1 Israeli = 155 Palestinians

concussion

Some interesting, reasoned, letters to the Irish Times.

http://www.irishtimes.com/letters/index.html#1230936654466

meditraitor

concussion wrote: »

Some interesting, reasoned, letters to the Irish Times.

http://www.irishtimes.com/letters/index.html#1230936654466

agreed, this one is a prime example;

Madam, - When the Israeli army has pulverised Gaza and killed many more Palestinian civilians, when the rockets cease firing, will all those who have written in support of Israel then demand that it lifts its siege and stop its collective punishment of the Palestinian people? Will they demand an end to Israel's apartheid policies in the West Bank? Will they call on Israel to respect international and humanitarian law, to stop the ongoing settlement expansion, dismantle the illegal separation wall and halt the theft of Palestinian land?

No, of course they won't. Their denunciation of violence extends only to Palestinian violence; their calls for the rule of law applies only to the occupied people. There is nothing that Israel will do that these "friends of Israel" won't support with self-righteous anger, indignation and charges of anti-Semitism against those who disagree.

Pity the Palestinians; but pity the Israeli Jewish citizens too, whose country represents to the world today what apartheid South Africa represented for much of the last century. Pity them their "friends" abroad. - Is mise,

TOMAS McBRIDE,

Carrigawley,

Letterkenny,

Co Donegal

munchester29

I prefer this letter:

"Madam, - The call by Chris Andrews TD to "expel the Israeli Ambassador to Ireland" (January 5th) is a predictable outcome of his alliance with Sinn Féin TD Aengus Ó Snodaigh in the Oireachtas, where they have been jointly circulating an anti-Israeli petition.

People who enter into alliances with SF usually end up parroting Provo policies. The Provos have a long record of attacking Israel and backing whatever bunch of Jew-hating terrorists or heads of state are leading the charge to "wipe Israel off the map" — whether it's Hamas to the south, Hizbollah to the north or Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the east.

The spectacle outside the Central Bank last Saturday of young children dressed in military fatigues and green Hamas headbands gave Dubliners a brief insight into the use of children by Hamas which was very different from the tragic images of dead and wounded children that appear daily in newspapers and television reports from Gaza. The anti-Semitic indoctrination and militarisation of children, their abuse as human shields and their posthumous exploitation, wrapped in Hamas flags, for propaganda purposes is part of Hamas strategy and fully compatible with its jihadist ideology.

The killing of innocent civilians, including children, must be condemned without reservation. In doing so, responsibility should be laid at the door of those responsible for locating military hardware and personnel in civilian settings, using civilians as human shields and exploiting children for propaganda. An objective analysis of all the facts, rather than an emotional response to horrific images on newspaper pages and TV screens, will show any fair-minded person that it is not Israel's policy that is responsible for the tragic deaths of civilians in Gaza.

I hope the Government will ignore Deputy Andrews's outrageous and opportunistic demand to expel the ambassador of a small country that is fighting to protect its citizens from daily rocket attacks and to secure its borders in the midst of enemies on all sides who deny the right of the Jewish state to exist. The Irish Government should continue to back the two-states policy supported by the majority of Israelis and moderate Palestinians. - Yours, etc,

OLIVER DONOHOE,

Poddle Park,

Kimmage,

Dublin 12.

djpbarry

concussion wrote: »

Indeed, however it was sprayed on them, they didn't drink it. There were no deaths or serious illnesses mentioned in the report and so there are probably no long term effects due to the lack of carcinogenicity etc.

The point is that, as you have said, spraying it on people is pretty stupid, irresponsible and totally unnecessary.

Manic Moran wrote: »

Where was the rest of the world in sitting down between the two sides and actually trying to make a serious effort at finding out just what would be acceptable to the two sides?

I presume by “the rest of the world” you mean the US? Let’s be realistic here; the EU can be as damning as they like, but at the end of the day, Israel is only going to listen to the keeper of the purse.

CK.1

...or heads of state are leading the charge to "wipe Israel off the map" — whether it's Hamas to the south, Hizbollah to the north or Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the east.

Ahmadinejad never said anything about wiping Israel off the map despite it being repeated again and again in much the same way all we heard about was "weapons of mass destruction" in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad_and_Israel

Many news sources repeated the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) statement that Ahmadinejad had demanded that "Israel must be wiped off the map",[5][6] an English idiom which means to "cause a place to stop existing",[7] or to "obliterate totally",[8] or "destroy completely".[9]

Ahmadinejad's phrase was " بايد از صفحه روزگار محو شود " according to the text published on the President's Office's website.[10]

According to Juan Cole, a University of Michigan Professor of Modern Middle East and South Asian History, Ahmadinejad's statement should be translated as:

The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad).[11]

According to Cole, "Ahmadinejad did not say he was going to 'wipe Israel off the map' because no such idiom exists in Persian". Instead, "He did say he hoped its regime, i.e., a Jewish-Zionist state occupying Jerusalem, would collapse."[12]

....

President Ahmadinejad has been asked to explain his comments at subsequent press conferences. At a later news conference on January 14, 2006, Ahmadinejad stated his speech had been exaggerated and misinterpreted.[25] "There is no new policy, they created a lot of hue and cry over that. It is clear what we say: Let the Palestinians participate in free elections and they will say what they want."

Speaking at a D-8 summit meeting in July 2008, when asked to comment on whether he has called for the destruction of Israel he denied that his country would ever instigate military action, there being "no need for any measures by the Iranian people". Instead he claimed that "the Zionist regime" in Israel would eventually collapse on its own. "I assure you... there won't be any war in the future," both the BBC and AP quoted him as saying.[26][27]

And asked if he objected to the government of Israel or Jewish people, he said that "creating an objection against the Zionists doesn't mean that there are objections against the Jewish". He added that Jews lived in Iran and were represented in the country's parliament.[26]

In a September 2008 interview with Juan Gonzalez and Amy Goodman on the radio and television program Democracy Now!, Ahmadinejad was asked: "If the Palestinian leaders agree to a two-state solution, could Iran live with an Israeli state?" and replied

If they [the Palestinians] want to keep the Zionists, they can stay ... Whatever the people decide, we will respect it. I mean, it's very much in correspondence with our proposal to allow Palestinian people to decide through free referendums.[28]

[/QUOTE]

munchester29

djpbarry wrote: »

I presume by “the rest of the world” you mean the US? Let’s be realistic here; the EU can be as damning as they like, but at the end of the day, Israel is only going to listen to the keeper of the purse.

And since Hamas are Iranian puppets - the middle east is screwed.

djpbarry

munchester29 wrote: »

And since Hamas are Iranian puppets - the middle east is screwed.

Indeed. We have a war between two theocracies that are being propped up by two more theocracies (I know the US is not a pure theocracy, but it's interest in Israel is obviously based in Judaio-Christian fundamentalism).

wes

munchester29 wrote: »

The spectacle outside the Central Bank last Saturday of young children dressed in military fatigues and green Hamas headbands gave Dubliners a brief insight into the use of children by Hamas which was very different from the tragic images of dead and wounded children that appear daily in newspapers and television reports from Gaza.

Pictures above is Israeli children signing messages on rockets. From 2006.

Here is another gem:

Palestinians capture violence of Israeli occupation on video

An Israeli child from a far-right settler group in the West Bank city of Hebron hurls a stone up the stairs of a Palestinian family close to their settlement and shouts: "I will exterminate you." Another spits towards the same family.

Click here for full article

There is a video there as well.

Very odd how people forget that Israel indoctrinates children as well. What both sides do is pretty damn messed up imho.

munchester29

CK.1 wrote: »

Ahmadinejad never said anything about wiping Israel off the map despite it being repeated again and again in much the same way all we heard about was "weapons of mass destruction" in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.

Semantics, I think.
If you repeatedly say things like "Israel will be destroyed", "Israel should be destroyed", "Israel’s destruction is near", it basically amounts to the same thing, and can be construed as a threat.

munchester29

wes wrote: »

Very odd how people forget that Israel indoctrinates children as well. What both sides do is pretty damn messed up imho.

I agree.

Manic Moran

I presume by “the rest of the world” you mean the US? Let’s be realistic here; the EU can be as damning as they like, but at the end of the day, Israel is only going to listen to the keeper of the purse.

It's not US troops which were sent to Lebanon after the 2006 escapade. I don't think Israel has any particular problem with bodies other than the US getting involved. Yes, the US is just as guilty of not helping find a long-term solution as any other first-world power. But at least they're not taking a stance of righteous moralising over the evils of the conflict after having done nothing to prevent it.

NTM

concussion

djpbarry wrote: »

The point is that, as you have said, spraying it on people is pretty stupid, irresponsible and totally unnecessary.

My point is that the news reports can distort the truth - toxic chemicals, children thinking they're being gassed, when in fact there was little physical danger to the people involved. Still a sh*tty thing to do.

g5fd6ow0hseima

This Mr. Donoghue, well when he plays the 'wipe world off map' card, he cant go and bash Sinn Fein. Its a fairly idiotic arguement he plays in fairness. Im not much of a hamas sympathiser, but im furios with the fact that the western world wont stop for a minute and look at the root causes of this conflict.

When civilians have to dig tunnels to bring in essential supplies from Egypt (gun running is there too, but doesnt that go on in Dublin if im right), well can the international community has all those nations who choose to be America's lapdog (EU) not see that the Gazans are clearly viewed as asub-human nuisance by the Israeli administration.

Clearly, Gaza is a bloc of land the expansionist Zionists would rather have as theirs. Im not anti-Israeli, but im willing to go beyond the 'nazi' / 'the whole world are out to get us' rhetoric and be realistic about the conflict. Im sure if many of you who read this grew up in Gaza in the past few years, you would have different attitudes. Its easy and sit on your arse and say 'those ***** shouldnt be firing homemade weapons into Israel'.

Striking similarities between Gaza and the Warsaw Ghetto uprising dont you think? Who were the perpetrators in the view of the Reichstag? hmm.....

djpbarry

Manic Moran wrote: »

I don't think Israel has any particular problem with bodies other than the US getting involved.

I'm not saying that they do - they'll quite happily sit down with EU leaders for a bit of a chin wag, but EU “pressure” is not going to have any effect (if Tzipi Livni’s rhetoric the other day is anything to go by). Relative to the US, the EU's influence is minimal, in my opinion.

wes

munchester29 wrote: »

I agree.

Good to hear. Both sides are foolishly making sure the conflict continue long after the current adult generation is dead and buried.

g5fd6ow0hseima

After all, isnt Israel a laboratory.

marius

munchester29 wrote: »

Semantics, I think.
If you repeatedly say things like "Israel will be destroyed", "Israel should be destroyed", "Israel’s destruction is near", it basically amounts to the same thing, and can be construed as a threat.

This drives me nuts!

It has been clearly explained what he said above and you write it off as semantics....it is not semantics. You have just read what he actually said and yet you cannot accept that he did not say he wanted to wipe Israel off the map, it is written there in black and white and you still cannot accept it.....why is this?

It is like you want him to have said it as it fits nicely into your view of the world.....


What it is, is propaganda - what he said is being deliberately mis-interpreted be the US administsation and most main stream media to justify the perception of Iran wanting to destroy Israel.....it is boll0x, even The Roy Keane lookalike himself has explained that he never said it but people continue to spew this nonsense.....

Manic Moran

but EU “pressure” is not going to have any effect

"Pressure" is not negotiation or moderation. It is an attempt to impose something.

The long-term solution is not going to be 'What the EU thinks it can live with', the solution is going to be 'What the Israelis and Palestinians think they can live with.' Instead of trying to mandate whatever the EU policy happens to be, they should chuck it out and look at the two parties involved, not attempt to impose their own morals, regardless of how well-meaning they happen to be. And the chances are that given the distrust between the two sides, it also means getting actively involved on the ground.

NTM

Serenity Now!

marius wrote: »

This drives me nuts!

It has been clearly explained what he said above and you write it off as semantics....it is not semantics. You have just read what he actually said and yet you cannot accept that he did not say he wanted to wipe Israel off the map, it is written there in black and white and you still cannot accept it.....why is this?

It is like you want him to have said it as it fits nicely into your view of the world.....

What it is, is propaganda - what he said is being deliberately mis-interpreted be the US administsation and most main stream media to justify the perception of Iran wanting to destroy Israel.....it is boll0x, even The Roy Keane lookalike himself has explained that he never said it but people continue to spew this nonsense.....

He was quoting Nasser at the time actually who said when mobilising Egypt's allies (and appealing to not only Arabs but the Persians in question too) to attack Israel in 1967 that they would drive Israel "into the sea".
Then at the UN, he stated that he meant the 'Israeli regime' and not Israel per se.
So what you state is like a diluted version. Why? Propaganda perchance? :rolleyes:

djpbarry

Manic Moran wrote: »

The long-term solution is not going to be 'What the EU thinks it can live with', the solution is going to be 'What the Israelis and Palestinians think they can live with.'

True, but I imagine the former will settle on whatever the latter happens to be.

Manic Moran wrote: »

And the chances are that given the distrust between the two sides, it also means getting actively involved on the ground.

You mean in the form of a peacekeeping force?

Macha

Interesting article on the subject, written by an Israeli Oxford Prof of International Relations:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine

"How Israel brought Gaza to the brink of humanitarian catastrophe"

The Biblical injunction of an eye for an eye is savage enough. But Israel's insane offensive against Gaza seems to follow the logic of an eye for an eyelash. After eight days of bombing, with a death toll of more than 400 Palestinians and four Israelis, the gung-ho cabinet ordered a land invasion of Gaza the consequences of which are incalculable.

No amount of military escalation can buy Israel immunity from rocket attacks from the military wing of Hamas. Despite all the death and destruction that Israel has inflicted on them, they kept up their resistance and they kept firing their rockets. This is a movement that glorifies victimhood and martyrdom. There is simply no military solution to the conflict between the two communities. The problem with Israel's concept of security is that it denies even the most elementary security to the other community. The only way for Israel to achieve security is not through shooting but through talks with Hamas, which has repeatedly declared its readiness to negotiate a long-term ceasefire with the Jewish state within its pre-1967 borders for 20, 30, or even 50 years. Israel has rejected this offer for the same reason it spurned the Arab League peace plan of 2002, which is still on the table: it involves concessions and compromises.

Manic Moran

djpbarry wrote: »

True, but I imagine the former will settle on whatever the latter happens to be.

Doesn't seem to be the case so far, though, otherwise both sides would have agreed to them.

You mean in the form of a peacekeeping force?

Quite possibly. Apparently there has not been a single attack across the Lebanese border (in either direction) since the new, improved UNIFIL force showed up. I don't know if this is because UNIFIL are being effective, or if it's just a result of the pounding that Israel gave out, but either way, it seems to be working. The longer there's peace, the more likely people are going to start to slowly trust each other. (Maybe trust is the wrong word, but be willing to work with, at least). I presume that something similar could work in Gaza.

For example, let's say Israel refuses to open the borders as long as Hamas refuses to recognise Israel. Getting either one of the two sides to yield obviously isn't working, so give up on it. Instead keep the wall up, but put an international force on the crossing points. They enforce the restrictions on who/what can't cross into Israel, but they (the internationals) get to approve/disapprove what aid, food and utilities can cross into Gaza, not the Israelis and Egyptians. Israel's immediate security concerns are met, and the Palestinians complaints of blockades are also met, but neither side has caved into the demands of the other. It may not be a solution in itself, but it's at least a first step.

NTM

g5fd6ow0hseima

Manic Moran wrote: »

Doesn't seem to be the case so far, though, otherwise both sides would have agreed to them.



Quite possibly. Apparently there has not been a single attack across the Lebanese border (in either direction) since the new, improved UNIFIL force showed up. I don't know if this is because UNIFIL are being effective, or if it's just a result of the pounding that Israel gave out, but either way, it seems to be working. The longer there's peace, the more likely people are going to start to slowly trust each other. (Maybe trust is the wrong word, but be willing to work with, at least). I presume that something similar could work in Gaza.

For example, let's say Israel refuses to open the borders as long as Hamas refuses to recognise Israel. Getting either one of the two sides to yield obviously isn't working, so give up on it. Instead keep the wall up, but put an international force on the crossing points. They enforce the restrictions on who/what can't cross into Israel, but they (the internationals) get to approve/disapprove what aid, food and utilities can cross into Gaza, not the Israelis and Egyptians. Israel's immediate security concerns are met, and the Palestinians complaints of blockades are also met, but neither side has caved into the demands of the other. It may not be a solution in itself, but it's at least a first step.

NTM

Keep the wall up?

And yet we condemn Hamas for shelling Israel?

Resistance is natural, people will defend themselves. Most of us here will look upon the old IRA with fondness wont we (or the PC crew might say, well ye know at the time I suppose it was ok but wouldnt be now).

The bottom line is that white european settlers, most of whom arent in the middle east half a century, cannot treat their islamic brethern with the respect they were ought to be given given the whole situation regarding the founding of Israel as a state. Israel doesnt want a Gaza Strip, If for example, a colonial power didnt want an inconvenient entity to exist, the situation would naturally be reciprocated. Who is to blame? Not Hamas, not the Qassams of 2009.

Manic Moran

Darrell Grumpy Urination wrote: »

Keep the wall up?

And yet we condemn Hamas for shelling Israel?

I submit that anyone who thinks that the entire problem can be dealt with immediately with one fell swoop is deluding themselves. It is only going to get better step by step. If step 1 is just 'stop the blockade' and 'stop the shelling,' which are the two factors claimed in starting the current round of fighting, then that's better than trying to hold on from doing anything at all for the sake of trying to achieve perfection immediately. There's just too much mistrust between the sides to do that.

NTM

Mr.Micro

We need a multinational peace keeping force in the area no matter what Israel thinks or objects. Its about time that the UN or the US or the EU get it sorted as neither side will ever trust the other or probably tolerate the other. With a new President in the US perhaps this could be a new start to at least get some stability before any moves can be made to sort out the whole Gaza issue. Do'nt hold your breath though.

ionix5891

Mr.Micro

Mr.Micro wrote: »

We need a multinational peace keeping force in the area no matter what Israel thinks or objects. Its about time that the UN or the US or the EU get it sorted as neither side will ever trust the other or probably tolerate the other. With a new President in the US perhaps this could be a new start to at least get some stability before any moves can be made to sort out the whole Gaza issue. Do'nt hold your breath though.

Until a way can be put into place whereby attacks against Israel are stopped, nothing will happen. Israel will not withdraw, and they will continue to make their attacks irrespective of international pressure. Regardless of whether there's an international force put in or not. Just as Hamas will continue their attacks...

And lets face it, any such force is likely to be useless. They probably wouldn't have the numbers, the equipment, or even any real orders about what to do with either Israeli incursions, or Palestinian armed forces. It would be an obvious paper shield incapable of enforcing a peace.

Stop the attacks, and Israel would most likely return its forces to previous positions. At least until the next series of rocket attacks began again.

[Its funny how nobody ever seems to wonder what it would be like if there were no more attacks on Israel by Palestinian groups like Hamas... What would Palestine and Israel achieve then?]

Lemming

Deleted User wrote: »

[Its funny how nobody ever seems to wonder what it would be like if there were no more attacks on Israel by Palestinian groups like Hamas... What would Palestine and Israel achieve then?]

What would be achieved judging by prior precedent, would be a continued blockade and starvation of basic necessities (foodstuffs, medicines, power, clothing) by Israel, aggravation of any unsanitary living conditions imposed on the Gaza population by fighting and destruction of water and sewage systems, continued harassment and intimidation by border guards along with continued denial of travel for most residents thus forcing them to live in squalor.

That's what would happen. The question you ask also has a flip-side to it and that is when the other side (Israel) is going to reciprocate. The answer is at best-guess judging again by prior precedent depressingly negative. Israel is (and always has been) holding almost all the cards here. If people want peace in the region, they're the ones who can actually give it. Any peace accord is a two-way street, yet they [Israel] seem to want it all their own way. That isn't a peace accord. That's subjugation and enough to get anyone's backs up at which point you're back to the same old, same old depressing routine again.

But all that said and done klaz, lets not loose sight of what's really going on here at the moment. This has nothing to do with Palestinians, or Gaza, or rockets. It has everything to do with politicians trying to look "good" for election in less than two months time.

Steviemak

17,500 dead – almost all civilians, most of them children and women – in Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon;

1,700 Palestinian civilian dead in the Sabra-Chatila massacre;

106 Lebanese civilian refugees massacred in Qana 1996, more than half of them children, at a UN base;

the massacre of the Marwahin refugees who were ordered from their homes by the Israelis in 2006 then slaughtered by an Israeli helicopter crew;

1,000 dead of that same 2006 bombardment and Lebanese invasion, almost all of them civilians

700+ and counting in Gaza 2009 again mostly civilians

How dare the Palestinians launch firecrackers in symbolic defiance.

TOMASJ

A lot of David Irving types posting on this thread, and giving sucker to IDF criminals,
220 little children buchered to date,
maybe in years to come we can look froward to Simon Wiesenthal type efforts to have these murderous perpetrators jailed.