Israel

Lemming

Originally posted by Hobbes

I don't know something called International Principles. I vow that I'll burn every Palestinian Child will be born in this area. The Palestinian Woman and Child is more dangerous than the Man, Because the Palestinian Child existence refers that Generations will go on, but the man causes limited danger. I vow that if I was just an Israeli Civilian and I met a Palestinian I would burn him and I would make him suffer before killing him. With One hit I've killed 750 Palestinians ( in Rafah, 1956). I wanted to encourage my soldiers by raping Arabic Girls as The Palestinian Woman is a slave for Jews, and we do whatever we want to her and Nobody tells us what we shall do but we tell others what they shall do. - Ariel Sharon, In an interview with General Ouze Merham, 1956

Firstly .. an horrific line of thought that smacks of nazi-esque attitudes

Secondly, I have 4 words word that would sum up what Sharon just said: "genocide and Ethnic Cleansing".

Sand

I've been here all along thank yiou very much Sand. And yes .. a "new low". A deliberate attempt aimed SPECIFICALLY at the mass murder of children. That to me is a new low. And as things stand, they were pretty low anyway.

No, you obviously havent. The palestinians have been doing that every week if not every day for the past 18 months and all we here is "I dont agree with terrorism BUT". I get the feeling that there are two standards. If a palestinian bombs women and children its "terrorism", if an Israeli (remarkable because its the first time Ive heard of an Israeli vigilante group (thats who was reported as carrying it out) carrying out such acts) then its terrorism. Its new alright, but not a new low. The Palestinians have been that low for a long long long long time.

it's about (apparently) the US having a strong allay in the region to protect it's oil interests,

You are aware of course that the Arabs who hate Israel export the oil the US and Europe needs. Youre aware of course that US support of Israel pissess off these Arabs? Youre aware of course that if you were looking for a strong ally in the region to protect your oil interests Israel would be the absolute worst choice?

Though that said maybe you have a point Sand, perhaps the Palestinians and the entire UN are being unreasonable and the US and Israel are the supreme exponents of the 'right way'.

I wouldnt say the Palestinians are being unreasonable. Theyve a right to a just settlement and the UN should try to bring that about. However, the palestinians are being completely unreasonable utilising terrorism - that is not acceptable and the Israelis have a right to defend themselves from terrorism. As for the UN- take a look at the membership of its councils, the human rights one is hilarious to stat of with. A whole host of humane societies, struggling to find a better way to release their citizens unique potential. Pffft.

RE:Sharons 1956 quote
I find that quote evident of a disgusting mentality. A mentality shared by the palestinians terrorists re their victims no doubt. One can only hope that Sharon has mellowed to some degree in the 46 years since he stated that. Since taking power in Israel he has not ordered the rape of arab women or the killing of their children that i know of. The palestinian terrorists on the other hand....

gurramok

I wouldnt say the Palestinians are being unreasonable. Theyve a right to a just settlement and the UN should try to bring that about. However, the palestinians are being completely unreasonable utilising terrorism - that is not acceptable and the Israelis have a right to defend themselves from terrorism. As for the UN- take a look at the membership of its councils, the human rights one is hilarious to stat of with. A whole host of humane societies, struggling to find a better way to release their citizens unique potential. Pffft.

So Sand by your logic, the deaths of the 1000 or so palestianians are justifiable in some way by labelling every one of them terrorists or where they just accidential killings just like the slaughter of those children in Ramallah ?...As far as i can see, the terrorism by Israel is EQUAL to the terror of the suicide bomber....no difference whatsoever. Violence by one side never justifies violence by the other.
One thing why on earth are the israeli army still in the west bank and occasionally gaza, is it just to terrorize the palestinains or maybe it could be oil prospecting or something we dont know of?
*sigh*

Sand

Double sigh. Read the thread. Your problem was addressed under deliberate and accidental.

Hobbes

It's all to do with words.

Not military, targets civilians = Terrorist.
Military, targets military targets and kills loads of civilians = Good guys.

Walk into public place and blow yourself up = Terrorist.
Place bomb in public place to kill a military target and then lie about it when it kills five children = Good guys.

Taking shots at Border patrols = Terrorist.
Stopping people getting to hospitals or fire engines getting to fires by blocking them at the border = Good guys.

Throwing stones at Tanks = Terrorist
Threatening to blow up a house which isn't in Israel, has a terrorist and all his hostages (which are palistinians plus other families living in the building) unless he comes out = Good guys.

Blowing up buses = Terrorist.
Blowing up police stations in an attempt to kill a terrorist who has been jailed but instead killing police men and making it so the terrorist can escape = Good guys.


Now that we have cleared that up please use the correct terms. Thank you.

Typedef

Yes Sand but the issue you consistently duck is, the Palestinian state cannot and should not be held responsable for the actions of militants that do not represent the state. You can't simply label the 'Palestinians' as one plot that is represented by a militant group and act in a unilateral way because of the actions of a minority. Like I say the Israeli army acts in the name of the Israeli government, but as is evident from quotes of Ariel Sharon who you don't view as a terrorist, the Israeli army is an apt representation of Israel and it's governmnet too.


Yes aside from a substancial and powerful Zionist lobby in the US there is an interest in the Suez Canal, in making expiditious flow of gulf oil around the world happen

Suez was a war which now seems hard to understand - an Arab nationalist regime had taken over in Egypt under the charismatic leadership of Gamal Abdel-Nasser, and nationalised the Suez Canal which was then still a key waterway for world trade, especially for the flow of Gulf oil into the industrialised economies of the West.
Nasser also blockaded the Straits of Tiran, Israel's only outlet into the Red Sea. Israel promptly invaded Sinai on October 29, 1956, and the former colonial powers Britain and France joined her in what amounted to an invasion of Egypt.

Read your history Sand.

Lemming

Originally posted by Typedef
Yes Sand but the issue you consistently duck is, the Palestinian state cannot and should not be held responsable for the actions of militants that do not represent the state. You can't simply label the 'Palestinians' as one plot that is represented by a militant group and act in a unilateral way because of the actions of a minority. Like I say the Israeli army acts in the name of the Israeli government, but as is evident from quotes of Ariel Sharon who you don't view as a terrorist, the Israeli army is an apt representation of Israel and it's governmnet too.

Think of it like this Sand. Picture Bloody Sunday. What was the difference between those Soldiers shooting civilians, and the IRA planting a bomb?

The answer is quite simple:

The IRA represent no-one except themselves (and a few misguided idiots). The British Army are supposed to represent law and order and an ENTIRE nation.

Boston

simple fact is both palestin and isreal are responsible for thsi conflict in its presnt form, yes?

yes, now isreali holds nearly all the cards, therefore they control weather or not there will be peace, therefore they hold the greater protion of blame for the continued conflict. its a simple equation. To denie that fact, and then try to warp it so it is the palestinians who have the greater blame is just twisted.

you act as if isreal has no control over this, they do

Odian

Did anyone see that programe a few sundays ago about the palestine and Israel conflict?was very good ,it was an insight into the frame of mind of the palestines,like the mad men up flew the planes into the twin towers,they believe that wrapping themselfves in a few packs of C4 ,to be utmost worthwhile thing and which gaurantees passage to their holy land.Even if their trip to it means killing 20 or 30 innocent civialians

They dont see only the Israelian Goverment and its army the devil but they have been thought that even woman and children are the enemy

yes, now isreali holds nearly all the cards, therefore they control weather or not there will be peace, therefore they hold the greater protion of blame for the continued conflict.

its is quite clearly that they dont,then why are buses still been blown up and people been gunned down in Tel Aviv the other night.It would be quite hard for Israel to bring down the so called freedom fighters/terroists because they live with the people,sure they are the people.All the Israelain Goverment is doing is blowning the crap out of know headquarters,which are already abandoned

Sharkey

Originally posted by Neil3030


Sickening.

We are talking about a nuclear nation that goes into towns with tanks and heavy bombing to combat men armed with the odd rifle or two.

no, we are talking about a people who are attacking another group of people who are murdering innocent civilians at pizza parlours and barmitsvas.

Next time one of those NI dorks blows up a school bus in your neighborhood, remember it is not a terrorist act.

.... Israel are no good guys. Just look at the picture.

Yeah? Your point? Does this picture tell you anything of what happened before?

Boston

Originally posted by Odian
Did anyone see that programe a few sundays ago about the palestine and Israel conflict?was very good ,it was an insight into the frame of mind of the palestines,like the mad men up flew the planes into the twin towers,they believe that wrapping themselfves in a few packs of C4 ,to be utmost worthwhile thing and which gaurantees passage to their holy land.Even if their trip to it means killing 20 or 30 innocent civialians

They dont see only the Israelian Goverment and its army the devil but they have been thought that even woman and children are the enemy

yes i saw that program, and it is isreal thats teaching them that lesson there is no need for propaganda in this conflict.

As for the conflict, yes they hold most of the cards, people are getting blown up as a result of isreali attacks, stop the attaclks and stop the bombings

Boston

Originally posted by Sharkey


no, we are talking about a people who are attacking another group of people who are murdering innocent civilians at pizza parlours and barmitsvas.

Next time one of those NI dorks blows up a school bus in your neighborhood, remember it is not a terrorist act.


Yeah? Your point? Does this picture tell you anything of what happened before?

there for you are allowed to kill and bomb who ever you want, grow up

Sharkey

Originally posted by Boston

As for the conflict, yes they hold most of the cards, people are getting blown up as a result of isreali attacks, stop the attaclks and stop the bombings

A small piece of fact to screw with your fantasies -- the terrorist attacked first. All those school children didn't die because the Israelis decided to send in tanks and soldiers weeks after the kids were killed. All those soldiers and tanks were delpoyed because of the terrorist bombed civilian targets first.

Without trying to sound too harsh -- where do you come that information that you mistake for facts?

Sharkey

Originally posted by Boston


there for you are allowed to kill and bomb who ever you want, grow up

Take a week off and see if you can get at least two brain cells working. If someone is attacking you, you have the right to defend yourself.

The Israelis didn't kill and bomb these people for the exercize -- they went in to clean out known terrorist cells.

Boston

Originally posted by Sharkey

A small piece of fact to screw with your fantasies -- the terrorist attacked first.

you should try and avoid talking out your arse, people might listen to you. A small piece of fact to screw with your fantasies is that this conflict has been goiong on for years, there is no first or second, every attack is a reaction to a reaction to a reaction.

the idea that anybody attacks first is beyond the realms of reality

Boston

Originally posted by Sharkey


Take a week off and see if you can get at least two brain cells working. If someone is attacking you, you have the right to defend yourself.

The Israelis didn't kill and bomb these people for the exercize -- they went in to clean out known terrorist cells.

well they certainly didnt bomb them in an atempt to stop the violence, i know, military atction isnt working, lets try more.

gandalf

Sharkey watch your attitude, discuss the issues and do not personalise the arguement, how many times do you have to be told. If you disagree with him do so civilally.

Boston do not start to personalise this with him/her as well. If he steps out of line I will take action.

Gandalf

Sharkey

Originally posted by Boston


well they certainly didnt bomb them in an atempt to stop the violence, i know, military atction isnt working, lets try more.

Actually, they did bomb them to stop the violence. The same way I would shoot someone trying to kill my family. I would rather not , but the consequences of doing nothing are greeater than the consequences of acting.

Of course, if we adhered to you theory of life, we didn't bomb Germany et al to stop the violence in WWII.

Talking nice to Arafat and his thugs didn't work. The Israeli/Palestinean peace process was totally derailed by Arafat making a last minute demands that the Israelis were never going to agree to.

Peace is preferable to violence, but when you can't have peace, its best to battle from a position of strength.

Sharkey

Originally posted by gandalf
Sharkey watch your attitude, discuss the issues and do not personalise the arguement, how many times do you have to be told. If you disagree with him do so civilally.

Boston do not start to personalise this with him/her as well. If he steps out of line I will take action.

Gandalf

Gandalf -- read carefully -- I didn't start with the smart-a$$ed comments. Boston did. His "grow up" comment was rude and infantile. Now given this, I don't feel especially disposed to "bending over" to any random tool who insults me first just for the sake of civility.

However -- I do appreciate the fact that at least you made a warning to both of us and I will tone the rhetoric given Boston does as well

Typedef

Hey Sharkey.
Have you read any of the arguments in this thread? The reason I ask is because you seem to proport the same tired old mantra.
Israel is responding to the bombing of pizza parlors by a minority of Palestine, by punishing the whole of Palestine and if the Palestinians simply didn't try to resist 'illegal' occupation with 'terrorism' and instead rolled over and played dead, this conflict would be over.

Your logic is astounding in it's utter ignorant intransigence, no matter how much evidence is supplied to the contrary or reasoned argument made, there will 'always' be people who say, 'if you bomb a pizza parlor and you are from ethnic group n, that makes any and all retalitory counter strikes vindicated qed'.
This is known as carte blanche support of something, and carte blanche support of something rarely if ever has good, logical and intellegent reasons bringing intellectual weight to debate.
I might suggest you re-read this thread and take note of the 54 year occupation, the inumerate UN resolutions calling for immediate Israel withdrawal from the West Bank, the billions of US dollars going to fund the occupation and colonisation of Palestine and then ask yourself at exactly which point in time did your views become consistent with carte blanche support of neo-colonialism?

Colonization is necessary if France is to keep its place in the concert of
nations and avoid the ëhighroad to decayí. If it withdraws into itself and
refrains from colonization, other nations will do it instead, but in the name
of less noble values and with less talent. (Jules Ferry, President of French
Colonial Union in spech to the Chamber of Deputies 28 July, 1885)

Sand

Now that we have cleared that up please use the correct terms. Thank you.

Sigh. Read the thread. Your trolling was covered under definition of terrorist.

Yes aside from a substancial and powerful Zionist lobby in the US there is an interest in the Suez Canal, in making expiditious flow of gulf oil around the world happen

Read your history Sand.

I assumed it was general knowledge that the UN resolutions which brought an end to the suez conflict were one of the few instances of US-USSR agreement in support of them. Obviously I was wrong.

Yes Sand but the issue you consistently duck is, the Palestinian state cannot and should not be held responsable for the actions of militants that do not represent the state.

There are two scenarios here. Either Arafat can control the terrorists and refuses to do so for political gain. Or he cannot, which is what you claim. In which case Israel is justified in defeating the terrorists if Arafat cannot/will not. Ideally the Palestinians should deal with the terrorists (As Ireland has done with the IRA) but its quite clear that Araft cannot or will not.

Think of it like this Sand. Picture Bloody Sunday. What was the difference between those Soldiers shooting civilians, and the IRA planting a bomb?

When all else fails use emotive argument tactics.

For your answer there is no difference. While the soldiers claim they were shot at, I dont believe them. Those soldiers were as much terrorists as the IRA. To say their crime was worse because they were Soldiers? I wouldnt agree with that. I await with baited breath your explanation of how Bloody Sunday relates to Israeli attacks on terrorists.
TBH, youre wasting your time with this sort of emotive stuff- unless you can persuade me that the Israeli army go out with the objective of killing as many civillians as possible (like the palestinians do), then I will continue to classify them as an army carrying out milatary operations as opposed to terrorists carrying out terrorist attacks.

Sharkey there is little point engaging with Boston. If I didnt know better Id think he was trolling most of the time.

Israel is responding to the bombing of pizza parlors by a minority of Palestine, by punishing the whole of Palestine and if the Palestinians simply didn't try to resist 'illegal' occupation with 'terrorism' and instead rolled over and played dead, this conflict would be over.

Type, I dont know where to begin. Lets just say that Israel is being a damn sight more selective with its targeting in response to extremely provocative terrorist attacks on civillians. Its sad that you see the only solution for the palestinians is to blow up resteraunts, childrens parties and bar mitzvahs. Tell me, given the effectiveness of these tactics how many more dead before the palestinian victory?
You seem to completely ignore the possibility of ceasing terrorist attacks, negotiating, or failing that waging an actual war, a guerilla war as it would have to be. Very, very sad.

Your logic is astounding in it's utter ignorant intransigence, no matter how much evidence is supplied to the contrary or reasoned argument made, there will 'always' be people who say, 'if you bomb a pizza parlor and you are from ethnic group n, that makes any and all retalitory counter strikes vindicated qed'.

Hilariously ironic. Can you find me that quote by the way? The only thing Im intransigent about is my complete and utter opposition to terrorism. No ""s, no BUTs, no exscuses.

then ask yourself at exactly which point in time did your views become consistent with carte blanche support of neo-colonialism?

Or you might want to ask yourself when exactly did your (undoubtedly well meaning) views become consistent with carte-blanche support of terrorism. Oh wait, "terrorism". Im getting quite good at JPFese.

Lemming

Originally posted by Sand
When all else fails use emotive argument tactics.

For your answer there is no difference. While the soldiers claim they were shot at, I dont believe them. Those soldiers were as much terrorists as the IRA. To say their crime was worse because they were Soldiers? I wouldnt agree with that. I await with baited breath your explanation of how Bloody Sunday relates to Israeli attacks on terrorists.
TBH, youre wasting your time with this sort of emotive stuff- unless you can persuade me that the Israeli army go out with the objective of killing as many civillians as possible (like the palestinians do), then I will continue to classify them as an army carrying out milatary operations as opposed to terrorists carrying out terrorist attacks.

For the love of ...

Stop responding with "witty quips" when all else fails Sand.

I was NOT using emotive arguement tactics, so quite frankly you can take that sanctamonious attitude and stick where the sun don't shine.

What I was trying to do was take an incident from our own history so that we could possibly (if not entirely equate) see the point being put across.

In many ways what the soldiers [at bloody sunday] actually did WAS worse. Not because they were British soldiers, but because they were supposed to represent law and order, and yet they acted like thugs themselves in the name of that law and order, and were then shielded by it.
At the end of the day they were no better than the IRA, but the implications of what they did were far worse.

And THAT is what I am trying to say RE Israel's current strategy. Once again, surplant Israel and the Palestinians with Britian and Ireland. If the British retaliated against Ireland for every IRA action, would it be reasonable? The IRA certainly do not represent this country, but yet they claimed to be "fighting" for us? So would that give the British establishment free-reign to send bombers over Dublin/Cork/Limerick/wherever?? No.

And to a certain extent, the same logic would apply anywhere else. Granted, the Mid-East is alittle more complex than that, but the same basic logic applies. Here we have a supposed "civilised" nation tarring every member of an ethnic group which they displaced with the same brush.

Sand

Lemming you are using emotive tactics. Sorry but you are. The Israeli army is not the Paras. Ireland is not Palestine. Israel is not Britain. Your attempting to use an incident which has little relation to the middle east conflict because yore aware of how emotive bloody sunday is amd thus attempting to trade on any instinctive dislike of Britain.

You go on to confirm that (emotive based arguments) with your next "argument". Are you aware of how *many* times ppl have used that Britian bombing Ireland thing? Seriously?

One more time then: Ireland is not Palestine. Ireland combats the terrorism presented by the IRA. It arrest, convicts and jails terrorists and confiscates their arms dumps, passes on intelligence to the British to prevent terrorist attacks. Ireland happens to be an ally of Britain in combatting the IRA. Palestine is not an ally of the Israelis in combatting terrorism and never has been.

Can you pass the word around the JPF to stop bringing that sorry exscuse for an argument around? Some naive people might actually believe it.

Lemming

Originally posted by Sand
Lemming you are using emotive tactics. Sorry but you are. The Israeli army is not the Paras. Ireland is not Palestine. Israel is not Britain.

Noooo .. I'm not. Did I saw the Israelis were the Paras? Did I say Ireland was Palestine? Did I say Israel was Britain? No. What I was saying was that there were similiarities between the two situations. Maybe not now, but there were all those years ago. So once again .. stop trying to draw emotion into it.

You go on to confirm that (emotive based arguments) with your next "argument". Are you aware of how *many* times ppl have used that Britian bombing Ireland thing? Seriously?

One more time then: Ireland is not Palestine. Ireland combats the terrorism presented by the IRA. It arrest, convicts and jails terrorists and confiscates their arms dumps, passes on intelligence to the British to prevent terrorist attacks. Ireland happens to be an ally of Britain in combatting the IRA. Palestine is not an ally of the Israelis in combatting terrorism and never has been.

See my above post.

Can you pass the word around the JPF to stop bringing that sorry exscuse for an argument around? Some naive people might actually believe it.

]

I am not your messager so you can tell THEM yourself. I am not JPF. Just because I am critiscisinrg Israel's CURRENT policies does not make me JPF. Neither did peopel criticising some of the US' policies re Afghanistan make them anti-US. So once again ... get down of your pious-holier-than-thou horse before you're knocked off it.

bonkey

Seeing as people seem unable to take the most direct of suggestions about civility....

Thread locked.

Thank you for playing.

jc