News Is Israel's Sacrifice of Territory for Ceasefire a Triumph for Terrorism?

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by russ_watters
Seconded. Sig.

I agree.

Originally posted by Zero
A Jewish state isn't based on race?!?

Yes. It is not based on racism - which is a completely
different thing. It treats its citizens equally as is
reasonably possible and it is no more racist than the US
about Americans, the UK about British and so on.

Originally posted by russ_watters
Israel's existence isn't based on racism. Opposition to Israel (in the Middle East) is based on racism.

Precisely.

Originally posted by Zero
Of course, the world instead decided to create a state based on racism on Arab land.

The world had very little to do with this and it is NOT
arab land. Israel formed just a bit later than most
other countries in the region and earlier than others.

Originally posted by jcsd
Yes there were several well reported clearances and massacres by Jewish defence and terrorist organisations and roughly 700,000 Arabs either fled or were expelled.

Several ?! I specificly know of one. The arabs were not
expelled at all. Those that fled did it of their own
free will.

Originally posted by jcsd
You do not understand Likud. Likud (or more correctly the two parties it was formed out of, one of themselevs an amalmation of two pre-1948 terrorist organisations) were a dying party until they started to support the settler movement, it is clear from their rhetoric especially of the right of the party that they do not wish to withdraw (infact an end to the conflict would certainly be a death-knell to figures like Netanyahu and Sharon who owe their postions to the shifting of Israeli politics to the right as a result of the conflict).

You are completely ignoring what I'm telling you and
wasting time with irrelevant nonesense. Israelis will
NEVER agree to retreat to 1967 borders (including
the Golan Heights returned to Syria, aspecialy) in the
current or close to current situation. They were not even
fully prepared to do this in the optimistic time before
the current conflict. Israelis will NEVER, and this is under
ANY curcampstance, agree to accept the "right of return".

Originally posted by jcsd
Until a couple of years ago it was perfectly legal for the Israeli security services to torture Palestinas in their custody, even with reforms torture is still not illegal.

A fully relevant and acceptable means to deal with
constant high level of terrorism. Saving innocent lives, on
both sides is the most important thing. Same thing goes
for targeted bombings.

Originally posted by jcsd
Palestinians have virtually no legal protection against there land being taken by Israelis and against attacks by settler militias.

The Palestinians had no gevernment and later had one that
was impossible to reasonably deal with, as was later proved.
The settlements were initially constructed when Israelis were
called to protect the country against the terrorist organizations
and possible return of the defeated armies of surrounding arab
countries. There was nothing defined to deal with.

As for settlers they are being dealt with and sent to jail too.
It is not easy to deal with such people in such a situation
and in such no man's land territories where the IDF has to
deal with people on both sides.

Originally posted by jcsd
I remember 'the troubles', so I am perfectly aware of what it's like to live with the threat of terrorism.

You make me laugh.

Originally posted by jcsd
Recently groups such as HRW, have reported several laws that are specifically targetted against Israeli-Arabs, such as the reduction of child benefit to families who do not serve in the IDF (though the strict Orthodox Jews were also affected by this there exists a separate fund that they can claim from not accesible to Arabs). Also at the moment there is a row over a law that will stop someone from claiming automatic citzenship if they have a Palestinian parent, even if they meet all the other criteria.

As for the first that is a delibarate lie. This law is the
result of the economic crisys Israel currently experiences.
The law is NOT limmited to those who did not serve in the IDF
but to all the citizens. The law limmits the greatly exhagerated
payments to all families with many kids and was originally
passed through pressure of the religious segments of the
population who have many kids. The Jewish religious sections
are quite politicly influential despite the fact that they've
lost a lot of political power lately (which is why the law
was accepted), so they've more resources. On the other hand
the arab segments of the population are more indpendent.

As for the second law, the Palestinians are trying to receive
Israeli citizenship at all costs in consdirable amounts, many
threough illegal manipulations assisted by Israeli arabs.
This phenomenon is requires more strict control of the entire
process.

Originally posted by jcsd
Just because the UN does not agree with your point of
view is no reason to rubbish it

Yes it is, my point of view is right, according to the UN's
own long forgotten priciples of protection of human life.
Some necessary principles were not even part of its agenda
in the first place - like democracy, which is the reason
for its pathetic performance.

Originally posted by jcsd
(particularly without pointing out a single unfair UNSC resolution),

You mean resolutions that were incorrect according to
the basic principles modern democratic societies think
we should ussualy accept (except extreme curcampstance) -
of human life, rights and democracy ?
I'm afraid that the length of the server space of this
forum is insufficient for me to specify all such descicions
and lack of them when required.

Originally posted by jcsd
I also remind you that no Arab countries have permanent seats on the UNSC and the spectre of an Arab oil cartel running the UN is just as absurd as the notion of ZOG.

What's ZOG ?
You are trying to delibrately twist what I say, again.
I never said that the Arab countries "run the UN". I said
that their economical influence and their influence due
to pure numbers of people and countries (despite the fact that
almost all of these countries are not democratic - and never the less treated as equal to democratic which is one of the main clear absurdities in the UN) is quite sufficient to shift relativly
inconsequential (to most of the world) descisions in their
favour and against Israel due to the particuilar interests of
every voting member country. The same pathetic discision making
is ussualy made on all the other issues in the UN, when each
country ussualy votes for its own interests with complete
and often rather blunt disregard of any moral principles
much of the modern world claims to adopt. Further more,
countries often tend to obscure the true nature of such
votes by delibrately using and even supporting the ignorance
of their general public on the relevant issues.

Peace and long life.

 

[jcsd]

Originally posted by drag
Greetings !

Several ?! I specificly know of one. The arabs were not
expelled at all. Those that fled did it of their own
free will.

Shows what you know there were several well-recorded expulsions(e.g. Beit Nuba) and famous incidences of Irgun butchery such as the Deir Yassin massacre.

You are completely ignoring what I'm telling you and
wasting time with irrelevant nonesense. Israelis will
NEVER agree to retreat to 1967 borders (including
the Golan Heights returned to Syria, aspecialy) in the
current or close to current situation. They were not even
fully prepared to do this in the optimistic time before
the current conflict. Israelis will NEVER, and this is under
ANY curcampstance, agree to accept the "right of return".

Well the Palestinians will never accept anything less than a return to the 1967-borders, the settlements are founded on racist principals and while they are in the OT the rest of the world is always likely to view the Palestinians in a more favourable light than the Israelis.

Quite frankly if Israel is never going to offer a fair peace deal, then there will always be terrorism.

A fully relevant and acceptable means to deal with
constant high level of terrorism. Saving innocent lives, on
both sides is the most important thing. Same thing goes
for targeted bombings.

So surely if it's okay to kill people and bomb suspected miltants even when there with their families the Palestinians can justify suicide bombings as the level of suffering caused by Palestinian terrorist pales in comparison with the level of suffering caused by the IDF.

The Palestinians had no gevernment and later had one that
was impossible to reasonably deal with, as was later proved.
The settlements were initially constructed when Israelis were
called to protect the country against the terrorist organizations
and possible return of the defeated armies of surrounding arab
countries. There was nothing defined to deal with.

The PLO has been recognised as the legitmate government of Palestine since circa 1970 and PNC is even older. The settlements do nothing for Israels security and have been consistenly described by UNSC resolutions as 'an obstacle to peace'.

As for settlers they are being dealt with and sent to jail too.
It is not easy to deal with such people in such a situation
and in such no man's land territories where the IDF has to
deal with people on both sides.

Israel is responsible for the actions of the settlers yet it very rarely prosecutes them, and usually obstructs any investigation into wrong-doing by them (for example an Israeli soldier witnessed the murder of a Palestian by a group of settlers and Israeli security forces but was contiunely told to 'drop it').

You make me laugh.

Well, perhaps you should learn more about the conflict then.

As for the first that is a delibarate lie. This law is the
result of the economic crisys Israel currently experiences.
The law is NOT limmited to those who did not serve in the IDF
but to all the citizens. The law limmits the greatly exhagerated
payments to all families with many kids and was originally
passed through pressure of the religious segments of the
population who have many kids. The Jewish religious sections
are quite politicly influential despite the fact that they've
lost a lot of political power lately (which is why the law
was accepted), so they've more resources. On the other hand
the arab segments of the population are more indpendent.

No, this law was a specfic reduction of child benefit to all familes who didn't serve in the IDF and was generally called racist by human rights groups worldwide.

As for the second law, the Palestinians are trying to receive
Israeli citizenship at all costs in consdirable amounts, many
threough illegal manipulations assisted by Israeli arabs.
This phenomenon is requires more strict control of the entire
process.

No, this law will stop Palestinains who are LEGALLY entitled to live in Israel from claiming citzenship (for example they may have a Jewish or Israeli parents)

Yes it is, my point of view is right, according to the UN's
own long forgotten priciples of protection of human life.
Some necessary principles were not even part of its agenda
in the first place - like democracy, which is the reason
for its pathetic performance.

Again, ignorance.

You mean resolutions that were incorrect according to
the basic principles modern democratic societies think
we should ussualy accept (except extreme curcampstance) -
of human life, rights and democracy ?
I'm afraid that the length of the server space of this
forum is insufficient for me to specify all such descicions
and lack of them when required.

So again no specifc UNSC resolutions mentioned (even though the ones that passed did so wuth the tacit consent of the US), I think your just talking crap.

What's ZOG ?
You are trying to delibrately twist what I say, again.
I never said that the Arab countries "run the UN". I said
that their economical influence and their influence due
to pure numbers of people and countries (despite the fact that
almost all of these countries are not democratic - and never the less treated as equal to democratic which is one of the main clear absurdities in the UN) is quite sufficient to shift relativly
inconsequential (to most of the world) descisions in their
favour and against Israel due to the particuilar interests of
every voting member country. The same pathetic discision making
is ussualy made on all the other issues in the UN, when each
country ussualy votes for its own interests with complete
and often rather blunt disregard of any moral principles
much of the modern world claims to adopt. Further more,
countries often tend to obscure the true nature of such
votes by delibrately using and even supporting the ignorance
of their general public on the relevant issues.

This shows you no nothing about the internal politics of the UN, Arab countries are routinely criticized by the UN.

Peace and long life. [/QUOTE]

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by jcsd
Shows what you know there were several well-recorded expulsions(e.g. Beit Nuba) and famous incidences of Irgun butchery such as the Deir Yassin massacre.

Even if that is true, these are small and isolated incidents with
the spicific perpetrators being the guilty ones.

Originally posted by jcsd
Well the Palestinians will never accept anything less than a return to the 1967-borders, the settlements are founded on racist principals and while they are in the OT the rest of the world is always likely to view the Palestinians in a more favourable light than the Israelis.

I disagree. I think they will. The settlements have nothing
to do with racist principles whatsoever, they were good
security for the country and good politics once, now they're
bad security and bad politics and full of fanatics.

Originally posted by jcsd
Quite frankly if Israel is never going to offer a fair peace deal, then there will always be terrorism.

And there is only ONE way to deal with terrorism.

Originally posted by jcsd
So surely if it's okay to kill people and bomb suspected miltants even when there with their families the Palestinians can justify suicide bombings as the level of suffering caused by Palestinian terrorist pales in comparison with the level of suffering caused by the IDF.

On some occasions inoccents do get hurt when targeted
assasinations take place and yet the IDF takes the greatest
care to avoid such casualties and sometimes deals with those that
make such severe mistakes if they were neglegent. Nevertheless,
this is the best method od dealing with terrorists.
The alternatives all envolve much greater potential casualty
rates on both sides and it is inconcievable that a terrorist
who is preparing an attack will not be stopped.

Originally posted by jcsd
The PLO has been recognised as the legitmate government of Palestine since circa 1970 and PNC is even older. The settlements do nothing for Israels security and have been consistenly described by UNSC resolutions as 'an obstacle to peace'.

They are. As for all those "international" organizations
I already expressed my opinion about the UN.
I remember those poor Belgians also wanted to put
Bush and others on trial until it was quite clearly suggested
to them that their whole pathetic deal with the "intrenational
court" will be dealt with appropriately and they "reconsidered".
Seriously, someone should put a lid on these pathetic weed smokers' "intrenational" parties who think they're the most
beautifull moral crystal clear peace flowers around. Who the
hell are they to tell who and what is right or wrong unless
they've been there, seen it and spilled their blood there.
Pathetic... Western Europe has stopped being the center
power of the world long ago, but some of the countries there still think that they, from the perspective of almost 0 experience in
real conflicts in the past half a century and their primary
EU problems being environmental issues, can dictate the rest
of the world how it should live. Where were they 60 years ago
with all that moral crap ?
The Russians should've kept on going a bit...

Originally posted by jcsd
Israel is responsible for the actions of the settlers yet it very rarely prosecutes them, and usually obstructs any investigation into wrong-doing by them (for example an Israeli soldier witnessed the murder of a Palestian by a group of settlers and Israeli security forces but was contiunely told to 'drop it').

Not true. Any reference to this case ?

Originally posted by jcsd
Well, perhaps you should learn more about the conflict then.

I was actually answering your claim of "being aware what it's
like".

Originally posted by jcsd
No, this law was a specfic reduction of child benefit to all familes who didn't serve in the IDF and was generally called racist by human rights groups worldwide.

I believe you are mistaken (though not entirely certain).

Originally posted by jcsd
No, this law will stop Palestinains who are LEGALLY entitled to live in Israel from claiming citzenship (for example they may have a Jewish or Israeli parents)

If a person has a Palestinian parent then why should he
recieve citizenship automaticly ?
"LEGALLY" ? Israel defines what is legal and what is not
the same as any other country and its immigration laws.

Originally posted by jcsd
Again, ignorance.

Of course anyone who actually cares about the truth and
lives of other human beings rather than his own pocket is
ignorant. That's why the UN's filled with "smart" people.

Originally posted by jcsd
So again no specifc UNSC resolutions mentioned (even though the ones that passed did so wuth the tacit consent of the US), I think your just talking crap.

No you are just talking crap and further more with your
level of knowledge it is also clear that you delibrately
lie. Here's a small taste on this issue from the first link
I found, there is a countless number of others like I said
and a great deal of others that are related to other
issues and other countries.
http://www.townhall.com/news/politics/200304/FOR20030422d.shtml

Originally posted by jcsd
This shows you no nothing about the internal politics of
the UN, Arab countries are routinely criticized by the UN.

"Criticized" ? They are dectatorships run by murederous
dictators and extreme Islamic fanatics they are not supposed
to be a part of any international organization much less make
discisions or head commities in such organizations in the 21st century. Spare me from this BS, please.

Peace and long life.

 

[jcsd]

HRW: Arabs second class citizens in Israel (includes the child benefit laws)


B'tselem: Israeli non-enforcement of the law with regards to settlers:

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/israel2/ISRAEL0901-13.htm

There quite a few massacres, Irgun who carried out the Deir Yassin massacre wher one of the largets Jewish militias fighting in the 1948 war and this was part of a wider policy to inspire terror in the Arabs in order that they would leave.

The IDF does not take any care to avoid civilian deaths, over hald the Palestinians it has killed have been non-combatants. 1/3 of the people killed in the targeted assasinations were also non-combatants, hardly "great care".

I do not know where yo acquired your dogmatic view that Israel can do no wrong.

 

[kat]

The development of Israel was indicative of a race, persecuted throughout the arab kingdom, throughout the area called Palestine, throughout europe. SO yes Israel was formed out of racism, as the one place possibly on Earth that they might escape to and live together safely after having been proven that it was not safe for them to depend on others to ensure their safety. That is the legacy of the beginning of Israel.

It's quite easy to figure out if the expulsions of the Arabs was really Zionist extermination philosophy or really a reaction to Arab violence, one can look to see if expressions of desire to expel Palestinians were always present among the leadership of the Zionist movement at about the same level, or if they increased substantially with increasing anti-Jewish attacks, especially the atrocities of the 1929 massacre which severely traumatized the Yishuv, and convinced many Jews that it was not possible to live with the Arabs. 1929 had the same effect on the Yishuv that Deir Yassin was to have on the Arab community in Palestine nearly 20 years later. The Arabs fled in terror after Deir Yassin. The Jews had NO PLACE to go after the 1929 massacres. All they could do was stay in place and suffer their increasing fears and terror.

Here is a quote of David Ben Gurion made in 1928, the year before the anti-Jewish massacres, to a gathering of Zionists in the Yishuv in Palestine: "Our sense of morality forbids us to deny the right of a single Arab child, even though by such denial we might attain all that we seek." now here is a quote from the SAME Zionist leader in 1929, just after the anti-Jewish atrocities: "We shall never be forgiven for the sin of weakness, should we even act as angels … Woe to the weak. That is the philosophy of history."

I know that you and Zero will simply discount these statements of Ben Gurion that don't fit your historical theories.
But there are many similar statements, made by the early Zionist leaders, that suggest the Zionists intention was NOT to evict or displace the Arabs, but to live in harmony with them. Victor Jacobson said in 1913 "the first article of our work-programme ought to be an entente with the Arabs." But after 1929, one finds more and more quotes that suggest fear, hatred and the desire to be separated from what was more and more seen as the enemy in a violent struggle for survival.


As to the Palestinians who were actually expelled by force in 1948, and those killed at Deir Yassin and Hebron ... gee, if the allegations are true, I guess they had just experienced what Jews had endured from Palestinian and other Arab majorities for more then fifty years until the Jews finally found a country of refuge in 1948, and nearly all left their homes, leaving everything behind and fled there.

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by jcsd
The IDF does not take any care to avoid civilian deaths, over hald the Palestinians it has killed have been non-combatants. 1/3 of the people killed in the targeted assasinations were also non-combatants, hardly "great care".

According to YOUR understanding of the statistics ?
The IDF takes the greatest care of avoiding civilian casualties
in such a complex situation, more than any other military force in
the world. It is clear that you understand very little
about military conflicts, aspecialy such a complex one
as this dealing with fanatic suicide terrorists who attack
with total disregard for their own or any other lives.
Ever seen the statistics of NATO's bombings in Serbia a
few years ago ? The fast invasion and capture of Baghdad
with exteremely low casuualties is just one example of what
US military commanders learned while spending time in the
field with the IDF forces in Israel and learning their first
level tactics.

Originally posted by jcsd
I do not know where yo acquired your dogmatic view that
Israel can do no wrong.

My view is not that Israel can do wrong, it is that
Israel does little intentional wrong because most of its actions
are forced upon it by the lack of choice in this complex
situation of dealing with crazy propoganda washed minds
of fanatic Muslim extremests in such great amount (and the
other Arab countries in the past). Israel never wanted or
initiated any military conflict ever, except the cases when
it was no longer possible to avoid it and it did sometimes
manage to launch pre-emptive attacks. I won't even mention
the fact that those statitics are only partially correct
because when accidently an intellegence failure leads
to more people in the company of the targeted terrorist getting killed in a targeted assasination or people get shot "while peacefully walking" near an aggressive demonstartion or attack
of an IDF outpost with weapons in their hands or with snipers
hiding behind them as they throw stones and inflict damage,
these people are not exactly "innocent". You should see
the casualty statictics of the Israeli population.

The only dogmatic view I see here is yours and of people like
you who either know nothing or like you may know a lot and still
form their totally unjustified opinions by watching a
pelestinian who inspirationally shouts to the camera
that he's being massacared or scenes of mass funerals
of suicide bombers. Better watch the burnt remains of
the buses with the really innocent people who were on them.

P.S. What does your link have to do with what we've talked
about ? Not to mention that HRW is traditionally used to
condemn Israel on everything and not to further mention
that it condemns a huge amount of other countries for
many things. Did it condemn the Palestinian education system
as a terrorist educational institutionn which preaches murder
and extreme Muslim fanatism ? Hmm... I suppose that any
education will do for HRW as long as they get one, right ?
Did they mention that Jewish religious organizations get
a lot of money because of their misuse of their political
power and as wrong as that may seem to most other segments
in the Israeli population - Jewish or not Jewish, these
are internal political matters and exist in similar forms
in many other countries ?

Live long and prosper.

 

[Zero]

What ever happened to David ben Gurion?

 

[jcsd]

Kat- it is clear from earlier writings of zionist leaders such as Thomas Herzl that the plans to expel the Arabs existed well before 1929 and it was infact this fear of being dispossesed that motivated the violence against zionist settlers as before zionism you have to go back to the crusader period for attacks on Jews in Palestine.


drag- If they take such great care (a claim that is not borne out by the reports of human rights groups), how come there is no significant difference between the ratio of Israeli civilians/Israelisecurity forces killed(0.63) and Palestinian non-combatants/Palestinian miltants(~0.55), except that the Palestinian death toll is three times higher.

You attack HRW without knowing anything about it, it routinely reports on corruption and torture in the PA and releases reports on the wrongdoings of Palestinian terrorists. Israel is only one concern out of many for HRW, whose head is incidently Jewish.

I see a pattern here you routinely make an assertation, it's proved false yo make another then again are forced to retreat from your postion, would it not be a good idea to become more knowledgeable on the subject before blindly defending everything that the Israeli government does?

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by drag

The only dogmatic view I see here is yours and of people like
you who either know nothing or like you may know a lot and still
form their totally unjustified opinions by watching a
pelestinian who inspirationally shouts to the camera
that he's being massacared or scenes of mass funerals
of suicide bombers. Better watch the burnt remains of
the buses with the really innocent people who were on them.

So Palestinian children killed in missle attacks aren't innocent?

 

[kat]

Originally posted by jcsd
Kat- it is clear from earlier writings of zionist leaders such as Thomas Herzl that the plans to expel the Arabs existed well before 1929 and it was infact this fear of being dispossesed that motivated the violence against zionist settlers as before zionism you have to go back to the crusader period for attacks on Jews in Palestine.

JSCD- The Zionist dream of a jewish state was similar to so many other of the political utopian dreams of the same period. The real development had little similarity with the dream. Today with the ability to see the history in the making we can realize how unrealistic these visions were. However, the utopian visions of Theodore Herzl most certainly included Arabs living among the jews. Herzl describes how he sees the future in his book "Altneuland" and if you have read it then you already know that the future as Herzl believed it could be was one with jews and arabs living together in harmony. Herzl believed that they would happily accept his vision of a future and he wrote about this in his diaries and depicted this in his novel. Like all dreamers he underestimated the opposition that his ideas would bring BUT Herzl and his dreams did not call for ethnic cleansing of Arabs from Palestine.
Herzl invisioned a state that would be so advanced that it would replace the current feudalism and that the new Zionist society would be too advanced to support the feudal condition that supprted serfdom in a practical state of slavery. In fact in his diary Herzl relates his thoughts of how the displaced serfs would have to be given a new place to live BUT those thoughts are very clearly about the issue of the newly developed society that had no support for the slavery like sitution of serfs. It was NOT about the lack of place for ARABS.
I'm supposing that your historical education arises from the writing of Edward Said who quotes Herzl's words in a dishonest fashion by cutting out sections of his comments mid-sentence and distorting his statements.
This is the type of revisionist history (Said's) that arises when one's allegiance is with their own prejudicial beliefs and causes rather then objective analysis.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Zero
What ever happened to David ben Gurion?

Zero-He retired early 70's and died a few years after

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Originally posted by jcsd
Kat- it is clear from earlier writings of zionist leaders such as Thomas Herzl that the plans to expel the Arabs existed well before 1929 and it was infact this fear of being dispossesed that motivated the violence against zionist settlers as before zionism you have to go back to the crusader period for attacks on Jews in Palestine.

Like she answered - a lie. The hatred of the arabs towards the
Jews never existed in any siginificant measure until the early
20th century uprise of arab nationalism, then their siding
with Nazi Germany and later the Muslim extremism.

Originally posted by jcsd
drag- If they take such great care (a claim that is not borne out by the reports of human rights groups), how come there is no significant difference between the ratio of Israeli civilians/Israelisecurity forces killed(0.63) and Palestinian non-combatants/Palestinian miltants(~0.55), except that the Palestinian death toll is three times higher.

First of all 0.63 is NOT 0.55. Second, like I said these statistics
are not accurate. Third, read this (not a "news" site but
a site that describes the truth about the situation, not the
"truth" of the arabs whose middle-eastern upbringing teaches them
that lies are the best way to gain, but the reality in the field):
http://www.wjc.org.il/publications/policy_dispatches/pub_dis63.html

Originally posted by jcsd
You attack HRW without knowing anything about it, it routinely reports on corruption and torture in the PA and releases reports on the wrongdoings of Palestinian terrorists. Israel is only one concern out of many for HRW, whose head is incidently Jewish.

I don't know whom else it crtisizes and how much, I don't
know whether indeed its head is Jewish - which by the way
says nothing because normal people are not used to manipulate
suhc "power" in their own favor. I DO know that its claims are
often exhagerated and ussualy ignore completely the situation
because an 18 year old "peaceful demonstrant" is not equal to
a 5 year old child blown up in a bus.

Originally posted by jcsd
I see a pattern here you routinely make an assertation, it's proved false yo make another then again are forced to retreat from your postion, would it not be a good idea to become more knowledgeable on the subject before blindly defending everything that the Israeli government does?

That's funny, I see no such pattern. The only pattern I see
so far is that you bring up random pieces of info to
justify your biased pro-arab, pro-Muslim and racist views
and then when I expose the lie or delibarate misinterpretation
or misrepresentation that you make you "forget" about it
and jump to new pieces of info with the same intent.

Zero, perhaps your extensive military experience can suggest
better ways of dealing with Palestinian terrorism ? I'd love
to hear them for once, instead of your critism of whatever
concerns Israel and admiration of all Palestinian.

Live long and prosper.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by Zero
So Palestinian children killed in missle attacks aren't innocent?

Certainly. They are as innocent as the Israeli children killed by the suicide bombers who's leaders are then killed in the missile attacks. If the suicide bombers go away, the need to attack their leaders and the associated collateral damage does too.

Zero, perhaps your extensive military experience can suggest
better ways of dealing with Palestinian terrorism ? I'd love
to hear them for once, instead of your critism of whatever
concerns Israel and admiration of all Palestinian.

Drag, we already had that discussion (I'm pretty sure you participated).
We discussed whether its better (for everyone) to fire some missiles from a helicopter or send in a platoon of infantry (or even two cops) after a terrorist leader. Though he didn't exactly concede (he never does) his reaction seemed to indicate that he agreed that it IS better for everyone if gunships instead of infantry are used.

According to YOUR understanding of the statistics ?
The IDF takes the greatest care of avoiding civilian casualties
in such a complex situation, more than any other military force in
the world. It is clear that you understand very little
about military conflicts, aspecialy such a complex one
as this dealing with fanatic suicide terrorists who attack
with total disregard for their own or any other lives.

Not to mention, drag, the uncomfortable little fact that while Israel may kill some civilians BY ACCIDENT, virtually every single civilian killed by the Arabs in this conflict was intentional.

They are. As for all those "international" organizations
I already expressed my opinion about the UN.
I remember those poor Belgians also wanted to put
Bush and others on trial until it was quite clearly suggested
to them that their whole pathetic deal with the "intrenational
court" will be dealt with appropriately and they "reconsidered".
Seriously, someone should put a lid on these pathetic weed smokers' "intrenational" parties who think they're the most
beautifull moral crystal clear peace flowers around. Who the
hell are they to tell who and what is right or wrong unless
they've been there, seen it and spilled their blood there.
Pathetic... Western Europe has stopped being the center
power of the world long ago, but some of the countries there still think that they, from the perspective of almost 0 experience in
real conflicts in the past half a century and their primary
EU problems being environmental issues, can dictate the rest
of the world how it should live. Where were they 60 years ago
with all that moral crap ?

Well damn, drag, don't sugar coat it, tell us how you really feel! (I agree)

The development of Israel was indicative of a race, persecuted throughout the arab kingdom, throughout the area called Palestine, throughout europe. SO yes Israel was formed out of racism, as the one place possibly on Earth that they might escape to and live together safely after having been proven that it was not safe for them to depend on others to ensure their safety. That is the legacy of the beginning of Israel.

Well put, kat. To expand, Israel was founded not ON racism, but as an escape from racism by a specific race. But the escape from racism (among other things) is not limited to Jews. Any Arab can move to Israel to escape the many problems in Arab countries.

I'm thinking maybe this is part of the reason we feel such a kinship with Israel - the US was founded largely by people who were escaping some sort of persecution in Europe. And as a result, we built a Bill of Rights into our Constitution.

B'tselem: Israeli non-enforcement of the law with regards to settlers:

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/isr...RAEL0901-13.htm

Jcsd, that article is about education rights. It has nothing to do with the law on serving in the military and non-enforcement with regard to the settlers. Please try to make your lies a little less transparent.

 

[Zero]

Two wrongs make a right, I suppose...so long as it is Israel who commits the second wrong.

 

[Zero]

To be more specific, when a suicide bomber kills 7, it is horrible(we all agree on that). When Israeli troops retaliate by killing 6 suspected terrorists, and their wives and children, we also blame taht on the terrorists, huh? Just once, I would like to see someone decry the horrible fact that Israeli troops are slaughering children. It wouldn't make you anti-semitic, you know?

Actually, that seems to be teh entire argument, from my perspective. "The Arabs did it first, so it doesn't matter what Israel does in return." Oh, and let's never distinguish between Palestinians terrorists and civilians. The Israeli troops sure don't.

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Zero
To be more specific, when a suicide bomber kills 7, it is horrible(we all agree on that). When Israeli troops retaliate by killing 6 suspected terrorists, and their wives and children, we also blame taht on the terrorists, huh? Just once, I would like to see someone decry the horrible fact that Israeli troops are slaughering children. It wouldn't make you anti-semitic, you know?

Actually, that seems to be teh entire argument, from my perspective. "The Arabs did it first, so it doesn't matter what Israel does in return." Oh, and let's never distinguish between Palestinians terrorists and civilians. The Israeli troops sure don't.

Let me be as specific as I can be without being rude as to what I feel when I read your comments, with the understanding that I am being blunt for clarity and not for condemnation as we all come from our own views of life and our own sympathies and most often we all have some bit of right and some bit of wrong within them no matter what they are or where they arise from.
What I hear you say is Israeli slaughter needlessly, that they purposely go out and hunt down children and women and slaughter them wilingly and needlessly because they are such hateful vile people, this is what I read from you. Now whether that is your intention I do not know, but this IS what I read.
It seems to me that you want to lay all of the blame on the Israeli's, you believe they have no right to be there and none of this would exist if they did not AND so because of this they should either pack up and leave, open the doors to all the arabs waiting to enter or if not this then because it is their own guilt that has brought them to the situation they should simply walk around with big fat targets on their t-shirts and not DO anything in defense. If this were not the case then SURELY when I have outlined the problems with your statements on how they should handle this, and I continuesly suggest to you that there REALLY is no better way, and IN FACT there are less civilians killed this way then when using OTHER OPTIONS you tacticly ignore that fact AND never, ever offer any solutions, NEVER.
SO, to me when someone continues to blame yet never offers better VIABLE solutions then they quite simply are part of the problem.

ALso, let me explain to you why I don't spend my time and energy focusing on blaming the Israeli's with the same fervor as you (although REALLY at this point I think blaming is useless and we really MUST all shift gears and start pushing for VIABLE solutions) If I must blame SOMEONE when surely there is SO MUCH blame to spread around it should be ridiculously silly if it wasn't so HORRIBLE HORRIBLY TRAGIC. BUT as for SPECIFIC blame, I would surely be MANY in line before Israel.

The blame for Christians:
For two thousand years the Christian world acted COLLECTIVELY to deprive the Jews in the diaspora of a means of livelihood. They expelled them out of country after country, robbing their possessions and their homes. Finally they began to exterminate the Jews of Europe, first by blood libels, then by pogroms and finally by gas chamber genocide. The remnant of the Jews demanded to return to their homeland for security. That is a perfectly understandable reaction to that history. The Christian world is at fault for that much. Let the Christian world pay back to the Jew all they stole over the centuries with reasonable interest. Let the Christian world decide what to do with the wave of Arab refugees that triggered when the wave of Jewish refugees that they created hit the shores of Palestine. The Christian world is at fault for starting the refugee wave. Let them solve the problem. Don’t ask the Jews to solve the problem that was fomented by Christian anti-Semitism. The Jews are the victim of those Christian actions just as much as the Palestinians are.

The Blame for the Arabs:
When the whole Arab world was being divided into 20+ nation-states, it rejected the right of the Jews to self determination in a nation-state of their own on less than ½ of 1% of the land. When it rejected that minimal partition and opted instead for war because "All of Arab land must be only and always Arab" they were at fault. When they decided on war instead of a peaceful political compromise, they took on the full responsibility for the outcome. The refugee problem is theirs to solve. It is not the Jews’s problem to solve. The Jews did not ask for that war. The Arab world did.

When the Arab world then united and for 50 years insisted that the refugees must remain in those camps, and for 50 years said no peace, no negotiation, no Jewish State … then they became not only at fault, but criminally at fault, and deserve not only to pay compensatory damages their policies caused Israel and the Palestinians, but punitive damages as well.

The Blame for the Muslims:
For centuries the Islamic world treated Jews in dozens of places like second class serfs. They collected special taxes from them and prevented many from earning a livelihood in many professions. They prevented them from owning land in many places. By restricting the rights of Jews to compete on an equal basis, the Islamic world helped set the stage for the Jews to seek salvation in a state of their own. The Islamic world is at fault for both the damage they directly did to the Jews, and the indirect damage they caused by forcing the Jews to seek a state of their own if they were to have any chance at getting equal justice in the Muslim world.

Zero, when I think in terms of blame, I see a lot that needs to be made up to the Jews before the Jews can be asked by any Christian or Muslim to take responsibility for what happened to the Palestinians. When I think of Jews deciding what they should do on the basis of fault, I think the Jews had every reason in the world to expel the Palestinians who, to this day, call Husseini a hero, and supported bombs landing on Tel Aviv, and support Hamas that calls for killing EVERY Jew hiding behind EVERY rock.

Finally, the blame for the Palestinians:
When starting in 1888 a trickle of Jews began to leave Europe they were unarmed refugees. They moved to Palestine and paid for land to create small Jewish villages where they might live unmolested. These villages were routinely and repeatedly attacked from nearby Arab villages and Jews were murdered. Not only the attackers themselves are at fault. At fault are also those Arabs who spread the rumors the fomented these attacks and the Arabs who sheltered the attackers in their villages so they could be free to attack again. Before Israelis are asked to collectively make ANY recompense to Palestinians, the Palestinians must collectively take responsibility for those attacks and pay recompense for the damage they did.

Haj Amin El Husseini fomented one riot against the Jews after another, usually by spreading anti-Jewish libel in the Muslim/Arab communities. He fomented the anti-Jewish riots in Palestine in 1929 (and was instrumental in fomenting the anti-Jewish farhad in Iraq in 1941). The Palestinians cheered him on and collectively joined in those riots, which among other things resulted in the expulsion of the ENTIRE Jewish community from Hebron. If Palestinians were subsequently expelled from their homes, they should consider themselves paying no more than the natural consequences of their actions against the Jews, in those riots.

And don't give me that crap that Husseini would have been a good boy and everything wonderful if the Jews had not come. Sure, if the Jews remained in Europe and just died there, he would not have had to kill them in Palestine. That reasoning makes me want to puke.

When Hitler decided to get rich and get rid of the Jews at the same time by allowing the Jews of Europe to be ransomed one by one, the Jews (especially the Zionists) started collecting funds to try to save as many lives as they could. Husseini traveled to Berlin to convince Hitler to stop letting any Jews out of Europe and to exterminate them instead. He then personally aided in the extermination of the Jews of Yugoslavia. All those friggin racists who supported Husseini then and who do so today are at fault. They bear collective responsibility for the result; that hundreds of thousands of Jews are dead, and many of the remainder cannot bear to even think of living near Christians or Muslims. So if the Palestinian Christians and Moslems had to be expelled to alleviate a situation they helped foment … well maybe that is the balance of justice.

When I think in terms of bringing PEACE to a horrible situation I DON"T THINK OF ANY OF THIS BLAME, I think of ridding the Palestinian people of the FANATICS and those ARABS who are in power that entrap them, that also kill them and make them suffer evern greater then the Israeli's, I think of how UNTIL they rise up against these groups THEY WILL KNOW NO PEACE, the Israeli's ARE not really the BIGGEST problem the Palestinians face..they are however a very good diversion. Some day if there is to be ANY peace in the middle east the fanatics MUST be dealt with by the Palestinians themselves and UNTIL the entire focus is on this there will be NO peace that will NOT BE undermined.

 

[russ_watters]

Since I realize the previous post will probably be deleted, I' do this in a separate post.

Zero, I can't understand why you don't see the obvious difference between a child killed ON PURPOSE and one killed BY ACCIDENT. And that's at best - typically terrorist PURPOSELY hide among civilians so according to the Geneva Convention, civilian deaths are the fault of the terrorists. The use of human shields is a Geneva Convention violation.

Further, you have conveniently forgotten our discussion on the best way to go after suspected terrorists. You seemed to acknowlege that sending a squad of infantry into a town to arrest a terrorist would end up causing more deaths on both sides than a gunship attack.

And you emphasized the word "suspected". "Suspected terrorists." The implication being that they need to be arrested and tried before they can be executed. Zero, terrorists and their sympathizers LOVE to try to get the best of both worlds - both criminal and military rights. In reality, terrorists get NEITHER the rights of criminals nor the rights of legal enemy combatants.

 

[Zero]

Kat, three quick things that I have told you repeatedly, which you continuously ignore.
1) I never said that Israeli troops target women and children. I said that they don't seem to show any caution to avoid killing them. You know, simple things like blowing up a car containing a suspected terrorist, and his wife and child. You make that leap for some reason...and I usually guess that the reason is so that you can claim that I am anti-semitic.

2)Do you think that I cannot have the opinion that the situation is horrible unless I have a perfect solution to offer? In that case, no one can say they are anti-ANYTHING without having a solution...and if we all had solutions there would be no problems in the world, would there?

3) I don't understand your attitude that every other group must be perfect before Israel accepts the first bit of blame. The terrorist attacks are wrong, so the retaliation is ALWAYS 100% RIGHT, so long as it isn't as bad as a terrorist attack?


And, Russ, about your comment about suspected terrorists and their rights? Shouldn't someone have to prove that a person is a terrorist before they kill them and their wife and child?

 

[russ_watters]

*edit*

 

[kat]

I don't quite understand what was wrong with Rw's post, I read it quickly just after it was posted and although I don't remember exactly what it said..it didn't seem problematic...
What was the issue?

anyhow, now that I have some breathing time I'll take a sec and respond to your 3 points.

Originally posted by Zero
Kat, three quick things that I have told you repeatedly, which you continuously ignore.

I don't think I ignore anything you've "told" repeatedly, I think that a)you are a bit blind to your own prejudices b)I think you're suffering from a severe case of moral equivelancy. C) You have a nasty habit of ignoring the facts when they don't jive with your world view.

Originally posted by Zero

1) I never said that Israeli troops target women and children. I said that they don't seem to show any caution to avoid killing them. You know, simple things like blowing up a car containing a suspected terrorist, and his wife and child. You make that leap for some reason...and I usually guess that the reason is so that you can claim that I am anti-semitic.

I think it was perhaps the word "slaughter" and your continued voluntary and pointed ignorance of the situation in the disputed territories. I've pointed out on several occasions that a) Israel has a right to protect itself b) targeting with "missiles" is far less bloody then other methods available and if you do not agree then give a viable alternative.
Also, the reason is not to claim that you're anti-semitic, the reason is because you fail to acknowledge the right to self protection and offer a viable alternative. I claim your anti-semitic because of your statements supporting genocide and the absolute anhilation of Israel.

Originally posted by Zero
2)Do you think that I cannot have the opinion that the situation is horrible unless I have a perfect solution to offer? In that case, no one can say they are anti-ANYTHING without having a solution...and if we all had solutions there would be no problems in the world, would there?

I think you can have an opinion that the situation is horrible, certainly I have made the same statement MYSELF, repeatedly. HOWEVER, you don't just have an opinion that the situation is horrible, you have an opinion that the situation is horrible AND that the guilt lies on the head of the Israeli's. You then make statements declaring that perhaps it's because of the jews early biblical "sins" and advocate the complete anhilation of the jewish state by black topping it over. You lay the blame upon the victim, and you continue to ignore that they are indeed also victims who have the right to self protection.

Originally posted by Zero

3) I don't understand your attitude that every other group must be perfect before Israel accepts the first bit of blame. The terrorist attacks are wrong, so the retaliation is ALWAYS 100% RIGHT, so long as it isn't as bad as a terrorist attack?

I don't understand how you twist my statements. Maybe you need to re-read my post, where have I called for perfection? Where do I claim 100% anything? I simply point out your errors and seldom have time to actually have an intelligent discourse on real viable solutions because our conversations our continuesly weighted down with inflamnatory statements that neglect the on ground realities. Your unrealistic suggestion of joint palestinian/israeli policing is a perfect example of this.

Originally posted by Zero

And, Russ, about your comment about suspected terrorists and their rights? Shouldn't someone have to prove that a person is a terrorist before they kill them and their wife and child?

Zero, you don't have to prove someone is guilty when they publicly admit, no wait,..proudly, proclaim guilt and willingly take responsibility for the purposeful murder of civilians.

As for killing the wife and child...YES, it's horrible. YES, it should be avoided, YES, it should be condemned
BUT when the militant
PROCLAIMS war
plans, creates, supports, recruits, finances, attacks and
TARGETS NOT military targets
but
PURPOSELY targets innocent civilians
and
AGAINST ALL GENEVA CONVENTIONS
PURPOSELY and continiously surrounds theirselves with civilians
for the SOLE purpose of dragging the Israeli military into a situation where this sort of issue will arise..
is where a huge amount of guilt MUST LIE...
because if it DOES NOT ...
VOCALLY lie there, with the militant who creates this as a strategy
then you are guilty of complicity
because you encourage the militant to use that tactic
because IT BECOMES EFFECTIVE.
Do you understand this? or is it completely foreign to you?

 

[Zero]

Hatred of innocents is so unattractive, Kat...but indifference because of racism is worse.

BTW...calling me anti-semitic is idiocy...being anti-Israel isn't anti-Jewish. Too bad you can't see a distiction, but that is par for the course with you. Palestinians, I'm sure, feel they are exercising their right to protect themselves too.

 

[halfdyke]

zero told me something very insightful once. when someone bombs a cafe in the west bank, and the israelis respond by taking out half a village, that only gives the future bombers that are waiting in the wings more fuel for their "cause". so the question then becomes, how do we resolve the issue without giving the palestinians more and more reasons to hate and want to kill the israelis? each time an israeli assassination squad takes out another village, while the palestinians in that village can only fight back with rocks and other things like that, it makes them want to say "hey, maybe i should go to one of those suicide bomber training camps." and kat talks about the israelis' right to defend themselves. what about the palenstinians' right to defend themselves when israel retaliates? i don't know about kat, but my mom always taught me that violence in retaliation for violence solves nothing...so why do you support israel's violence in retaliation for violence? it solves nothing.

 

[Shadow]

so the question then becomes, how do we resolve the issue without giving the palestinians more and more reasons to hate and want to kill the israelis?

NO. No, I believe the real question is this: Who will be the stronger country and decide not to take the next step? To instead rely on defense, but not attack. Who will be the peaceful country, the one who offers not only a ceasefire, but will make an offer towards peace? An offer such as giving trust to the other country. Not complete trust, but a little, and a trust that will grow and could very well become a friendship. These two countries need to see their faults. They need to learn that two wrongs DO NOT make a right and that their war is killing their own people. And the war is killing their people over what? Some land and differences in beliefs. So they have to learn one more thing. Accept people for who they are.

 

[drag]

Greetings !

halfadyke's and shadow's messages reveal a clear lack of knowledge
and understanding of the real situation. Zero's editing of
my previous post reveals, again , his clear bias on
this issue since no one would edit my message otherwise
since it simply expressed the incredible misunderstanding and
lack of info on the issue that the person to whose message
I responded there showed.

Live long and prosper.

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by drag
Greetings !

halfadyke's and shadow's messages reveal a clear lack of knowledge
and understanding of the real situation. Zero's editing of
my previous post reveals, again , his clear bias on
this issue since no one would edit my message otherwise
since it simply expressed the incredible misunderstanding and
lack of info on the issue that the person to whose message
I responded there showed.

Live long and prosper.

Funny how you claim that only your views are correct, and that you should respond by posting content-free insults, and then complain when they are deleted.

Stay on topic.

 

[Shadow]

Greetings !

halfadyke's and shadow's messages reveal a clear lack of knowledge
and understanding of the real situation. Zero's editing of
my previous post reveals, again , his clear bias on
this issue since no one would edit my message otherwise
since it simply expressed the incredible misunderstanding and
lack of info on the issue that the person to whose message
I responded there showed.

How so? Lately some of your posts seem to be less intelectual and more critical. You say things about Halfdyke and I yet I was responding to Halfdykes post and he was responding to Kat and Zero. You have contributed little to this topic in your past few posts and even before that, you said Kat was wrong when she was expressing her opinion/ view on the matter.

And if I have "A clear Lack Of Knowledge" how would you propose to resolve the issue? How would you have them make peace?

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by kat
I don't quite understand what was wrong with Rw's post, I read it quickly just after it was posted and although I don't remember exactly what it said..it didn't seem problematic...
What was the issue?

Hmm, yeah, it was a while ago, but if I remember correctly, it was just an explanation of how hiding amongst civilians is a Geneva Convention violation and therefore the majority of Arab civilian deaths are crimes comitted by Arabs.

]Originally posted by Zero Funny how you claim that only your views are correct..

Etu Brutei. Zero, you are making this entire forum pointless.

 

[Zero]

Russ, if you don't like it, leave. Period.

Shadow, ignore Drag's personal comments, and stay on topic.

 

[schwarzchildradius]

For as far as the eye can see, this joker of a president has provided us with war and poverty. The MOST he can do is hand over all the power of this nation to the Pentagon and claim credit for its victories, while passing the blame to others for failures -- no wonder everybody he works with gets fired.
The terrorist acts against Israel slow down, while our boys get fragged for what reason? Why is our joker president so chummy with the Brits? Is he a redcoat in disguise? Let's do away with the old empires and revive the American Republic. The traitors in our midst have sensitive positions in the government.

 

[Zero]

And, on that note...we're through.