|
On July 29 2014 02:48 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +This is just derailing, what about the West bank settlements? Even you said they were illegal. Why are they still being built by the government then? Yes, the settlements are illegal. I don't support that they're building more of them. But if you think that the extremism towards Israel is a reaction to the settlements, what are you basing that assertion on? After Israel disengaged from Gaza they didn't elect moderates, they made the Hamas sole authority of Gaza.
You're aware that Israel still occupies Gaza and controls most of its boundaries, right? A UNRWA report argued that, in order to be a livable place by 2020 given demographic pressure, "as a heavily urbanized environment with little room for further growth, Gaza needs to be open and accessible to the world. The viability of a future Palestinian state depends on a proper connection between the West Bank and Gaza, providing access to the Mediterranean for the entire occupied Palestinian territory."
Source
On July 29 2014 02:48 Nyxisto wrote:
This isn't derailment. It just goes to show that the radical Palestinian forces can not be appeased.
They certainly can't be appeased when being hit with air strikes. As clearly explained here, there is a "correlation between Israel's military attacks upon the Gaza Strip and Hamas militant activity. Hamas rocket fire increases in response to Israeli military attacks and decreases in direct correlation to them. Cease-fires have brought the greatest security to the region."
![[image loading]](http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/a/GetImageAction/i/46974)
Like I said earlier, moving forward for Israel implies 1) legitimizing and boosting Fatah's support among the population by negotiating in good faith with them and 2) indirectly supporting Hamas' pragmatic wing by not bombing the hell out of Gaza. Israel is doing neither.
|
In 2011 Israel did not conduct any military operations in Gaza, still they were hit by about 700 rockets. How does that proof what you're saying? The graph shows that after 'cast lead' Hamas attacks were way lower than during the 'relatively peaceful' years 2010-2012. I don't understand how the graph is supposed to reflect what you're saying.
|
On July 29 2014 02:24 Broetchenholer wrote:
If Israel wanted peace, they would start tto clear the illegal settlements. But they don't do that. They actively settle more land. And that is not done by some right-wing extremists, this is done by the government.
Just end the settlements and Israel can look down on the palestinians and condemn their terrorism. If it still exists afterwards.
You can argue all you want that Hamas is leaving them no choice but to retaliate, but you can't argue that Hamas leaves them no choice but to settle those lands. Israel is pleasing it's right wing extremists and Hamas is happy to provide for reasons and rake the hatred for their own gains.
I used to think that Israel just had to retreat and destroy its illegal settlements. But Israel did that in 2005 : it retreated from Gaza and all the settlers were expelled manu military by Israel. Then the Hamas took over in Gaza (after election & fighting with Fatah). After Israels experience in Gaza, I don't think they will leave the Westbank soon.
That being said, many in Europe ask themselves legitimately if Israel still want a two state solution, because Bebe & Lieberman have systematically undermined peace negotiations (e.g. announcing new settlements during negotiations etc). Maybe someone from Israel could explain what the stance is from the Likud on this matter?
On a side note, I see on wiki that there are 13 parties in the Knesset (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knesset). This means that Bebe is allied with other small parties - if one of these parties withdraws its support, the government falls. This way small parties can take the the government hostage (this problem is also present in the Belgian parliament which is composed of 14 parties!).
|
People still don't get that you can't negotiate with muslim extremists. Ask yourselves what would those people do if they had the power to enforce it.
|
On July 29 2014 03:14 Nyxisto wrote:
In 2011 Israel did not conduct any military operations in Gaza, still they were hit by about 700 rockets. How does that proof what you're saying? The graph shows that after 'cast lead' Hamas attacks were way lower than during the 'relatively peaceful' years 2010-2012. I don't understand how the graph is supposed to reflect what you're saying.
I'll be honest, you picking and choosing which parts of my post you decide to reply to is slightly annoying - why are you not addressing the broader argument? The graph shows that the high spikes in rockets launched occur after Israeli violence, and that rocket activity is the lowest when ceasefires are agreed. How is that not obvious?
|
On July 29 2014 02:48 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +This is just derailing, what about the West bank settlements? Even you said they were illegal. Why are they still being built by the government then? Yes, the settlements are illegal. I don't support that they're building more of them. But if you think that the extremism towards Israel is a reaction to the settlements, what are you basing that assertion on? After Israel disengaged from Gaza they didn't elect moderates, they made the Hamas sole authority of Gaza. This isn't derailment. It just goes to show that the radical Palestinian forces can not be appeased.
Israel has been electing extremists for as long as it existed. I don't see how Gaza, the largest concentration camp in the world has been helped by the "disengagement". You just keep repeating how electing Hamas is some kind of criminal move or casus belli. Before that, the excuse was that that Palestine is undemocratic because they don't hold elections.
So forcible demolitions and settlement buildings aren't enough of a reason for self defense now? Are they supposed to protest? File at the ICC? Complain with the USA?
How is the Arab-Israeli war a myth? The hundreds of thousands of refugees resulted from precisely that war. Israel was already proposing to grant 100k people the right to return in 1949. If you're going to assign blame how about you start with the parties that started the war?
Zionist terrorist groups were large at work already. Israel declared itself over the heads of hundreds of thousands who were not even asked. I fail to see how the Arab armies were the aggressors there.
|
On July 29 2014 03:19 SoSexy wrote:
People still don't get that you can't negotiate with muslim extremists. Ask yourselves what would those people do if they had the power to enforce it.
Solution: stop creating muslim extremists. They were not there 70 years ago.
|
On July 29 2014 03:23 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2014 03:14 Nyxisto wrote:
In 2011 Israel did not conduct any military operations in Gaza, still they were hit by about 700 rockets. How does that proof what you're saying? The graph shows that after 'cast lead' Hamas attacks were way lower than during the 'relatively peaceful' years 2010-2012. I don't understand how the graph is supposed to reflect what you're saying. I'll be honest, you picking and choosing which parts of my post you decide to reply to is slightly annoying - why are you not addressing the broader argument? The graph shows that the high spikes in rockets launched occur after Israeli violence, and that rocket activity is the lowest when ceasefires are agreed. How is that not obvious?
no, that is just a lie, here I explained it for you:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zpZwrId.jpg)
|
Nyxisto... Yes Israel did ethnic cleansing, they did mass expulsion during the 1947 arab israeli war.
Even a pro israeli historian, such as Benny Morris (lead israeli historian on the subject), basically wrote that it was ethnic cleansing (altho he retracted afterward because he is a zionist to the core).
When Shavit called the 1948 Palestinian exodus "ethnic cleansing", Morris responded, "[t]here are circumstances in history that justify ethnic cleansing. I know that this term is completely negative in the discourse of the 21st century, but when the choice is between ethnic cleansing and genocide — the annihilation of your people — I prefer ethnic cleansing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benny_Morris
Later in the war, Palestinians were expelled as part of Plan Dalet.[16][citation needed] The expulsion of the Palestinians has since been described by some historians as ethnic cleansing,[17][18][19] while others dispute this charge.[20][21][22]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestinian_exodus
The only thing that Morris discuss is that : it is not ethnic cleansing because it was not systematic (they didn't expulse every Arabs), it is not a war crime because it was necessary (like he is legitimate to judge if it is or not a warcrime, this scoundrel), and it would be best if they had all been expulsed (the arabs) because the region would be more stable.
Those people would justify anything for their "security".
The more I read you and the more I believe that, in the end, you don't know much about the subject, but you defend the israeli because of two reasons : you have a particular view on arabs and muslim specifically and you feel Israeli are the victim of the holocaust, and as victims must be pure and innocent.
|
On July 29 2014 02:48 Nyxisto wrote:How is the Arab-Israeli war a myth? The hundreds of thousands of refugees resulted from precisely that war. Israel was already proposing to grant 100k people the right to return in 1949. If you're going to assign blame how about you start with the parties that started the war? Show nested quote +This is just derailing, what about the West bank settlements? Even you said they were illegal. Why are they still being built by the government then? Yes, the settlements are illegal. I don't support that they're building more of them. But if you think that the extremism towards Israel is a reaction to the settlements, what are you basing that assertion on? After Israel disengaged from Gaza they didn't elect moderates, they made the Hamas sole authority of Gaza. This isn't derailment. It just goes to show that the radical Palestinian forces can not be appeased.
You act as if this trend of electing right wing extremist war hawks is confined solely to Gaza. It has happened in Israel, happened many times in Europe, US, etc. Whenever there's a war mongering mentality, the average citizen becomes more right wing.
Israel is trending farther to the right as well.
|
On July 29 2014 03:29 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2014 03:23 kwizach wrote:On July 29 2014 03:14 Nyxisto wrote:
In 2011 Israel did not conduct any military operations in Gaza, still they were hit by about 700 rockets. How does that proof what you're saying? The graph shows that after 'cast lead' Hamas attacks were way lower than during the 'relatively peaceful' years 2010-2012. I don't understand how the graph is supposed to reflect what you're saying. I'll be honest, you picking and choosing which parts of my post you decide to reply to is slightly annoying - why are you not addressing the broader argument? The graph shows that the high spikes in rockets launched occur after Israeli violence, and that rocket activity is the lowest when ceasefires are agreed. How is that not obvious? no, that is just a lie, here I explained it for you:
Those too were provoked by Israeli air strikes, but are not marked on the graph. You can read them up on wikipedia if you like, Israel "suspected" terrorists in Gaza, killed dozens of civilians in the process.
|
@WhiteDog:
This is Benny Morris current stance towards the "ethnic cleansing question, regarding Wikipedia:
Morris summarized his current political views of the Arab-Israeli conflict in the Irish Times (and other publications):
"There was no Zionist 'plan' or blanket policy of evicting the Arab population, or of 'ethnic cleansing'" and "the demonisation of Israel is largely based on lies—much as the demonisation of the Jews during the past 2,000 years has been based on lies. And there is a connection between the two."
You're even saying yourself that he changed his position. I don't even know why you're bringing him up. He has changed his position, just because you're not sharing the same point of view means you can disregard what the guy himself has been saying?
What he has been saying for 15 years supports what I have been saying before. With the Palestine war the Arab states brought the refugee situation upon themselves. If you're going to criticize someone for the humanitarian crisis of the Palestinian people in 48 a good place to start would be the Arab countries.
Those too were provoked by Israeli air strikes, but are not marked on the graph. You can read them up on wikipedia if you like, Israel "suspected" terrorists in Gaza, killed dozens of civilians in the process.
The graph is clearly showing that the Hamas attacks precede Israel's military operations. The graph supports Israel's position. The military operations seem to stop the Hamas attacks for a certain amount of time. Regarding the escalation from 06-08 Wikipedia has to say this:
On 26 November, a ceasefire was signed by Palestinian organisations and Israel, and Israel withdrew its troops while the Palestinian Authority forces deployed to stop Qassam rocket launchings. Following the truce over 60 Qassam rockets were fired from the Gaza Strip at Israel, and 1 Palestinian (armed with guns and grenades) was killed by the IDF. On 19 December, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad began taking open responsibility for the Qassam rocket firing, because they said Israel killed two of their members in Jenin
|
No everyone agree that they massively expulsed arabs from their land. Benny morris changed his point of view not on the facts, but on the scale (he consider that a part of the exodus was due to the arabic population and not only the expulsion from zionists). For him, it would have been better to expulse all arabs - he never use ethnic cleansing because he is a scoundrel, he talk about "transfer" which is much more neutral).
But the fact remain, you can say mass expulsion, transfer or ethnic cleansing I don't care, the facts remain they did that, they colonialise the land and expulsed the arabs (and they had orders for that), they murdered them, even used rape and you can justify it, because they're the victim of the holocaust or because they would have been killed by the bad arabs muslim extremists dangerous savage but you cannot deny the fact.
Benny Morris, in the month ahead the new version of your book on the birth of the Palestinian refugee problem is due to be published. Who will be less pleased with the book - the Israelis or the Palestinians?
"The revised book is a double-edged sword. It is based on many documents that were not available to me when I wrote the original book, most of them from the Israel Defense Forces Archives. What the new material shows is that there were far more Israeli acts of massacre than I had previously thought. To my surprise, there were also many cases of rape. In the months of April-May 1948, units of the Haganah [the pre-state defense force that was the precursor of the IDF] were given operational orders that stated explicitly that they were to uproot the villagers, expel them and destroy the villages themselves.
"At the same time, it turns out that there was a series of orders issued by the Arab Higher Committee and by the Palestinian intermediate levels to remove children, women and the elderly from the villages. So that on the one hand, the book reinforces the accusation against the Zionist side, but on the other hand it also proves that many of those who left the villages did so with the encouragement of the Palestinian leadership itself."
Are you saying that Ben-Gurion was personally responsible for a deliberate and systematic policy of mass expulsion?
"From April 1948, Ben-Gurion is projecting a message of transfer. There is no explicit order of his in writing, there is no orderly comprehensive policy, but there is an atmosphere of [population] transfer. The transfer idea is in the air. The entire leadership understands that this is the idea. The officer corps understands what is required of them. Under Ben-Gurion, a consensus of transfer is created."
Ben-Gurion was a "transferist"?
"Of course. Ben-Gurion was a transferist. He understood that there could be no Jewish state with a large and hostile Arab minority in its midst. There would be no such state. It would not be able to exist."
I don't hear you condemning him.
"Ben-Gurion was right. If he had not done what he did, a state would not have come into being. That has to be clear. It is impossible to evade it. Without the uprooting of the Palestinians, a Jewish state would not have arisen here."
http://www.rense.com/general47/ben.htm
|
On July 29 2014 03:29 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2014 03:23 kwizach wrote:On July 29 2014 03:14 Nyxisto wrote:
In 2011 Israel did not conduct any military operations in Gaza, still they were hit by about 700 rockets. How does that proof what you're saying? The graph shows that after 'cast lead' Hamas attacks were way lower than during the 'relatively peaceful' years 2010-2012. I don't understand how the graph is supposed to reflect what you're saying. I'll be honest, you picking and choosing which parts of my post you decide to reply to is slightly annoying - why are you not addressing the broader argument? The graph shows that the high spikes in rockets launched occur after Israeli violence, and that rocket activity is the lowest when ceasefires are agreed. How is that not obvious? no, that is just a lie, here I explained it for you:
What's wrong with you? Are you terrible at reading a graph or something? Do you not see the high spikes which followed the Israeli violence highlighted with brown lines, and the periods of relative calm which followed the ceasefires (also highlighted with brown lines, meaning you have to take the extra step of reading the captions)? Your "no attacks" arrow at the end follows exactly what I said, namely a ceasefire. The "Nov 2012 War on Gaza" you put inside a bubble followed the Israeli violence that is highlighted on the graph. Your "no war, lots of attacks" bubble for 2012, which doesn't highlight the high spikes I was referring to, fails to take into account that there was violence from both sides at the time - for example, March 2012 saw the launch of Operation returning echo by Israel. If you do not know this, I suggest you consult a timeline of the conflict because that particular graph isn't there to spell everything out for you. Next, the "few attacks" arrow follows, as I said, a deescalation, from the "Cast Lead War on Gaza" which followed Israeli Air Strikes (prior to the surge in rockets). Finally, your bubble "no attacks from Israel since end of 06" is completely false - Israel conducted plenty of raids and airstrikes against Gaza/Hamas during that period.
Look, nobody is saying that every single rocket coming out of Gaza is the result of something Israel did that day. The point is that Israeli violence increases the number of rockets, and that ceasefire negotiations are what reduces those numbers. And if you took the time to actually address my arguments in my previous two posts instead of focusing on a graph you misinterpret, perhaps you'd understand that Israel should focus on negotiations to move forward, not military violence.
|
On July 29 2014 03:27 EtherealBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2014 03:19 SoSexy wrote:
People still don't get that you can't negotiate with muslim extremists. Ask yourselves what would those people do if they had the power to enforce it.
Solution: stop creating muslim extremists. They were not there 70 years ago.
Offcause they were, because mohammed's forced conversion didnt exist in the past. extremists have always existed.
|
@kwizach:
You specifically asked me to "adress the broader argument", and given the graph you posted the broader argument is relatively simple. Israel's big military operations have always been preceded by a very high amount of attacks coming from Gaza. Sure, there always were small skirmishes, being it drone attacks by Israel to take out some military leader or new tunnels by the Hamas, but in the end the rocket attacks on Israel were always way lower after Israel conducted a big operation than before,and that's what their goal was.
I don't understand the ceasefire argument. Yes during the ceasefires not much was happening. That's why it's called a ceasfire. Needless to say the Hamas broke almost all of them by themselves.
But the fact remain, you can say mass expulsion, transfer or ethnic cleansing I don't care, the facts remain they did that, they colonialise the land and expulsed the arabs (and they had orders for that), they murdered them, even used rape and you can justify it, because they're the victim of the holocaust or because they would have been killed by the bad arabs muslim extremists dangerous savage but you cannot deny the fact.
I'm not denying the fact that many Palestinians had to flee during the Palestine war, but this wasn't an ethnic cleansing. The countries representing the Palestinian people declared war on Israel. How are you supposed to live with people that just declared war on you? As said before in 1949 Israel promptly granted 100k people the right to return. What else could they have done under the circumstances? And given the large Arabic population of Israel today, how does the accusation that Israel is "ethnically cleansing the country" still make sense?
|
On July 29 2014 01:55 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2014 01:34 Nyxisto wrote:There's a difference between institutionalized war crimes and war crimes committed by individuals. This happened in Iraq, does this make the US a terrorist state? No. If Israeli soldiers are found guilty of war crimes they're going to prison, as do US soldiers. Also by international law the death of civilians does not constitute a war crime in itself, even if the attacking force knows that the attack might kill civilians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportionality_(law)#International_humanitarian_lawOn July 29 2014 01:31 EtherealBlade wrote:On July 29 2014 00:15 Nyxisto wrote:On July 28 2014 22:49 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On July 28 2014 22:24 ImFromPortugal wrote:On July 28 2014 18:31 Noam wrote:They were presumed alive, and no one knew anything until their bodies were found. There was a recording where one of the boys called the police, and there was a sound which was later thought to be a single gunshot (I am sure no one can even say that for certain). Other than that there was no actual evidence suggesting they are dead. The fact that Hamas did not officially kidnap them does not change the turn of events in the slightest, especially when hamas admits to ATTEMPTING to kidnap civilians all the time. Israel is at war with Hamas because Hamas wants to destroy Israel. Limiting this conflict to the most recent reason that increased the violence is shortsighted. I even find it funny when Israel supporters scream "they[Hamas] started it!". This started in 1947 when the UN gave jews apart of this land and the arabs decided to remove us by force. Anyway, here's the turn of recent events as far as I can remember. Don't take it as evidence (not that I would expect a self declared anti-semite to believe something an Israeli jew says... I read your comment history, you are definitely not a troll, just another anti-semite, but at least you admit to it and take pride in it!): - 3 Israeli jewish boys kidnapped near the West Bank.
- Israeli army / police investigate the kidnappings and try to find them. During this investigation known terrorists in the west bank are arrested and questioned.
- Hamas increases rocket fire from Gaza to Israel (operative word: INCREASES. Rockets have been fired from Gaza nonstop for years.)
- Israeli arab muslim child gets kidnapped. Preliminary evidence shows he was taken into a car by force. Police investigation finds (about a week later) that he was killed by a Israeli jewish extremists. (effectively these are criminals who will spend the rest of their lives in jail, there is no "organization" behind this)
- From this point on the cycle of Hamas fires more and more rockets from Gaza, Israel strikes in Gaza from the air get more intense
- Hamas shows its hand by sending in forces from Gaza through tunnels. Israel goes into gaza by land because air strikes don't do much against tunnels.
And here we are now, where Israel is under a threat it cannot ignore (intelligence suggests Hamas has over 50 tunnels from Gaza to Israel, and planned to use them in an organized surprise ground attack on civilians). And Hamas is exactly where it wants to be. Their leaders are enjoying the good life in Qatar, and the civilians who elected them are dying to protect them. This started when the zionist terrorists started bombing hotels and killing people long before the arabs. Fairly amusing to see how he conveniently forgot this part about the history. It's the reason for this whole clusterfuck in the first place. I don't really like Palestine at all, but I don't know, you can't kickoff everything with terrorism, ethnic cleansing, deportation, and now apartheid and land-grabbing, and expect the people to be happy about it. I guess it's easier to justify and stomach when you consider them inherently inferior to yourself. This attitude and mindset is certainly nothing novel. It's existed a million times over historically, even in US history of all places (slavery being a prime example), but in this century, one would expect people to be a bit more civilized. Even the South African leaders eventually learned that having humans in a position like dogs due to racial policy is pretty bad. Can you please provide some proof if you start acussing a country of terrorism, ethnic cleansing, and being an apartheid regime? Has some international court of law actually found Israel guilty of those crimes? Israel is not a signatory party to the international criminal court, and every single security council resolution against them has been vetoed by one - the USA. It's impossible to convict Israel but that does not mean they are not guilty. To my knowledge Israel has never even been accused of genocide,ethnic cleansing, or state terrorism by any international authority(besides the Iranian government, maybe). This is not about whether Israel has used excessive force on occasion,which is debatable. This is about putting Israel on one level with apartheid regimes, American slave owners, and drawing parallels to genocides. All of this is wrong, there simply is no proof for it. I am pretty sure he meant those acts of terrorism. As for ethnic cleansing, just look at the maps that track the shrinkage of the Palestinian territory due to illegal settlements. They were provided earlier in the thread. That's the definition of ethnic cleansing. Apartheid? Palestinian territory is not recognized as a sovereign state, ergo it's part of Izrael. If you think keeping Palestinians in an open prison does not qualify as apartheid, then I pity you.
Exactly. Israel was funded by terrorists that after were part of the government. It's interesting how he didn't address any of those facts and my post got buried under all the discussion.
Zionist political violence refers to acts of violence committed by Zionists.
Actions were carried out by individuals and Jewish paramilitary groups such as the Irgun, the Lehi, the Haganah and the Palmach as part of a conflict between Zionists, British authorities, and Palestinian Arabs, regarding land, immigration, and control over Palestine.[1]
British soldiers and officials, United Nations personnel, Palestinian Arab fighters and civilians, and Jewish fighters and civilians were targets or victims of these actions. Domestic, commercial, and government property, infrastructure, and material were also attacked.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_political_violence
The zionists started terrorism in that region of the world and now they are reaping what they sowed.
|
On July 29 2014 04:26 Nyxisto wrote:@kwizach: You specifically asked me to "adress the broader argument", and given the graph you posted the broader argument is relatively simple. Israel's big military operations have always been preceded by a very high amount of attacks coming from Gaza. Sure, there always were small skirmishes, being it drone attacks by Israel to take out some military leader or new tunnels by the Hamas, but in the end the rocket attacks on Israel were always way lower after Israel conducted a big operation than before,and that's what their goal was. I don't understand the ceasefire argument. Yes during the ceasefires not much was happening. That's why it's called a ceasfire. Needless to say the Hamas broke almost all of them by themselves. Show nested quote +But the fact remain, you can say mass expulsion, transfer or ethnic cleansing I don't care, the facts remain they did that, they colonialise the land and expulsed the arabs (and they had orders for that), they murdered them, even used rape and you can justify it, because they're the victim of the holocaust or because they would have been killed by the bad arabs muslim extremists dangerous savage but you cannot deny the fact. I'm not denying the fact that many Palestinians had to flee during the Palestine war, but this wasn't an ethnic cleansing. The countries representing the Palestinian people declared war on Israel. How are you supposed to live with people that just declared war on you? As said before in 1949 Israel promptly granted 100k people the right to return. What else could they have done under the circumstances? And given the large Arabic population of Israel today, how does the accusation that Israel is "ethnically cleansing the country" still make sense?
Israeli military officers and politicians gave orders to expulse arabs massively. That's ethnical cleansing, the reason that "justify" it according to you does not change the facts.
Plus they never did that because they had to defend themselves, they did that because they wanted a jewish state, which mean jewish people and no arabs.
|
I keep coming to this thread, trying to express my thoughts and feelings on the matter, but they never come out right. This is a problem so historic and complex, I don't think you can solve what has already gone on. For there to be peace, both sides must come to the table with peace as their only objective. The second they go down the path of retribution/compensation/etc. it is doomed.
It is a very fucked up situation. I hope it can be resolved for the good of all, sooner rather than later; I am not holding my breath.
|
On July 29 2014 04:40 ImFromPortugal wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2014 01:55 maybenexttime wrote:On July 29 2014 01:34 Nyxisto wrote:There's a difference between institutionalized war crimes and war crimes committed by individuals. This happened in Iraq, does this make the US a terrorist state? No. If Israeli soldiers are found guilty of war crimes they're going to prison, as do US soldiers. Also by international law the death of civilians does not constitute a war crime in itself, even if the attacking force knows that the attack might kill civilians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportionality_(law)#International_humanitarian_lawOn July 29 2014 01:31 EtherealBlade wrote:On July 29 2014 00:15 Nyxisto wrote:On July 28 2014 22:49 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On July 28 2014 22:24 ImFromPortugal wrote:On July 28 2014 18:31 Noam wrote:They were presumed alive, and no one knew anything until their bodies were found. There was a recording where one of the boys called the police, and there was a sound which was later thought to be a single gunshot (I am sure no one can even say that for certain). Other than that there was no actual evidence suggesting they are dead. The fact that Hamas did not officially kidnap them does not change the turn of events in the slightest, especially when hamas admits to ATTEMPTING to kidnap civilians all the time. Israel is at war with Hamas because Hamas wants to destroy Israel. Limiting this conflict to the most recent reason that increased the violence is shortsighted. I even find it funny when Israel supporters scream "they[Hamas] started it!". This started in 1947 when the UN gave jews apart of this land and the arabs decided to remove us by force. Anyway, here's the turn of recent events as far as I can remember. Don't take it as evidence (not that I would expect a self declared anti-semite to believe something an Israeli jew says... I read your comment history, you are definitely not a troll, just another anti-semite, but at least you admit to it and take pride in it!): - 3 Israeli jewish boys kidnapped near the West Bank.
- Israeli army / police investigate the kidnappings and try to find them. During this investigation known terrorists in the west bank are arrested and questioned.
- Hamas increases rocket fire from Gaza to Israel (operative word: INCREASES. Rockets have been fired from Gaza nonstop for years.)
- Israeli arab muslim child gets kidnapped. Preliminary evidence shows he was taken into a car by force. Police investigation finds (about a week later) that he was killed by a Israeli jewish extremists. (effectively these are criminals who will spend the rest of their lives in jail, there is no "organization" behind this)
- From this point on the cycle of Hamas fires more and more rockets from Gaza, Israel strikes in Gaza from the air get more intense
- Hamas shows its hand by sending in forces from Gaza through tunnels. Israel goes into gaza by land because air strikes don't do much against tunnels.
And here we are now, where Israel is under a threat it cannot ignore (intelligence suggests Hamas has over 50 tunnels from Gaza to Israel, and planned to use them in an organized surprise ground attack on civilians). And Hamas is exactly where it wants to be. Their leaders are enjoying the good life in Qatar, and the civilians who elected them are dying to protect them. This started when the zionist terrorists started bombing hotels and killing people long before the arabs. Fairly amusing to see how he conveniently forgot this part about the history. It's the reason for this whole clusterfuck in the first place. I don't really like Palestine at all, but I don't know, you can't kickoff everything with terrorism, ethnic cleansing, deportation, and now apartheid and land-grabbing, and expect the people to be happy about it. I guess it's easier to justify and stomach when you consider them inherently inferior to yourself. This attitude and mindset is certainly nothing novel. It's existed a million times over historically, even in US history of all places (slavery being a prime example), but in this century, one would expect people to be a bit more civilized. Even the South African leaders eventually learned that having humans in a position like dogs due to racial policy is pretty bad. Can you please provide some proof if you start acussing a country of terrorism, ethnic cleansing, and being an apartheid regime? Has some international court of law actually found Israel guilty of those crimes? Israel is not a signatory party to the international criminal court, and every single security council resolution against them has been vetoed by one - the USA. It's impossible to convict Israel but that does not mean they are not guilty. To my knowledge Israel has never even been accused of genocide,ethnic cleansing, or state terrorism by any international authority(besides the Iranian government, maybe). This is not about whether Israel has used excessive force on occasion,which is debatable. This is about putting Israel on one level with apartheid regimes, American slave owners, and drawing parallels to genocides. All of this is wrong, there simply is no proof for it. I am pretty sure he meant those acts of terrorism. As for ethnic cleansing, just look at the maps that track the shrinkage of the Palestinian territory due to illegal settlements. They were provided earlier in the thread. That's the definition of ethnic cleansing. Apartheid? Palestinian territory is not recognized as a sovereign state, ergo it's part of Izrael. If you think keeping Palestinians in an open prison does not qualify as apartheid, then I pity you. Exactly. Israel was funded by terrorists that after were part of the government. It's interesting how he didn't address any of those facts and my post got buried under all the discussion. Show nested quote +Zionist political violence refers to acts of violence committed by Zionists.
Actions were carried out by individuals and Jewish paramilitary groups such as the Irgun, the Lehi, the Haganah and the Palmach as part of a conflict between Zionists, British authorities, and Palestinian Arabs, regarding land, immigration, and control over Palestine.[1]
British soldiers and officials, United Nations personnel, Palestinian Arab fighters and civilians, and Jewish fighters and civilians were targets or victims of these actions. Domestic, commercial, and government property, infrastructure, and material were also attacked. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_political_violenceThe zionists started terrorism in that region of the world and now they are reaping what they sowed.
Anyone who's read anything about the creation of Israel knows that the tactics used by Hamas now (Terrorism, hiding weapons in unethical places, etc.) were exactly the same ones used by the Jewish founders of Israel. Many of the politicians critical in founding Israel were actually labeled as Terrorists by the UK government.
I'm not saying that justifies Hamas's terrorism, but it certainly makes Israel a bunch of self-righteous hypocrites. They have no reason to treat the Palestinians the way that they do, ESPECIALLY given how their country was created in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
