposed to be a nation-state, not a theocracy.


Sorry I should have chosen my words better. Yes, of course it is structured as a democratic nation-state, not a theocracy.

However, it is clearly a jewish homeland, with jewish right-of-return, star of david on the flag etc.

So it was definitely designed as a "jewish homeland", but not a theocracy of course.

The problem I think is that it should have from the start been a 2-state solution - a Palestine for the arabs, and an Israel for the jews.

But there are a lot of reasons historically for the way things evolved.

I am not anti-Israel by any means. But I think across the board people would likely agree that, with hindsight, things could have been done differently/better.

But, going back to my original point - I am arguing that the whole Israel-Palestine issue has only amplified the already existing structural problems in the middle east. It is not the cause.

You correctly point out that there was a long history of interaction between jewish people and arabs prior to Israel being created.


I don't see how that is different to any other nation-state. For example, Japan preferencing Brazilians of Japanese descent to return in the 1980's & 1990's. Or the Hungarian flag originating from national republican movements of the 18th and 19th centuries.

The use of the word "however" in your second sentence is furthermore confusing. There is no point of contention here. Israel was always supposed to be a homeland for the Jews. It is considered a legal entity within the 1967 borders by the International Court of Justice.

Furthermore, It was a 2-state solution in 1947. The partition of the mandate into Jewish and Palestinian states was made by the General Assembly of the UN -resolution 181:II - on On 29 November 1947.

Just as an aside, there are Arabic political parties that hold seats in the Knesset too and roughly 20% of the population are Arabic. However, I will also echo the sentiments of several Israeli civil rights groups that the current form of the Knesset is very racist towards the Arab minority. I despise the current Israeli government and most of its policies. However, I am a strong supporter of Israel as a home for the Jewish people.


Cheers for that - happy to agree with you on those points. I wasn't aware the 1947 madate was a 2-state structure.

I guess the problem is that Israel was a minnow surrounded by aggressively opposed states for the first 20 years of its existence.

As history has evolved they have become the predominant military power in the region. But many in govt still have a siege mentality.

I also think there is an element within the Israel establishment, and certainly within the PA who perceive their interests being served by maintaining the status quo, rather than making peace.
Edited
9 Years Ago by AzzaMarch
Murdoch Rags Ltd
Murdoch Rags Ltd
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.2K reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.2K, Visits: 0
BETHFC wrote:
I have to say that people who complain about police really shit me. They're humans with one of the worst jobs imaginable. They have to deal with scum on a daily basis and bleeding hearts make it illegal for them to shoot first ask questions later. They're held to a ridiculous and unreasonable standard of behaviour which means they have to act super-human when confronted with violence.

Like FFS a bloke runs at a cop with a knife and gets shot and there's always some c*nt whinging about over-zealous cops.

If you don't want police violence, don't make them notice you for being a c*nt. Simple stuff.


Bitch had the kicks on the ground coming'. Deserved to be deprived of water too...

Quote:
A Victoria Police officer who kicked a woman in custody has defended his actions, telling an anti-corruption inquiry it was a knee-jerk reaction because he was in a "prime position" to get hurt.

Senior Constable Steven Repac appeared at the Independent Broad-Based Anti-Corruption Commission [IBAC] hearing into multiple allegations of brutality by police officers in Ballarat.

Senior Constable Repac was on night shift on January 14 last year when a 51-year-old woman was taken into custody for being drunk in public.

Police said the woman was "aggressive and abusive" and she was pepper-sprayed after taking a senior officer's lanyard during a scuffle.

The woman was taken back to her cell where she lay facedown with her pants off while handcuffed.

Security footage showed Senior Constable Repac standing on the woman's bare legs. He told the inquiry he weighed about 95 kilograms.

"She was quite aggressive in her tone and her language. I was in a prime position to get kicked," he told the hearing....
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-23/ballarat-police-filmed-kicking-stomping-woman-in-custody/7437258



Edited
9 Years Ago by Murdoch Rags Ltd
paulbagzFC
paulbagzFC
Legend
Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K, Visits: 0
11.mvfc.11 wrote:


smgdh


umad

Nothin wrong with a token apology brah

-PB

https://i.imgur.com/batge7K.jpg

Edited
9 Years Ago by paulbagzFC
aussie scott21
aussie scott21
Legend
Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K, Visits: 0
paulbagzFC wrote:


umad

Nothin wrong with a token apology brah

-PB


Edited
9 Years Ago by scott21
mcjules
mcjules
World Class
World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)World Class (8.5K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K, Visits: 0
Hopefully one day we'll apologise for the white australia policy but let's get Aboriginals recognized in our constitution first.

Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here

Edited
9 Years Ago by mcjules
paulbagzFC
paulbagzFC
Legend
Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K, Visits: 0
scott21 wrote:
paulbagzFC wrote:


umad

Nothin wrong with a token apology brah

-PB



umadx2?

-PB

https://i.imgur.com/batge7K.jpg

Edited
9 Years Ago by paulbagzFC
elf.II
elf.II
Weekender
Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 30, Visits: 0
Austria has missed its chance but there are signs of political awakening.
Edited
9 Years Ago by elf.II
paulbagzFC
paulbagzFC
Legend
Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K, Visits: 0
elf.II wrote:
Austria has missed its chance but there are signs of political awakening.


The real change will happen in surrounding countries with their upcoming elections imo.

-PB

https://i.imgur.com/batge7K.jpg

Edited
9 Years Ago by paulbagzFC
BETHFC
BETHFC
World Class
World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)World Class (8.2K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.2K, Visits: 0
paulbagzFC wrote:
elf.II wrote:
Austria has missed its chance but there are signs of political awakening.


The real change will happen in surrounding countries with their upcoming elections imo.

-PB


Which countries do you think have a realistic chance of getting sold a far right wing government?

Surely Germany wouldn't?
Edited
9 Years Ago by BETHFC
paulbagzFC
paulbagzFC
Legend
Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)Legend (45K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K, Visits: 0
Chinese banks sitting on $1.7 trillion debt time bomb
by business reporter Stephen Letts
Updated 59 minutes ago

A vendor holds Chinese Yuan notes at a market in Beijing.
PHOTO: The level of bad debts and loss-making is rising in China's state sector. (Reuters: Jason Lee)
MAP: China
Chinese banks are looking down the barrel of a staggering RMB 8 trillion - or $1.7 trillion - worth of losses according to the French investment bank Societe Generale.

Key points:

China's non-financial debt grew more than 15pc last year to 250pc of GDP
More than a quarter of China's state-owned firms are loss-making
China's banks could lose half their capital base prompting a financial crisis
Put another way, 60 per cent of capital in China's banks is at risk as authorities start the delicate and dangerous process of reining in the debt-bloated and unprofitable state-owned enterprise (SOE) sector.

Disturbingly though, debt is not only not shrinking, it is accelerating, making the eventual reckoning far worse.

China's overall non-financial debt grew by 15.2 per cent in 2015 to RMB 167 trillion ($35 trillion) or almost 250 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP).

That is up from 230 per cent of GDP the year before and the 130 per cent it was eight years ago before the global financial crisis hit.

The problem is largely centred on China's 150,000 or so SOEs, which suck-up an entirely disproportionate amount of the nation's capital.

SOE debt could easily overwhelm China's banking system

"Although contributing to less than one-third of economic output and employment, SOEs take up nearly half of bank lending (RMB 37 trillion) and more than 80 per cent of corporate bond financing (RMB 9.5 trillion)," Societe Generale found.

"While the inefficiency of SOEs is gradually dragging down economic growth, recognising even a small share of SOEs' non-performing debt would easily overwhelm the financial system."

Despite their moribund financial performance, the SOEs still enjoy a considerable advantage in access to funding through the banking system than the private sector.

"To put things into perspective, a quarter of SOEs' loans and bonds are equivalent to the entire capital base of commercial banks plus their loan-loss reserves, equivalent to 23 per cent of GDP," Societe Generale's China economist Wei Yao said.

On the bank's figures, if just 3 per cent of loans to SOEs sour, commercial banks' non-performing loans would double.

This is not out of the question given more than a quarter of SOEs are consistently loss making.

Graph of loss making state-owned enterprises in China
PHOTO: The proportion of loss-making state-owned enterprises in China is rising. (NBS, CEIC, Societe Generale)
An industrial landscape littered with so-called zombie companies - technically bankrupt but still feeding on fresh capital - is central to the mounting crisis.

The Beijing administration has promised reform, with Prime Minister Li Keqiang famously stating, "For those zombie enterprises with absolute overcapacity, we must ruthlessly bring down the knife."

But so far there has not been much ruthless knife-wielding.

Abundant credit is still greasing the wheels of industry as steel production - one of the favourite habitats of the zombie enterprises - is rattling along at record levels.

The credit splurge earlier this year to assist construction and infrastructure projects and support the official GDP target, giving steel and cement makers as well as Australian miners a hefty kick down the road, is only now starting to slow.

The broad outlines of the industrial restructuring announced earlier this year include reducing steelmaking by 100 to 150 million tonnes annually - or around 13 per cent - over the next three to five years, while coal production is targeted for a 9 per cent cut.

50pc of banks' capital base at risk

However there was little or no detail about policy support for restructuring debt in the sectors.

Not surprisingly Chinese banks quickly responded by cutting credit lines to steel and coal companies, before policymakers had time to react.

"This was one key factor that triggered the sudden acceleration in bond defaults among SOEs recently," Ms Yao noted.

"All in all, SOE debt restructuring could jeopardise 50 per cent or more of the banks' capital base, which - if it materialises quickly - would almost certainly knock China's banking sector into a systemic crisis."

State-owned enterprise defaults are on the rise
PHOTO: State-owned enterprise defaults are on the rise. (Caixin, Societe Generale)
An earlier attempt at SOE reforms during the 1990s pushed banks' non-performing loan ratios to between 30-50 per cent, rendering the entire banking system insolvent.

While authorities dawdled restructuring banks in response to the dramas of 20 years ago, they are unlikely to have the same luxury this time around.

"If the authorities do not foot the bill of SOE restructuring upfront, the recognition of credit risk on banks' balance sheets will accelerate and overwhelm the system," Ms Yao warned.

This however may still be a few years away, depending on how rapid the SOE restructure is.

"Eventually, the Government should - and probably will - help banks," Ms Yao said.

"If the government were to make sensible decisions for the long run, the next bank restructuring would have to be much less kind to the banks and short-term economic growth."

Choice between a hard landing or a lost decade

But the situation is far trickier than the last big salvage operation in Chinese banking.

Societe Generale is none-too-impressed with any of the ideas the government has floated so far; debt-for-equity swaps, loan securitisation or dumping the whole mess in asset management companies, the so-called "bad bank" solution.

While they are market based approaches, the Government and market may have decidedly different views on a " fair value" for such distressed and often terminally ill assets.

Bank of China employee counts yuan banknotes
PHOTO: China's overall non-financial debt grew by 15.2 per cent in 2015. (Reuters)
Unlike the '90s restructuring, a rampant economy won't help "grow" the problem away this time.

The government has a responsibility, given a sizeable chunk of the problem has its origin in the massive RMB 4 trillion GFC stimulus package that helped create the overcapacity, disinflation and debt in the first place.

But the policy-makers are now facing a nasty dilemma over the pace of reform and restructure.

"A fast restructuring of corporates and banks risks an economic hard landing, since that could entail massive corporate defaults and big losses in terms of economic output, even in the case of a quick recapitalisation," Ms Yao argued.

'Hard landing' will threaten social stability and global outlook

Given that a hard landing threatens not only social stability but also the global economic outlook, authorities have understandably chosen a slower, more gradual process.

This means attempting to slow defaults and occasional bursts of stimulus, topping up the needs of struggling SOEs and banks.

"The Government seems to think that it can restructure the worst part of the corporate sector - zombie SOEs - bit by bit and use the freed-up resources to support good corporates and the new economy," said Ms Yao, however, she added that this is an overly optimistic view.

"There are two major risks with this gradual approach, in our view: a lost decade and policy uncertainty."

In this scenario, debt will not be wound back and the bill to fix what is already a massive problem will only mount.

It is impossible to see the process being smooth, and the possibility of a very hard landing looms large, hardly a comforting thought given how spooked financial markets are already about China.

In those circumstances it would not take much for a Chinese crisis to become a full-blown global one.

Topics: business-economics-and-finance, economic-trends, banking, international-financial-crisis, china

-PB

https://i.imgur.com/batge7K.jpg

Edited
9 Years Ago by paulbagzFC
Carlito
Carlito
Legend
Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)Legend (28K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K, Visits: 0
BETHFC wrote:
paulbagzFC wrote:
elf.II wrote:
Austria has missed its chance but there are signs of political awakening.


The real change will happen in surrounding countries with their upcoming elections imo.

-PB


Which countries do you think have a realistic chance of getting sold a far right wing government?

Surely Germany wouldn't?

Greece? Italy?? Hell the red dawn or whatever they are called have a foothold in greek politics
Edited
9 Years Ago by MvFCArsenal16.8
aussie scott21
aussie scott21
Legend
Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)Legend (20K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K, Visits: 0
paulbagzFC wrote:
scott21 wrote:
paulbagzFC wrote:


umad

Nothin wrong with a token apology brah

-PB



umadx2?

-PB

This was in direct connection to
"Nothin wrong with a token apology brah"

Peacock didnt token apologise when one was demand by Arnie. That's the joke.

Edited
9 Years Ago by scott21
adrtho
adrtho
World Class
World Class (6K reputation)World Class (6K reputation)World Class (6K reputation)World Class (6K reputation)World Class (6K reputation)World Class (6K reputation)World Class (6K reputation)World Class (6K reputation)World Class (6K reputation)World Class (6K reputation)World Class (6K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K, Visits: 0
BETHFC wrote:
paulbagzFC wrote:
elf.II wrote:
Austria has missed its chance but there are signs of political awakening.


The real change will happen in surrounding countries with their upcoming elections imo.

-PB


Which countries do you think have a realistic chance of getting sold a far right wing government?

Surely Germany wouldn't?


where it always been...Austria, Czech rep, Hungary, Poland .....

Italy , Greece will not, because there to many fucking communist there
Edited
9 Years Ago by adrtho
elf.II
elf.II
Weekender
Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)Weekender (30 reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 30, Visits: 0
MvFCArsenal16.8 wrote:
BETHFC wrote:
paulbagzFC wrote:
elf.II wrote:
Austria has missed its chance but there are signs of political awakening.


The real change will happen in surrounding countries with their upcoming elections imo.

-PB


Which countries do you think have a realistic chance of getting sold a far right wing government?

Surely Germany wouldn't?

Greece? Italy?? Hell the red dawn or whatever they are called have a foothold in greek politics


Golden dawn. Nationalist and racist..exactly what is needed.
Edited
9 Years Ago by elf.II
AzzaMarch
AzzaMarch
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K, Visits: 0
elf.II wrote:
MvFCArsenal16.8 wrote:
BETHFC wrote:
paulbagzFC wrote:
elf.II wrote:
Austria has missed its chance but there are signs of political awakening.


The real change will happen in surrounding countries with their upcoming elections imo.

-PB


Which countries do you think have a realistic chance of getting sold a far right wing government?

Surely Germany wouldn't?

Greece? Italy?? Hell the red dawn or whatever they are called have a foothold in greek politics


Golden dawn. Nationalist and racist..exactly what is needed.


Except they are mostly in jail.

In Italy the far right got into mainstream politics decades ago when Berlusconi got them to jump into bed with him - Northern League.

The main populist group in Italy is the 5 Star Movement - more populist left, and not racist. But in favour of leaving the EU so some similarities with right wing populist groups.

I would say Scandinavian countries are most at risk, as the far right has been on the rise for a while.
Edited
9 Years Ago by AzzaMarch
Conservative
Conservative
Hardcore Fan
Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 175, Visits: 0
They are not far right, just right. The communists call them far right to associate them with Hitler - to marginalise them and the media promotes this too because communism in actual practice preserves the wealth of the elite technocrats by raping the wealth of the middle classes.

Austrian election was rigged too, to keep out the right and preserve the EU pyramid scheme.
Edited
9 Years Ago by Conservative
Davide82
Davide82
Legend
Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)Legend (13K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12K, Visits: 0
Conservative wrote:

Austrian election was rigged too, to keep out the right and preserve the EU pyramid scheme.


Yet "loony lefties" are crazy conspiracy theorists for suggesting The AFP were ever so slightly leaned on?

Just curious
Edited
9 Years Ago by Davide82
Conservative
Conservative
Hardcore Fan
Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)Hardcore Fan (177 reputation)

Group: Banned Members
Posts: 175, Visits: 0
Davide82 wrote:
Conservative wrote:

Austrian election was rigged too, to keep out the right and preserve the EU pyramid scheme.


Yet "loony lefties" are crazy conspiracy theorists for suggesting The AFP were ever so slightly leaned on?

Just curious


Turncoat is another technocrat. The most leftist Coalition leader ever, and darling of the left until he actually became PM.
You wont get me into a futile argument about Coalition vs ALP. They're both raping us and if you choose a side of that coin then you're happy to be continually raped as long as the cock is the colour of your choice.
Edited
9 Years Ago by Conservative
AzzaMarch
AzzaMarch
Semi-Pro
Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)Semi-Pro (1.7K reputation)

Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K, Visits: 0
Conservative wrote:

Turncoat is another technocrat. The most leftist Coalition leader ever.


Untrue. Until Howard won the Liberal Party was actually made up of both "wets" (moderates) and "dries" (conservatives). They have a long history of cycling from one side to the other.

However, when Hawke/Keating pushed the ALP to the centre/centre-right in terms of economic policy (deregulation, floating the dollar, enterprise bargaining etc) they stole the centre ground from the Libs - hence their 13 years in opposition.

Howard's election and 11 years as PM signalled the triumph of the "dries" and the conversion of the Liberal Party into the Conservative Party.

Abbott tried to continue this, and push the party further to the right, but failed.

Turnbull coming in is actually a realignment more consistent with the history of the Liberal Party, and a return of the "wets".

Saying he is the most "leftist" of the Coalition PMs in history is laughable. What policy has he introduced that is even remotely "leftist"?

All that has happened is that his rhetoric is more moderate than Abbott. That's about it.
Edited
9 Years Ago by AzzaMarch
GO


Select a Forum....























Inside Sport


Search