Israel - Palestine Conflict. **Mod note in OP - updated 1st August**

paulmcshane

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

During their first few years as a political party, harassing the opposition, beating up rivals and attacking dissident figures opposed to their rise, you have the textbook definition of a terrorist organization (and oddly similar to Hamas at that).

Now once the Nazi party assumed controlled over the German apparatus of state you're dealing with a whole new level of evil; discriminatory racial laws, systematic extermination of ethnic, religious, sexual, political and other groups, war crimes pertaining to the treatment of prisoners and occupied populations (which is in my view a far better area for comparison) - a whole new and far more terrifying level of evil, but it doesn't really fit the title of terrorism.

You mean it doesn't fit your definition of terrorism.

Tuisceanch

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

During their first few years as a political party, harassing the opposition, beating up rivals and attacking dissident figures opposed to their rise, you have the textbook definition of a terrorist organization (and oddly similar to Hamas at that).

Now once the Nazi party assumed controlled over the German apparatus of state you're dealing with a whole new level of evil; discriminatory racial laws, systematic extermination of ethnic, religious, sexual, political and other groups, war crimes pertaining to the treatment of prisoners and occupied populations (which is in my view a far better area for comparison) - a whole new and far more terrifying level of evil, but it doesn't really fit the title of terrorism.

It appears that you have a definite stance on the issue of the conflict being discussed in that you subscribed to the opinion that Israel is only acting in self defense and that it's actions should not be considered as terrorism or illegal but simply the prerogative of a state which considers itself the victim of unwarranted aggression. I thought that you entered the discussion on the premise that you were playing devil's advocate but if you are a devout supporter of the Israeli position then it would be more honest to simply state that as I have no problem in stating that I do not believe Israel has any justification for it's actions.

Irish Praetorian

Nodin wrote: »

You'll find that many members of the PIRA were from the south. Therein might lie your answer.

Be that as it may, I'm hard pressed to think of any attacks launched on the UK from this country, where our government didn't bend over backwards to assist the investigations. Don't forget our own country was also in conflict and lost people to the PIRA.

Tuisceanch wrote: »

You avoided answering the question yet again. I posted a piece which cites the human rights organisations version of events and asked you whether you thought they were lying.Your stance is that Israel has acted in self defense and I dispute that and so do these organisations. So are you right and they're wrong?

Oh, no I don't believe the piece is lying, although I might be interested to know where it bases some of its factual claims, particularly the AI claim about the remote chances of Israel not being involved. Nonetheless I remain inconvenienced that the strikes on Gaza post Israeli withdrawal constitute in any way a less preferable situation to Israeli troops on the ground and Israeli settlers on Gazan land. You may decry it for not being a comprehensive grant of independence but it was nonetheless the most concrete step taken toward a free Palestine than I dare say we've seen before or since.

bumper234 wrote: »

Why is it only terrorism when it's non state actors?

paulmcshane wrote: »

Very convenient!

We have a separate category for when states behave like terrorist groups, its called war crimes.

RustyNut wrote: »

So not Hamas then as they are the elected representatives of the people of Gaza and are legitimately resisting military aggression by their neighbour.

I would consider the deliberate targeting of Schools, hospitals and UN places of safety to be acts of terrorism. Targeting kids playing on a beach, the collective punishment of an entire population that is terrorism.
Or is it excusable to you because they were state actors who carried out these acts?

Hamas are the elected representatives of Gaza in the same sense that Fianna Fail having been elected in 2007, deciding to murder the opposition, seize control of state apparatus and not permit any subsequent election despite their unpopularity, would still be our elected representatives. There is no need to besmirch the cause of an independent Palestine by granting a monopoly on it to groups as deplorable as Hamas. Their use of schools and hospitals as places to store weaponry is no less an offence than Israel's bloody and heavy handed (to stay nothing of frequently mistaken) retaliatory strikes.

Irish Praetorian

Tuisceanch wrote: »

Well that's a legalistic answer if ever I heard one. You maintain your position on your initial assertion and suggest that once the Nazi's rose to power their subsequent action could not be deemed terrorism but something more evil. So by that definition are the Israeli government's actions more evil than terrorism and deserve a different label?

The label you're looking for is called war crimes.

Irish Praetorian

paulmcshane wrote: »

You mean it doesn't fit your definition of terrorism.

Considering there is no binding legal definition of terrorism it will have to suffice - why what is your definition?

bumper234

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

B
We have a separate category for when states behave like terrorist groups, its called war crimes.

So why would Israel as America to stop any investigations into war crimes committed by the IDF? In your own words war crimes = terrorism right?

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/08/07/report-netanyahu-asks-us-lawmakers-to-help-israel-avoid-war-crimes-charges/

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is reportedly urging U.S. lawmakers to protect his country from Palestinian claims that Israel engaged in “war crimes” during recent Gaza fighting that left nearly 1,900 Palestinians dead.

Tuisceanch

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

The label you're looking for is called war crimes.

Are you saying that Israel is guilty of war crimes?

Irish Praetorian

bumper234 wrote: »

So everything that Israel is doing?

What was the name of your previous account? Some of the pro Israeli people made so many it's no wonder they forgot the passwords to them all :rolleyes:

If you are under the impression that I am a sock puppet feel free to contact an admin.

bumper234

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

If you are under the impression that I am a sock puppet feel free to contact an admin.

Sock puppet no,

Re reg? Maybe

Will i report you? No......these accounts never seem to stay around too long anyway, once their usual lies and BS is exposed they seem to disappear for some strange reason.

Back to the point at hand, Are Israel guilty of war crimes for the barbaric bombardment of innocent civilians?

Tuisceanch

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Oh, no I don't believe the piece is lying, although I might be interested to know where it bases some of its factual claims, particularly the AI claim about the remote chances of Israel not being involved.

Ok so you don't think they are deliberately fabricating the facts to suit their agenda but you remain unconvinced by their conclusion. In order to be fair to all sides then we should apply the same degree of healthy scepticism towards all reported facts. For instance are we to believe that Hamas was responsible for the breaking of the most recent ceasefire or should we question why we are supposed to accept the Israeli assertions as the truth and nothing but the truth.

RustyNut

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Generally speaking I would understand it as non-state actors engaging in acts of mass destruction or organized violence to achieve political aims.

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

We have a separate category for when states behave like terrorist groups, its called war crimes.



.

Well on the bases that Israel engaged in acts of mass destruction and organised violence against the civilian population of Gaza to achieve the ultimate political goal of zionism, that of a jewish homeland on all of the palestinian lands then i'm sure you will join the call for a full and thorough independent inquiry into the war crimes alleged against the state of israel.

Irish Praetorian

bumper234 wrote: »

So why would Israel as America to stop any investigations into war crimes committed by the IDF? In your own words war crimes = terrorism right?

Tuisceanch wrote: »

Are you saying that Israel is guilty of war crimes?

I would suspect and I dare say the media reports we have all seen corroborate that. The problem being I don't think bringing up government or senior military figures in Israel on charges of war crimes is going to A. detract from the reality that such measures will likely continue for as long as there is an occupation and no peace treaty and B. achieve any pragmatic result apart from triggering a 'go for broke' reaction in Israeli society, which sheared utterly of the pretence that it is acting purely in legal and defensive terms, may well employ measures more fully deserving of the titles genocide and war crimes. Remember we are dealing with a state which if it decided to enact a full genocide of Palestine tomorrow, we would not be able to stop even with the support of country in the world. I much prefer to smile and nod at Israel, coaxing it toward a free Palestine, than decry it as a villain, lest we make the idea of true villainy irresistible to them.

bumper234

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I would suspect and I dare say the media reports we have all seen corroborate that. The problem being I don't think bringing up government or senior military figures in Israel on charges of war crimes is going to A. detract from the reality that such measures will likely continue for as long as there is an occupation and no peace treaty and B. achieve any pragmatic result apart from triggering a 'go for broke' reaction in Israeli society, which sheared utterly of the pretence that it is acting purely in legal and defensive terms, may well employ measures more fully deserving of the titles genocide and war crimes. Remember we are dealing with a state which if it decided to enact a full genocide of Palestine tomorrow, we would not be able to stop even with the support of country in the world. I much prefer to smile and nod at Israel, coaxing it toward a free Palestine, than decry it as a villain, lest we make the idea of true villainy irresistible to them.

So we should just let them away with the continued war crimes?

Irish Praetorian

bumper234 wrote: »

So we should just let them away with the continued war crimes?

I've spoken at length for quite a bit here so I might as well return the favour - what do you imagine we're going to 'do' or can 'do' towards them?

Irish Praetorian

bumper234 wrote: »

Sock puppet no,

Re reg? Maybe

Will i report you? No......these accounts never seem to stay around too long anyway, once their usual lies and BS is exposed they seem to disappear for some strange reason.

Back to the point at hand, Are Israel guilty of war crimes for the barbaric bombardment of innocent civilians?

Do not be shy about reporting me.

Tuisceanch wrote: »

Ok so you don't think they are deliberately fabricating the facts to suit their agenda but you remain unconvinced by their conclusion. In order to be fair to all sides then we should apply the same degree of healthy scepticism towards all reported facts. For instance are we to believe that Hamas was responsible for the breaking of the most recent ceasefire or should we question why we are supposed to accept the Israeli assertions as the truth and nothing but the truth.

RustyNut wrote: »

Well on the bases that Israel engaged in acts of mass destruction and organised violence against the civilian population of Gaza to achieve the ultimate political goal of zionism, that of a jewish homeland on all of the palestinian lands then i'm sure you will join the call for a full and thorough independent inquiry into the war crimes alleged against the state of israel.

Now I think I deal with these issues in my above post so I will let you respond there.

RustyNut

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I've spoken at length for quite a bit here so I might as well return the favour - what do you imagine we're going to 'do' or can 'do' towards them?

Boycott all israeli goods. International sanctions would be a good next move followed by some war crimes trials for those accused of offences.

Or we could just smile benignly at them and let them carry on.

Irish Praetorian

RustyNut wrote: »

Boycott all israeli goods. International sanctions would be a good next move followed by some war crimes trials for those accused of offences.

Or we could just smile benignly at them and let them carry on.

So the first thing you would do is sink all differences between Israelis by targeting them indiscriminately as settlers and criminals? OK and when Israeli switches markets to states less concerned by civil rights campaigns such as say Russia? What then?

War crimes trials, how do you get the accused out of Israel into the Hague?

Moreover, what do you do when an Israel now faced without the prospect of losing trade with 'us' (already lost), decides it has no further need of appeasing public opinion, and decides to turn the West Bank and Gaza into Lebensraum 2.0?

RustyNut

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

So the first thing you would do is sink all differences between Israelis by targeting them indiscriminately as settlers and criminals? OK and when Israeli switches markets to states less concerned by civil rights campaigns such as say Russia? What then?

War crimes trials, how do you get the accused out of Israel into the Hague?

Moreover, what do you do when an Israel now faced without the prospect of losing trade with 'us' (already lost), decides it has no further need of appeasing public opinion, and decides to turn the West Bank and Gaza into Lebensraum 2.0?

Is your argument that we should leave the terrorist state of israel alone because although it is willing to slaughter thousands of civilians, if the civilised world attempt to curb their behaviour then the israeli state will get worse? How?

Irish Praetorian

RustyNut wrote: »

Is your argument that we should leave the terrorist state of israel alone because although it is willing to slaughter thousands of civilians, if the civilised world attempt to curb their behaviour then the israeli state will get worse? How?

By slaughtering hundreds of thousands (or more likely driving them across the Jordan or desert, mostly likely to the same effect) - see when law and order breaks down you get militia groups, settlers with guns etc. Its not the states themselves that tend to orchestrate the killings these days, its people who think they have a free hand and can do what they please, its how it happened in Bosnia, in Abkhazia, in Sudan, and I don't think we should be trying to replicate the circumstances in Israel. So my question stands to you, what do we do?

evo2000

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Do you really imagine that Israel is happy to be rocketed without interruption from Gaza and only react once every few years because it suits some 'Western Agenda'? Incidentally if you could expand on what exactly that agenda is I would be grateful. Also it might be some consolation to know that even if America and the EU turned around tomorrow and decided to employ all their resources to curbing Israel, it still wouldn't be a foregone conclusion what would happen.

However to simply reduce Israeli operations to being ethnic cleansing for the purposes of obtaining additional land is simply flying in the face of the facts. For one thing the Palestinian population is not only growing, but growing at a faster rate than the Israeli one. Secondly, if Israel had wanted empty land they were well placed to simply drive out the local population when they first gained control of the area in 1967, just as Turkey did with the Greeks of Northern Cyprus in 1974, or as the Armenians did to the Azeris in the 1990s. The price of course that Israel has to pay for failing to display the same barbarity and cruelty as several other states in its neighbourhood is now is obvious but at any rate you can't really say they are doing a good job of 'getting rid' of the Palestinians.

They are Barbaric there killing innocent men, women and children by the droves, there response is completely disproportionate to these rockets that arent a threat because of there defence system,

Do they deserve to be rocketed ? no ,are they bringing it on themselves? 100% yes you cant treat people the way they are treating the Palestinians, and not expect a response, that treatment simply breeds hate.

You say they dont want the land? thats funny because Gaza gets smaller and smaller and smaller thats a fact, whos taking the land?

Id imagine it wouldnt look too favorble on jews if they went out and just out right wiped them out, when they can just provoke attacks through being cruel and then simply call it self defense.

Imagine someone from your housing estate threw a stone at my house, and i didnt know who it was but i knew whoever it was came from there, so i level the entire estate and kill hundreds, as a response thats the same scale israel is working on.

As for western agenda i think its fairly obvious, why do you think america donates so much to israel in the way of arms and weapons?

bumper234

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

By slaughtering hundreds of thousands (or more likely driving them across the Jordan or desert, mostly likely to the same effect) - see when law and order breaks down you get militia groups, settlers with guns etc. Its not the states themselves that tend to orchestrate the killings these days, its people who think they have a free hand and can do what they please, its how it happened in Bosnia, in Abkhazia, in Sudan, and I don't think we should be trying to replicate the circumstances in Israel. So my question stands to you, what do we do?

And this would be allowed :rolleyes:

RustyNut

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

By slaughtering hundreds of thousands (or more likely driving them across the Jordan or desert, mostly likely to the same effect) - see when law and order breaks down you get militia groups, settlers with guns etc. Its not the states themselves that tend to orchestrate the killings these days, its people who think they have a free hand and can do what they please, its how it happened in Bosnia, in Abkhazia, in Sudan, and I don't think we should be trying to replicate the circumstances in Israel. So my question stands to you, what do we do?

Iv given my answer Boycott sanctions and war crime tribunals.
Do you think these people should not be brought to justice because it will be hard to do?

Im glad we agree on one thing and that is the potential for outright slaughter by the terrorist zionists. Their willingness to impose death and suffering on innocent people seems endless.

Little CuChulainn

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Now once the Nazi party assumed controlled over the German apparatus of state you're dealing with a whole new level of evil; discriminatory racial laws, systematic extermination of ethnic, religious, sexual, political and other groups, war crimes pertaining to the treatment of prisoners and occupied populations (which is in my view a far better area for comparison) - a whole new and far more terrifying level of evil, but it doesn't really fit the title of terrorism.

Much like the present day Israeli government

Irish Praetorian

evo2000 wrote: »

They are Barbaric there killing innocent men, women and children by the droves, there response is completely disproportionate to these rockets that arent a threat because of there defence system,

Do they deserve to be rocketed ? no ,are they bringing it on themselves? 100% yes you cant treat people the way they are treating the Palestinians, and not expect a response, that treatment simply breeds hate.

You say they dont want the land? thats funny because Gaza gets smaller and smaller and smaller thats a fact, whos taking the land?

Id imagine it wouldnt look too favorble on jews if they went out and just out right wiped them out, when they can just provoke attacks through being cruel and then simply call it self defense.

Imagine someone from your housing estate threw a stone at my house, and i didnt know who it was but i knew whoever it was came from there, so i level the entire estate and kill hundreds, as a response thats the same scale israel is working on.

As for western agenda i think its fairly obvious, why do you think america donates so much to israel in the way of arms and weapons?

We moved on from a lot of this but just to take up a few of your points:

I don't believe Gaza has shrunk much since 1948, as a matter I believe some Israeli settlements were ripped out tooth and nail, what exactly makes you think t othe contrary?

They don't deserve to be rocketed but they are bringing it on themselves? Is there no contradiction there? For the record my response has been Israeli actions in Palestine make them a target but Gaza is doing nothing but hurting itself by launching these rocket attacks.

As for American Agenda, well part of me thinks they give so much money to Israel for the same reason they give so much money to its neighbours Egypt and Jordan - they much prefer a relatively peaceful Middle East to one torn up by war. Now of course with Israel there are clearly strong ties between the two countries, the US certainly enjoys having military bases in Israel for one, but there are other factors at play. For one thing, 80% of US aid toward Israel goes straight back to the US in the form of contracts for the purchase of American military equipment, its why Ron Paul dubs it 'corporate welfare'. If it is any consolation more Americans, particularly younger ones, are disgusted by their actions, and quite a few are aware of the benefits of dumping Israel as an ally - I'm just not quite convinced that such a development will have positive implications.

Irish Praetorian

bumper234 wrote: »

And this would be allowed :rolleyes:

What do you imagine would be done to stop it? Have we succeeded in stopping the exact same happening in Syria or Iraq?

RustyNut wrote: »

Iv given my answer Boycott sanctions and war crime tribunals.
Do you think these people should not be brought to justice because it will be hard to do?

Im glad we agree on one thing and that is the potential for outright slaughter by the terrorist zionists. Their willingness to impose death and suffering on innocent people seems endless.

I don't think its worth the price to bring people to justice for the slaughter of 2,000, by precipitating the slaughter of 200,000. This is not a pleasant world we live in and these are the realities we have to face.

bumper234

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

What do you imagine would be done to stop it? Have we succeeded in stopping the exact same happening in Syria or Iraq?



I don't think its worth the price to bring people to justice for the slaughter of 2,000, by precipitating the slaughter of 200,000. This is not a pleasant world we live in and these are the realities we have to face.

So Israeli soldiers should be allowed to get away with war crimes even as Israel hunts down 90 year old German soldiers :rolleyes:

Irish Praetorian

bumper234 wrote: »

So Israeli soldiers should be allowed to get away with war crimes even as Israel hunts down 90 year old German soldiers :rolleyes:

I'm sorry but my question was that are you going to do to stop it?

Now as for not liking how the real world works, yeah it sucks, that is sadly the way of it.

bumper234

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I'm sorry but my question was that are you going to do to stop it?

Now as for not liking how the real world works, yeah it sucks, that is sadly the way of it.

Do you think the world would stand by as Israel slaughtered 200,000 people? Are you really that delusional.to.think that they could just kill.that many with out consequences?

Irish Praetorian

bumper234 wrote: »

Do you think the world would stand by as Israel slaughtered 200,000 people? Are you really that delusional.to.think that they could just kill.that many with out consequences?

I'm sorry, have you not been following events in Syria? Again, what are you going to do about it?

evo2000

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

We moved on from a lot of this but just to take up a few of your points:

I don't believe Gaza has shrunk much since 1948, as a matter I believe some Israeli settlements were ripped out tooth and nail, what exactly makes you think t othe contrary?

They don't deserve to be rocketed but they are bringing it on themselves? Is there no contradiction there? For the record my response has been Israeli actions in Palestine make them a target but Gaza is doing nothing but hurting itself by launching these rocket attacks.

As for American Agenda, well part of me thinks they give so much money to Israel for the same reason they give so much money to its neighbours Egypt and Jordan - they much prefer a relatively peaceful Middle East to one torn up by war. Now of course with Israel there are clearly strong ties between the two countries, the US certainly enjoys having military bases in Israel for one, but there are other factors at play. For one thing, 80% of US aid toward Israel goes straight back to the US in the form of contracts for the purchase of American military equipment, its why Ron Paul dubs it 'corporate welfare'. If it is any consolation more Americans, particularly younger ones, are disgusted by their actions, and quite a few are aware of the benefits of dumping Israel as an ally - I'm just not quite convinced that such a development will have positive implications.

Gaza hasnt shrunk much?

You re splitting hairs now, man and i wont be drawn on it, i just think alot of what youre saying is baseless and i disagree with it.

You can put a pro Israeli spin on it as much as you d like it but at the end of the day alot innocent people are being butchered by Israel and thats what matters.

Nodin

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

So the first thing you would do is sink all differences between Israelis by targeting them indiscriminately as settlers and criminals?

It was good enough for South Africa.

RustyNut

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

What do you imagine would be done to stop it? Have we succeeded in stopping the exact same happening in Syria or Iraq?



I don't think its worth the price to bring people to justice for the slaughter of 2,000, by precipitating the slaughter of 200,000. This is not a pleasant world we live in and these are the realities we have to face.

So you agree it would suit the zionist cause to slaughter 200,000 people to achieve their goal and only international opinion and action holds them back from the "final solution"

Irish Praetorian

evo2000 wrote: »

Gaza hasnt shrunk much?

You re splitting hairs now, man and i wont be drawn on it, i just think alot of what youre saying is baseless and i disagree with it.

You can put a pro Israeli spin on it as much as you d like it but at the end of the day alot innocent people are being butchered by Israel and thats what matters.

Yes it hasn't shrunk much, you are welcome to disagree with me, you are welcome to say I'm putting a pro-Israeli slant on it, but this is a factual point which has only one answer and that is since 1948 the borders of Gaza (which incidentally were earmarked under the UN partition plan as being quite a bit larger) have not changed.

Tuisceanch

bumper234 wrote: »

So Israeli soldiers should be allowed to get away with war crimes even as Israel hunts down 90 year old German soldiers :rolleyes:

Much commentary suggests that the Israeli government are a little nervous at the prospect that the Palestinian representatives will take the matter of war crimes to the ICC. The US is reported to have being more than slightly miffed at the behaviour of the Israelis during the recent peace talks and has intimated that they may not provide the usual backing to prevent this outcome. It is this scenario which is considered a potential negotiating chip for a future round of negotiations. However many commentators have made the point that the necessary proof required to make the accusation of war crimes stick is necessarily difficult to obtain. The recent reports that Amnesty and Human Rights Watch were denied access to Gaza and the fact that the Israeli government has made a point that the requisite military expertise is not available to assess those claims suggests that they are mindful of this fact.

Irish Praetorian

Nodin wrote: »

It was good enough for South Africa.

Together with two overseas wars, the fall of Communism and subsequent collapse in Western support and the liberal tradition of the Cape - people tend to forget those bits...

evo2000

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I'm sorry but my question was that are you going to do to stop it?

Now as for not liking how the real world works, yeah it sucks, that is sadly the way of it.

The allies should have just said the same to the jews during the holocaust sorry! thats just the way of it, reality an all that!

Oh wait but they didnt because what was happening was morally wrong innocent people being killed for no reason.

Irish Praetorian

RustyNut wrote: »

So you agree it would suit the zionist cause to slaughter 200,000 people to achieve their goal and only international opinion and action holds them back from the "final solution"

Well we are back in part to the question of Zionism, if you mean do I imagine that your average Israeli is filled with joy at the prospect of expelling the Palestinians across the Jordan, I don't think so. However there is a significant settler community within Palestine proper, which under the correct circumstances, such as a collapse of the Western stake in the state, could quite easily mobilize and precipitate the kind of ethnic cleansing we observed in Bosnia and Sudan. Again, people frequently forget, it wasn't the state forces in these conflicts which undertook the gruesome actions, but locally supposed militias manned by people on the ground - these forces don't have the discipline or the cares that regular military forces do.

Tuisceanch

evo2000 wrote: »

The allies should have just said the same to the jews during the holocaust sorry! thats just the way of it, reality an all that!

Oh wait but they didnt because what was happening was morally wrong innocent people being killed for no reason.

The historical record doesn't show that before,during or after the war the allies had acted in the interests of the Jewish people. The plight of the survivors after the war was not pleasant and they were not offered safe refuge in the US or other western countries and their migration to Palestine was stymied by the British navy mindful of their government's concerns that such migration could destabilse the region. We should not attempt to paint history in a rosy light which it does not deserve.

Irish Praetorian

evo2000 wrote: »

The allies should have just said the same to the jews during the holocaust sorry! thats just the way of it, reality an all that!

They did, and most couldn't believe what was going on until it was too late.

Oh wait but they didnt because what was happening was morally wrong innocent people being killed for no reason.

The allies didn't intervene when Jews were first expropriated from Germany, nor when Germany conquered Austria, the Sudetenland, Czechoslovakia and Memel and did the same there. They intervened when they invaded Poland, and the Soviet Union intervene only when it too was invaded. Now we are lucky that the Axis forces didn't win the Second World War, but it was not a war on the Holocaust by any means.

WinnyThePoo

IDF showing care? News to me.

Irish Praetorian

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

IDF showing care? News to me.

You should try looking at some of the worlds more 'unscrupulous' military forces - I would reccomend the Janjaweed of Sudan, the Army of Republika Srpska, the Abkhazian irregulars, or these charming individuals called the Islamic State.

evo2000

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

You should try looking at some of the worlds more 'unscrupulous' military forces - I would reccomend the Janjaweed of Sudan, the Army of Republika Srpska, the Abkhazian irregulars, or these charming individuals called the Islamic State.

The fact that you have to compare the IDF to some of the most brutal ruthless forces on the planet to make it look some what civil says it all really.

RustyNut

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Well we are back in part to the question of Zionism, if you mean do I imagine that your average Israeli is filled with joy at the prospect of expelling the Palestinians across the Jordan, I don't think so. However there is a significant settler community within Palestine proper, which under the correct circumstances, such as a collapse of the Western stake in the state, could quite easily mobilize and precipitate the kind of ethnic cleansing we observed in Bosnia and Sudan. Again, people frequently forget, it wasn't the state forces in these conflicts which undertook the gruesome actions, but locally supposed militias manned by people on the ground - these forces don't have the discipline or the cares that regular military forces do.

So these militant zionists and their constant threat of and willingness to use terrorism to achieve their political goals are the real problem not the people of Gaza or who they elect. Should we just appease these terrorists because of a threat of violence.

Should we extend the same courtesy to isis, ignore it while they behead innocent men women and children because they threaten to kill even more innocent people if someone attempts to save the inocents?

Irish Praetorian

evo2000 wrote: »

The fact that you have to compare the IDF to some of the most brutal ruthless forces on the planet to make it look some what civil says it all really.

Yes and what it says is, it could be a heck of a lot more bloody, more violent and more destructive.

evo2000

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Yes and what it says is, it could be a heck of a lot more bloody, more violent and more destructive.

Oh ok so ! once its not Isis level of violence its ok to butcher innocent people, come on man you cant really believe half the stuff your saying lol

Irish Praetorian

RustyNut wrote: »

So these militant zionists and their constant threat of and willingness to use terrorism to achieve their political goals are the real problem not the people of Gaza or who they elect. Should we just appease these terrorists because of a threat of violence.

Appease I'm not so certain about, but making sure your actions don't precipitate their strengthening is a very wise course of action. It's not a particularly pleasant prospect having to sit back and watch these events, but its far better than involving yourself and making the situation worse.

Should we extend the same courtesy to isis, ignore it while they behead innocent men women and children because they threaten to kill even more innocent people if someone attempts to save the inocents?

Something tells me we won't have a 293 page discussion about how terrible the IS are (used to be called ISIS, now IS, I preferred ISIS myself) and how we must intervene and do something about them.

Irish Praetorian

evo2000 wrote: »

Oh ok so ! once its not Isis level of violence its ok to butcher innocent people, come on man you cant really believe half the stuff your saying lol

What was it you were going to do about them again?

paulmcshane

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Considering there is no binding legal definition of terrorism it will have to suffice - why what is your definition?

Roughly the same as yours, but I certainly wouldn't differentiate between the actions of a non state faction or the leadership of a supposedly westernised democratic country. In doing so, you would seem to think murdering children is a terrorist act if perpetrated by Al-Qaeda but not if committed by the IDF.

Utter nonsensical train of thought in my opinion.

WinnyThePoo

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

What was it you were going to do about them again?

There is a thread here buddy

62 pages and counting

Have a gander

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057265918&page=62

RustyNut

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

What was it you were going to do about them again?

Do you think that Israel and the IDF should be held responsible for any war crimes that were committed, weather that is a realistic prospect or not?