Israel hits Palestine again while West Cheers Them On
-
Originally posted by jojobeach:
Let's face it Jarhum, disarmament is indeed the best thing to do. But if Israel is to take this route.. then it is also fair that all countries that poses a threat to Israel be disarmed too. Are the other countries willing to do that as well ?
Weapons are evil.. it's creation was for the sole purpose of killing and destructions.
Yes I agree it wasn't a fair fight from the beginning.
But isn't it kinda stupid for HAMAS to take on Israel with their home made mortars/rockets ?
If holding on to power is causing sufferings to your own people.. wouldn't a honest leader be willing to put down his pride and step down ?
Of course, your suggestion would be the most ideal scenario for everyone. I would ardently support such a move.Contrary to the 2006 Hzbullah war, this war is not about Hamas or it is the least about Hamas. I mentioned that in my previous posts.
Hamas began with a few people. However, most of their combtants were fathers and husbands of Palestinian women and children who were killed in the war. And most people will take up arms when their loved ones are killed and being killed.
-
Originally posted by oldbreadstinks:
even if you want to use scholarly assessments and deductions you must consider the source. Shiraz Dossa isn't well known for his unbiased views. if i haven't read wrongly he believes there's ethnocide against Palestinians. would you trust someone like that to translate what Ahmedinejad said?
The 2002 Arab Initiative means nothing, its unlikely to be followed through. its just an empty promise they can't keep. most likely they'll normalise ties while recuiting fighters for the next jihad at the same time. hatred is too deepset in the region. you can't snap your fingers sign some papers and hope it'll go away
Likewise, the president of the UN General Assembly stated that the Israelis is committing genocide against the Gazans. So, who or what do you believe in.The Initiative which you beieve is redundant is simply your assumption. Thus you do not believe in any attempts for peace. Israel has broke numerous promises, agreements and truces. When you mention hatred is deeply entrenched in the region, you disregard any hopes for peace and diplomacy. I advice you do some soul searching within yourself first.
Moreover, it is Israel who declined the initiative. Achieving peace is about both sides winning some and losing some. However, Israel is not prepared to lose.
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
Perhaps the only way should be Israel be disarmed and U.N peacekeepers supervise its pre 1967 borders. Israel is guilty of numerous war crimes including the rape and murder of women and children. Read Sabra and Shatilla massacres in Lebanon.Thusfar, no Palestinian army has fought within Israel. Arab nations in its previous wars with Israel are much comparatively cleaner than Israel in the number of war crimes committed. Thus, you may be able to deduce a probable inference from here. Israeli leaders have a list of war crimes committed hanging above them.
It is ludicrous Hamas should bear the brunt of the blame when the innocent Gazans are intently murdered by the Israelis themselves. I will emphasize this fact. Your argument is contradictory to rational thinking simply because of your prejudice possibly due to emotional ties to Israel.
Military strategist have stated that if Israel were to engage Hamas in a guerilla warfare, Israel will lose. The Israel "soldier" hides behind its helicopters and tanks. Any man would affirm that this is not a fair fight in its purest sense. Who are the cowards then?
haha why would the victor of a war in which it was not the aggressor give back annexed lands to countries who would continue to be hostile to it? much less disarm in such a hostile region? Sabra and Shatilla massacres were not commited by the IDF. their fault was they didn't protect the victims.
Palestinian army has fought within Israel because they don't have the ability to do so, not because they don't want to. and of course the arabs were cleaner in their wars with israel, they've lost every single one.
instead of throwing in words like genocide and murder how about opening your eyes to how the palestinians are dying?
haha and which military strategist are you going to quote? did the military strategist also tell you Israel will lose in guerilla warfare because if israeli soldiers were to charge at bullets fired from behind covers they would die? why else do you think helicopters and tanks were brought in? are you trying to tell us you think the israeli army is there in gaza to challenge the hamas to a duel?
so is war supposed to be fair? is that honestly what you think? so iraq was conquered by an army of cowards? When British ships bombed the island of Zanzibar were they cowards as well? should they have landed and throw away their muskets and engage in a sword fight with the sultan's men? should the IDF have brought israeli women to hide behind instead of helicopters and tanks?
-
Originally posted by oldbreadstinks:
haha why would the victor of a war in which it was not the aggressor give back annexed lands to countries who would continue to be hostile to it? much less disarm in such a hostile region? Sabra and Shatilla massacres were not commited by the IDF. their fault was they didn't protect the victims.
Palestinian army has fought within Israel because they don't have the ability to do so, not because they don't want to. and of course the arabs were cleaner in their wars with israel, they've lost every single one.
instead of throwing in words like genocide and murder how about opening your eyes to how the palestinians are dying?
haha and which military strategist are you going to quote? did the military strategist also tell you Israel will lose in guerilla warfare because if israeli soldiers were to charge at bullets fired from behind covers they would die? why else do you think helicopters and tanks were brought in? are you trying to tell us you think the israeli army is there in gaza to challenge the hamas to a duel?
so is war supposed to be fair? is that honestly what you think? so iraq was conquered by an army of cowards? When British ships bombed the island of Zanzibar were they cowards as well? should they have landed and throw away their muskets and engage in a sword fight with the sultan's men? should the IDF have brought israeli women to hide behind instead of helicopters and tanks?
The Sabra and Shatilla massacres were committed by the IDF. An internal investigation by a commision within the Israeli ministry itself found the IDF led by Ariel Sharon guilty of the masacres. They were women and children. You can't expect them to protect themselves against bullets.I see you are a Zionist extremist. I see no sense in reasoning out with you here. If you think your nonsensical blabbering is valid, I challenge you to a debate in person. Reply to me in private.
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
Likewise, the president of the UN General Assembly stated that the Israelis is committing genocide against the Gazans. So, who or what do you believe in.The Initiative which you beieve is redundant is simply your assumption. Thus you do not believe in any attempts for peace. Israel has broke numerous promises, agreements and truces. When you mention hatred is deeply entrenched in the region, you disregard any hopes for peace and diplomacy. I advice you do some soul searching within yourself first.
Moreover, it is Israel who declined the initiative. Achieving peace is about both sides winning some and losing some. However, Israel is not prepared to lose.
so what if he's the president of the UN General Assembly, that doesn't mean he's correct. unless something do come to pass any views give scholarly or otherwise can only be regarded as assumptions.
other ways of achieving peace can start with arab nations disarming first. as suggested even complete genocide against gaza can achieve lasting peace. why must israel be prepared to lose something first? why not the others?
as for soul searching, you need it more than i do if you're going to continue to use victims this way in your arguements.
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
The Sabra and Shatilla massacres were committed by the IDF. An internal investigation by a commision within the Israeli ministry itself found the IDF led by Ariel Sharon guilty of the masacres. They were women and children. You can't expect them to protect themselves against bullets.I see you are a Zionist extremist. I see no sense in reasoning out with you here. If you think your nonsensical blabbering is valid, I challenge you to a debate in person. Reply to me in private.
Ah yes.. the Shaba and Shatilla massascres... absolutely horrid.
And indeed.. without the help of IDF.. the Phalangist will not have access to the killing ground.
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
The Sabra and Shatilla massacres were committed by the IDF. An internal investigation by a commision within the Israeli ministry itself found the IDF led by Ariel Sharon guilty of the masacres. They were women and children. You can't expect them to protect themselves against bullets.I see you are a Zionist extremist. I see no sense in reasoning out with you here. If you think your nonsensical blabbering is valid, I challenge you to a debate in person. Reply to me in private.
An internal investigation by a commision within the Israeli ministry itself found the IDF led by Ariel Sharon guilty of the masacres because they didn't stop it from happening. not in the sense of IDF charging in and shooting people.
i'm a zionist extremist? haha then what are you? right wing of hamas? if i didn't see atobe posting in favour of israel at the begining of the thread i would have thought you're him.
and if you think your nonsensical blabbering is valid, why can't i think my nonsensical blabbering is valid. and if you can't even answer my questions here what makes you think i'll answer your nonsensical blabbering in private?
-
When it comes to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict everybody is a farkin hypocrite!
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
You call me a nincompoop..Come on, I challenged you to a debate and you keep avoiding the challenge. A debate will prove who is the idiot. Once again, I challenge you to a debate in person. I will assume another avoidance of my challenge as an admission to defeat by you.
Would you engage me in an intellectual discourse?
....but you are no intelectual.
You twist facts. That I know. Are you a Goebbels wanna-be? His propaganda principles are out of date already.
-
Originally posted by googoomuck:
OK, freedomclub disagrees that if Arabs put down weapons, there will be no violence.
Next, Hamas use civilians as human shields. Who disagrees?
Silence?!
This is typical of terrorist supporters, denying Hamas' wrong doing.
Short clips as evidence:
Where have I ever denied Hamas' wrong doings? I've put it across many times that as long as the conflict continues, it is both sides that have to be condemned. But the popular opinion of people in this forum is to take one side, overlook the crimes of the other side, and condemn the other side.
When you say "Arabs", do you refer to Hamas, the Palestinians or the Arab countries like Egypt, Jordan, Syria or Saudi Arabia? We all know that the Arab countries that attacked or got attacked by Israel over the last few decades, namely Egypt, Jordan and Syria, have made peace with Israel (except for Syria perhaps). If you mean that Hamas puts down their weapons, peace will only ensue if Israel halts its oppression of the Palestinian people, and that includes the inhumane closing of the Gazan border.
In the absence of more evidence from the Gaza Strip, due to Israel's cutting off the foreign media there, I will not say that Hamas cant help using human shields, because I cant prove it, though that is my opinion. So I agree with you on that point. But so is Israel guilty of that charge.
"Israel is facing growing demands from senior UN officials and human rights groups for an international war crimes investigation in Gaza over allegations such as the "reckless and indiscriminate" shelling of residential areas and use of Palestinian families as human shields by soldiers.
....
The Israeli military are accused of:
• Using powerful shells in civilian areas which the army knew would cause large numbers of innocent casualties;
• Using banned weapons such as phosphorus bombs;
• Holding Palestinian families as human shields;
• Attacking medical facilities, including the killing of 12 ambulance men in marked vehicles;
• Killing large numbers of police who had no military role.
...
Amnesty International says hitting residential streets with shells that send blast and shrapnel over a wide area constitutes "prima facie evidence of war crimes".
"There has been reckless and disproportionate and in some cases indiscriminate use of force," said Donatella Rovera, an Amnesty investigator in Israel. "There has been the use of weaponry that shouldn't be used in densely populated areas because it's known that it will cause civilian fatalities and casualties.
"They have extremely sophisticated missiles that can be guided to a moving car and they choose to use other weapons or decide to drop a bomb on a house knowing that there were women and children inside. These are very, very clear breaches of international law."
....
Rovera has also collected evidence that the Israeli army holds Palestinian families prisoner in their own homes as human shields. "It's standard practice for Israeli soldiers to go into a house, lock up the family in a room on the ground floor and use the rest of the house as a military base, as a sniper's position. That is the absolute textbook case of human shields.
"It has been practised by the Israeli army for many years and they are doing it again in Gaza now," she said."
- Demands grow for Gaza war crimes investigation
I have never denied that Hamas has committed war crimes, nor have I denied Israel has. Simply engaging in a one-sided condemnation of Hamas's war crimes is a characteristic of what Short Ninga called "a farkin hypocrite".
-
Originally posted by freedomclub:
Where have I ever denied Hamas' wrong doings? I've put it across many times that as long as the conflict continues, it is both sides that have to be condemned. But the popular opinion of people in this forum is to take one side, overlook the crimes of the other side, and condemn the other side.
When you say "Arabs", do you refer to Hamas, the Palestinians or the Arab countries like Egypt, Jordan, Syria or Saudi Arabia? We all know that the Arab countries that attacked or got attacked by Israel over the last few decades, namely Egypt, Jordan and Syria, have made peace with Israel (except for Syria perhaps). If you mean that Hamas puts down their weapons, peace will only ensue if Israel halts its oppression of the Palestinian people, and that includes the inhumane closing of the Gazan border.
In the absence of more evidence from the Gaza Strip, due to Israel's cutting off the foreign media there, I will not say that Hamas cant help using human shields, because I cant prove it, though that is my opinion. So I agree with you on that point. But so is Israel guilty of that charge.
"Israel is facing growing demands from senior UN officials and human rights groups for an international war crimes investigation in Gaza over allegations such as the "reckless and indiscriminate" shelling of residential areas and use of Palestinian families as human shields by soldiers.
....
The Israeli military are accused of:
• Using powerful shells in civilian areas which the army knew would cause large numbers of innocent casualties;
• Using banned weapons such as phosphorus bombs;
• Holding Palestinian families as human shields;
• Attacking medical facilities, including the killing of 12 ambulance men in marked vehicles;
• Killing large numbers of police who had no military role.
...
Amnesty International says hitting residential streets with shells that send blast and shrapnel over a wide area constitutes "prima facie evidence of war crimes".
"There has been reckless and disproportionate and in some cases indiscriminate use of force," said Donatella Rovera, an Amnesty investigator in Israel. "There has been the use of weaponry that shouldn't be used in densely populated areas because it's known that it will cause civilian fatalities and casualties.
"They have extremely sophisticated missiles that can be guided to a moving car and they choose to use other weapons or decide to drop a bomb on a house knowing that there were women and children inside. These are very, very clear breaches of international law."
....
Rovera has also collected evidence that the Israeli army holds Palestinian families prisoner in their own homes as human shields. "It's standard practice for Israeli soldiers to go into a house, lock up the family in a room on the ground floor and use the rest of the house as a military base, as a sniper's position. That is the absolute textbook case of human shields.
"It has been practised by the Israeli army for many years and they are doing it again in Gaza now," she said."
- Demands grow for Gaza war crimes investigation
I have never denied that Hamas has committed war crimes, nor have I denied Israel has. Simply engaging in a one-sided condemnation of Hamas's war crimes is a characteristic of what Short Ninga called "a farkin hypocrite".
Accusing IDF of mass-killing civilians and then alleged that IDF uses Palestinian families as human shields? That is absurd.
Unless Donatella Rovera produces evidence that IDF uses palestinian families as human shields, she's making a mockery of human rights issues, where Hamas is already guilty of.
Oh yes, talking about ambulances, didn't the Hamas also used UN ambulances to transport its militants?
Hamas uses a UN/Red Cross Ambulance as a terrorist transport
-
Originally posted by googoomuck:
Accusing IDF of mass-killing civilians and then alleged that IDF uses Palestinian families as human shields? That is absurd.
Unless Donatella Rovera produces evidence that IDF uses palestinian families as human shields, she's making a mockery of human rights issues, where Hamas is already guilty of.
Oh yes, talking about ambulances, didn't the Hamas also used UN ambulances to transport its militants?
Accusing IDF of mass-killing civilians and then alleged that IDF uses Palestinian families as human shields? That is absurd.
Unless Donatella Rovera produces evidence that IDF uses palestinian families as human shields, she's making a mockery of human rights issues, where Hamas is already guilty of.
When you deny Israel's war crimes, it is a mockery of human rights, especially with that "
"."ISRAELI shells set ablaze a food warehouse at UN headquarters in Gaza yesterday, destroying tons of emergency rations intended for needy Gaza civilians, a senior UN official said.
...
srael's prime minister, Ehud Olmert, said the military fired artillery shells at the UN compound after Hamas militants opened fire from the location, a version of events John Ging, director of Unwra in Gaza, rejected as "nonsense"
Mr Ging said Israeli shells first hit a courtyard filled with refugees, then struck garages and the UN's main warehouse, sending thousands of tons of food aid up in flames. Later, fuel supplies ignited, sending a thick plume of smoke into the air.
"It's a total disaster for us," said Mr Ging, adding that the UN had warned the Israeli its shelling put the compound in danger."- Israeli 'phosphorous shells' incinerate 1,000s of tons of UN food as Gaza starves
Oh yes, talking about ambulances, didn't the Hamas also used UN ambulances to transport its militants?
Would you care to cite your source? If they did, I guess thats why Israel attacks hospitals now.
"Loaded down with babies, toddlers and children, dozens of families arrived at the doors of the Al-Quds hospital shortly after dawn as dozens of tanks roared into the area, sparking furious battles with Palestinian fighters.
...
But as the frightened civilians took refuge in the facility, part of the hospital caught fire after an Israeli strike. The blaze was brought under control in the medical area but not in the administrative building.
The attack put about 100 patients and medical staff at risk, according to the international Red Cross, while a doctor inside said many of them were trapped.
"The Israelis are bombing and attacking all around the hospital. We can't get out. There's fire, and we're trapped inside. The water has been cut off," French doctor Regis Garrigue said.
The hospital was hit after around 12 hours of "incessant" bombing, said Garrigue, the president and founder of the French medical aid agency Help Doctors.
The collapse of the entire wing of a building triggered a moment of panic among the sheltering patients and families, and caused a fire in the building."...
- Civilians sheltered at Gaza hospital before 'horror' attack
How about a check on the casualties while we're at it?
Palestinians: At least 1097 dead, including at least 355 children and 100 children. 5000 wounded.
Israelis: 10 soldiers (4 from friendly fire) and 3 civilians
-
Originally posted by googoomuck:
Accusing IDF of mass-killing civilians and then alleged that IDF uses Palestinian families as human shields? That is absurd.
Unless Donatella Rovera produces evidence that IDF uses palestinian families as human shields, she's making a mockery of human rights issues, where Hamas is already guilty of.
Oh yes, talking about ambulances, didn't the Hamas also used UN ambulances to transport its militants?
Hamas uses a UN/Red Cross Ambulance as a terrorist transport
Sure, its absurd because the IDF is an upholder of human rights. What about the other accusations?
"The Israeli military are accused of:
• Using powerful shells in civilian areas which the army knew would cause large numbers of innocent casualties;
• Using banned weapons such as phosphorus bombs;
• Holding Palestinian families as human shields;
• Attacking medical facilities, including the killing of 12 ambulance men in marked vehicles;
• Killing large numbers of police who had no military role."
-
Originally posted by freedomclub:
Accusing IDF of mass-killing civilians and then alleged that IDF uses Palestinian families as human shields? That is absurd.
Unless Donatella Rovera produces evidence that IDF uses palestinian families as human shields, she's making a mockery of human rights issues, where Hamas is already guilty of.
When you deny Israel's war crimes, it is a mockery of human rights, especially with that "
"."ISRAELI shells set ablaze a food warehouse at UN headquarters in Gaza yesterday, destroying tons of emergency rations intended for needy Gaza civilians, a senior UN official said.
...
srael's prime minister, Ehud Olmert, said the military fired artillery shells at the UN compound after Hamas militants opened fire from the location, a version of events John Ging, director of Unwra in Gaza, rejected as "nonsense"
Mr Ging said Israeli shells first hit a courtyard filled with refugees, then struck garages and the UN's main warehouse, sending thousands of tons of food aid up in flames. Later, fuel supplies ignited, sending a thick plume of smoke into the air.
"It's a total disaster for us," said Mr Ging, adding that the UN had warned the Israeli its shelling put the compound in danger."- Israeli 'phosphorous shells' incinerate 1,000s of tons of UN food as Gaza starves
Oh yes, talking about ambulances, didn't the Hamas also used UN ambulances to transport its militants?
Would you care to cite your source? If they did, I guess thats why Israel attacks hospitals now.
"Loaded down with babies, toddlers and children, dozens of families arrived at the doors of the Al-Quds hospital shortly after dawn as dozens of tanks roared into the area, sparking furious battles with Palestinian fighters.
...
But as the frightened civilians took refuge in the facility, part of the hospital caught fire after an Israeli strike. The blaze was brought under control in the medical area but not in the administrative building.
The attack put about 100 patients and medical staff at risk, according to the international Red Cross, while a doctor inside said many of them were trapped.
"The Israelis are bombing and attacking all around the hospital. We can't get out. There's fire, and we're trapped inside. The water has been cut off," French doctor Regis Garrigue said.
The hospital was hit after around 12 hours of "incessant" bombing, said Garrigue, the president and founder of the French medical aid agency Help Doctors.
The collapse of the entire wing of a building triggered a moment of panic among the sheltering patients and families, and caused a fire in the building."...
- Civilians sheltered at Gaza hospital before 'horror' attack
How about a check on the scoreboard while we're at it?
Palestinians: At least 1097 dead, including at least 355 children and 100 children. 5000 wounded.
Israelis: 10 soldiers (4 from friendly fire) and 3 civilians
In a war, any building with Hamas nearby is fair game. Hamas must not fight in close proximity of these buildings.
Civilians will be better off to keep clear of these 'safe' sanctuaries because the Hamas militants are always close by..
-
Originally posted by freedomclub:
Sure, its absurd because the IDF is an upholder of human rights. What about the other accusations?
"The Israeli military are accused of:
• Using powerful shells in civilian areas which the army knew would cause large numbers of innocent casualties;
They were heavily infested with Hamas militants
• Using banned weapons such as phosphorus bombs;
The bomb is not banned. It is unfortunate that Hamas military activities always take place in civilian places, making it dificult to enforce the guidelines for using phospherous bombs.
• Holding Palestinian families as human shields;
No concrete evidence. If IDF is accused of mass-killing civilians, what's the point of IDF holding families as human shields?
• Attacking medical facilities, including the killing of 12 ambulance men in marked vehicles;
UN and red cross ambulances are known to have transport Hamas militants.
• Killing large numbers of police who had no military role."
I doubt it. Show evidence for us(or me) to verify.
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
The Sabra and Shatilla massacres were committed by the IDF. An internal investigation by a commision within the Israeli ministry itself found the IDF led by Ariel Sharon guilty of the masacres. They were women and children. You can't expect them to protect themselves against bullets.I see you are a Zionist extremist. I see no sense in reasoning out with you here. If you think your nonsensical blabbering is valid, I challenge you to a debate in person. Reply to me in private.
There is an oft quoted Malay proverb. It goes something like this: When you point a finger at a person, three fingers point at you..
Muslims are also facist, who believe that they are superior to the infidels. And when Muslims have the upper hand, how do you think they'd behave? They would discriminate against you, and impose their laws on you. They believe its their God given rule that a Muslim is worth twice that of an infidel.
-
Hi All,
Just wanted to share this video and this is coming from a Rabbi Yisroel Weiss. This created a controversial issue amongst Jewish community.
From my personal opinions all lot of people DO NOT understand the histories of Palestine, Jews and the Muslims. I think is best to back track a little before the post.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=DeaZuj7ruwM
-
From my personal opinion its freedom of speech.
Bear in mind certain cults do not allow such freedom. They risk getting their heads severed from their body with a large knife.
-
Originally posted by oldbreadstinks:
so what if he's the president of the UN General Assembly, that doesn't mean he's correct. unless something do come to pass any views give scholarly or otherwise can only be regarded as assumptions.
other ways of achieving peace can start with arab nations disarming first. as suggested even complete genocide against gaza can achieve lasting peace. why must israel be prepared to lose something first? why not the others?
as for soul searching, you need it more than i do if you're going to continue to use victims this way in your arguements.
So what? Ahh.. your dismissal which you have not thought through much depicts your incapacity for any proper discussion. I adivice in the event you decide to disagree with someone of higher intellectual authority than you are cite proper disagreements from one who is of similar authority.My stand is both Israel and its neighbours should disarm ideally at the same time under strict supervision from relevent international organizations. However, this remains a romantic notion. You are barbaric to claim that a complete genocide of the Palestinians is legitimate to achieve lasting peace. You are worse off than an animal. In no sound mind would one advocate murdering innocent civilians for any purpose. You cannot accuse me of siding with any terrorist organizations for I detest the killings of innocent to further any cause, no matter how noble it may be. However, the same can't be said of you.
I am an ardent defendent of the Palestinian lives being maliciously taken away and violated by the very atrocities of the Israeli army. I believe my ethical values correspond to the values of humanity and thus require no soul searching
However, you remain one of those Zionist extremists such as googoomuck, jojobch and mancha who have avoided my challenge for a fruitful debate. It is understandable with the diminishing moral inferiority you possess with regards to your stand as well as the lack of much proper intellectual discourse you have portrayed all this while.
Ah beng talk will get you no where in this forum.
-
Originally posted by Jarhum:
Shotgun,
I beg to differ. Your justification that Israel is not a belligerent due to a single simplistic quoted rhetoric is grossly inadequate. And your attempt to cite inadequately speaks volumes on your intent.
Nasser said" "If Israel embarks on an aggression against Syria or Egypt, the battle against Israel will be a general one and not confined to one spot on the Syrian or Egyptian borders. The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel"
I view your intent to leave out the first sentence of his announcement to trade unionist as purposeful and tantamount to alter the discourse of the exact causation of the war.
Moreover, Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban wrote in his autobiography that he found "Nasser's assurance that he did not plan an armed attack" convincing, adding that "Nasser did not want war; he wanted victory without war". Writing from Egypt on 4 June 1967 New York Times journalist James Reston observed: "Cairo does not want war and it is certainly not ready for war. But it has already accepted the possibility, even the likelihood, of war, as if it had lost control of the situation. In addition, Egypt planned to send its vice president to Washington for last ditch diplomacy attempts to avert a war on the day of Israel's pre-emptive strike.
However, Israel's insistence to proceed with a preemptive strike leading to a war was a transformative and political manovouer rather than purely a miliary defence one.
On resolution 242,
there are various interpretations of the ambigous, inconclusive declaration. However, you have adopted the pro-Israeli stance as a definitive direction of the resolution which reflects your prejudiced stand. There exist various perspectives and interpretations of this vaguely coined declaration. Academics would point to the essence of the resolution that neither requires Israel to withdraw nor permits Israel to retain the 1967 boundaries.
Palestine is defined as occupied territories rather than a sovereign state actor. Your reluctance to accept Israel's liabilities towards its war crimes is questionable. Numerous groups have accused Israel of blatant violation of the fourth geneva convention, notably Amnesty, UNWRA and several others. Israel themselves do not refute its violation of human rights, only to justify it with claims of self defence.
Does extermination requires the perpertrator to publically announce its intention in forms of rhetoric to justify charges of genocide directed at it? What Israel is doing in Gaza tantamounts to acts of genocide, I reiterate. Try asking Hitler was he responsible for acts of genocide against the Jews? He would vehemently refute the accusations. Any criminal would attempt to justify their wrongdoings and Israel is no different. I see no disparity between the killings of innocent civilians of a sovereign state and a non state actor. Do you imply acts of extermination of citizens would only then constitute genocide?
The president of the UN General Assembly has condemned Israel's killings of Palestinians in its Gaza offensive as genocide.
I am fully aware any state or individual has the right to self-defence. However, unlike you, I am not selective in its application. Unfortunaely, Israeli attacks, in this current round of events are not retaliatory nor a reaction. They were the perpertrators of this war. Refer to my previous article for my elaboration and substatiation of this.
I am tremendously appalled at your attempted downplay of the massacre and the gross violation of human lives and rights by the Israeli Zionists. In addition, I am pretty amused at your selective citation of information to further a flismy stand. I hope you would reconsider your stand for disregard for the precise cause of the massacre of innocents will do your values no justice.
Jarhum,
My bad for also forgetting to mention that Egypt also enacted a blockade on Israeli Shipping in the Red Sea. Isn't that an act of belligerency?
Add that with the thousand tanks, and hundred thousand troops sitting on the border, Israel had a real concern for its security. Any country would.
Eban did attempt to delay Israeli pre-emptive strike, however, American plans to aid Israel fell on its ass, and Israel then knew they stood alone and had to do whatever it took to guarantee its Survival. Why would it be matter of Survival? All thanks to Nasser who chose very powerful words for that situation.
Again, you claim to be a Political Scientist, and should understand that words are very carefully chosen when dealing with other countries. Nasser's choice of words were in not way defensive. He did not claim that they would defeat Israel, but chose the words, "destruction of Israel." He added, "The Arab people want to fight" and not "The Arab people will want to fight." A very aggressive choice of words don't you think?
On Resolution 242, it was a matter of fact that the Security Council rejected appeals to insert the word "all." If they intended for Israel to return all territories and force her to accept pre may 1967 borders, they would have happily made amendments.
Now on the issue of Genocide. A massacre might pass as a charge, but genocide not. Genocide entails the complete elimination of a race of people, hence the root word, "gene-." What Hitler tried to do, was genocide. He targeted Jews, and came up with systematice methods to kill them by the droves. He openly stated his ideals of "purification" of "Aryan" peoples and lands.
There is no sign that the Israelis are systematically killing Palestinians. If aerial bombings are considered so, then Americans should have been accused of genocide of Iraqis too. Oh, did I mention that that would be horribly inefficient without the use of Fuel Air Explosives?
You can call me whatever you like, Zionist Extremists, PAP Dog, blah blah... I'm used to it. I've said it before, I'm a realist. I don't really care as much as for the morals and how many people are dying from Israeli WP. I just know that the coexistence of Hamas and Israel creates security dilemmas and the only way to relative "peace" is the capitulation of Hamas.
-
"Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal has said the Islamist movement will not accept Israel's terms for a Gaza truce."
This Idiot is sitting comfy in Syria on "exile" while his own people are dying in Gaza.
Now why would this HAMAS leader wants a truce ?
If Israel occupies GAZA.. this guy can just stay in Syria as a Political refugee and continues to enjoy the hospitality of Syrian Gov. No need to go back to that poverty stricken little strip.
Life is good in Syria isn't it ?
-
Originally posted by oldbreadstinks:
An internal investigation by a commision within the Israeli ministry itself found the IDF led by Ariel Sharon guilty of the masacres because they didn't stop it from happening. not in the sense of IDF charging in and shooting people.
i'm a zionist extremist? haha then what are you? right wing of hamas? if i didn't see atobe posting in favour of israel at the begining of the thread i would have thought you're him.
and if you think your nonsensical blabbering is valid, why can't i think my nonsensical blabbering is valid. and if you can't even answer my questions here what makes you think i'll answer your nonsensical blabbering in private?
I never intended nor attempted to answer your idotic questions. I only aim to refute your barbaric disregard for human lives. I am not surprised you avoid my invitation for a fruitful debate, looking at the tremendously low level of knowledge and intelligence you are unfortunately born with.The IDF did not only not prevented any massacre from happening but facilitated the carnage. However, the Kahan commision states that there was no direct involvement by the IDF. However, this claim was challenged by Philangists who stated that there were direct Israeli participation. It is difficult to believe Israel's claims nowadays with conflicting reports from from Israel against the U.N with regards to the presence of Hamas combatants within the U.N compund which Israel attacke And interestingly a conflicting report from none other than Ehud Olmert himself against Israel's stanuch ally, the United states where olmert arrogantly boasted that he instructed the U.S to abstain from voting the security council resolution which was denied by Washington. Thus, Israel's claims and reports are fast losing credibility as a result of direct conflicts of reports from itself against others. Moreover, the viability and integrity of the Kahan Commision comes into doubt since although it concludes that Sharon should never hold public office again, he still went on the become the PM of Israel.
Israels facilitation and assistance is analogous to getting the Mafia to kill someone you want dead, instead of doing it yourself. Moreover, you should attempt to keep your prejudice towards Israeli violent policies in check. Sabra and Shatilla were under direct control of the IDF. If you would utilize your same brand of arguing that loss of lives in Gaza is due to Hamas since Gaza is under direct control of Hamas, you should afirm that the massacre of Sabra and Shatilla is due to IDF. Moreover, Israel facilitated the massacres by providing assistance to the Philangists. I abhor your statement that these victims,women and children included, should just protect themselves without any weapons.
It is pretty obvious your knowledge regarding this matter is shallow. Hamas has no ring wing branch. It does not declare itself a ring wing organization nor western nations refer to it as "ring wing". Only insane Zionist zealots like yourself speaking the language of zionist terrorist groups such as Kach and those adhering to Kahanist ideologiea. Although I am convinced this was done out of pure stupidity.
Initially, your lack of much competent arguments gained my sympathy. However, there is a stark difference between sympathy and pathetic. Now I realised it is the latter.
At the very least if you realise you do not possess the required know how to challenge me to a fruitful debate, refrain from posting further incoherent and violent claims.
-
Originally posted by googoomuck:
....but you are no intelectual.
You twist facts. That I know. Are you a Goebbels wanna-be? His propaganda principles are out of date already.
Prove it coward. -
Originally posted by Jarhum:
Corruption and inadequancies of governance is the main cause of problems in Arab nations. They utilize and exaggerate the fear factor from suicide bombings to legitimize their hard rule. The main raison d etre for the existance of terrorist groups and its attacks on the goverments and kingdoms of the Arab countries is due to the harsh treatment received for voicing or writing against the state, rather than establishing a pan-islamic state. Like the JI which thrives of the leverage between various separatist movements such as MILF in Philippines, Laskar Jihad of Indo and Thai separatist movements to advance their personal, disparate causes of autonomy and retaliation against harsh persecution by their respective governments.
However, the stark similarity is derived from the existance of certain groups which aims to achieve a Pan Islamic state in the Middle East inclusive Israel such as Muslim Brotherhood.
On the other hand, Zionism aims to achieve a Jewish state ranging from modern Israel, to all of the Palestinian territories and Lebanon, large chunks of Syria, Jordan and Egypt as well as proportions of Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Turkey although the Israeli spokesman would deny this but admissible by rightist Israelis.
Antagonism among the Muslim groups also arises from their perception that their governments are facilitating the Zionist movements although this may be disputed.
Unfortunately, both entities desire the similar territories.
Another mistatement: Muslims in the Middle East envision an era of peace from a pan-Islamic brotherhood of nations but which version of it will it be? The Shiite or Sunni vision?
Another mistatement from Jarhum:
Is every Israeli who defends his nation a Zionist? Granted that there are Kahanists in the military, but the state of Israel is a legal nation under the perview of the UN and thus must stand against all agression, including Hamas unwillingness to help police the mutual border.
-
Me a Zionist extremist! Ha ha ha
This from someone who by default is a potential terrorist sympathizer. Opps! I am not allowed to say that. Rule is "Can't do on to them what they do on to us."
Fruitfull discussion. My foot.