 sj |
||
|
||
Palestine (continuation)
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Palestine From: GUEST Date: 29 Oct 11 - 11:34 PM I thought guests could not start threads, has there been a policy change ?
-Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: GUEST,Teribus Date: 30 Oct 11 - 04:07 AM "What records show that........? Whose records?" - Stringsinger What an idiotic question - the documented records of that highly biased and ultra pro-Israeli organisation - THE UNITED NATIONS - they good enough for you Stringsinger Odd thing is those "myth" following Palestinian Arabs (excluding Hamas and Hezbollah) who have been attacking, robbing, bombing and murdering the Jewish population of Palestine for about ninety-one years now, have just recently put forward the fiction that they would now be prepared to accept the two-state option originally proposed by the UN based on the pre-Six Day War borders (which in fact were no borders at all because those self same "myth" following Palestinian Arabs did not recognise them) - Damned shame that they didn't do that in 1948 it would have saved everyone a great deal of grief. It does however beg the question that if the deal was no good then why is it acceptable now? The answer of course lies in the Arabs of Palestine's track record on previous agreements, they did not honour those - they will not honour this one. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: GUEST,Teribus Date: 30 Oct 11 - 04:32 AM Apologies - hit the wrong key: Records show that: 1 - The Jews of Palestine accepted this solution and on the ending of the period of the League of Nations Mandate in 1948 declared the existence of their independent sovereign state which they called Israel. - Teribus Elicited the following comment by Don T A somewhat sanitised version of events during that period. Leaving out, of course, the actions of Menachim Begin et al, of "Irgun Zwai Leumi", who were murdering British soldiers with gay abandon and the tacit approval of the aforementioned Jewish community. So much so that Begin, like many other terrorists, went on to lead his country. Funny how apologists for Israeli intransigence gloss over such relatively significant events. Complete and utter red-herring which has nothing whatsoever to do with the UN, or their proposed two-state solution. But in stating the above Don is being very selective himself. From 1920 until 1948 both Jews and Arabs attacked and murdered British troops in Palestine, prior to the start of the Second World War it was predominantly Arabs doing the killing and during the "Great Arab Revolt" (1936 to 1939) the Jews actually helped the British in order to defend themselves. It was only as the British tried to enforce restrictions to immigration that one of the Jewish Defence organisations turned against the British. This mind you comes from the source of a comment on the other "Palestine" thread about the deplorable presence of IDF troops in Gaza. Don T deplores the presence but ommitted to mention the reason for that presence - the indiscriminate firing of over 8,000 missiles, rockets and mortar bombs at Israeli civilian targets from territory that had been handed over to the Arabs of Palestine on the understanding that such attacks would not be launched - (Yet another example of the Arabs of Palestine not being capable of honouring any agreement they enter into). To put the scale of these attacks into perspective in the 2003 US invasion of Iraq there were only 804 missiles fired, there were only 505 bombing missions flown. The fact that the 8,000+ Hamas missiles fired into Israel resulted in so few casualties was pure good fortune, the death toll was low but not for the want of Hamas and their fellow travellers trying to kill as many innocent civilians as possible. Very pleased however to see that Don T does not refute what the UN's records do in fact say - That the Jews of Palestine accepted the 1947-UN Plan and that the Arabs of Palestine rejected it - elect to go to war and you are automatically condemned to accept the consequences. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Lox Date: 30 Oct 11 - 07:22 AM Actually it is prettyt well established by now that the Gaza Massacre of the end of 2008 beginning of 2009 was not the result of a breach of the ceasefire by Hamas, but in fact it was the Israelis who broke it. For a more thorough analysis check out the following lecture by Jewish academic Norman Finkelstein. Finkelstein If Teribus's shouting and impotent machismo intimidate you, Finkelstein is the perfect antidote. Teribus' bark is a lot worse than his bite. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 30 Oct 11 - 09:04 AM How ever would you justify "pretty well established" Lox? In your house? The missiles continued after the cease fire. They were no less deadly because "rogue groups" launched them. Israel was no less justified in trying to prevent them. The blockade did not prevent the import of missiles. They could have imported more of their actual needs instead of missiles. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Oct 11 - 09:06 AM ...elect to go to war and you are automatically condemned to accept the consequences. If that means that you should not be surprised at the the consequences, that may be true enough. If it means that the consequences are justified, it would imply that terrorism is justified in many or even in most of the circumstances in which it takes place. I do not think that Hamas or Al Qaeda would quarrel with Teribus on that particular point, even if they might disagree on the definition of "elect to go to war" some of the time. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: pdq Date: 30 Oct 11 - 11:08 AM It has been mentioned many times, but the League of Nations Mandate was divided is such a way that 77% went to the new country of Jordan, one of the current 20 states of the informal Arab World. Jews were supposed to get a viable homeland, but got only 6.7% of the Mandate's land as inhabited territory for Jews, plus the Negev Desert to control. That is the "home" of the nomadic Beduin and has been an expensive proposition in terms of Israeli money invested. The British Mandate: Overview "In 1920, following the defeat of the Turks, the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and the peace conferences after World War I, the British Mandate for Palestine was created by the League of Nations. The Mandate was international recognition for the stated purpose of "establishing in Palestine a national home for the Jewish people." The area of the Mandate was originally 118,000 square kilometers (about 45,000 square miles). In 1921, Britain took the 91,000 square kilometers of the Palestine Mandate east of the Jordan River, and created Trans-Jordan (later the Arab country of Jordan) as a new Arab protectorate. Jews were barred by law from living or owning property east of the Jordan river, even though that land was over three-fourths of the original Mandate. In 1923, Britain ceded the Golan Heights (another 1,176 square kilometers of the Palestine Mandate) to the French Mandate of Syria. Jews were also barred from living there. Jewish settlers on the Golan Heights were forced to abandon their homes and relocate inside the westerb area of the British Mandate. The total remaining area of the Mandate for Palestine, after these land deductions, was just under 26,000 square kilometers (about 10,000 square miles). The southern part of the Mandate – the desert of the Negev – was also closed by the British to Jewish settlement. The area was inhabited by 15,000 roaming Bedouins, and had no Jewish or Arab settlements in it. The balance of the Mandate, the inhabited part of Palestine, and only the part west of the Jordan, was just 14,000 square kilometers. Jewish immigration was limited by the British from time to time, especially after the periods of Arab riots and severely restricted after 1939. At the same time, Arab immigration was not restricted or even recorded. By 1948, when the State of Israel was founded, 1.8 million people lived the western area of the Mandate, estimated to be 600,000 Jews and 1.2 million Arabs. Following the war between the Jews and the Arabs in 1948, the inhabited areas of the 14,000 square kilometers were divided along cease-fire lines between Israel and Jordan/Egypt. 8,000 square kilometers, or 57% of the reduced area (which is only 6.7% of the original Mandate territory), became Israel. The rest of the area of western Palestine, 5,700 square kilometers of historic Judea and Samaria, was annexed by Jordan – and renamed the West Bank – while 360 square kilometers were occupied by Egypt and called the Gaza Strip." |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: GUEST,Teribus Date: 30 Oct 11 - 12:16 PM Last 24 hours: 40 rockets/mortars fired into Israel from Gaza IDF response - air strikes resulting in the deaths of at least 10 militants. When a "ceasefire" brokered by Egypt is supposed to be in effect. Yet another example of how incapable the Arabs of Palestine are of honouring any agreement entered into. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: bobad Date: 30 Oct 11 - 01:21 PM "The Palestinian president, in a remarkable assessment delivered on Israeli TV, said Friday the Arab world erred in rejecting the United Nations' 1947 plan to partition Palestine into a Palestinian and a Jewish state." Huffington Post |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: pdq Date: 30 Oct 11 - 02:06 PM "... the Arab world erred in rejecting the United Nations' 1947 plan to partition Palestine into a Palestinian and a Jewish state." More correctly stated: "...into an Arab and a Jewish state". There are already 20 states in the Arab World recognized by the United Nations. What was called "Palestine" in the 1920 Mandate is now divided into at least three Arab countries plus Israel. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Lox Date: 30 Oct 11 - 08:44 PM Keith, Pay attention. The assertion was made that Palestinians break their agreements and can't be trusted. This assertion was false. You may twist and turn and filibuster as much as you like as to whatever excuse you think is best, but Hamas stuck to their side of the Bargain. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 31 Oct 11 - 02:36 AM There is no doubt that Palestinians launched anti personnel missile attacks on the ordinary people and children of Israel, from Gaza, in breach of the cease fire, and of international law. You may assert that it was done without Hamas connivance, but not that it is "pretty well established." Most people, like me, believe it had their tacit approval, if not active participation. We know they exert tight control over tunnel imports, because they impose taxes on them. We also know that they have never criticised or condemned a single one of the thousands of launches since signing the cease fire. (And neither has Jim. "Every little helps." Right Jim?) |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Jim Carroll Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:23 AM "right Jim?" Do you really want to add my voice to this Keithy - I'd have thought.... never mind. Bit busy at present, but compared to the massacres (that didn't happen) the well-armed and trained forces with their tanks, and heavy artillery (not forgetting the chemical weapons) against a poorly armed and untrained third world people..... Unlike you and your pro-Zionist apologists, I have sided with nobody and believe (along with the U.N (apart from the US and UNESCO) that a peaceful solution will only be arrived at when the Palestinians are dealt with at the conference table as equals rather than waving bits of paper and hiding behind an ancient pseudo-historical myth to dislodge an entire people from their homeland (starting with the Bedouins - or maybe that was made up as well). In the meantime, as Turpitude has pointed out, everyone has the right to defend themselves, especially against religious fanatics with nuclear capability. Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:41 AM They were not poorly armed nor untrained in 1948. They were the embodied regular armies of 6 [count them ~ SIX] hostile Arab states who all simultaneously invaded the newly declared, UN-authorised, sovereign state of Israel from different directions ~ including the British-trained [by Brigadier Glubb "Pasha"] Arab Legion of Transjordan: & got their backsides well & truly kicked right back out again from Dan to Beersheba by what was indeed a not that highly trained or well armed, but dedicated, defending army all the way from Dan to Beersheba. And they and their pathetic antisemitic sympathisers like Carroll, who wished they had succeeded in rendering the area Jüdenrein, have been squealing like stuck pigs ever since. ~M~ |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:47 AM ... which is not, I say again, to say that Israel in its present form is other than a grievous disappointment to those of us who rejoiced then. We are not rejoicing now at the state, in both senses, that Netanyahu & his like have reduced it to. But they have been driven to it regrettably. As even Carroll-the-Prejudice has admitted {not ignoring his doctrinaire & tendentious qualifications, however} "everyone has the right to defend themselves". |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Jim Carroll Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:58 AM "They were not poorly armed nor untrained in 1948. " No they weren't, but it is no longer 1948 and unless we want our children's children to be struggling with the bloodbaths, it's about time this is recognised. Nobody comes out of this mess with a clean track record and nit-picking about who did what to whom when solves nothing. Do we have to continue this "Carroll-the-Prejudice" "Mike the racist apologist, hypocrite" childishness - it gives these discussions a decidedly schoolyard flavour? But maybe you are more comfortable in your colostomy/flatulent mode! Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Oct 11 - 05:10 AM ---religious fanatics with nuclear capability.--- & he seems to mean Israel here; and there is some truth in the charge ~ hence some of our disappointment: the religious parties are far too influential and sufficiently popular (in a democratic process, do not forget however) to have to be included in any coalition; which is a great shame. BUT they have none of the official standing of the Mullahs in those countries - you know which they are -where Sharia is established by government decree or popular acclaim. When was the last adultress stoned in Israel? Under King David IIRC ~ or perhaps under Pilate; I don't expect the one Jesus rescued was the only one. But that was then: the daily RIGHT NOW stonings and beheadings and amputations and floggings in Riyadh and Dahran and Jeddah have not their counterparts in Tel-Aviv or Haifa. No thanks to Carroll, mind. They would soon be back if he & his antisemitic mates had their way. ~M~ |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Oct 11 - 05:17 AM X-posted "Do we have to continue this "Carroll-the-Prejudice" "Mike the racist apologist, hypocrite" childishness - it gives these discussions a decidedly schoolyard flavour?" .,,. No we don't, Jim; happy to drop it if you are. But, even tho this is no longer 1948, the Sharia-abuses I rubricate above are ongoing in too much of the present Arab world, are they not ~ so-called "Spring" notwithstanding? And do you not even consider the danger of their adoption in any state with a Hamas Hezbollah influence elected by the will of the populace that might be established? |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:15 AM Jim: And let us now try to recover this halcyon time ~~ Subject: RE: BS: Muslim prejudice From: Backwoodsman - PM Date: 27 Feb 11 - 01:41 AM The recent posts by Jim and Michael are a perfect example of how two people with diametrically opposed viewpoints, a firm grasp of the English language and decent writing skills can carry on an intelligent, civilised discussion which, whilst probably never leading to agreement between them, at least stands a chance of coming to a successful accomodation. A pleasure to read. Certain other contributors should also read them.........and learn No reason we cannot recapture that sort of relationship, with a bit of goodwill both ways. Apologies, so far as called for, for my excesses. Shall hope for, and assume, the same from your side. Best ~Michael~ |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Lox Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:32 AM "Most people, like me, believe it had their tacit approval, if not active participation." Funny, because the Israeli ministry of foreign affairs stated that: "Hamas was careful to maintain the ceasefire" and "Hamas enforced the ceasefire on the rogue terrorist organizations with a great deal although not complete success" You will find this at 7.50 in the Finkelstein lecture that you have ignored. So who is making shit up ... 1. The Israeli foreign ministry? 2. A Jewish doctor of political science with special expertise in the Israel/Palestine conflict who earned his doctorate at princeton, whose parents were both Jewish concentration camp survivors (his father was in Auschwitz)? 3. Or Keith? Who do catters know to have the worst track record of making shit up ... Hmmm ..... ... I'm getting a nagging sense of Deja Vu ... this reminds me of a thread about Pakistanis cultural tendency to paedophilia where someone was making shit up ... |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Jim Carroll Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:36 AM "Jim: And let us now try to recover this halcyon time" Would very much apprciate it - as much as we disgree on some issues, I very much value and respect your input on this forum. Really not able to become too invoved in this Traveller talk to write (plus temprmntal keyboard) Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:51 AM -I very much value and respect your input on this forum- ~~ Thank you: & likewise as you know. ~Michael~ |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 31 Oct 11 - 08:21 AM Lox, "Hamas was careful to maintain the ceasefire" and "Hamas enforced the ceasefire on the rogue terrorist organizations with a great deal although not complete success" I listened well past that bit Lox. I would like to know the context of the first quote. Sarcasm? And also the second quote. How can hundreds of missile launches be described as "a great deal" of "success" in maintaining a ceasefire. It is certainly not "pretty well established" as you claim Lox. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 Oct 11 - 08:22 AM A ceasefire in one conflict at any rate... Let's hope it's less fragile than too many other ceasefires. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Lox Date: 31 Oct 11 - 08:50 AM The context of the first quote was a foreign office report. I don't know of foreign office reports from any nation that are written in a sarcastic way. If you are suggesting that the Israeli foreign office writes reports in a sarcastic way, then you are either accusing the Israeli foreign office of being irresponsible and childish or you are ... ... ta daaaa .... ... making shit up to cover your ass. So keith - are you accusing the Israeli foreign ofice of telling lies? |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 31 Oct 11 - 08:54 AM Put up the quote in context Lox and we will see. Jim, how can firing missiles loaded with ball bearings at civilians possibly be construed as "self defence" ??! |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 Oct 11 - 09:36 AM Surely by the same peculiar logic by which the assault on Gaza which led to the death of so many non-combatants was presented as "self defence" by Israel. The two sides seem to have a remarkably similar way of justifying what they do. It's just that one side has far more weaponry and kills far more people. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 31 Oct 11 - 10:31 AM Not the same logic at all. The Israelis claimed that their incursion was in response to the rain of missiles, and did succeed in reducing the number of launches. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Mrrzy Date: 31 Oct 11 - 11:54 AM Hey, we're in! Anybody see the news? And you ad hominem folks, use the other thread, please. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Oct 11 - 11:58 AM Mrrzy ~ out of interest ~ who "we"? |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: MGM·Lion Date: 31 Oct 11 - 12:03 PM ... and who, pray, is going to tell Hamas that indiscriminately firing missiles into populated areas is neither Educational, Scientific, nor Cultural? |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Lox Date: 31 Oct 11 - 12:50 PM You know what Keith, I'll trust the accuracy of a Jewish Doctor of Political science with a list of credentials and peer reviewed research papers as long as as my arm,, whose special expertise is the Israel Palestine conflict over Keith A from Hertford any day of the week. One is a serious, proven and recognized academic, and the other is prone to making mistakes and generalizing about people of various races in a disparaging way. In this case Keith has taken to supporting the view expressed by teribus that Palestinians are untrustworthy people who break agreements. Previously he defended the view that Pakistanis are perverse people with a propensity for pedophilia. I recommend a good watch of the video I posted folks - it is a lot more informative than anythng said by teribus or keith. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 31 Oct 11 - 01:53 PM ""Jewish and Israeli are too very different things."" I agree with that, but I am responding to those who have insisted that Israel is a "Jewish State", indicting their belief that Jews are a racial rather than a religious grouping. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 31 Oct 11 - 03:01 PM Previously he defended the view that Pakistanis are perverse people with a propensity for pedophilia. That is a malicious lie Lox. Your doctor had an agenda, and he may have taken something out of context. I make no claim but would like to see the quotes in context. That is all I said. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: GUEST,mg Date: 31 Oct 11 - 03:23 PM Do the Palestinians have an anthem? That is first order of business if not..something proud but peaceful of course. Singable, beautiful anthems are very important (ours is unfortunately neither). Next..a logo..with olive trees or branches and oranges perhaps. Next..some letterhead. Next an official website, which I presume they must have. Ready for business. mg |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: GUEST,mg Date: 31 Oct 11 - 03:59 PM It seems they ahve a very nice unofficial perhaps anthem..most words are not at all offensive..some are a little militaristic perhaps...this is from the one on you tube with lyrics. There are other songs that are also said to be an anthem that are way more militaristic...hopefully those will nto be used as an anthem. They also need a P.O. (oops...) box somewhere and some flagships registered in other countries. Do they have a soccor team? That always helps. mg |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:07 PM ""Most people, like me, believe it had their tacit approval, if not active participation."" An assertion which you soundly castigated when it was made concerning certain massacres which the Israelis chose not to prevent. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: GUEST,mg Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:08 PM Good news. Soccer team..played Thailand ..first game in 50 years in some regard. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxN8v6-a2cc |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 31 Oct 11 - 04:32 PM ""The fact that the 8,000+ Hamas missiles fired into Israel resulted in so few casualties was pure good fortune, the death toll was low but not for the want of Hamas and their fellow travellers trying to kill as many innocent civilians as possible."" Not only disingenuous, but factually inaccurate. 1. The missiles, having no guidance beyond being pointed in the direction of Israel, cannot be said to be targetted at anything or anybody in particular. They were, in point of fact, so inaccurate that 8000+ managed to cause, I believe, 11 fatalities in about eight years. 2. Unguided missiles would seem to be a very inefficient way of attempting to kill "as many innocent civilians as possible", given the number of willing suicide bombers available. Those missiles for the most part landed in open fields and at best scared a few goats. All in all, hardly sufficient justification for the bloody and violent responses. If you want to bring up the slaughter of large numbers of innocent civilians, take another look at those responses. I would be less disgusted if Israel were just once to express regret for that collateral damage, but all I hear is excuses and rationalisations for the (so called) "necessity". Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 31 Oct 11 - 05:19 PM The missiles were accurate enough to aim at towns, and they all were. They have killed and maimed people of all ages. No country on earth would allow that to happen without taking action. The number of Jews killed (not "Zionists" just Jews) is not large compared to the number of missiles fired, but as Jim put it, "every little helps." |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: GUEST,Teribus Date: 31 Oct 11 - 05:35 PM Don T I am impressed with the equanimity and total disregard to safety, of not only yourself but your family and loved ones, you would undoubtedly display in the face of such a barrage. Ah but of course Don you are not in the firing line are you, so you can dismiss them as harmless fireworks. The UN don't though do they Don, they decry the firing of these weapons into Israel indiscriminately as a war crime. Tha fact that the death toll is so light as I stated was not for the want of trying on the part of the Arabs of Palestine. The suicide bombers and snipers have been kept from killing Israelis and out of Israel by the Wall and the check points which is why they exist Don. If someone fired even one rocket into the UK (let alone 8,000) I would expect the UK to respond forcibly in such a manner as to deter those responsible from any further firing. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 31 Oct 11 - 05:52 PM From BBC . "Since 2001, when the rockets were first fired, more than 8,600 have hit southern Israel, nearly 6,000 of them since Israel withdrew from Gaza in August 2005. The rockets have killed 28 people and injured hundreds more. In the Israeli town of Sderot near Gaza, 90% of residents have had a missile exploding in their street or an adjacent one. The range of the missiles is increasing. The Qassam rocket (named after a Palestinian leader in the 1930s) has a range of about 10km (6 miles) but more advanced missiles, including versions of the old Soviet Grad or Katyusha, possibly smuggled in, have recently hit the Israeli city of Beersheba, 40km (25 miles) from Gaza and brought 800,000 Israelis into range." Three of the dead were infants, and many of the hundreds of injured are children with life-changing injuries. "Every little helps." |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:17 PM The Israelis claimed that their incursion was in response to the rain of missiles. I can't see how that claim if the Israeli government to have been acting in self defence in response to attacks differs in any significant way from the reasons that would be given by those within Gaza who have fired those missiles. The difference lies in the scale of the violence and the number of civilians who died as a consequence. It's also relevant that the violence from Israel is carried out by government forces, whereas the responsibility for the missiles during the ceasefire is less clear, and the Hamas administration claim to have been trying to stop this happening. (I too would like a source for that quote "Hamas enforced the ceasefire on the rogue terrorist organizations with a great deal although not complete success") |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:28 PM Breaking News UNESCO recognises Palestine as a full member |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 31 Oct 11 - 06:52 PM ""Ah but of course Don you are not in the firing line are you, so you can dismiss them as harmless fireworks."" Much as you dismiss White Phosphorus aimed into civilian areas as "illuminations or smoke screens". Ever had a phosphorus burn T?.........I have, albeit in a laboratory situation, but I can still feel that burning through my wrist to the bone. ""6,000 of them since Israel withdrew from Gaza in August 2005."" So who are all those people still in disputed residence in 2011? ""Three of the dead were infants, and many of the hundreds of injured are children with life-changing injuries. "Every little helps.""" And how many dead or maimed children are there in Gaza Keith, or are they not as important in your scheme of things, as whitewashing anything the IDF does, as justifiable defence? Until people like you stop trying prove that all blame attaches to the Palestinians, and recognise the indefensible ruthlessness of the IDF, progress toward peace remains a pipe dream. At bottom this is the David and Goliath story with Goliath armed with nuclear missiles. As I said earlier, both sides have to want peace for this to end, and it won't happen without compromise on the part of Israel, as well as Palestine. And there is no evidence to support that the word "compromise" is in the Israeli vocabulary. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: artbrooks Date: 31 Oct 11 - 08:50 PM Returning to the original topic, after the UNESCO vote admitting Palestine, the US State Department said that US funds would be withheld: "Today's vote by the member states of UNESCO to admit Palestine as member is regrettable, premature and undermines our shared goal of a comprehensive just and lasing peace in the Middle East," said State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: GUEST,mg Date: 31 Oct 11 - 09:40 PM That is nuts. mg |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: GUEST,Teribus Date: 01 Nov 11 - 01:49 AM WP not used as an incendiary only as smoke (If you are talking about the mnitions used in Gaza December 2008/January 2009) Why was it fired again Don T? Oh yes because Hamas were using their own population as human shields, and deliberately sighting military units in sensitive civilian locations - a war crime, another one that you see fit to ignore. No rockets = No attacks No Israelis killed = No Palestinians killed Hamas founding charter says what about the State of Israel and the Jews? The Israeli constitution says what about the Arabs. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 01 Nov 11 - 02:41 AM Kevin, I can not accept your comparison of the incursion and the missiles. The missiles came first and as indiscriminate attacks on civilians were war crimes and recognised as such by Amnesty and UN. The incursion was launched to attack and destroy the missile facilities, which were cynically sited in densely populated areas, another war crime. In accordance with the Law of Armed Conflict, the Israelis sacrificed the advantage of surprise by giving warnings to residents of the areas where attacks were going to be made. There were no indiscriminate attacks on civilians at all. The smoke is not supposed to be deployed in civilian areas, but Hamas was not supposed to fight from such areas. IDF accepted the local commander was wrong to use it, and should have accepted additional deaths to his own people. If I lost a son or daughter for want of screening from their enemies I might have stronger views. |
|
Subject: RE: Palestine (continuation) From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 01 Nov 11 - 02:46 AM First 100! Don, you posted, ""6,000 of them since Israel withdrew from Gaza in August 2005."" So who are all those people still in disputed residence in 2011? Do you deny that Israel used troops to force all its settlers out of Gaza (at gun point) in 2005? |
| Share Thread: |
