Protests over Gaza deaths at 5PM Today (Monday) outside Israeli Embassy..

indough

agree with munchester29, palestinians have no more claim to the land than the israelis do

that being said, expansion should stop and israel should take the responsibility of making the first real move towards peace

arybvtcw0eolkf

The Saint wrote: »

Oh and Mairt, I think you'll find that Hamas didn't exist at the time that soldier was kidnapped. You might also want to look at the Irish killed by the Israeli's, the Israeli backed Christian militia and the Israeli backed South Lebanon Army. I think you'll find the proportion of Irish peacekeepers killed by these groups to be quite substantial.

You don't have to tell me about those deaths, I've witnessed them first hand myself, because unlike the vast majority of people here I've served in Lebanon a number of times since 1988.

And while I acknowledge those deaths as terrible, we were in a war and deaths happen. But the Israeli's never kidnapped, murdered and held onto the body of one of my countrymen.

I've also never seen the IDF or SLA hide behind human shields, but I served with the FMR (Force Mobile Reserve) when the Hezbollah launched Katyusha rockets at the Galilee from behind civilians sheltering in a Fijian UN post beside us.

Despite plea's from UNIFIL to stop firing, they continued to do us. When IDF Operations told us that they'd have no other option but to return fire (they were observing the firing position from a drone over Qana we approached the Hezbollah again, still they continued to fire into Israel.

The IDF returned fire from Israel (M119 155mm SP Arty guns), a number of shells landed on the sheltering civilians killing 102 and guess what. The Israeli's suffered the wreath of condemnation, not the Hezbollah who were fully aware of the danger's they were exposing Lebanese civilians to.

I've also been on the receiving end of IDF/SLA fire when the Amal and Hezbollah would use our positions as shelter when they'd shell Israel from behind us.

Not once have I met an Israeli who didn't want peace, each and every Israeli I've ever spoke to wanted peace with their neighbours.. I can't say the same for Arabs unfortunetely, some wanted peace (a tiny few I might add) but most wanted to totally destroy the Israeli state and seen each and every Israeli citizen as a legitimate target for killing and could fully justify suicide bombers (to themselves).

You also know that if the UN were to send in a peace keeping/enforcement force to Gaza, we'd serve. And we'd be targets for Hamas too, I've no doubt what so ever about that.

I was in Lebanon when we pulled out, it was time to go, our mandate was served.

But when UNIFIL II went in on the ground of Lebanon the Hezbollah made a very serious attack on UN forces, and IED mean't for Irish troops killed 11 Spainish instead. Then another hit a UN vehicle outside of Tyre injuring two Irish soldiers (I serve with one of them).

These are all tactics used by all terriorist forces accross the region, but I've never seen one terrorist attack on us by the IDF/SLA.

A lot of people here have very misplaced and misguided loyalties, campaign and make representations to the Palestinians for the return of Kevin Joyce's remains and forget about Hamas, they were voted in by their own people - now they must reap what they've sown.

The Mighty Ken

Mairt wrote: »

You don't have to tell me about those deaths, I've witnessed them first hand myself, because unlike the vast majority of people here I've served in Lebanon a number of times since 1988.

And while I acknowledge those deaths as terrible, we were in a war and deaths happen. But the Israeli's never kidnapped, murdered and held onto the body of one of my countrymen.

I've also never seen the IDF or SLA hide behind human shields, but I served with the FMR (Force Mobile Reserve) when the Hezbollah launched Katyusha rockets at the Galilee from behind civilians sheltering in a Fijian UN post beside us.

Despite plea's from UNIFIL to stop firing, they continued to do us. When IDF Operations told us that they'd have no other option but to return fire (they were observing the firing position from a drone over Qana we approached the Hezbollah again, still they continued to fire into Israel.

The IDF returned fire from Israel (M119 155mm SP Arty guns), a number of shells landed on the sheltering civilians killing 102 and guess what. The Israeli's suffered the wreath of condemnation, not the Hezbollah who were fully aware of the danger's they were exposing Lebanese civilians to.

I've also been on the receiving end of IDF/SLA fire when the Amal and Hezbollah would use our positions as shelter when they'd shell Israel from behind us.

Not once have I met an Israeli who didn't want peace, each and every Israeli I've ever spoke to wanted peace with their neighbours.. I can't say the same for Arabs unfortunetely, some wanted peace (a tiny few I might add) but most wanted to totally destroy the Israeli state and seen each and every Israeli citizen as a legitimate target for killing and could fully justify suicide bombers (to themselves).

You also know that if the UN were to send in a peace keeping/enforcement force to Gaza, we'd serve. And we'd be targets for Hamas too, I've no doubt what so ever about that.

I was in Lebanon when we pulled out, it was time to go, our mandate was served.

But when UNIFIL II went in on the ground of Lebanon the Hezbollah made a very serious attack on UN forces, and IED mean't for Irish troops killed 11 Spainish instead. Then another hit a UN vehicle outside of Tyre injuring two Irish soldiers (I serve with one of them).

These are all tactics used by all terriorist forces accross the region, but I've never seen one terrorist attack on us by the IDF/SLA.

A lot of people here have very misplaced and misguided loyalties, campaign and make representations to the Palestinians for the return of Kevin Joyce's remains and forget about Hamas, they were voted in by their own people - now they must reap what they've sown.

Sorry, your life experience means absolutely nothing. I have a political agenda here, damnit!

The Saint

Mairt wrote: »

I've also never seen the IDF or SLA hide behind human shields, but I served with the FMR (Force Mobile Reserve) when the Hezbollah launched Katyusha rockets at the Galilee from behind civilians sheltering in a Fijian UN post beside us.

Despite plea's from UNIFIL to stop firing, they continued to do us. When IDF Operations told us that they'd have no other option but to return fire (they were observing the firing position from a drone over Qana we approached the Hezbollah again, still they continued to fire into Israel.

The IDF returned fire from Israel (M119 155mm SP Arty guns), a number of shells landed on the sheltering civilians killing 102 and guess what. The Israeli's suffered the wreath of condemnation, not the Hezbollah who were fully aware of the danger's they were exposing Lebanese civilians to.

With regard to the 1996 shelling at Qana:

The UN appointed military advisor Major-General Franklin van Kappen of the Netherlands to investigate the incident. His conclusions were:

“ (a) The distribution of impacts at Qana shows two distinct concentrations, whose mean points of impact are about 140 metres apart. If the guns were converged, as stated by the Israeli forces, there should have been only one main point of impact.
(b) The pattern of impacts is inconsistent with a normal overshooting of the declared target (the mortar site) by a few rounds, as suggested by the Israeli forces.

(c) During the shelling, there was a perceptible shift in the weight of fire from the mortar site to the United Nations compound.

(d) The distribution of point impact detonations and air bursts makes it improbable that impact fuses and proximity fuses were employed in random order, as stated by the Israeli forces.

(e) There were no impacts in the second target area which the Israeli forces claim to have shelled.

(f) Contrary to repeated denials, two Israeli helicopters and a remotely piloted vehicle were present in the Qana area at the time of the shelling.

While the possibility cannot be ruled out completely, it is unlikely that the shelling of the United Nations compound was the result of gross technical and/or procedural errors.

Amnesty International conducted an on-site investigation of the incident in collaboration with military experts, using interviews with UNIFIL staff and civilians in the compound, and posing questions to the IDF, who did not reply. Amnesty concluded, "the IDF intentionally attacked the UN compound, although the motives for doing so remain unclear. The IDF have failed to substantiate their claim that the attack was a mistake. Even if they were to do so they would still bear responsibility for killing so many civilians by taking the risk to launch an attack so close to the UN compound."

Human Rights Watch concurred, "The decision of those who planned the attack to choose a mix of high-explosive artillery shells that included deadly anti-personnel shells designed to maximize injuries on the ground — and the sustained firing of such shells, without warning, in close proximity to a large concentration of civilians — violated a key principle of international humanitarian law."

I've also been on the receiving end of IDF/SLA fire when the Amal and Hezbollah would use our positions as shelter when they'd shell Israel from behind us.

Mairt wrote: »

Not once have I met an Israeli who didn't want peace, each and every Israeli I've ever spoke to wanted peace with their neighbours.. I can't say the same for Arabs unfortunetely, some wanted peace (a tiny few I might add) but most wanted to totally destroy the Israeli state and seen each and every Israeli citizen as a legitimate target for killing and could fully justify suicide bombers (to themselves).

From a joint opinion poll survey from 2006:

59% of the Israelis and 85% of the Palestinians support the recent cease fire agreement between Israel and the Palestinians in Gaza. 85% of the Palestinians support and 14% oppose extending the agreement to the West Bank.

Among Palestinians 61% support or strongly support and 37% oppose or strongly oppose an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip with the exception of some settlement areas in less than 3% of the West Bank that would be swapped with an equal amount of territory from Israel in accordance with a map that was presented to the Palestinian respondents. The map was identical to that presented to respondents in June 2006, when support for this compromise, with its map, stood at 54% and opposition at 44%.

Among Israelis 44% support and 54% oppose a Palestinian state in the entirety of “Judea, Samaria” and the Gaza Strip except for several large blocks of settlements in 3% of the West Bank which will be annexed to Israel. Israel will evacuate all other settlements, and the Palestinians will receive in return territory of similar size along the Gaza Strip. In June 2006, 47% of the Israelis supported this component while 47% opposed it.

Kind of puts holes in your arguement.

Mairt wrote: »

You also know that if the UN were to send in a peace keeping/enforcement force to Gaza, we'd serve. And we'd be targets for Hamas too, I've no doubt what so ever about that.

It has previously been proposed to put in peacekeepers into the occupied terrirtories by the Palestinians however this was rejected by Israel

Mairt wrote: »

A lot of people here have very misplaced and misguided loyalties, campaign and make representations to the Palestinians for the return of Kevin Joyce's remains and forget about Hamas, they were voted in by their own people - now they must reap what they've sown.

Sound like you're saying that the Palestinians deserve punishment for the actions of Hamas because they elected them. There's a term for that "collective punishment" and its a violation of international law.

tallaght01

I despise violence.

But, I have to say, mairt, that was a fantastic post.

Shows perfectly that there's murderers on both sides.

It just gets tiring to hear about it all being one sided. it's like sitting in a bar in crossmaglen talking about the north.

Fair balls to you for hanging around in the midde of it Mairt!

IRISH RAIL

Pen1987 wrote: »

From a mother from Gaza...

“There is a complete black out in Gaza now. The streets are still as death.”

I am speaking to my father, Moussa El-Haddad, a retired physician who lives in Gaza City, on Skype, from Durham, North Carolina in the United States, where I have been since mid 2006- the month Gaza’s borders were hermetically sealed by Israel, and the blockade of the occupied territory further enforced.

He is out on his balcony. It is 2am.


http://a-mother-from-gaza.blogspot.com/

More propoganda if theres a blackout how is He on skype as other terorist supporters will tell you there has been a blackout for months now

Poccington

Mairt wrote: »

You don't have to tell me about those deaths, I've witnessed them first hand myself, because unlike the vast majority of people here I've served in Lebanon a number of times since 1988.

And while I acknowledge those deaths as terrible, we were in a war and deaths happen. But the Israeli's never kidnapped, murdered and held onto the body of one of my countrymen.

I've also never seen the IDF or SLA hide behind human shields, but I served with the FMR (Force Mobile Reserve) when the Hezbollah launched Katyusha rockets at the Galilee from behind civilians sheltering in a Fijian UN post beside us.

Despite plea's from UNIFIL to stop firing, they continued to do us. When IDF Operations told us that they'd have no other option but to return fire (they were observing the firing position from a drone over Qana we approached the Hezbollah again, still they continued to fire into Israel.

The IDF returned fire from Israel (M119 155mm SP Arty guns), a number of shells landed on the sheltering civilians killing 102 and guess what. The Israeli's suffered the wreath of condemnation, not the Hezbollah who were fully aware of the danger's they were exposing Lebanese civilians to.

I've also been on the receiving end of IDF/SLA fire when the Amal and Hezbollah would use our positions as shelter when they'd shell Israel from behind us.

Not once have I met an Israeli who didn't want peace, each and every Israeli I've ever spoke to wanted peace with their neighbours.. I can't say the same for Arabs unfortunetely, some wanted peace (a tiny few I might add) but most wanted to totally destroy the Israeli state and seen each and every Israeli citizen as a legitimate target for killing and could fully justify suicide bombers (to themselves).

You also know that if the UN were to send in a peace keeping/enforcement force to Gaza, we'd serve. And we'd be targets for Hamas too, I've no doubt what so ever about that.

I was in Lebanon when we pulled out, it was time to go, our mandate was served.

But when UNIFIL II went in on the ground of Lebanon the Hezbollah made a very serious attack on UN forces, and IED mean't for Irish troops killed 11 Spainish instead. Then another hit a UN vehicle outside of Tyre injuring two Irish soldiers (I serve with one of them).

These are all tactics used by all terriorist forces accross the region, but I've never seen one terrorist attack on us by the IDF/SLA.

A lot of people here have very misplaced and misguided loyalties, campaign and make representations to the Palestinians for the return of Kevin Joyce's remains and forget about Hamas, they were voted in by their own people - now they must reap what they've sown.

You know the bad thing about this post Mairt?

You're now gonna have a load of civvie's try to pick it apart with "Oh no, I read on the interwebs etc." while refusing to accept something from a person that has served there. Not read an article on the internet, not gotten al their info from the internet but actually SERVED there!

You can see it's already happening with the Qana incident. You may have actually been there but these people have articles off the Internet damnit! :rolleyes:

Anyway, quality post Mairt but your own personal experience will be considered wrong.... Cause the Internet said so :rolleyes:

wes

munchester29 wrote: »

So, we can agree that both people have ancient historical roots in the country, but yet, somehow you only see that the Palestinians have a right to own the country?
How come the Jews are not entitled to their piece of land?

I have historical roots, in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran. Do I have a right to setup a ethno-religious Sudhun state in those nations? My ancestors use to live there as well. So if I showed up and started demanding a states, what do you think would happen to me? Would not the locals fight me?

Again, the Palestinians were living there, it was there country at the time, the Zionists lived in Europe for a 1000 years. To claim the land is there after a 1000 years is simply insane. Everyone can trace there roots back to Africa, doesn't give us all a right and go there and create are own states. The logic used to justify Zionism is ridiculous.

All you are offering is an excuse for there aggression, citing some ancient claim on the land. Anyone can do this if they go far back enough.

Now that Israel is there, they should of course have a state, but only because kicking them out would be equally wrong as kicking out the Palestinians. So a 2 state solution is needed.

munchester29 wrote: »

Yet the fact that the Jews were exiled out of their country somehow does change who they are?

So that makes it ok for them to kick out the Palestinians then? 2 wrongs don't make a right. There were people there, the Zionists threw them out. Nothing justifies that.

munchester29 wrote: »

I don’t know where you got that piece of information, but it’s wrong.
The Jews did accept the partition, and thousands of Israelis went out to the streets and started dancing out of joy when they found out about the UN decision.
The few who were against the partition idea didn’t even speak out much against it, since they all knew that no matter what the UN decision was, the Arabs will attack anyway – arguing about it was pointless.

The Palestinians made up 2/3 of the population and didn't want partition. The Zionists went against the majority plain and simple and what right did foreign nations have to give away Palestine? They went against the majority will and this cause conflict.

munchester29 wrote: »

We have established already that there always was a Jewish settlement in Israel. After most of the Jews were exiled in ancient times, there were more non-Jews than Jews, that is true – but the Jews were still there none the less. I specifically say non Jews and not Palestinians, because there were no Palestinians at the time, only Arabs – they had no national entity to identify with, and the term “Palestinians” was not used prior to the late 60’s (I think).
The Palestinians were not asked to give up half of their country, they were asked to share a newly formed country with the Jews, and we all know how that ended.

There were Palestinians, this is a fact. The Zionist lie has long been debunked. I provided sources for this earlier. Stop insisting that some thing that is untrue is true.

The term Palestine was in use under the Ottoman empire. Why you pretend this is not the case is puzzling and even if they didn't exist this is no excuse for ethnic cleansing.

Palestinians were asked to give up half there country to European colonists. They came from Europe, plain and simple. Lived there for a 1000 years and they disagreed, like any other people in the world would have.

munchester29 wrote: »

So the Israelis started the 1948 war? Is that what you are saying?
They simply rose and attacked all the unsuspecting surrounding Arab countries and their Arab neighbours?

A group of invaders declaring there own nation is an act of war.

munchester29 wrote: »

I would like some proof of that if you don’t mind, since it seems every historian in the world kind of disagrees with what you said.

I have provided my source already in the thread. Perhaps you should provide some.

munchester29 wrote: »

Please read the following statement sent to the Irish times by Benny Morris, who is often quoted by Palestinian supporters, so you can’t blame him for being biased:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23624754-20261,00.html

To sum things up: allegations of ethnic cleansing are mostly crap.

Yet, in his own work he calls it half a ethnic cleansing.

Of course the work of the likes of Illan Pappe and Avi Shalaim state a different story, both are Isrel historians. Also, a lot of other historian agree that ethnic cleansing took place. The excuses offered don't explain why there are so many refugees.

munchester29 wrote: »

There never was a Palestinian state under the Ottomans. It kind of went against everything they were trying to do in occupied territories.

There was, I provided my source earlier. This is an old Zionist lie, long debunked.

munchester29 wrote: »

Well, the way I see it:
People who used to live there before the Palestinians came from Europe & Africa, after almost being annihilated in the countries they were exiled to.
I think that an old injustice was rectified when the Jews received their old homeland back.

And an injustice was committed against, the Palestinians. 2 wrongs do not make a right.

Also, the crimes of Europe, not the Palestinians fault.

munchester29 wrote: »

The only reason it is at the expense of the Palestinians is due to the Palestinian stubbornness that everything is theirs. Note that even the surrounding Arab countries acknowledge Israel’s right to exist, while the Palestinians don’t.
They are kind of stubborn that way…

So claiming land after a 1000 years is what exactly? I would say the Zionists are far more ridiculous in the stubbornness.

munchester29 wrote: »

It’s not an excuse – it’s called life.
Most of the Arab states were founded by European colonists.
The US was taken from the Indians.
All of Europe looks like it does now because of wars and conquests.

So, ethnic cleansing and stealing other land is a-ok then. Good to know. So why is it wrong for Hamas to do the exact same thing then? If you justify Israel actions to the Palestinians, the same logic is easy to turn around.

Simply put what your describing is simply wrong. Regardless of who is doing it.

munchester29 wrote: »

I know – It’s ugly, it’s not nice, it’s annoying, it’s this and it’s that – but the bottom line is – that’s life, and life is not always pleasant or peachy creamy coloured with lovely pink rainbows and unicorns.

No there crime plain and simple, no excuses.

munchester29 wrote: »

I can actually think of several:
1. Security reasons (preventing attacks and suicide bombings, supplying Israelis with safe areas to drive through, etc).
2. The Israelis are smart enough to know that when the time comes and both sides really sit to negotiate peace, each settlement is a playing card in the negotiations. They are stacking cards.
3. They are pissed at the Palestinians and do it out of spite.

Israel is an apartheid state. Your offer ridiculous excuses. Israel racism is very very apparent. There is no reason to build on other peoples land. There is no reason for Jewish only roads. Its absurd racism from Israel and nothing else.

munchester29 wrote: »

I really believe that the day the Palestinians stop attacking Israel, will be the last day a Palestinian dies from an Israeli bullet.
I don’t think the Palestinians are starving.

This is not a 1 sided conflict. Plain and simple Israel needs to stop there violence as well.

Also, the UN has stated several time that the Palestinian are starving. If you want to ignore reality go right ahead.

munchester29 wrote: »

I believe the Palestinians are suffering greatly because they use funds sent to them by sympathetic countries to equip themselves with guns & explosives, instead of using those funds to better their lives.

Strangely your forget the occupation and the blockade, which are real things.

munchester29 wrote: »

They are also suffering because that is one of the Hamas’s playing cards against Israel – another chip in the war over public opinion. That’s why Hamas attacked a border pass used to transfer food & fuel to Gaza, that’s why hospitals in Gaza are complaining about fuel shortages – they don’t have a fuel shortage – Hamas has taken control of the fuel dumps, and will use them in the fight against Israel, not to better the lives of the Palestinians.

The UN has stated there are shortages, not Hamas. Stop denying there is a blockade. It was all over the news for months.

munchester29 wrote: »

I think that most of the Palestinian suffering is their own fault. Violence begets violence, and since Israel’s hands are tied most of the time (we haven’t seen Israeli divisions roll over Gaza yet), they fight the Palestinian in other ways – confiscating lands for security reasons, inspecting shipments into Gaza, etc.

Sorry, the occupation causes the problems. Stop blaming the occupied for being occupied. If Israel wanted the land, they need to take the people.

Also, there are no excuses for Israel violence either. They need to stop as well, otherwise there will never be peace.

munchester29 wrote: »

The children of Gaza suffer, but so do Israeli children who live with daily rocket threats, mortar bombings and suicide bombings.
Also, I think the children in Darfur are much worse off than the children in Gaza. The dead numbers speak for themselves in such cases.

Yes, the Isreali's are suffering, but at least they have food readily available. Also, since when has 2 wrongs made a right exactly? I have stated both sides to need to stop, but you seem to only think this is a one sided conflict.

Also, what is happening in Darfur, does not excuse Israel. The fact you seem to think the children look the same, shows how bad things are.

munchester29 wrote: »

I agree. I would like to see Hamas stop all hostilities for just one week though…

Great and I wonder if Israel would do that as well. Stop there settlements and there violence against Palestinians and there blockade.

munchester29 wrote: »

By the same logic, you can say that it’s OK for prison inmates to kill guards, judges and lawyers… I mean – you and I think they should be in prison, society thinks they should be in prison – but I’ll bet the prisoners themselves don’t agree with that…

So all Gazans are guilty then? Your comment is absurd and nothing else. What Israel has done to the Gazan's is state terrorism and there is no excuse for it. Just as Hamas has not excuse to attack Israeli civilians.

Collective punishment is wrong and I have stated that violence from Hamas has no excuse and the same goes for Israel.

munchester29 wrote: »

Israel left Gaza – look what that got her – instead of reducing the number of attacks because of this step towards peace, the attacks actually intensified.
So who is responsible for the violence intensification? Is it the occupier who left, or the occupied who just wants one thing?

They stole more land in the West Bank. You seem to have left that out. The Palestinians are one people, so stealing land else where, clearly shows Israel is not serious about peace, and there control over air space and all Gaza borders, shows that the occupation has not ended. A real withdrawal, would mean the Palestinians control there air space and borders. Israel never gave them that. The occupation still continues there.

munchester29 wrote: »

And the Palestinian authority finances suicide bombers, and other terrorist activities.
So let’s spank them both and send them to bed…

Yes, both should be treated the same, as I have said again and again.

munchester29 wrote: »

Seriously, the refugees again?

The same thing can be said by the almost a million Jewish refugees who lost everything they had when they had to leave the surrounding Arab countries after 1948, 1967, etc.

The Palestinians are not to blame for the actions of other nations. To suggest they are is nonsense.

The ethnic cleansing of Palestine is something the Zionists did and is there fault.

munchester29 wrote: »

The differences between the Jewish refugees and the Palestinian refugees:
The Jewish refugees had much more property and money than their Palestinian counterparts.
The Jewish refugees immediately started working on rebuilding their lives when they got to Israel, while the Palestinian refugees basically sat in refugee camps and moaned about their bad luck and all they lost.

Something that is common to both refugee camps:
No one but themselves really expects them to get everything they lost back. The Israeli refugees don’t really expect that anyway.

I think that whenever the Palestinian refugee questions rises, someone should mention the Jewish refugees also. I mean – if the Palestinians are to be compensated, then The Jewish ones should be compensated too, right?

I agree completely both should be compensated, but the Palestinians are not to blame. Why you seems to try and link the 2 is really strange.

Israel should take it up with the Arab nations responsible and try and not shift the blame to the Palestinians. Which is what so many try to do. There 2 separate issues that happened year between one another.

IRISH RAIL

You know the bad thing about this post Mairt?

You're now gonna have a load of civvie's try to pick it apart with "Oh no, I read on the interwebs etc." while refusing to accept something from a person that has served there. Not read an article on the internet, not gotten al their info from the internet but actually SERVED there!

You can see it's already happening with the Qana incident. You may have actually been there but these people have articles off the Internet damnit!

Anyway, quality post Mairt but your own personal experience will be considered wrong.... Cause the Internet said so

dont forget the other morons who just put fact at the end of there post believing it right

arybvtcw0eolkf

tallaght01 wrote: »

Fair balls to you for hanging around in the midde of it Mairt!

AH, it was worth it for the few bob I made - and the Israeli fanny in Tel Aviv night clubs :P

IRISH RAIL

Mairt wrote: »

AH, it was worth it for the few bob I made - and the Israeli fanny in Tel Aviv night clubs :P

ah temptation the best club on Rehovot Ben Yehuda

arybvtcw0eolkf

Poccington wrote: »

You know the bad thing about this post Mairt?

You're now gonna have a load of civvie's try to pick it apart with "Oh no, I read on the interwebs etc." while refusing to accept something from a person that has served there. Not read an article on the internet, not gotten al their info from the internet but actually SERVED there!

You can see it's already happening with the Qana incident. You may have actually been there but these people have articles off the Internet damnit! :rolleyes:

Anyway, quality post Mairt but your own personal experience will be considered wrong.... Cause the Internet said so :rolleyes:

Sure, I know all that. And I rarely debate Israeli/Arab affairs for the same reasons.

Usually I get it and look a the person trying to pick me apart, I think 'what life experience has helped them form this opinion', then I change the subject before I laugh in their face - or choke 'em

But in all honesty, most people are too entrenched in their beliefs that its not worth the energy to debate, either that or their just anti semitic and will use any excuse to beat up on Jew's.

anonymous_joe

Mairt wrote: »

Sure, I know all that. And I rarely debate Israeli/Arab affairs for the same reasons.

Usually I get it and look a the person trying to pick me apart, I think 'what life experience has helped them form this opinion', then I change the subject before I laugh in their face - or choke 'em

But in all honesty, most people are too entrenched in their beliefs that its not worth the energy to debate, either that or their just anti semitic and will use any excuse to beat up on Jew's.

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I think accusing them of anti-Semitism is a bit harsh. I hope so anyway...

brianthebard

My name is Mud wrote: »

Funny thing is that if no religon existed, none of this would be happening.

Regardless of the Israeli's using excessive force, or Hamas hiding in Palenstinian civillian centres, all this bloodshed stems from religon.

Load of cock it is really.

This is a nationalist issue along race/religious lines, if religion didn't exist this would still be happening in another form.

Pen1987

IRISH RAIL wrote: »

More propoganda if theres a blackout how is He on skype as other terorist supporters will tell you there has been a blackout for months now

How do you think journalists from agencies on both sides are making phonecalls from there? A blackout doesnt always mean internet and phone lines.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Pen1987 wrote: »

How do you think journalists from agencies on both sides are making phonecalls from there? A blackout doesnt always mean internet and phone lines.

Sat-phones, INMARSAT and other sources.

One of the first things the Israeli's would have disabled lines of communications in Gaza.

The Israeli's are experts at this kind of thing.

wes

Every article I have read, has stated that the Palestinians, do have a few hours of electricity a day and some people have there own generators.

Dudess

Mairt wrote: »

the Israeli fanny in Tel Aviv night clubs :P

Nice Mairt - why don't you just go the whole hog and call it meat?

/me thinks back to when I heard girls going on about all the cock in particular nightclubs. Nope, didn't happen.

Anyhoo, Hamas are terrorist, murderous bastards and yes, ordinary Israelis do live in fear, but people are objecting on the other hand to how Palestinians are treated as inferior species - similar to catholics in the North post partition - and they are also objecting to the heavyhanded bullying tactics by the Israeli Defence Forces... as well as the hugely disproportionate retaliations - e.g. what's going on now.

Is that such an unreasonable position to take?

Pen1987

Mairt wrote: »

Sat-phones, INMARSAT and other sources.

One of the first things the Israeli's would have disabled lines of communications in Gaza.

The Israeli's are experts at this kind of thing.

So you reckon that whole post was propaganda? (seriously, not an aggresive question, but I'm honestly wondering...)

It was an article commissioned by the Guardian and the journalist, who moved stateside 2weeks ago is all over US radio.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Pen1987 wrote: »

So you reckon that whole post was propaganda?

Yes I believe so.

Believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear (read) and you'll do ok.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Dudess wrote: »

but people are objecting on the other hand to how Palestinians are treated as inferior species - similar to catholics in the North post partition - and they are also objecting to the heavyhanded bullying tactics by the Israeli Defence Forces... as well as the hugely disproportionate retaliations - e.g. what's going on now.

Is that such an unreasonable position to take?

In war not everything has an opposite and equal reaction, if it did no one would win battles.

And if people are so concerned at Palestinian's human rights let them also show fairness and protest to the Lebanese, Kuwaiti's, Saudi's, Jordanians and everyone else in the Middle East who detain Palestinians in refugee camps and deny them basic human rights.

Even do some research on Hamas justice in Gaza and tell me they're excising anything even close to human rights.

But back to what I said at the start,

"In war not everything has an opposite and equal reaction, if it did no one would win battles",

Most military men will believe in peace through superior firepower.

I'm a big guy, if a little guy punched me in the face it would hurt but probably wouldn't knock me out. But if I was to retaliate I'd punch his lights out, not return a bitch slap.

IRISH RAIL

Since when is war a mathematical equation? The basic objective of any warring party is to inflict maximal damage on the enemy while minimizing its own casualties. Was there anything proportional about the US war in Iraq? Or about Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait for that matter? Or about Russia’s recent war against Georgia? Israel is doing exactly what any other country has done in the past. This is how war works.
Would a British citizen complain that “too few” British soldiers are being killed in Iraq? Probably not.

And on a more elementary note: Palestinian military inferiority is not an indication of moral superiority. Palestinian insistence on resorting to violence despite this military weakness is an indication of poor judgment perhaps – yet it is by no means an indication of moral virtue. Being militarily weak does not make the Palestinians right.

Pen1987

Mairt wrote: »

In war not everything has an opposite and equal reaction, if it did no one would win battles.

And if people are so concerned at Palestinian's human rights let them also show fairness and protest to the Lebanese, Kuwaiti's, Saudi's, Jordanians and everyone else in the Middle East who detain Palestinians in refugee camps and deny them basic human rights.

Even do some research on Hamas justice in Gaza and tell me they're excising anything even close to human rights.

Just to add to this slightly to put some example of source and research behind it, people tend to take everything as personal opinion on forums unless theres some slight form of proof.

The front page of the International Herald-Tribune has a story about Paelstinian in-fighting during the current conflict. It talks about supposeded Israeli collaborators who had been imprisoned by the Hamas government and were "awaiting trail", the prison was bombed so the injured prisoners were taken to the hospital. As some of them were on strecthers there were Palestinian fighters walking around and just shooting them in the head as they lay there, basically short-circuiting their trails as far as i can make out. One was reported to have been shot by his own brother to "cleanse the family shame".

I would link the article but the website is time delayed because of time-zone issues, its a worldwide paper, the sister of the NY Times and highly respected.

IRISH RAIL

wes wrote: »

Every article I have read, has stated that the Palestinians, do have a few hours of electricity a day and some people have there own generators.

but they have no petrol for generators ?
well thats what they would have you to believe

oh hang on now weve gone to a few hours a day whats next the secret esb line thats helping keep the struggle :rolleyes:

Terry

munchester29 wrote: »

Not true any which way you look at it.
The Jews started immigrating back to Israel in the mid 19th century. Even then they were attacked constantly by the surrounding Arabs.
The Arabs also attacked the newly formed state of Israel in 1948. The Israelis were content with just getting a place of their own.



I won’t argue about the legal right – you are very wrong with this point, check international law – no justification to firing rockets or mortar shells into civilian populations under most circumstances.

In regards to popular support – this is given to the Palestinians in most cases, not to the Israelis. The reason for this is that everybody loves the underdog; in particular countries who have been underdogs themselves (Did someone just say Ireland?)
For this reason, Irish public opinion was all in favour of Israel every time in the past when they fought against incredible odds (1948 war, 1967 war, etc).
Irish and global public opinion now leans towards the Palestinians because they are the underdogs.
To the average Joe in the street it doesn’t matter what the Palestinians stand for (read the Hamas charter if you care to learn the truth), what their beliefs are, how they conduct themselves, etc.

The Israelis left Israel 1,000 or so years ago.
They can't just walk back in and tell everyone to leave because the bible says it's their land.

Mairt wrote: »

I might drop over and ask the same Palestinians and their supporters the reveal the where abouts of Private Kevin Joyce (18rys old) who was kidnapped and murdered by the Palestinians in Lebanon.

He is still officially the longest held captive in Lebanon.

The Palestinians know the location of his body, but refuse to divulge the information to the Irish government, or to his family.

But instead they want to use Kevin's remains as a political tool in their tussle with between the Irish government and the Israeli's.

MORE ON PTE KEVIN JOYCE.

Guys, we owe the Palestinians very, very little.

You could also say that the entire Catholic population of Northern Ireland are to blame for the people killed by the IRA. After all, they did vote Sinn Fein into office.

Nehaxak

...and if the big guy comes at the small guy for no reason other than to bully/push themselves about ? I feel it perfectly within reason that the smaller guy pulls out a weapon of some sort to retaliate. They all get it in the end, big mouths, big shouters, all basically full of shít.

Some of the stuff posted in here has been just stupid to go through and read.

Israel is the aggressor here and always has been, who gives a flying fck what the jews went through from the Nazi's, still does not give them any right to go take over land and carry out what amounts to genocide of the Palestinian people.

It's all bullshít and the sooner the Arabic states rise up together and fight back against the Israeli's the better.

IRISH RAIL

Nehaxak wrote: »

...and if the big guy comes at the small guy for no reason other than to bully/push themselves about ? I feel it perfectly within reason that the smaller guy pulls out a weapon of some sort to retaliate. They all get it in the end, big mouths, big shouters, all basically full of shít.

Some of the stuff posted in here has been just stupid to go through and read.

Israel is the aggressor here and always has been, who gives a flying fck what the jews went through from the Nazi's, still does not give them any right to go take over land and carry out what amounts to genocide of the Palestinian people.

It's all bullshít and the sooner the Arabic states rise up together and fight back against the Israeli's the better.

just like that post

Nehaxak

IRISH RAIL wrote: »

just like that post

Yeah, lets all support the Israeli's because, well, because ? er ? Why exactly ?

You CANNOT deny that Israel is the aggressor and is totally at fault, nor can it be denied that they are carrying out what amounts to genocide of the Arabic people in the surrounding lands.

Bollocks to the Irish peacekeepers out there too, they're meant to be impartial but from posts from some of them in here, they clearly are not. If you cannot do your job in an impartial manner then you shouldn't be there, ever been there and never should go there.
I've also some old friends who served over there and they also were not impartial, siding always with the Israeli's, one of them telling me it was mostly out of fear.

World war 3 please, can we get this sorted out once and for all.

Poccington

Nehaxak wrote: »

Bollocks to the Irish peacekeepers out there too, they're meant to be impartial but from posts from some of them in here, they clearly are not. If you cannot do your job in an impartial manner then you shouldn't be there, ever been there and never should go there.
I've also some old friends who served over there and they also were not impartial, siding always with the Israeli's, one of them telling me it was mostly out of fear.

And until you pull on the uniform you shouldn't judge the jobs our soldiers do out there, what they did out there and what they may do there in the future.

Many a good lad died over there while serving this country, a bit of ****ing respect isn't too much to ask.

Nehaxak

Poccington wrote: »

And until you pull on the uniform you shouldn't judge the jobs our soldiers do out there, what they did out there and what they may do there in the future.

Many a good lad died over there while serving this country, a bit of ****ing respect isn't too much to ask.

Which uniform is that ? I was in an army and I have had training but it wasn't here in this country.
I have respect but if you can't be impartial when you're there doing your job as a peacekeeper then GTFO, you shouldn't be there. I have respect for those in the Irish army who manage to maintain their impartiality and respect for everyone they are there to protect, not just one side.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Nehaxak wrote: »

Bollocks to the Irish peacekeepers out there too, they're meant to be impartial but from posts from some of them in here, they clearly are not. If you cannot do your job in an impartial manner then you shouldn't be there, ever been there and never should go there.
I've also some old friends who served over there and they also were not impartial, siding always with the Israeli's, one of them telling me it was mostly out of fear.

.

In our dealings with people on all sides we've always been impartial.

If you really do have friends who've served out there, and from the last line there I very much doubt you do, who always side with the Israeli's ask yourself why.

As for speaking out of fear, absolute and complete bullsh*t.

Most soldiers out there would have served on checkpoints and OP's with little if any dealings with the Israeli's (or even the SLA). Not one would have even been in a position whereby he'd have had an Israeli gun put to his head and told to support Israel.

Your post is a pathetic tbh.

Poccington

Nehaxak wrote: »

Which uniform is that ? I was in an army and I have had training but it wasn't here in this country.
I have respect but if you can't be impartial when you're there doing your job as a peacekeeper then GTFO, you shouldn't be there. I have respect for those in the Irish army who manage to maintain their impartiality and respect for everyone they are there to protect, not just one side.

The lads that were out there and anywhere we go have always been impartial when dealing with either side in any country we get sent to.

However, if you think lads will spend 6 months there without forming an opinion on the matter you're wrong. They just don't let their opinions get in the way of their work, they're professionals and as such act like it.

Dudess

Nehaxak wrote: »

...and if the big guy comes at the small guy for no reason other than to bully/push themselves about ?

Apparently that unnecessary bullying and harassment and intimidation and humiliation of Palestinian civilians is Israel "defending itself"...

I feel it perfectly within reason that the smaller guy pulls out a weapon of some sort to retaliate.

I disagree with that. Decent Israeli civilians have suffered at the hands of Hamas too... and it doesn't do the ordinary Palestinians any favours. I wish Hamas would stop playing into the Israeli government's hands.

But yeah, I agree... why the hell, unless you're a fanatical zionist, would you back Israel? Sure... condemn the attacks by Islamic extremists but to not have a problem with a state that oppresses the citizens of another state? The mind boggles...

Nehaxak

Well yourself and the other thug really sound like you're both Impartial in your views expressed on here :rolleyes:

Bringing your service and our country into disripute if you ask me.

Your post is a pathetic tbh.

The feeling is mutual, your biased views expressed I find a disgrace to our peacekeeping forces and our country itself, hope you're proud of that.

Terry

Nehaxak wrote: »

Well yourself and the other thug really sound like you're both Impartial in your views expressed on here :rolleyes:

Bringing your service and our country into disripute if you ask me.



The feeling is mutual, your biased views expressed I find a disgrace to our peacekeeping forces and our country itself, hope you're proud of that.

Banned for personal abuse.

Run_to_da_hills

Steyr wrote: »

How am i not surprised that you went to protest at the US Embassy.........your all just anti American. Israel has a right to defend itself with whatever arms it deems necessary, no right minded Nation would just sit back as others over missiles into it's territory.

I totally oppose the way the Israelis treat the Palistinians as disposable and I have seen it for myself first hand. I also deplore the way the USA is collaborating with the Zionists with state of the art weaponry when they know damn well it is being tested out on innocent civilians.

Put it another way, If the Irish Government got fed up with all the crime and shooting from the few notorious families in Moyross and decided to erect a 40Ft wall around the housing estate over night with heavily fortified exits would you expect all the residents to sit back and take it all? I would hardly think so.

Israel is currently using a sledgehammer to crack an egg just like it did last year in the Lebanon.

panda100

The IPSC has called for a national demo to protest against the ongoing assualt on Gaza for this Saturday,starting at 1pm at the central bank.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I totally oppose the way the Israelis treat the Palistinians as disposable and I have seen it for myself first hand. I also deplore the way the USA is collaborating with the Zionists with state of the art weaponry when they know damn well it is being tested out on innocent civilians.

Put it another way, If the Irish Government got fed up with all the crime and shooting from the few notorious families in Moyross and decided to erect a 40Ft wall around the housing estate over night with heavily fortified exits would you expect all the residents to sit back and take it all? I would hardly think so.


.

Of all the posts in the last few days, thats the most nieve.

OK-Cancel-Apply

The IDF did and DO use human shields.

http://www.ynet.co.il/english/articles/0,7340,L-3387356,00.html

Google it.

Israel is a far bigger terrorist than Hamas. Again, people who think the are being progressive and liberal say, "Ah they're just as bad as each other". No, the fact is that NONE of this would ever have happened, or would CONTINUE to happen if it weren't for Israeli TERRORIST aggression and expansion.

If anyone here served in Lebanon, SURELY they would have spoken to the civilian population? Shame you weren't there in 2006 when Israel was cluster-bombing the **** out them, and hear what they have to say.

So what if Israel hasn't kidnapped any IRISH soldiers?? How ****ing short sighted. Israel has hundreds if not thousand of prisoners held without charge, including women and children.

Re claim to the land:

Since when can you have a RELIGIOUS 'CLAIM' to a foreign country?? How do people from Poland, Austria, Germany, Africa, China have a 'claim' to the land??

It's not a question of "Do Jews have a right to the land?" It's a question of, "Do foreign settlers have the right to violently drive out the native population and live in their houses, forcing them into camps?"

Under Israeli law, anyone who is has a Jewish mother, (by religion, or however else they can persuasively define themselves as Jewish), grandmother or great grandmother has a right immigrate, while Arabs who are NATIVE to the land must fear for not only their right to stay, but their lives.

Israel is anti-Arab. The small Arab population who are Jewish by religion are treated as second classes citizens.

Only Jews have the right to live in certain areas and use certain roads. That's called APARTHEID. There are signs on streets that read "Jews Only". It's shocking.

Groups like Hamas are guerrilla outfits armed with rocket launchers. Israel is a nuclear armed military power will the full financial backing of the US. For every Israeli that dies in this conflict, it seems that hundreds of Palestinians die.

Look here: http://www.ipsc.ie/

Here are some numbers:

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/

Poccington

OK-Cancel-Apply wrote: »

So what if Israel hasn't kidnapped and IRISH soldiers?? How ****ing short sighted. Israel has hundreds if not thousand of prisoners held without charge, including women and children.

So what?

There's a fair few people on this forum including myself, that would consider that Irish soldier(His name is Kevin Joyce btw) as a comrade. I'll be ****ed if I'm gonna just forget about his body STILL not coming home, just cause Israel have their own prisoners.

OK-Cancel-Apply

Poccington wrote: »

So what?

There's a fair few people on this forum including myself, that would consider that Irish soldier(His name is Kevin Joyce btw) as a comrade. I'll be ****ed if I'm gonna just forget about his body STILL not coming home, just cause Israel have their own prisoners.

Nobody's asking you to 'forget' him. But put things in perspective for god's sake.

Poccington

OK-Cancel-Apply wrote: »

Nobody's asking you to 'forget' him. But put things in perspective for god's sake.

Ok, I'll put things in perspective then.

There's a conflict going on, that has gone on throughout history.... It involves 2 states to which I don't belong or have any particular love for, over a piece of land that is in reality of no massive importance to me and will continue on for many years to come.

Somewhere in that piece of land, lies the body of one of my comrades. One of the many men that served before me and someone that put his own life on the line to actually help people, rather than sit behind a computer giving out about evil Israeli's, evil Palestinians etc. Now whilst he was over there actually doing some good, he was kidnapped and presumably murdered by Palestinians. It's been over 20 years and his body still has not been returned, he still hasn't gotten the proper burial that he deserves and his family still have not gotten their son back.

Now personally, Kevin Joyce is more important to me than the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The fact I've seen people say "So what if they kidnapped an Irish soldier" honestly sickens me. For the life of a young man that served his country to be disregarded in such a way, is unbelievable and unforgiveable in my eyes. I'll say no more on the subject because at this moment in time, I'm disgusted and quite angry.

The Saint

IRISH RAIL wrote: »

You know the bad thing about this post Mairt?

You're now gonna have a load of civvie's try to pick it apart with "Oh no, I read on the interwebs etc." while refusing to accept something from a person that has served there. Not read an article on the internet, not gotten al their info from the internet but actually SERVED there!

You can see it's already happening with the Qana incident. You may have actually been there but these people have articles off the Internet damnit!

He never said he was at Qana. I posted the conclusion of a UN report (the organization who's compound was bombed killing those taking refuge inside. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch also came to the same conclusion. The reports would have taken eyewitness accounts from everyone there at the time and been very comprehensive. I'm going to go with this evidence.

I also used statistical evidence to show how not all Arabs (specifically Palestinians) want to kill Jews and destroy Israel. While I'm sure Mairt has spoken to many Arabs there at the time I'm sure he doesn't have the resources to conduct wide ranging opinion polls as was done in this report. Also I'd imagine (although I could be wrong) that many of the Arabs he spoke to were in Lebanon and it's hardly surprising that they don't see Israel in a very good light given the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, the support of the Christian Militias and subsequent events from this.

IRISH RAIL wrote: »

Anyway, quality post Mairt but your own personal experience will be considered wrong.... Cause the Internet said so

dont forget the other morons who just put fact at the end of there post believing it right

I do not think that Mairts personal experience is wrong. Personal experience cannot be wrong. I admire the work that he has done there just as with all UNIFIL troops. And while he might have experience in Lebanon he has not served in the Occupied Territories so it's not exactly talking about the same thing.

Mairt

Mairt wrote: »

These are all tactics used by all terriorist forces accross the region, but I've never seen one terrorist attack on us by the IDF/SLA.

First off Mairt that was an excellent post.

However I was very surprised by this sentence. As a man who has military experience I would have thought you realised that suicide bombings, IED's and such things; while often the tactics used by groups designated by others as "terrorists" are actually guerilla tactics commonly employed by inferior military forces in the face of overwhelming superiority of their opponents.

"Terrorism" refers to the objectives, not the methods. The ends, not the means. It is a pejorative term and one which should be avoided when discussing these issues. I am not making any argument for either side, just pointing out that one should strive to be impartial as much as possible when issues such as this are up for debate.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Poccington wrote: »

Ok, I'll put things in perspective then.

There's a conflict going on, that has gone on throughout history.... It involves 2 states to which I don't belong or have any particular love for, over a piece of land that is in reality of no massive importance to me and will continue on for many years to come.

Somewhere in that piece of land, lies the body of one of my comrades. One of the many men that served before me and someone that put his own life on the line to actually help people, rather than sit behind a computer giving out about evil Israeli's, evil Palestinians etc. Now whilst he was over there actually doing some good, he was kidnapped and presumably murdered by Palestinians. It's been over 20 years and his body still has not been returned, he still hasn't gotten the proper burial that he deserves and his family still have not gotten their son back.

Now personally, Kevin Joyce is more important to me than the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The fact I've seen people say "So what if they kidnapped an Irish soldier" honestly sickens me. For the life of a young man that served his country to be disregarded in such a way, is unbelievable and unforgiveable in my eyes. I'll say no more on the subject because at this moment in time, I'm disgusted and quite angry.

An absolutely fantastic post.

And isn't it sad and a little pathetic that the vast majority of people defending the Palestinians will not, or have ever served in any kind of military role, peace keeping or otherwise, but yet throught reading the internet or viewing Sky News feel better qualified to voice an opinion.

Mairt

Mairt wrote: »

And isn't it sad and a little pathetic that the vast majority of people defending the Palestinians will not, or have ever served in any kind of military role, peace keeping or otherwise, but yet throught reading the internet or viewing Sky News feel better qualified to voice an opinion.

Soldiers do not have the exclusive rights to truth or knowledge in this matter. In fact the inevitable relationships with the indigenous peoples which you would develop working in such harsh circumstances would arguably make your opinion, while absolutely valid and indeed vital to a full understanding of the issue, somewhat biased. Taking that bias into account we can weight your opinion and weave it into the tapestry of truth that we search for.

I do not mean denigrate your opinion but you must realise that it is simply one perspective in a hugely complicated issue. Just because I have been to Chernobyl does not mean my opinion on the region is better than a scholar specialising in the area, it just gives me a different one.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Deleted User wrote: »

First off Mairt that was an excellent post.

However I was very surprised by this sentence. As a man who has military experience I would have thought you realised that suicide bombings, IED's and such things; while often the tactics used by groups designated by others as "terrorists" are actually guerilla tactics commonly employed by inferior military forces in the face of overwhelming superiority of their opponents.

"Terrorism" refers to the objectives, not the methods. The ends, not the means. It is a pejorative term and one which should be avoided when discussing these issues. I am not making any argument for either side, just pointing out that one should strive to be impartial as much as possible when issues such as this are up for debate.

OK, first things first.

If you think suicide bombings and IED's are a justified mean's of attack against your enemy then your saying that you agree with the IRA's proxy suicide attacks against British forces in N.I. - I can't justify this in any way shape or form.

Plus to justify suicide bombings (I'm speaking in as someone who has served in Lebanon more than once) then you justify the murder of three Fijian solders murdered by a suicide bomber at Naqoura in 1988 while I was there. Sorry, but I can't justify that.

IED's, an IED murdered 3 Irish soldiers in Lebanon in 1989 (69th Irish battalion, UNIFIL). the lads were from Galway, all were married and all were part of a company of Irish soldiers guarding water tanks above a village (Brash*t) South Lebanon. This attack was carried out by members of Amal, why were we targetted?, we weren't a massively superior force in the region, indeed our mandate was a very weak one.

As for us being impartial.

Apart from implimenting UN resolutions 425 and 426 we brought humanitarian assistance to villages all accross our area of operations, regardless of the villages loyalties, or religions.

I've worked with Christians & Muslims alike, plus garded Israel's border's with complete impartiality.

Pen1987

The protests happening should be against the violence not against the Israeli action or to aid the Paelstinian people. Anything other than that... hmm...

Mairt

Mairt wrote: »

OK, first things first.

If you think suicide bombings and IED's are a justified mean's of attack against your enemy then your saying that you agree with the IRA's proxy suicide attacks against British forces in N.I. - I can't justify this in any way shape or form.

Plus to justify suicide bombings (I'm speaking in as someone who has served in Lebanon more than once) then you justify the murder of three Fijian solders murdered by a suicide bomber at Naqoura in 1988 while I was there. Sorry, but I can't justify that.

IED's, an IED murdered 3 Irish soldiers in Lebanon in 1989 (69th Irish battalion, UNIFIL). the lads were from Galway, all were married and all were part of a company of Irish soldiers guarding water tanks above a village (Brash*t) South Lebanon. This attack was carried out by members of Amal, why were we targetted?, we weren't a massively superior force in the region, indeed our mandate was a very weak one.

As for us being impartial.

Apart from implimenting UN resolutions 425 and 426 we brought humanitarian assistance to villages all accross our area of operations, regardless of the villages loyalties, or religions.

I've worked with Christians & Muslims alike, plus garded Israel's border's with complete impartiality.

I am afraid what you have done is looked at what I said and simply put your own interpretation on it.

What I said was that those tactics were used historically by forces facing massively superior enemies as part of an overall guerilla approach to warfare. To classify them as "terrorist" is inaccurate and shows your feelings towards those people who use such tactics.

I neither said I condone them nor condemn them.

Also, when I referred to "our need to be impartial" I meant we as individuals not "we" as in the State of Ireland. Alas, I fear impartiality cannot be hoped for from someone who has had such an emotional connection with the issue. This is not a sleight, you would be inhuman if it did not affect you so.

Mikel

Deleted User wrote: »

As a man who has military experience I would have thought you realised that suicide bombings, IED's and such things; while often the tactics used by groups designated by others as "terrorists" are actually guerilla tactics commonly employed by inferior military forces in the face of overwhelming superiority of their opponents.

"Terrorism" refers to the objectives, not the methods. The ends, not the means. It is a pejorative term and one which should be avoided when discussing these issues.

Absolutely 100% false.
You can argue all you like about who is in the right and you'll never get people here to change their minds, but suicide bombings are not 'guerilla tactics commonly employed by inferior military forces', they are terrorism, plain and simple.

Damn right it's a pejorative term.
Should we not be pejorative about organisations which strap explosives to people and send them on suicide missions?
How about our friends in the IRA who would force innocent people to drive a car filled with explosives into a checkpoint.

If you can't be pejorative about that kind of nihilistic barbaric behaviour then how are you supposed to treat it?
Why should it be avoided?

This is where the moral equivocation leads.