 |
| |
|
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by axi
Ned:
Funny thing for you to mention the KLA in this case, since your argument provides the best excuse ever to Milosevich's troops, who, if the KLA killed a policeman, would be justified to shell Albanian villages. Is it or is it not the same situation? Yet I don't see any NATO aircraft bombing Tel Aviv...
|
Axi, I never argued that killing a policeman would justify shelling a villiage, as we saw happen in Syria. (And, BTW, were you calling for Assad's head for that one?) I was just trying to point out by analogy that Israel's only solution for a motar attack on its settlers was something other than complete withdrawal from Gaza.
Gaza presents Israel with a major problem. It is density populated so any military action whatsoever will undoubtedly cause civilian casualties. But to do nothing in the face of motar attacks from Gaza is also an unacceptable alternative.
Hamas is also to blame for the civilian casualties. If they launch attacks from Gaza and take refuge in densely populated neighborhoods, they deliberately place the lives of the residents of Gaza in danger. This is why such actions by combatants are outlawed by Geneva conventions.
I think it is appropriate here to condemn Hamas for the motar attack on civilians, condemn them for taking refuge in densely populated civilian areas, call for Israel to use less firepower in attempting any arrests, and condemn Israel for what appears to be a significant number of civilian casualties in the current operation.
But more than this. The UN should take a position on Hamas and other terrorist groups killing Israeli civilians. It should not only condemn the acts of terror, but pledge to arrest and try for war crimes those responsible, including their leadership. It should call for a UN force to go into Palestine to replace the Israeli's for the purpose of arresting terrorists and preventing further acts of terror.
As to the composition of the force, I nominate the Dutch to lead the effort. I especially would like to see Saint Marcus lead the squad of Dutch commando's into Hamas' HQ to make the arrest of the Hamas leader. Wouldn't that be poetic justice for his constant condemnation of the Israeli's?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chris 62
|
 |
But I'm feeling MUCH better now
Jan 2001
time: 00:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Frogger
He doesn't usually defend it, though...  |
I never do normally, that's why when I write articles, I have an editor. 
I find it funny that long after all of that was resolved, Tuby and others brought it up again! 
As for dear Boris, at least I don't link dozens of hearsay articles and claim that proves my case, as someone named for a Russian national hero is want to do.  
I can wear my dunce cap happily, because this thread didn't degenerate into the norm, and is actually still interesting.
Now, on to a post for me:
Axi, I can understand that being a Communist, you have a differing viewpoint, but fascism (<--Spelled corectly to avoid any more abuse!) and Zionism are not even remotely the same, fascism was started by an idiot Italian years after Zionism was born, and the Zionist wanted a Jewish homeland in their ancestrial home, not an Empire based on former glories.
Also, Israel is not a one party dictatorship, as the fascists were, it's a democracy.
Calling a jew a Nazi or fascist is both hurtful AND inaccurate all at the same time.
If they REALLY were similar, the Jews would level any city that dares to oppose them, and nothing world opinion says could change that.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:22
|
|
From Haaretzdaily.com
quote:
Always a fighter, always a terrorist
By Amira Hass
These are the rules of war as laid down over the last two years:
A Palestinian is a terrorist when he attacks Israeli civilians on both sides of the Green Line - in Israel and the territories - and when he attacks Israeli soldiers at the gates of a Palestinian city. A Palestinian is a terrorist when an army unit breaks into his neighborhood with tanks and he shoots at a soldier who gets out of a tank for a moment, and he is a terrorist when he is hit by helicopter fire and is holding a rifle. Palestinians are terrorists whether they kill civilians or soldiers.
The Israeli soldier is a fighter when he shoots a missile from a helicopter or a shell from a tank at a group of people who gather in Khan Yunis, after the fighter or one of his colleagues fires a shell or a missile at a house - from which the army says a Qassam rocket was fired - and kills a man and woman. He is a fighter when he encounters two armed Palestinians in the brush. The Israeli soldier kills armed people and kills civilians. He kills senior commanders of battalions of murderous terrorists and he kills kindergarten-aged children and the elderly in their homes. More accurately, they are killed by IDF fire. Most accurately, they are killed, claim Palestinian sources.
The security authorities and the legal authorities chase down every single Palestinian terrorist. Hundreds are arrested and interrogated for information about a single person. This is war, but the Palestinians are not arrested as prisoners of war who have immunity from interrogation and trial. Their names are known, every detail of the investigation and the charge sheets against them are open and can be published. If and when a weak investigation actually identifies an Israeli soldier who deviated (meaning he killed or used his weapon improperly, or looted, or abused people at checkpoints), his identity remains concealed. In hundreds of other cases, the army says "we are unfamiliar with the complaint." In thousands of other cases, nobody bothers anymore to ask the IDF.
Thousands of Palestinians are under arrest in detention centers. Israel is a lawful state, but it deals them a more severe punishment than denial of personal liberty: it denies them family visits before their trial. Dozens of other terrorists have been convicted and sentenced to death without ever having been brought to trial. Them and the civilians who are near them. That is self defense by a lawful state attacked by a terrorist entity. Hundreds of Israelis are involved in these extra-judicial executions and are glorified. In the last two years, Palestinians killed dozens of suspected collaborators without trial or after kangaroo courts. That is despicable murder by animals, living in an entity that does not respect the law and human rights.
The Palestinians are expected to obey military orders from the State of Israel, as if they were the laws of a Palestinian state. But the state that imposes those orders and whose army controls the territories, the land, the water resources, is not responsible for the welfare of the Palestinians living in those territories. It need not behave like a normal state, since the Palestinians are not citizens with the right to vote. It need not behave like an occupying power, since the Oslo agreement freed it of that title (in the eyes of the world) when it transferred more than 90 percent of the Palestinian population to administrative control of the Palestinian Authority. The PA became responsible for its citizenry even when it was denied any authority over most of the territory in the West Bank and was unable to put down a water pipe without permission from the Civilian Administration. The PA is still responsible for the welfare and safety of the Palestinians even after its institutions were bombed and destroyed, and tanks and helicopters control the entire area, from within and without.
The terrorists endanger the civilian population by hiding among them so the IDF cannot be blamed when civilians are killed in their homes. The fighters and their personal weapons and tanks are only guests at the settlements and outposts and shoot at the Palestinian civilians whom the terrorists exploit.
The Palestinians are bloodthirsty and have only revenge as their ambition. That is proved by all the demonstrations and public opinion polls that show the Palestinians support attacks. The Israelis, whom public opinion polls showed supported the assassination of Salah Shehadeh even after it also killed 14 civilians, are never bloodthirsty nor want revenge.
The Palestinian disrupts public order when he violates a curfew imposed by the fighters in the tanks and armored jeeps. Such a Palestinian is punishable: tear gas in the best case, shooting in another. The Israeli fighter and his army protect public order and security when they prevent hundreds of thousands of children from going to school and teachers from going to work and patients from going to hospital and farmers from going to their fields and grandmothers from seeing their grandchildren
|
This article expresses well many of my feelings when it comes to the behavior towards Palestinians by the IDF. Though surely the manwill eb classified as an anti-semitic self-hating Jew....
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
CyberGnu
|
 |
of the Virtual Serengeti
Apr 1999
time: 05:22
|
|
quote:
He rather seems bent on promoting endless conflict - for what reason? |
Well, it could be because he hasn't been offered a deal he can accept yet...
If Clinton has forced Israel to abide by the Oslo accord, there might have been grounds for a deal. But as it was, Israel offered less than what was already agreed upon in the Oslo... There is no way he could have accepted that and stayed as a leader of palestine.
But he certainly makes a nice scapegoat.
What was it someone said right after Sharon ordered the latest siege? "If Arafat dies, what will Sharon do then? Order his bulldozer to dig up his grave every time there is a suicide bombing?"
Last edited by CyberGnu on 10-10-2002 at 07:13
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
axi
|
 |
Athens Greece
Sep 1999
time: 07:22
|
|
quote:
It should call for a UN force to go into Palestine to replace the Israeli's for the purpose of arresting terrorists and preventing further acts of terror. |
This would be ideal, but noo, Israel won't have that.
As for the mortar attack on the settlements, do not forget that they should not be there in the first place. The settlements are equivalent to open space, as far as Hamas is concerned. If armed Palestinians tried to move into Israel, what would the IDF do?
Chris62:
quote:
Axi, I can understand that being a Communist, you have a differing viewpoint, but fascism (<--Spelled corectly to avoid any more abuse!) and Zionism are not even remotely the same, |
They may look different because the socio-ideological superstructure is different, but the economic basis is the same.
quote:
fascism was started by an idiot Italian years after Zionism was born, and the Zionist wanted a Jewish homeland in their ancestrial home, not an Empire based on former glories. |
Zionism may have originated earlier, but it matured as a movement paralelly with fascism. The difference is that it wasn't created explicitly to stop the advance of communism, but to express a politically underrepresented minority. Which, once it got away from it's originating society and into the "Promise Land", formed a petty-bourgeois in character nationalist cluster which begun the exploitation of the land of Palestine and of the native populations. Their immediate goal was to achieve statehood. Their next goal was to expand their state. The limits of this expansion are unknown. I've heard that the Zionists claim all the land beween the Nile and the Euphrates as their "ancestral homeland"
quote:
Also, Israel is not a one party dictatorship, as the fascists were, it's a democracy. |
It's the superstructure again. They may be really democratic internally, but in all matters of exterior politics and concerning their stance vs the Arabs, it's the Zionist position that counts and they all support their leader. Mussolini and Hitler did have popular support, much more support than any western party currently has. If threy didn't have popular support, first they wouldn't have gone that far, second we would be calling them militaristic dictatorships, such as Franco's regime was, albeit falsely being called fascist.
quote:
Calling a jew a Nazi or fascist is both hurtful AND inaccurate all at the same time. |
I'm calling the Zionists fascists and Isreal, being dominated by them, a fascist state, but I'm not calling all Israelis and definitely not the Jews in general fascists. Be carefull with the terminology.
quote:
If they REALLY were similar, the Jews would level any city that dares to oppose them, and nothing world opinion says could change that. |
They are much smarter than that. If they did that, they would be toast in a matter of years.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ned
|
|
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:22
|
|
CyberGnu, I had a chance to review the link. Except for the suggestion that the Sec. of State was duped by Barak and that Barak had no intention of making a deal, the facts stated are consistent with what Clinton stated. Arafat insisted on beginning negotiations on his view of the UN resolutions that followed the '48 and '67 wars, but particularly the latter. The latter resolutions would require, under Arab interpretation, that Israel give back to Jordan, Syria and Egypt all the land they occupied as a result of that war in exchange for peace. This would include East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights that Isreal has already annexed. It would also include all the Israeli settlements regardless of size and duration.
Arafat insisted that this demand was just because he had already given up to Israel at Oslo the rest of Palestine - the land occupied by Israel in '48, and presumably Israel itself. He said he sould not be asked to give up any more.
His position, IIRC and not from the article, was that once Israel made these basic concessions, he would be open to discussing land swaps so that Israel could maintain some of the settlements.
On the RoR, he insisted that he did not want even to discuss compensation for Jewish refugees from "other" Arab countries on the basis that this had nothing to do with Palestine. He appeared to be willing to compromise on the actual return of the refugees to Israel, so long as they were compensated for the value of lost property, which was established in the aftermath of '48 to be 1.2 billion pounds sterling, as sum now worth several hundred billion dollars.
Most interestingly, there is no hint, whatsoever, of "viability" as the reason Arafat walked out.
Just a couple of points here. It does not appear that a settlement can be reached with only the Palestinians on the Arab side. The issue of Jewish refugees and the Golan heights has to be part of the equation. On the refugee situation, the net dollar exchange for Israel might actually be zero, but there might be a large flow of money from the other Arab states to the Palestinians (Israel pays Palestinians, Arabs countries other than Palestine pay Israel.)
On the issue of the UN resolutions, there has always been a dispute on whether the UN called for a withdrawal from ALL occupied territory. That was the demand of the Arabs and the Soviets in '67. The SC did not agree to include the word ALL with the specific intent of leaving that issue unresolved.
There is a way out of this dilemma. Israel could simply agree to abide by the '67 resolutions with a reservation on the whether these mean ALL, and with a reservation on previously annexed lands. I think, though, that Israel should pay for the lands it annexed previously, or which it annexes as a result of the new peace treaty. Even the US paid Mexico for California after winning the Mexican War.
In order to grease the skids, the UN should help on the monetary issues with a special assessment to their membership.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
 |
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:22
|
|
quote:
Arafat did negotiate, within his practical limits.
|
LOL
What a great title for: Give me what I want.
quote:
the exploitation of the land of Palestine and of the native populations. Their immediate goal was to achieve statehood. Their next goal was to expand their state. The limits of this expansion are unknown. I've heard that the Zionists claim all the land beween the Nile and the Euphrates as their "ancestral homeland"
|
Why don't you read some actual zionist literature instead of bullsh*tting?
In anycase, it doesn't surprise me a single bit that the Pro-Palestinians are arguing without inspecting the facts. I doubt CyberGnu knows what this thread is about, but he's happy to jump in.
As for the facts:
An Israeli force entered the Gaza strip and attacked an area central to Hamas activity - where most of them live, and where most of their ammunition is made.
As the IDF was leaving, around 3AM, armed Hamas gunmen opened fire on the troops from all the sorrounding buildings. The fire was fiercer than what was experienced in "Defensive Wall" in April.
IDF began returning fire, and called for backup.
A helicopter arrived for backup, began shooting at the gunmen and fired several missiles at the buildings from which the gunmen were firing.
One such missile caused a part of the building's wall to collapse and fall on a crowd beneath the building.
Who was hurt?
Gee, let's see - what people would be gathering in a crowd, at 3AM following an Israeli incursion, and would begin combat against IDF troops?
Would those be civilians or militants?
Would civilians try to get as near as possible to the fighting, and eventually get hurt?
Or is it logical, that if a person tried to get as near as possible to a fight, intended to participate in it?
Then why are so many civilians hurt?
Because Hamas militants ARE civilians, as soon as they put down the gun and take off the bomb-suit. They don't take their guns when they are delivered to the hospitals, where the press can get the impression they are civilians.
But teenagers were hurt!
Teenagers were hurt because teenagers participate in terror. If you haven't noticed, there were several 16, 17 and 18 year old suicide bombers.
how about the woman?
Beats me what a woman has to do in the middle of a prolonged gun battle. I would assume she was the wife of one of the militants, who was shooting from his home window, and was accidentally hit.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-10-2002 19:47
.
|