Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

UN To Vote On Change of Palestine Status to Non-Member Observer On Thursday


  • Please log in to reply
147 replies to this topic

#61 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,961 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 29 November 2012 - 08:19 PM

So Harper is being criticized both for not following the crowd and for being a puppet? Make up your mind!


There are two minds involved .. Harper IS an oil industry puppet beholden to American interests .. if he were PM we would have gone to Iraq .. how do you think that would have sat with the Country? ..
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#62 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,741 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:10 PM

I'm sorry but anybody who truly believes Abbas is really trying to implement a peaceful two state solution is quite gullible. You only need to go back a year or two to clearly see that he wan'ts Israel wiped off the map. What he is doing now is just providing lip service for world backing.



http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=826


When the idea of obliterating a country is disguised by the notion of "peace," everyone sadly falls for it.
  • 0

#63 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,961 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:35 PM

When the idea of obliterating a country is disguised by the notion of "peace," everyone sadly falls for it.


Why would anyone want to obliterate Israel? .. there must be valid reasons .. no? ..
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#64 Dazzle

Dazzle

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,254 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 06

Posted 29 November 2012 - 09:40 PM

Not really. There have been plenty of U.N. peacekeeping missions to "domestic" disputes, the Rwandan Civil War for example. The only thing this really accomplishes is an international platform for the PA to denounce Israel and therefore forward the Arab + Iranian agenda to wipe Israel off the map.


The UN is a useless organization. For the moves that they make to liberate a country of war, there are other countries where it stands idly pat because of members' interests in the area (or lack of interest). Somalia has been left alone. It's not like they don't have gunboats in the area or troops.
  • 0
Posted Image --> THANKS EGATTI.

I have to say Dazzle's was the coolest. ROTFLOL


#65 Coda

Coda

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,174 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 03

Posted 29 November 2012 - 10:26 PM

There are two minds involved .. Harper IS an oil industry puppet beholden to American interests .. if he were PM we would have gone to Iraq .. how do you think that would have sat with the Country? ..


There is no doubt Harper is an Albertan. He has stated since that going into Iraq would have been a mistake.

This is a different issue however.

Has it occured to you that Harper's government may simply oppose Palestine becoming a U.N. observering member for their own reasons while not being a puppet of the United States? If the NDP were in power and had voted for the inclusion, I would not try to claim that the NDP government was a puppet of Iran.
  • 0

#66 Coda

Coda

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,174 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 03

Posted 29 November 2012 - 10:30 PM

The UN is a useless organization. For the moves that they make to liberate a country of war, there are other countries where it stands idly pat because of members' interests in the area (or lack of interest). Somalia has been left alone. It's not like they don't have gunboats in the area or troops.


Agreed. The U.N. has rarely been able to actually deal with the conflicts it has tried to mediate. We all know about the Rwanda genocide. The Yugoslav genocides also happened with the U.N. standing by doing nothing. It was only when NATO entered the fray that situation began to improve.
  • 0

#67 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,961 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 29 November 2012 - 10:33 PM

There is no doubt Harper is an Albertan. He has stated since that going into Iraq would have been a mistake.

This is a different issue however.

Has it occured to you that Harper's government may simply oppose Palestine becoming a U.N. observering member for their own reasons while not being a puppet of the United States? If the NDP were in power and had voted for the inclusion, I would not try to claim that the NDP government was a puppet of Iran.


Well I searched hi and low for some info and found this:

What is Canada's position?

Canada declared its opposition to Palestinian membership in July and on Sept. 20 Prime Minister Stephen Harper told reporters at the UN that the Palestinian move could be "counter-productive" to the peace process.
"I think there’s no likelihood of this initiative by the Palestinian Authority doing anything to further the peace process," he said.
The Canadian government says it supports a two-state solution reached through negotiations

"Could be" .. the guy has no clue when he uses words such as "Could" and "likelihood" .. he has no firm position .. he is just following the US position like a good lil puppy ...
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#68 Coda

Coda

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,174 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 03

Posted 29 November 2012 - 10:36 PM

Why would anyone want to obliterate Israel? .. there must be valid reasons .. no? ..


There are certainly reasons they want to obliterate Israel...I'm not sure how you go about deciding if they are "valid reasons". Let's say hypothetically that the Arabs are successful in obliterating Israel. Would you excuse that genocide just because there were valid reasons for it? That seems kind of cold.
  • 3

#69 Coda

Coda

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,174 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 03

Posted 29 November 2012 - 10:42 PM

Well I searched hi and low for some info and found this:

What is Canada's position?

Canada declared its opposition to Palestinian membership in July and on Sept. 20 Prime Minister Stephen Harper told reporters at the UN that the Palestinian move could be "counter-productive" to the peace process.
"I think there’s no likelihood of this initiative by the Palestinian Authority doing anything to further the peace process," he said.
The Canadian government says it supports a two-state solution reached through negotiations

"Could be" .. the guy has no clue when he uses words such as "Could" and "likelihood" .. he has no firm position .. he is just following the US position like a good lil puppy ...


Well I searched hi and low for some info and found this:

What is Canada's position?

Canada declared its opposition to Palestinian membership in July and on Sept. 20 Prime Minister Stephen Harper told reporters at the UN that the Palestinian move could be "counter-productive" to the peace process.
"I think there’s no likelihood of this initiative by the Palestinian Authority doing anything to further the peace process," he said.
The Canadian government says it supports a two-state solution reached through negotiations

"Could be" .. the guy has no clue when he uses words such as "Could" and "likelihood" .. he has no firm position .. he is just following the US position like a good lil puppy ...


Or maybe he doesn't want to sound to eager to support Israel due to the massive public backlash he knows he will encounter. You really have nothing there to support your argument. Politicians use this kind of language all the time.
  • 0

#70 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,961 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 29 November 2012 - 10:47 PM

There are certainly reasons they want to obliterate Israel...I'm not sure how you go about deciding if they are "valid reasons". Let's say hypothetically that the Arabs are successful in obliterating Israel. Would you excuse that genocide just because there were valid reasons for it? That seems kind of cold.


I do not favor any kind of oppression .. too many folks here think Israel is in the right because they have such a powerful military thanks to the US .. they believe "might is right", or appear to ..

Perhaps if Israel admitted their own "sins" (i.e. colonization) and took steps to remedy some of the damage they caused, peace could be possible? ..

Suffice it to say, you can not have a "two state solution" without two states .. and Israel is doing everything it can keep Palestine from becoming a "state" ..
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#71 Coda

Coda

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,174 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 03

Posted 29 November 2012 - 11:12 PM

I do not favor any kind of oppression .. too many folks here think Israel is in the right because they have such a powerful military thanks to the US .. they believe "might is right", or appear to ..

Perhaps if Israel admitted their own "sins" (i.e. colonization) and took steps to remedy some of the damage they caused, peace could be possible? ..

Suffice it to say, you can not have a "two state solution" without two states .. and Israel is doing everything it can keep Palestine from becoming a "state" ..


In 1948 Israel was one day old when it was attacked by the 5 surrounding countries. Israel won, extending its existence. There have been six other wars since then, Israel winning each one (at least in the sense that the country was not obliterated). Blaming Israel for not returning to those undefendable 1948 or 1967 borders is blaming Israel for not accepting its own destruction. That is the reality. The only reason Arab nations are not attacking currently is that the Arab nations have learned over time not to be suicidal. If Israel is forced to give up the high ground on its borders however, defence will no longer be possible.

Easy to follow explanation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ytWmPqY8TE0

Edited by Coda, 29 November 2012 - 11:15 PM.

  • 3

#72 DonLever

DonLever

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,407 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 08

Posted 29 November 2012 - 11:28 PM

Israel says only negotiation will lead to a two state solution and this UN resolution does nothing to forward that proposal. Israel says unilateral actions like this will stop any move toward a peace settlement.

Clearly the majority of the world's population does not take this position as there was an overwhelming vote in favor of a change of status for Palestine.

The demand for negotiations by Israel seems puzzling because when the UN decided to partition Palestine, there were NO negotiations between the Arabs and Jews. The decision was IMPOSED on the Arabs who live in the area. There was no referendum or talks between the two sides then.

If the UN in 1947 was able to create the State of Israel with the wave of a pen, why should they not do the same for Palestine? The UN unilaterally created Israel. At the least, the UN can do the same for Palestine. Otherwise, there is a double standard here.

Edited by DonLever, 29 November 2012 - 11:29 PM.

  • 3

#73 Coda

Coda

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,174 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 03

Posted 29 November 2012 - 11:43 PM

Israel says only negotiation will lead to a two state solution and this UN resolution does nothing to forward that proposal. Israel says unilateral actions like this will stop any move toward a peace settlement.

Clearly the majority of the world's population does not take this position as there was an overwhelming vote in favor of a change of status for Palestine.

The demand for negotiations by Israel seems puzzling because when the UN decided to partition Palestine, there were NO negotiations between the Arabs and Jews. The decision was IMPOSED on the Arabs who live in the area. There was no referendum or talks between the two sides then.

If the UN in 1947 was able to create the State of Israel with the wave of a pen, why should they not do the same for Palestine? The UN unilaterally created Israel. At the least, the UN can do the same for Palestine. Otherwise, there is a double standard here.


The difference is this:

In 1947 the United Nations controlled the region of Palestine, and could do whatever it wanted with it. More accurately, the British controlled the area and did with it what the United Nations suggested.

Now due to land Israel took in defensive wars, most of the region is now under Israel's control. It would be a little hard for the UN to create a country of Palestine from land it doesn't control: about as easy as declaring Nunavut an independent country for the Inuit.

Edited by Coda, 29 November 2012 - 11:46 PM.

  • 3

#74 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,741 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:37 AM

If the UN in 1947 was able to create the State of Israel with the wave of a pen, why should they not do the same for Palestine? The UN unilaterally created Israel. At the least, the UN can do the same for Palestine. Otherwise, there is a double standard here.


The UN is too busy drawing cyberspace lines as opposed to geographical ones.
  • 0

#75 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,961 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 30 November 2012 - 12:30 PM

Another Israeli "peace" gesture:


JERUSALEM — As the United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to upgrade the Palestinians’ status Thursday night, Israel took steps toward building housing in a controversial area of East Jerusalem known as E1, where Jewish settlements have long been seen as the death knell for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.


Multimedia




Posted Image
Ramallah Reacts to U.N. Vote



Ramallah Reacts to U.N. Vote



Close Video
See More Videos »


Posted Image Slide Show
A Vote Elates Palestinians and Worries Israel

Related


Posted Image
Connect With Us on Twitter

Follow @nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines.
Twitter List: Reporters and Editors


Enlarge This ImagePosted Image
Ronen Zvulun/Reuters

Construction in the West Bank settlement of Maale Adumim last June. More Photos »

A senior Israeli official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said on Friday that the decision was made late Thursday night to move forward on “preliminary zoning and planning preparations” for housing units in E1, which would connect the large settlement of Maale Adumim to Jerusalem and therefore make it impossible to connect the Palestinian cities of Ramallah and Bethlehem to Palestinian neighborhoods of East Jerusalem. Israel also authorized the construction of 3,000 housing units in other parts of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, the official said.
The prime minister’s office refused to comment on whether the settlement expansion — first reported on Twitter by a reporter for the Israeli daily Haaretz — was punishment for the Palestinians’ success in upgrading its status from nonmember observer entity to nonmember observer state at the United Nations, but it was widely seen as such. The United States, one of only eight countries that stood with Israel in voting against the Palestinians’ upgrade, has for two decades vigorously opposed construction in E1, a 3,000-acre expanse of hilly parkland where a police station was opened in 2008.
In Washington, a State Department official criticized the move. “We reiterate our longstanding opposition to settlements and East Jerusalem construction,” he said. “We believe it is counterproductive and makes it harder to resume direct negotiations and achieve a two-state outcome.”
Hagit Ofran, who runs the Settlement Watch project of Peace Now, called E1 a “deal breaker for the two-state solution” and denounced the decision as “disastrous.”
“Instead of punishing the Palestinians, they are actually punishing Israel,” Ms. Ofran, who is Israeli, said in an interview. “Instead of taking advantage of this bid in the U.N. and calling for negotiations to get to a two-state solution, this government is choosing to take actions that might prevent the possibility of a two-state solution.”
But Dani Dayan, leader of Israel’s settler movement, welcomed the news, saying it was “a very important Israeli interest to develop E1.”
He described the two-state solution as “an existential threat to Israel” and said the E1 development was “beneficial for peace because a two-state solution is a prologue for another bloody confrontation.”
“The fear to develop the communities is not rational,” Mr. Dayan said. “The opposition to the settlements has become a kind of religious dogma for the West.”
Even Mr. Dayan, however, said he did not like the idea of expanding settlements “as a sort of retaliatory or punitive step.”
“Under the circumstances that we understand the government operates, I think it’s O.K.,” Mr. Dayan added. “We have a legal and a political and a moral right to build. It’s strategic for Jerusalem; to strengthen Jerusalem is the only horizon. We don’t see it as an obstacle to peace.”

Michael R. Gordon contributed reporting from Washington
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#76 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:40 PM

Posted Image
  • 0

Posted Image


#77 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:46 PM

Canada is one of only nine countries to vote no. This sure is out of step with the rest of the world. We should have abstain like Great Britain.


Harper has embarrassed Canadians all over the world. A nation once known for being a peace keeper is now a US puppet. Its a good thing that Canada has no seat at the UN security council, because Harper is an idiot. With this type of government, am happy that Canada is pretty much irrelevant in world politics.
  • 0

Posted Image


#78 Special Ed

Special Ed

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:50 PM

Harper has embarrassed Canadians all over the world. A nation once known for being a peace keeper is now a US puppet. Its a good thing that Canada has no seat at the UN security council, because Harper is an idiot. With this type of government, am happy that Canada is pretty much irrelevant in world politics.


Myself and many other Canadians I know aren't embarrassed. Speak for yourself.
  • 1

If you like looking at statistics to determine who's better, you're just a casual fan.

2.41 season GAA isn't very impressive. Let's not get into playoffs and his SV%.

Cory Schneider is the next Patrick Roy.


#79 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:56 PM

Not really. There have been plenty of U.N. peacekeeping missions to "domestic" disputes, the Rwandan Civil War for example. The only thing this really accomplishes is an international platform for the PA to denounce Israel and therefore forward the Arab + Iranian agenda to wipe Israel off the map.


Arab + Iranian agenda?? If Iran ever attacked Israel, it will be because Israel attacked them first. The majority of the world has decided to recognize the Palestinian state yet you oppose this because of what you think might happen to Israel in the future? That is such a self-centered ideology.
  • 0

Posted Image


#80 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 30 November 2012 - 01:58 PM

Myself and many other Canadians I know aren't embarrassed. Speak for yourself.


Define many?? I see the comments sections in most of the articles regarding this story and I see many Canadians upset. Maybe you should speak for yourself.
  • 0

Posted Image


#81 Coda

Coda

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,174 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 03

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:06 PM

Arab + Iranian agenda?? If Iran ever attacked Israel, it will be because Israel attacked them first. The majority of the world has decided to recognize the Palestinian state yet you oppose this because of what you think might happen to Israel in the future? That is such a self-centered ideology.


Hardly: I am not Israeli or Jewish. I happen to believe that abetting countries and groups of people who have continuously stated they want to destroy Israel and kill Jews is a bad idea.

I find it odd that you criticize me for thinking of future consequences of current events. I would argue failure to do this would be quite idiotic.
  • 0

#82 Special Ed

Special Ed

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:07 PM

Define many?? I see the comments sections in most of the articles regarding this story and I see many Canadians upset. Maybe you should speak for yourself.


Comments section? Lol. Maybe because the unhappy people post and the happy ones go about their business.
  • 0

If you like looking at statistics to determine who's better, you're just a casual fan.

2.41 season GAA isn't very impressive. Let's not get into playoffs and his SV%.

Cory Schneider is the next Patrick Roy.


#83 Hobble

Hobble

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,687 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 07

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:08 PM

Posted Image


Well that is just embarassing. If not Yes, then I wish we had just abstained.
  • 0

#84 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:08 PM

The reason why Canada still doesn't have a UN Security Council seat is because of its change in foreign policy which is pretty much tilted in favor of Israel and unpopular positions which was criticized by most of the UN members. During the voting process, not only Canada not get the Cuba, Venezuela, Belarus, China, Uganda, Saudi Arabia vote, but they also didn't get votes from consistent allies over the last 60 years like Norway, Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Sweden and France.
  • 0

Posted Image


#85 Coda

Coda

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,174 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 03

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:09 PM

Another Israeli "peace" gesture:


JERUSALEM — As the United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to upgrade the Palestinians’ status Thursday night, Israel took steps toward building housing in a controversial area of East Jerusalem known as E1, where Jewish settlements have long been seen as the death knell for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.


Multimedia




Posted Image
Close Video
See More Videos »


Posted Image Slide Show
A Vote Elates Palestinians and Worries Israel

Related


Posted Image
Connect With Us on Twitter

Follow @nytimesworld for international breaking news and headlines.
Twitter List: Reporters and Editors


Posted Image
Ronen Zvulun/Reuters

Construction in the West Bank settlement of Maale Adumim last June. More Photos »

A senior Israeli official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said on Friday that the decision was made late Thursday night to move forward on “preliminary zoning and planning preparations” for housing units in E1, which would connect the large settlement of Maale Adumim to Jerusalem and therefore make it impossible to connect the Palestinian cities of Ramallah and Bethlehem to Palestinian neighborhoods of East Jerusalem. Israel also authorized the construction of 3,000 housing units in other parts of East Jerusalem and the West Bank, the official said.
The prime minister’s office refused to comment on whether the settlement expansion — first reported on Twitter by a reporter for the Israeli daily Haaretz — was punishment for the Palestinians’ success in upgrading its status from nonmember observer entity to nonmember observer state at the United Nations, but it was widely seen as such. The United States, one of only eight countries that stood with Israel in voting against the Palestinians’ upgrade, has for two decades vigorously opposed construction in E1, a 3,000-acre expanse of hilly parkland where a police station was opened in 2008.
In Washington, a State Department official criticized the move. “We reiterate our longstanding opposition to settlements and East Jerusalem construction,” he said. “We believe it is counterproductive and makes it harder to resume direct negotiations and achieve a two-state outcome.”
Hagit Ofran, who runs the Settlement Watch project of Peace Now, called E1 a “deal breaker for the two-state solution” and denounced the decision as “disastrous.”
“Instead of punishing the Palestinians, they are actually punishing Israel,” Ms. Ofran, who is Israeli, said in an interview. “Instead of taking advantage of this bid in the U.N. and calling for negotiations to get to a two-state solution, this government is choosing to take actions that might prevent the possibility of a two-state solution.”
But Dani Dayan, leader of Israel’s settler movement, welcomed the news, saying it was “a very important Israeli interest to develop E1.”
He described the two-state solution as “an existential threat to Israel” and said the E1 development was “beneficial for peace because a two-state solution is a prologue for another bloody confrontation.”
“The fear to develop the communities is not rational,” Mr. Dayan said. “The opposition to the settlements has become a kind of religious dogma for the West.”
Even Mr. Dayan, however, said he did not like the idea of expanding settlements “as a sort of retaliatory or punitive step.”
“Under the circumstances that we understand the government operates, I think it’s O.K.,” Mr. Dayan added. “We have a legal and a political and a moral right to build. It’s strategic for Jerusalem; to strengthen Jerusalem is the only horizon. We don’t see it as an obstacle to peace.”

Michael R. Gordon contributed reporting from Washington


This is going to do more harm than good I think! Bad idea to expand the settlements at this time.
  • 0

#86 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:10 PM

Comments section? Lol. Maybe because the unhappy people post and the happy ones go about their business.


Well, if you are so happy then why are you commenting here? How can you assume there are more happy people then there are unhappy ones? Maybe the ones who are happy are the ignorant ones who don't know much about this issue.
  • 0

Posted Image


#87 Special Ed

Special Ed

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:11 PM

Arab + Iranian agenda?? If Iran ever attacked Israel, it will be because Israel attacked them first. The majority of the world has decided to recognize the Palestinian state yet you oppose this because of what you think might happen to Israel in the future? That is such a self-centered ideology.


The rest of the world. So like Somalia? Syria? Libya? Africa? Some other obscure and unknown countries that nobody wants to live in?We should just definitely just follow the rest of the herd right off the cliff.
  • 0

If you like looking at statistics to determine who's better, you're just a casual fan.

2.41 season GAA isn't very impressive. Let's not get into playoffs and his SV%.

Cory Schneider is the next Patrick Roy.


#88 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:17 PM

Hardly: I am not Israeli or Jewish. I happen to believe that abetting countries and groups of people who have continuously stated they want to destroy Israel and kill Jews is a bad idea.

I find it odd that you criticize me for thinking of future consequences of current events. I would argue failure to do this would be quite idiotic.


Your perceived future consequence of current events is just a seed of propaganda which US and Israel is trying to spread. Am sorry but Palestine deserves to be a recognized state and most of the world agrees with me. Your reasoning of why you oppose this is what makes it a self-centered ideology. I guess Iran, Syria and other Arab nations shouldn't be recognized states since they hate Israel.
  • 0

Posted Image


#89 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:19 PM

The rest of the world. So like Somalia? Syria? Libya? Africa? Some other obscure and unknown countries that nobody wants to live in?We should just definitely just follow the rest of the herd right off the cliff.


I guess no one wants to live in obscure countries like China, Russia, India, Greece, Finland, Ireland, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium etc. Look at all those obscure and unknown countries that voted yes.


Out of the 190 nations, 9 opposed the move to make Palestine a recognized state. 9??? So everyone should just follow what US and Israel says, since their agenda is not self-serving or anything like that. :rolleyes:

You should think about why Canada still doesn't have a seat in the UN security council. This is the big reason why.

Edited by Pouria, 30 November 2012 - 02:27 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


#90 Special Ed

Special Ed

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,552 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 30 November 2012 - 02:25 PM

Your perceived future consequence of current events is just a seed of propaganda which US and Israel is trying to spread. Am sorry but Palestine deserves to be a recognized state and most of the world agrees with me. Your reasoning of why you oppose this is what makes it a self-centered ideology. I guess Iran, Syria and other Arab nations shouldn't be recognized states since they hate Israel.


Nobody even wants to live in Iran, Syria and other Arab nations. Every iranian i know was happy about the embassy closure and doesnt want to return to iran. that says the most to me, when a person doesnt even want to live in their own country. i couldnt even imagine what it would take for me to move out of canada permanently. Those citizens have been permanently moving west. And others wish they could but only can't afford to. If your own country can't even support and become a place where it's inhabitants wish to live then it's a failed nation in my opinion. May as well not be recognized at all. And Palestine will just be another failed nation. Not that I want it to, but that's just how I see it.


Inflows of permanent immigrants into selected OECD and non-OECD countries, 2006-2009
Click heading to sort - Download this data
Ignore
Country
2006
2007
2008
2009
Change 2009/2008 (%)
SOURCE: OECD
1 Czech Republic 63,000 98,800 71,800 39,000 -45.7
2 Ireland 88,900 89,600 67,600 38,900 -42.5
3 Japan 104,100 108,500 97,700 65,500 -33.0
4 Korea 189,500 184,300 194,700 139,000 -28.6
5 Italy 171,300 537,200 489,100 369,000 -24.6
6 Spain .. 691,900 409,600 334,000 -18.5
7 Switzerland 86,300 122,200 139,100 114,800 -17.5
8 Denmark 23,900 30,300 45,600 38,400 -15.8
9 Belgium 35,600 40,300 43,900 37,700 -14.1
10 Germany 165,200 232,800 228,300 197,500 -13.5
11 Norway 28,300 43,700 48,900 43,100 -11.8
12 Finland 13,900 17,500 19,900 18,100 -9.1
13 Portugal 25,100 42,900 65,900 59,900 -9.0
14 New Zealand 54,800 52,000 51,700 47,200 -8.8
15 Austria 30,800 47,100 49,500 45,700 -7.8
16 France 195,300 184,500 192,200 178,700 -7.0
17 Sweden 78,500 74,400 71,000 71,300 0.4
18 Netherlands 73,000 80,600 89,600 90,500 1.0
19 Canada 251,600 236,800 247,200 252,200 2.0
20 United States 1,266,300 1,052,400 1,107,100 1,130,200 2.1

The US is the top destination for permanent immigrants according to a report published today.

The international migration outlook 2011 released by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) highlights the top 25 countries with the highest number of immigrants into OECD countries and also shows where they come from.

The US was home to 1,130,200 immigrants in 2009, a rise of 2.1% on 2008. The UK follows in second place, seeing a jump of 14.5% on the number of immigrants since the previous year. However the UK is also ranked the 8th highest for the number of people migrating to other OECD countries - 133,000 people migrated in 2009.

China was the top country for immigration into OECD countries in 2009 with 468,000 nationals emigrating. Romania has by the far the largest number of emigrants per million population at 12,000 whereas despite their high ranking, China has 350 emigrants per million population.

Out of the top 25 countries listed, only seven recorded percentage increases in immigrants during 2007-2009. Iraq has seen a 22% increase during 2007/2009 of people emigrating towards the OECD countries. The Dominican Republic records highly too with a 21% increase.

http://www.guardian....tion-statistics

Well everyone is moving to the USA and the UK. What a surprise. Iran, Syria and other Arab nations didn't seem to make the cut.

Edited by Special Ed, 30 November 2012 - 02:44 PM.

  • 0

If you like looking at statistics to determine who's better, you're just a casual fan.

2.41 season GAA isn't very impressive. Let's not get into playoffs and his SV%.

Cory Schneider is the next Patrick Roy.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.