How low can Israeli supporters sink

[DogOnPorch]

The poster here is speaking of an Israeli killed by a Palestinian.

In reality:

13 (THIRTEEN!!!) Israeli's have died in this latest go-round.

900 (NINE HUNDRED!!!) Palestians have died in this lastest go-round.

No wonder the Palestinians keep lobbing their antiquated rockets that never hit anything. They are rightfully pissed.

Anyone in their right mind should realize this.

Antiquated rocket damage.

http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief006-10.htm

----------------------------

It's a Daisy.

[KeyStone]

Indeed......"international law" only applies to Israel.

Name one thing that the UN or international law has actually done to Israel?

I'm not talking about finger-wagging - actual action"?

[KeyStone]

You could also usefully ask why Jordan and Egypt are not expected to slice off some of their land for a so-called "Palestinian state"?

Now, that is a good point.

The other Arab nations seem to argue on behalf of Palestine, but they don't do much for them.

I think that for many of them, they might just use Palestine as a pawn to try to get the 'unclean Jews' out of the holy lands.

[DogOnPorch]

Name one thing that the UN or international law has actually done to Israel?

I'm not talking about finger-wagging - actual action"?

Gave them a country,

-----------------------------------

From Hell's Heart, I stab at thee!

---Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan

[KeyStone]

this is a silly argument so i'm not sure why you're bringing it up. israel is basically saying that they will leave the land once the palestinians stop fighting the occupation and the illegal settlements that continues to increase. very silly. it is obvious that it's just more excuses to stall and to grab more land.

Exactly.

1) Subject people to harsh occupation, while encouraging more Jews to move to Israel and more settlers to move into the occupied territory.

2) Tell the Palestinians that you won't make any concessions until they stop the violence.

3) Block every effort for the Palestinians to have an effective voice, or for conditions in Palestine to be known.

Then either:

4a) If the Palestinians don't do any engage in any hostilities - just ignore them!

4b) If they do engage in any hostilities (no matter how minor) - accuse them of being terrorists and blow the sh*t out of them.

It's like having a boss who says:

"If you hadn't asked for a raise, I would have given you one"

[KeyStone]

Sometimes. Violence is a big word. Pushing someone is violence and might be a reasonable responce to someone how won't get out of your way. Shooting someones kids may not be a reasonable response to someone not getting out of your way.

Blockading Gaza is a reasonable response to preventing someone getting arms to kill your kids.

Negotiating and ending attacks is a reasonable response to ending a blockade.

It kind of seems like a vicious Catch 22.

Israel won't agree to change restrictions and end the occupation unless the attacks stop.

Hamas won't agree to end the attacks unless restrictions are eased and the occupation ends.

It's sort of like a primitive form of E-Bay.

The seller won't send until they get the money. The buyer won't send the money until they get the package.

Somebody has to give.

And of course, all of this needs to happen with the understanding that there will always be some Palestinians who will want to fire rockets at Israel. The important thing is that the government of Palestine acts to stop and imprison the people that do.

The sad part about all of this, is that there is room for happiness on both sides if the end state can be reached, but it seems impossible to get there.

[KeyStone]

Critics of Israel are often quick to insist that they’re not anti-Semitic—just anti-Zionist, anti-“occupation,” or something along those lines. But not these guys: at a protest against Israel in downtown Calgary on the weekend, the Nazi group, the Aryan Guard, showed up to march alongside the Muslims. Of course, the Aryan Guard is honest enough to admit they just plain hate Jews, not bothering to strain themselves with arguments of nuance. They fit right in on Saturday with their posters of Israeli flags defaced with the accusation “Terror State.”

United under the Swastika

Well, first of all, I concede that there are people who hate Jews.

And it is possible that they used the rally as an excuse for Jew-hating.

That does not mean that the majority feel this way, or that the Aryan Guard was supported or encouraged in any way.

In fact, given the fact that there are no pictures, I think it's a safe guess that members of the Aryan Guard who participated were not visible racists. Because, believe me, if they were visible, we'd be seeings lots of photos.

So, all we have is a writer from the staunchly pro-Israeli National Post stating that racists were in attendance.

Big whoop. The organizer of the rally said he told them he didn't want them there.

[segnosaur]

The other Arab nations seem to argue on behalf of Palestine, but they don't do much for them.

How can you say that? Saddam was giving 10s of thousands of dollars to the Palestinians. Of course, it was to support suicide bombers.

And what about all the aid being smuggled into Gaza now from Iran? Of course, its mostly in the form of weapons.

I think that for many of them, they might just use Palestine as a pawn to try to get the 'unclean Jews' out of the holy lands.

You're probably part right. But I think its not so much that they are worried about 'unclean Jews'. I think they're more worried about their own populations. As long as they have Israel as a whipping boy and the plight of the Palestinians, they can abuse their own people. If the situation is ever resolved, people in places like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, etc. might actually start looking at their own living conditions and questioning why they are so poorly treated.

[Shady]

If it wasn't for terrorism, and Israel, liberals would hate Hamas, and have a rather negative opinion of Islam. But for whatever reasons, Israel's so-called occupation trumps Hamas' and Islam's total disregard of freedom and democracy, the complete subjugation of woman, and a total unacceptance of homosexuality, accompanied by the hanging and/or stoning of gays and lesbians. But damn those Jews! Nuke em! Meanwhile in Israel, you have freedom, democracy and human rights for all, women are empowered and equals in society, and gay pride parades are an annual occurance in Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities. It seems to me, that some of the so-called "progressives" in this forum need to do some serious self-examination.

And why are some of you so suprised that innocent woman and children are killed during such hostilities? Hamas uses schools, mosques, and hospitals as weapon depots, and ambulances as transports, and some how you're shocked that the civilians Hamas is hiding behind, end up being injured or killed.

[segnosaur]

Exactly.

1) Subject people to harsh occupation, while encouraging more Jews to move to Israel and more settlers to move into the occupied territory.

2) Tell the Palestinians that you won't make any concessions until they stop the violence.

3) Block every effort for the Palestinians to have an effective voice, or for conditions in Palestine to be known.

Then either:

4a) If the Palestinians don't do any engage in any hostilities - just ignore them!

4b) If they do engage in any hostilities (no matter how minor) - accuse them of being terrorists and blow the sh*t out of them.

Excuse me, but before you claim 4a) is true, could you please point out any time in the recent history of Israel where there have not either been any direct hostilities (e.g. terrorism) or external threats (from countries like Syria, Egypt, etc.) for an extended period (lets say, 3 year).

You keep suggesting that Israel would just ignore the Palestinians if it weren't for the violence. Yet how can you tell? Israel has pretty much always been subject to violence/attacks.

So, once again, when has Israel had an extended (>3 years) period in which it wasn't subject to terrorist attacks and/or external military threats?

[DogOnPorch]

How can you say that? Saddam was giving 10s of thousands of dollars to the Palestinians. Of course, it was to support suicide bombers.

And what about all the aid being smuggled into Gaza now from Iran? Of course, its mostly in the form of weapons.

You're probably part right. But I think its not so much that they are worried about 'unclean Jews'. I think they're more worried about their own populations. As long as they have Israel as a whipping boy and the plight of the Palestinians, they can abuse their own people. If the situation is ever resolved, people in places like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, etc. might actually start looking at their own living conditions and questioning why they are so poorly treated.

I agree. History has shown that throughout the ages, the Jews have been the ideal scapegoat. The Plague was blamed on them by most of Europe which meant they were kicked out of the various kingdoms...which indeed spread the infection. As I'm sure we all know, the bubonic and pneumonic plagues were caused by unclean living conditions, making it ideal for the twin hosts, the flea and the Medieval Black Rat. Very few bothered to take notice that the Jews died at the same rate as everyone else...

----------------------------------------------

I say, then, that the years of the beatific incarnation of the Son of God had reached the tale of one thousand three hundred and forty-eight, when in the illustrious city of Florence, the fairest of all the cities of Italy, there made its appearance that deadly pestilence, which, whether disesminated by the influence of the celestial bodies, or sent upon us mortals by God in His just wrath by way of retribution for our iniquities...

---Giovanni Boccaccio

[Topaz]

You know what, the US arms Israel, the rest of the Middle-East arms Hamas, what so people expect going to happen. There citizens are both sides that just want peace so why not make it illegal to give or sell arms to these two groups?? Have the leader fight it out and save young kids lives!

[KeyStone]

If it wasn't for terrorism, and Israel, liberals would hate Hamas, and have a rather negative opinion of Islam. But for whatever reasons, Israel's so-called occupation trumps Hamas' and Islam's total disregard of freedom and democracy, the complete subjugation of woman, and a total unacceptance of homosexuality, accompanied by the hanging and/or stoning of gays and lesbians. But damn those Jews! Nuke em! Meanwhile in Israel, you have freedom, democracy and human rights for all, women are empowered and equals in society, and gay pride parades are an annual occurance in Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities. It seems to me, that some of the so-called "progressives" in this forum need to do some serious self-examination.

And why are some of you so suprised that innocent woman and children are killed during such hostilities? Hamas uses schools, mosques, and hospitals as weapon depots, and ambulances as transports, and some how you're shocked that the civilians Hamas is hiding behind, end up being injured or killed.

Well, you are right about many of these Arab countries being significantly backwards when it comes to human rights, particularly those of minorities. But prosperity brings with it education - and with education people become much more tolerant. The dictators in Saudi Arabia remain an exception of course - but we love them anyways, because they give us oil, and buy our weapons.

As much as Hussein was criticized, Iraq was actually a very progressive country for that region.

[KeyStone]

Excuse me, but before you claim 4a) is true, could you please point out any time in the recent history of Israel where there have not either been any direct hostilities (e.g. terrorism) or external threats (from countries like Syria, Egypt, etc.) for an extended period (lets say, 3 year).

You keep suggesting that Israel would just ignore the Palestinians if it weren't for the violence. Yet how can you tell? Israel has pretty much always been subject to violence/attacks.

So, once again, when has Israel had an extended (>3 years) period in which it wasn't subject to terrorist attacks and/or external military threats?

Three years is a long time. We could turn that question around. Why doesn't Israel give Palestine its own country for three years?

I think if you examine the most recent ceasefire, between Israel and Hamas, you will see that Hamas actually did a pretty good job of living up to its terms of the agreement. Israel on the other hand did not.

[KeyStone]

You know what, the US arms Israel, the rest of the Middle-East arms Hamas, what so people expect going to happen. There citizens are both sides that just want peace so why not make it illegal to give or sell arms to these two groups?? Have the leader fight it out and save young kids lives!

Well, while I appreciate the intention.

1) It already is illegal to give arms to the Palestinians, but it still gets through.

2) Israel already has its own arms industry so effectively banning the sale of weapons, would essentially mean that only Israel can have weapons.

But hey, I am all for unarmed combat. UFC style.

[Oleg Bach]

Three years is a long time. We could turn that question around. Why doesn't Israel give Palestine its own country for three years?

I think if you examine the most recent ceasefire, between Israel and Hamas, you will see that Hamas actually did a pretty good job of living up to its terms of the agreement. Israel on the other hand did not.

Palistine is no more. Once Israel is done with that place...there will be nothing left. I guess the world finally decided as Israel did...who would have to go - and the Israelites place their bet on Palistine being pushed into the sea..they were right..Israel took a chance to see who would stand up for them and who would stand up for Palistine - I guess it was easier to exterminate Palistine - after all the Jews are protected from holocausts - Palistine is not...good bye Palistine - say hello to a bigger and grander Israel.

[dub]

There has never been an extended period of time when Israel has not been subject to threats, either from conventional militaries (from Syria, Egypt, etc.) or from terrorists. Of course they have no reason to unilaterally grant a palistinian state under attack (or threats of attack).

this is a silly argument so i'm not sure why you're bringing it up.

are you here to make excuses or are you interested in a real and honest debate? israel has had plenty of time and opportunities to allow a palestinian state. likud has voted several times to never allow a palestinian state.

I'm bringing it up because its relevant and the facts support it... and because you seem to be ignorant of said facts...

Something you seem to not understand ... not all Palistinians and Arabs want a 2 state solution with a recognized Israel. Believe it or not. there are a significant number of terrorsts who are not just 'fighting the occupation', but who believe Israel should be destroyed. Eliminated. Wiped off the map. These are not people just fighting the occupation, but these are people fighting to turn all of the area (from the West bank all the way to the sea) into one Arab state.

And those people control the government of Gaza.

there you go pointing fingers at one side and failing miserably to acknowledge the other side's stance. these extremist groups can be found on both sides. it was only recently that sharon finally admitted that they are an occupying force. before that, it was never mentioned. i'm sure you know that there are many israeli groups who oppose the establishment of a palestinian state. many of them are part of the knesset.

majority of palestinians would be okay with a palestinian state living beside an israeli state. majority of israeli people feel the same way.

You know, the Israeli settlements in the West Bank and Gaza are the one main thing Israel has done wrong and which may be illegal.

there you go. we're getting somewhere. there is no "may". the international community, including Canada agrees that the settlements are illegal.

But here's the thing: Israel has already removed its settlements from Gaza. Unilaterally. Not much that the people in Gaza can complain about.

oh no. there you go making excuses again. first of all, 9000 people were removed from gaza but at the same time, more than that amount have been moved into settlements in the west bank. there has been no freeze on the settlements as they've been increasing even after israel agreed to bush's "peace" plan.

As for the other settlements... Israel has taken action to dismantle settlements in the past (e.g. in the Sinai).... no reason to suspect that they wouldn't do so in the future if appropriate agreements are made.

they haven't. just because they remove a few trailers, it doesn't mean it's okay to start large settlement projects elsewhere.

You know, so many anti-Israelis like th blame the temple mount visit as some sort of justification or way to absolve Palistinians of their guilt regarding the violence. Unfortunately, it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Frankly, it just comes off as a flimsy excuse to blame the Jooossss.

The situation was already violent before the visit to the temple mount. (For example, one soldier was killed the day before the visit...)

you don't think sharon's visit to the temple mount was provocative? you don't think he was counting on a reaction? do you think that the timing of sharon's action was only a coincidence in regards to a sudden escalation of violence?

whatever.. 10 years ago. 15 years ago. it doesn't change the fact that it has only killed 28 people in 8 years. whereas over 350 palestinian children have been killed in the last 2 weeks.

Well, if your argument that Israel is wrong because not enough people have died to justify the invasion, then that's a totally different issue. To that, I have to repeat: Any country should have, as its priority, the protection of its own citizens.

that's not defending. perhaps israel should look into the condition that they've helped to create.

And I've noticed you totally ignored the fact that before the rocket attacks, there were suicide bombings. Both the rocket attacks, and the suicide bombings, were directed at civilians.

Ummm.... no. Look up the definition of a 'chapter 6' resolution. All you are doing is illustrating your ignorance in the matter.

I challenged you to point out exactly what law they're violating. Simply quoting a reference that has many laws is not identifying any specific violation. (As I've said before, there's really only one area that Israel might be seen as actually violating International laws regarding occupation.)

i know what chapter 6 and chapter 7 stand for. you're trying to invalidate the resolutions. that's wrong to do. israel has been violating several resolutions. not just 242.

as far as breaking international law, i will try to remember a few:

- international court declared the wall israel has built as illegal. that was either in 2004 or 2005

- collective punishment is illegal. yeah, israel is making up excuses, but any honest person has seen how israel has acted; ie, 300 children killed. look up the 4th geneva convention, article 33.

- the illegal settlements and the increasing of them - you've already admitted to this

- look up the geneva convention, protocal 1. if i remember correctly, it's article 75 - this explains the treatment of civilians during armed conflicts

there are so many more violations that i don't have time to lookup. all you need to do is to take a peak at the geneva convention and the hague regulations.

[bush_cheney2004]

....there are so many more violations that i don't have time to lookup. all you need to do is to take a peak at the geneva convention and the hague regulations.

Sure.....Israel can get around to that as soon as the Palestinians do. In the end, international law is for wanksters who lack any means of enforcement, and even if they did, it would violate international law (see Operation Allied Force in 1999).

As for 900 dead Palestinians, SubSaharan Africans note their blessing compared to conditions not noticed for lack of Jew bait.

Edited January 16, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[segnosaur]

Excuse me, but before you claim 4a) is true, could you please point out any time in the recent history of Israel where there have not either been any direct hostilities (e.g. terrorism) or external threats (from countries like Syria, Egypt, etc.) for an extended period (lets say, 3 year).

Three years is a long time.

Fine... make it 2 years. Heck, Make it a year and a half... Long enough to know that Palestinian society is truly committed to peace and not simply taking some time off to rearm.

When has Israel had more than a year and a half when it was not subject to either terrorist attacks or external threats?

We could turn that question around. Why doesn't Israel give Palestine its own country for three years?

Well, first of all, YOU were the one that suggested the Palestinians would be ignored by Israel (and would continue to be oppressed) were it not for the violence. I'm expecting you to do something to justify your position, by pointing out just WHEN there was a time when violence was NOT inflicted on Israel.

Secondly, if there is a significant amount of the population that seeks the TOTAL distruction of Israel (e.g. Hamas) and that population's activities are not curtailed (or even encouraged) by the population, then why exactly would you risk giving them free reign by giving them their own country?

Really, given that Hamas has the destruction of Israel as part of their reason for existence, and given the fact that they have TV shows like Tomorrow's Pioneers on TV, why exactly would any sane country give them their own free country from which they could continue to launch attacks from?

I think if you examine the most recent ceasefire, between Israel and Hamas, you will see that Hamas actually did a pretty good job of living up to its terms of the agreement. Israel on the other hand did not.

Except for the fact that rocket attacks and Mortar attacks continued throughout this 'ceasefire' agreement. I guess you have no problem with that.

[M.Dancer]

as far as breaking international law, i will try to remember a few:

- international court declared the wall israel has built as illegal. that was either in 2004 or 2005

The Security Council has yet to accept and enforce the Court’s ruling, however, and the United Nations remains sidelined in the conflict. [5]

Israel submitted a 246 page written statement containing the views of the Government of Israel on Jurisdiction and Propriety to the Court, but chose not make any oral statements.[65] The case was viewed by many governments (including the United States and the European Union) as lacking standing, because the jurisdiction of the ICJ is limited to member states to the body, and the plaintiffs in the case lacked this designation (citation needed).

- collective punishment is illegal. yeah, israel is making up excuses, but any honest person has seen how israel has acted; ie, 300 children killed. look up the 4th geneva convention, article 33.

You should consider the Convention in its; entirty.

- the illegal settlements and the increasing of them - you've already admitted to this

Israel has and continues to remove settlements.

- look up the geneva convention, protocal 1. if i remember correctly, it's article 75 - this explains the treatment of civilians during armed conflicts

See above

there are so many more violations that i don't have time to lookup. all you need to do is to take a peak at the geneva convention and the hague regulations.

I think you need to take more than a peak...

[wulf42]

The poster here is speaking of an Israeli killed by a Palestinian.

In reality:

13 (THIRTEEN!!!) Israeli's have died in this latest go-round.

900 (NINE HUNDRED!!!) Palestians have died in this lastest go-round.

Anyone in their right mind should realize this.

Maybe next time the Palestinian's and the rest of the Arab world will think twice before pissing off Israel! i mean come on! how many times do the Arabs need to have their asses kicked before they get the message they are no match for Israel and the Israeli's are not a people you want to mess with they will wipe you out, they have overwhelming superior firepower and are not afraid to use it!

Edited January 16, 2009 by wulf42

[Oleg Bach]

Will I be branded as and anti- what ever - but the numbers signify racism and the beginings of the filthy coerce acceptable term "ethnic clensing" as if one race is dirty and the other is clean. This is dreadful.

[bush_cheney2004]

Will I be branded as and anti- what ever - but the numbers signify racism and the beginings of the filthy coerce acceptable term "ethnic clensing" as if one race is dirty and the other is clean. This is dreadful.

Nonsense....but thank you for parading the last feel-good human rights term for the conflict.

What's the matter with calling it what it is....just another war. We have lots of 'em.....why is this one so "special"? Must be those.....Joooooooooooooooooos.

[Oleg Bach]

Nonsense....but thank you for parading the last feel-good human rights term for the conflict.

What's the matter with calling it what it is....just another war. We have lots of 'em.....why is this one so "special"? Must be those.....Joooooooooooooooooos.

Cheney - a war is when one sides squares of with another and they wear red coats and stand up like men and take the hit....this "conflict" is more like shooting bears in a cage...or fish in a barrel - a war is something you enter into with the possiblity of actually losing your nation or your life - the Israelis are not at war - they are simply getting rid of the roaches - that were there when they stole the house.

[bush_cheney2004]

Cheney - a war is when one sides squares of with another and they wear red coats and stand up like men and take the hit....this "conflict" is more like shooting bears in a cage...or fish in a barrel - a war is something you enter into with the possiblity of actually losing your nation or your life - the Israelis are not at war - they are simply getting rid of the roaches - that were there when they stole the house.

Hmmm let's see.....Canada (never attacked) is "at war" and getting rid of "roaches" in Afghanistan, but Israel (attacked numerous times) is only allowed to have a "conflict" that "violates international law"?

The Israelis are at war...and have been since 1948.