CHOULO19

Yeah, maybe that's best. After all, he hasn't yet experienced English football even at youth level.

Lmaoooooo :lol: I think it's fair to say now that JT has been literally blamed for everything bad in the world!

Just think he's already way above the youth level and won't learn much there. He's been just sitting for how long? A year, now? I think we should get him in the action as soon as possible.

Great! Now loan him out.

Beautiful, but a part of my brain is screaming: "Too much needless air pollution!".

I hope everyone maintains a suitable chemical balance in their brains till the next time our planet passes through the random man-made set-point on it's imaginary trajectory around it's star Or in other words, Happy New Year everybody!

Well this has gotten out of hand... I think it's best that you leave this topic and don't answer to Bushman anymore, mate.

No, I understand what you're saying, but the problem is, if he is going to play in 4-2-3-1 he can't lose the ball that much. It would be a disaster.

Can't you then somehow transfer it to PayPal?

Came across this yesterday. Guarin was dispossessed 479 times in 2013. More than any other player in the Serie A http://www.sempreinter.com/2013/12/29/optasports-guarin-has-lost-most-balls-in-serie-a-during-2013/

Ran away in fear? Come on, we're having a promising intelligent discussion here, let's not insult anyone's intelligence I live next to Palestinian refugee camp. There are people there who still have the keys to their houses in Palestine! They've passed it down from generation to the next. It's absolutely heart-breaking and quite frankly delusional as their houses are most likely been destroyed. But that doesn't sound to me like people who ran away in fear.

Those were NEVER genuine proposals because the terms were ones that everyone knew the Arabs cannot and would never accept. At the time it was all Arab land. Even the Jews living there were Syrian Jews just like the ones living in Lebanon and today's Syria. And even if they did, it would not have made any difference what so ever because the Zionist target has always been and still is from the Laytani river to the Suez canal as clearly stated by various Zionist leaders throughout the past century. As for the British helping with the immigration, that is a fact. The British endorsed the Zionist plans of Jewish immigration to Palestine and did everything in their power to make it happen. How else would the number in Palestine increase exponentially from 1919 when the British first occupied the land till 1948.

Come on, people. Can we not keep this respectful? We were having a good discussion. No need for it to drop to this level. Like you, I don't see a solution anytime soon. I don't believe in the solution of two states and I think that if it happens it will only be temporary. I think the only possible solution is for the two sides to coexist. Trust me you don't know how hard that is for me to say because that is practically treason in my country, but it's reality.

That's just a snapshot of one of the many consequences of the conflict and is completely take out of context. Of course war is ugly and its consequences even uglier. Here's an image of Israeli children writing on bomb shells destined for the south of Lebanon. They are dedicating the bombs to the children of Lebanon with "love": But what does that prove about the cause of the conflict? Absolutely nothing.

You're mixing up A LOT of stuff in there and missing even more stuff. First let me clear up a couple of things: The Palestinians were NEVER genuinely offered any land to live peacefully. The Israeli plan has always been and still is to occupy the land from the Laytani River in Lebanon to the Suez canal in Egypt. And even if they were offered some land (which again they were not) why in the world would they accept that? The land is after all theirs. It's like someone came into your house, said it was his now and then offered to give you the living room back and said you're being unreasonable for taking it. Secondly, the notion that they have the right to occupy the land because they lived there 3000 years ago is just laughable. It's like saying to 300 million Americans to clear out because the Indians want their land, and by that logic you should give half of Europe back to the Mongols, or even east Europe as well as Spain and Portugal back to the Arabs. It's just beyond ridiculous. It doesn't work that way. Lands and nations and cultures evolve, they don't just go and come so suddenly. A lot of the original inhabitants of the old Israel converted to Christianity 2000 years ago and then a lot of those converted to Islam 600 years later. So most of the Palestinians who were being kicked out of their homes are as much the descendants of the original Israeli people as the people who were brought in to replace them except they had actually stayed in their land for all this time and made a home of Palestine. And even if you ignore all that, are you really saying that the answer to the racism against Jews in Europe is to murder thousands, evacuate millions from their homes and create a racist state that is destined to always be at conflict with it's surroundings? (PS: If you think Hitler invented racism against Jews, you really need to read up on European history). There is no logical explanation to what happened in the early 20th century in Palestine. There is no angle that makes this "fair" or "right". But it happened anyway and it cannot be undone. A solution has to be found to satisfy most of the people and it won't happen soon. But both you and me have thrown a lot of stuff in the air here, so just to make sure you, and everyone reading this, understand how happened, let me draw you a timeline of the events: - At the end of the 19th century, a corrupt and aging Ottoman empire ruled the region. Arabs were largely being marginalized and oppressed. The British, French, Russians and Germans (was still called Prussia at the time) had established special privileges in mount Lebanon under the banner of protecting religious minorities in an attempt to weaken the Empire from within. Muslims, Christians and even a Jewish minority lived peacefully in the economic center of the region: Palestine. -1914: World War 1 started with the Ottoman Empire allying with Germany. - 1915: In a continuation of their efforts to dismantle the Empire, the French and British made a secret agreement to divide the Arab lands between the two countries. The Zionists, who now had a large and growing influence on the politics in Europe got in on the negotiations. The British eager to please the Zionists who held some of the biggest positions in Europe and could genuinely affect the war added an "International Zone" to the plan which was intended to be the destination of Jewish immigrants from Europe. - 1916: After failing against the Ottoman Empire in the Balkan, the British realized that they needed the help of the Arabs. So they promised Al Sherif Hussein that the Arabs will be allowed to rule their own land, from the gulf to Syria if they in exchange aim the Allies in the war. The Arabs agreed and started the "Arab revolt" against the empire. - 1917: The British finally decided to actually go through with a Jewish state in Palestine. After contemplating places like Seychelles and Madagascar, the British decided that having an ally state in the region is in the best future for them in the long run. Note that all this was happening at the start of the oil revolution with oil being discovered in the region. This resulted in the Balfour Declaration. - 1918: The Arab revolt was a success and the Ottomans were defeated. Al Shariff Hussein started negotiations with all the different regions in the Arab world to create a unified government. A temporary government was created headed by Rida Al Rikabi. - 1919: World War 1 ended. British and French soldiers landed on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean and declared Lebanon, Syria, Palestine and Iraq (there was no such thing as Jordan back then), the lands they promised to the Arabs, as occupied land. The US, who believe it or not were adored in the region and actually genuinely stood for democracy and what's right in the world at that time, sent the Kind-Crane commission to the middle east to assess the situation and stand on the people's demands. They concluded that: "...the American people as a whole should realize that if the American government decided to support the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, they are committing the American people to the use of force in that area, since only by force can a Jewish state in Palestine be established or maintained." The report noted that there is a principle that the wishes of the local population need to be taken into account and that there is widespread anti-Zionist feeling in Palestine and Syria, and the holy nature of the land to Christians and Muslims as well as Jews must preclude solely Jewish dominion. It also noted that Jews at that time comprised only 10% of the population of Palestine. - 1920: The San Ramon conference stripped the Arabs of every right to rule their own land. The French occupied Lebanon and Syria while British occupied Palestine and Iraq after small battles. In order to shut the KSA up, the state of Jordan was created and given to King Abdullah, one of the royal family of KSA. After that, as planned, the British started a huge Jewish immigration from Europe to Palestine and gave them protection and privileges over the locals. The British took their time assembling, funding and arming an army of the newly arrived Jewish population. - 1948: Feeling the Jewish army was strong enough and the international political climate was suiting since the world was still busy with outcomes of World War 2, the British finally oversaw the "independence" of the State of Israel. Thousands of Palestinians killed, millions thrown out of their homes and made to be come refugees in Lebanon, Syrian and Jordan where they still till this day live as refugees in camps that aren't suited to even store cattle! After that, naturally a lot of Arab states rose to the aid of the Palestinians since they are practically the same nation with the same history. Defeats were inevitable, betrayals happened and resistance rose and fell and then rose up again and the Palestinian cause has been the number one used and abused cause in the Arab world since. So there's the story of how the State of Israel came to be for you. Obviously there are bound to be a few things that are not clear there because you could write a book about every single sentence; that's how vast and complicated the subject is. But feel free to ask me about anything or look it up for yourself if you want something more reliable.

Match Preview Here by @Strike.

Great work, mate. Should be another great tactical battle like one at the Bridge.

Of course both made mistakes, but you can't say that both are at fault because you would be confusing the cause with the reaction and equating the victim with the oppressor. You can't look at the situation with the eyes of today and ignore the reasons that lead to things being how they are.

Obviously you two can't discuss this calmly and respectfully, so please just leave the discussion where it is and agree to disagree. I appreciate that you each have your own take on the matter, but this is a football forum after all and there is no need to fight over politics.

Yeah, I'm still waiting for the first "Mourinho Out!" thread. Took longer than usual this time around

Welcome Tim. Very pleased to meet you. Hope you stick around

In Porto he played the most advanced in a 4-3-3, practically what Oscar does here. He's not even a starter for Columbia. And he also played as an attacking midfielder for the vast majority of his first season at Inter. He probably played a few times at CM, but Strama was changing so many things from game to game and trying so many different things, I'm surprised he never played him in goal.. Don't believe me, go read what the Inter fan wrote in the Guarin thread.

Good news. Best of luck, Patrick.

If you mean that he shouldn't be doing it on a football field then I couldn't agree more. But if you mean in general, then that is an issue of freedom of speech. It is an anti-Ziosnism/anti-establishment gesture just like any other political gesture.

Ah, you see here is where you run over some of the grey areas and confuse some of the entangled issues I mentioned before, my friend. There is a HUGE difference between Nazism and the "sentiments of Muslims towards Jews" as you put it. Nazi principles are, by nature, racist. Nazis hate Jews because their ideology implies it. The animosity from a large part of the Muslim world towards Zionists sprouts from political roots; namely the Palestinian cause. The occupation of Palestine in 1948 was (has been, and still is) so brutal that naturally it became the number one cause for all the people in the region. A region where the Islamic religion happens to be predominant. There are two million Christians in Lebanon (about half the population) and the vast majority of them are anti-Zionists. Same applies to the 8 million Christians in Egypt and 3 million in Syria. Islam has nothing to do with antizionism and it certainly has nothing to do with antisemitism. In fact, like I mentioned before, Jews and Muslims always got along very well throughout history. Jews always coexisted peacefully in all the Islamic states. Even when the Umayyads where kicked out of Andalusia (Spain and Portugal) by Christians, the Jews came back with them to the Arab world. Till the 1940s, the Jewish populations lived peacefully in all the Arab countries. As far as I know, they were never prosecuted by Muslims at any stage. I can tell for certain in my country, Lebanon, that the Jews were never part of any of our many civil wars. They lived in Lebanon in peace next to Muslims and Christians up until the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 at which point the vast majority of them either left for Europe or Israel. Now only an estimated 3000 Jews lives in Lebanon. Is there people in the Muslim world who confuse Zionism with Judaism and hate Jews? Of course there is. This area unfortunately suffers of a serious lack of education. So where does Islam come into the equation? Well that's through something called "Jihad" which literally means work. Jihad compels all Muslims to work for the good of the "Umma" or nation and fight against its enemies, in this case Israel (though lately the "enemies" of the nation has become a matter of perspective). That's why conservative Muslims have taken the spot light in the fight against Israel in the middle east. Though, even that is down to global and regional political reasons. Up until the 90s, the forces and parties fighting against Israel were sectarian parties like the Lebanese communist party, the Palestinian Fateh, the Asad regime...etc. It was the backing, arming and funding of the US and the KSA that catapulted the Muslim extremists to the front lines. I probably went on for too long there and told you stories you probably don't care about, I apologize. But the point I'm trying to make is, though, that Islam has very little to do with the principle and causes of antizionism and it has even less to do with confusion between antizionism and antisemitism, that is due mainly to the racist nature of Israel (at least on the surface). So, even though I completely understand where you are coming from and why it would seem to you this way, but even saying that "both Nazis and Muslims have the same sentiments towards Jews" is not only incorrect but reeks of ill-informed stereotypes and, forgive me if I am too harsh, even a similar type of racism to the one you are trying to oppose here.