₦airaland Forum

Ikomi:
If only you could read, I have mentioned to you that Germany and Japan were at war, they invaded other states and an agreement had to be exhumed from them that they would not and never invade other nations, which involved written there constitution by ailied forces. Still you agree that these same allied forces allowed them to have there own army at the time of writing this constitution, so what are you doing a round about for?

Germany/Japan were at war while Israel and the Palestinians were at peace? Are you a retard?

The first major war was the War of Independence. Who launched the invasion?

debosky:
Your assertion is equally ridiculous - since Gaza and the West Bank are no longer territorially contiguous with Jordan and Egypt, why should they be treated as the vanquished in a fight with an opponent that has long withrdawn (Egyptian and Jordanian forces)?

Territorially continguous? Leave blowing grammar to me.  

You are weakening your argument with every post. If states, like Germany and Japan, could lose their independent military capabilities, how much so non-states like the proposed Palestinian state.

Strictly speaking, the US taking over the newly formed Western Germany post WWII is apt here. There was no state of W.Germany prior to the war. Germany surrendered, would you now claim that since the people of West Germany did not surrender as a state, the US could not lay down the law there?

Ikomi:
Stop saying things you cant proof, its a move from ignorance to stupidity. Which is actually a real estate you might as well keep it.

What history have you got to back your argument, that a state should not have the right to defend itself?

I have asked this numbnut this question several times. What choice did the states of Germany and Japan have?

Answer the question and stop sounding like a blithering idiot.

Ikomi:
First let me point out it out to you that you estabished nothing.

A state still must have the choice to agree to what power controls its territory until its able keep control.

He said he has established, where are you located.

The undeniable evidence from history confirms the above as ignorant

There is no Palestinian state nor has there ever been one. The condition for creating one is that it be demilitarised. If Palestinians find that condition unacceptable, there will be no state.

RichyBlacK:
Iran is a democracy, an imperfect democracy like the imperfect democracy in the US where innocent people are jailed without trial for decades and poor people are allowed to die just because they do not have health insurance.

There is no perfect democracy. Iran and America are imperfect democracies!

Drawing parralels where there are none.

In America, civilians are not shot to preserve a theocratic system of Govt. Your reference to lack of health insurance is a red herring. Compare life expectancy in Iran to America's. You can't compare the wanton murder of citizens to lack of universal health care.


PS: Innocent people jailed for decades without trial in the US?

Many French citizens, some indigenous, wear Burqas. Within reason, it shouldn't be for the Govt to determine one's mode of dressing.

What France needs to do is limit Muslim migration. These piecemeal measures undermine French citizens' civil liberties and do not tackle the root cause of the Islamists' encroachment of France, which is unchecked Muslim migration.

Not only are we not sure whether the election was rigged, at least to an extent as to determine the winner, there is practically no difference between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad.

The question is whether Obama should have been harsher in his condemnation of Iran's heavy handed policing,electoral irregularities, etc . But then, where the facts are unclear, it's hard to calibrate the harshness of your criticism.

Another guy wey deserve serious beating na Ramsey Noah!

But Jim Iyke na the worst of the lot. I would love to see a picture of his badly damaged face.

Close and press the ''enter'' key continously.

This Florida toddler no sabi use laptop

Maybe Israelis being in the midst of feral people has started to affect some Israelis. You can't really blame them.

You don't have to actively seek this kind of inconsequential news for it to be thrust on you. Paper edition of today's Times features Obama's fly slaughtering heroics.

Nothing beats this though: http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2008/feb/28/news/chi-kass_28feb28 Obama applauded for blowing his nose.  

I have to review my understanding of geography. Didn't know Ukrainians were Westerners.

36 mins

seeklove:
@kobojunkie
Please educate yourself about the CIA. There is a bill in America called the freedom of information bill. Since it was passed, people can get more information about the CIA and there hitherto secret operations. You'd be surprised what and who the CIA will use an as undercover. It is possible that the guy is a secret agent.

With a name like Seeklove, no doubt, a pun on Strangelove, how are we sure you are not a spy?

This debate is surreal.   Is the presence of a white American hawking gala on the streets of Lagos the telltale signs of espionage?    

A man that posts in pink

@Richy

RichyBlacK:
Men = 6
Women = 5

2/3 of 6 = 4
3/5 of 5 = 3

Total = 4 men + 4 partners + 2 single men + 3 women + 3 partners + 2 single women = 18 < 20 = 1 score

Total # of singles = 2 + 2 = 4

Thanks for trying. No mind the rest wey no bother  

The number of men with partners must match the number of women with partners. You inverse the normal way of calculating fractions by finding the LCD of the numerator! In this case, 6. 2/3 + 3/5 becomes 6/9 + 6/10 = 12/19

7 is the number of singles. 12, 6men and 6 women, is number that came with partners

This is an original(ish) question. Won't find it anywhere else.  

Nairalanders organise a BBQ at which less than a score of people attend. 2/3rds of the male attendants came with a partner whilst 3/5ths of the female attendants also came with a partner. What is the number of people who came without a partner?  

Options: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

debosky:
That is the crux of the matter - it is not for Israel to decide for the Palestinians.

Japan surrendered to the Allies, so did the Germans - the Palestinians have not surrendered, and since there was no war between the Palestinian state and the Israeli state, comparisons with WWII are wide of the mark.

This is a stupid point. We have established that in principle states can be established subject to the military control of an occupying power.

Your point about Palestinians not surrendering is ridiculous. The proposed Palestinian state is to be made up of Gaza and the West Bank. Did Egypt and Jordan, which held sovereignty over these territories, not surrender?

So the Gala hawker is part of an American conspiracy? How retarded do you have be to believe this crap?

@Topic

It's always nice to hear good news from Nigeria. Just when you lost all hope about the country, you get such heart warming news as this.

Anybody who beats Jim Iyke up deserves a medal.

Ikomi:
Point out the blind and rubbish commentary. And if what makes it rubbish or blind is that you think Japan and Germany had no choice, than state why you think they did not. Dont just throw away a comment in other to sound right.

They had no choice over the presence of occupational troops on their land, no choice over military policy, no choice over the extent of their territory. Like I have said, if you are comfortable with this then you shouldn't mind Palestine having Israeli occupational troops or determining what weapons the Palestinian Govt can buy.

What a moronic thread. A man stealing a quick glance at a woman's cleavage is hailed as the execution of a $1million contract.

Ikomi:
Look a war just ended the institutions of these nations have been left in total disarray, someone had to come in and help, but the basic fact was that this nations had a choice, what was there choice, that they would adhere to the rule of nations and there countries would be rebuilt with all the help required, and in building nothing neccessary was denied them.

Now what is wrong with that?

You are arguing blindly and trying to pass rubbish as meaningful commentary. If the above is the extent of the choice held by Japan, that too is clearly available to a Palestinian state. The Palestinians, who already are the recipients of astonishing levels of aid, will receive all the help they desire provided they renounce a military capability.

These imbeciles never sign any player yet?

If Barca makes a firm bid for Cesc, they will lose their best player. Even bloody Sagna has made much about the remote prospect of moving to Real. Sinking ship!

Gay bastard.

Ikomi:
What do you mean?

Did Japan or Germany have a choice in their defence capabilities after WWII?

Ikomi:
But the absence of reasonable choice does.

Japan had a choice?

Ikomi:
Dont stoop too low now otherwise you will loose me, I hate it when people argue for the sake of it.

That is ironic as you have been yapping about broker states and neutral states when shown that history is littered with examples of states, whether voluntarily or otherwise, whose independent military capability has been severely restricted or non-existent.

The absence of an army is not incompatible with statehood.

Ikomi:
Isreal does not have to occupy Palestine and run its military that is what the people have been against, there could be some neutral forces that would help train and equip Palestinian army, and ensure no Isreali army is within the relinquished territory. Otherwise this is exactly what disrupted the first peace agreement, an Isreali soldier took it upon himself to walk into a mosque and massacre 48 Palestinians, it was later revealed there was no immediate other to stop Isreali soldiers from such attempt.

The purpose of Israel's insistence on demilitarisation is to safeguard Israel's security. Israel can no more entrust its safety to some neutral force than America would entrust its' in post-war Germany.

Which neutral forces? You mean like the UN forces who were supposed to keep an eye on Hezbollah?

@OP
This is a sham thread, NL is full of them, but let's play along.

Put up your picture and disprove claims that you are an ugly cow.

Show me one state without its own army, and define sovereignty. Then you would have answered yourself.

Costa Rica is not a sovereign state because it has no army.