Army Guy Posted May 30, 2005 Report Share Posted May 30, 2005 Black dog: Military incursions into civilian areas, destruction of property (such as bulldozing homes and crops), checkpoints, curfews and arbitrary arrests are examples of collective punishment and are routine in the Occupied Territories. Military incursions into civilian areas...Is the military way of showing of force... destruction of property (such as bulldozing homes and crops),correct me if i'm wrong but the homes that get dozed over are they not the ones of sucide bombers... checkpoints, curfews and arbitrary arrests are examples of collective punishment and are routine in the Occupied Territories...."Check pionts and curfews are not collective punishment but a means of nessicary control of the population and have been used in most conflicts that i know of"...As for the arbitrary arrests i guess that would depend on who you talked to...The IDF has a pretty good intel service and if they are arresting someone it was to be for a reason...remeber Marshall law or it's equilvalent powers of arrest are different and it allows the state or goverment to arrest without warrent or for very little cause. Even martial law has limitations: it's not a licence for free reign. No, but pretty close...even in Canada the goverments powers increase 10 fold... The onus is on the invader to minimize civilian deaths. But the U.S. response across Iraq, and Fallujah in particular, has been excessive and heavy-handed. And it's also been ineffective. You are right, the onus is on the military on both sides to minimize cilvilian cas at all costs...But there is two sides to every coin the the US militay did warn the civilian pop of it's intentions giving those that wanted to leave the chance to. Fighting in urban areas is very deadly for the attacker...to min cas on the attackers side armies rely on Arty and air delivered muntions more...Thats war... Despite bombing Fallujah to rubble, most reports say that the insurgents (who knew the assault was coming) melted away, rather than fight the U.S. forces toe-to-toe. Many non-coms also fled, but many remained behind. Someone was fighting....who were they if all the insugents melted away.... I'm not going to make any excuses, I've seen war first hand and this is war.....It's full of death...and destruction....thats what happens things and people perish...before you completely make up your mind on what is going on over there atleast research the american view from those that are serving over there or have served there...they'll find that war is a two way street with killing and maiming done by both sides....Right now you see a few bodies and are all pissed off ...rightly so....but not the entire US army is to blame ...or for that matter the entire US.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted May 30, 2005 Report Share Posted May 30, 2005 destruction of property (such as bulldozing homes and crops),correct me if i'm wrong but the homes that get dozed over are they not the ones of sucide bombers... Well first, if the home belongs to a suicide bomber, then its safe to assume he or she is dead. Therefore the people being punished are people who quite possibly had no connection to the crime. That's the very definition of collective punishment: punishing one group of people for the actions of others. Check pionts and curfews are not collective punishment but a means of nessicary control of the population and have been used in most conflicts that i know of would you deny that these methods of "controlling the population" are designed to instill a measure of fear in order to assure compliance? ...The IDF has a pretty good intel service and if they are arresting someone it was to be for a reason... I'm not willing to put my faith in any government arresting someone just on their own say so. Mass detention You are right, the onus is on the military on both sides to minimize cilvilian cas at all costs...But there is two sides to every coin the the US militay did warn the civilian pop of it's intentions giving those that wanted to leave the chance to. Fighting in urban areas is very deadly for the attacker...to min cas on the attackers side armies rely on Arty and air delivered muntions more...Thats war... What about th epeople too old, too sick, too poor or otherwise unable to leave? Thousands of these people stayed. Furthermore, there's many eyewitness reports out of Fallujah of civilians being delibirately targeted. I've read of U.S. soldiers saying the streets of Falujah were like Grand Theft Auto: a shooting gallery where everything that moved was targetted. I have no doubt that the destructiion of Fallujah should be considered an act of terrorism. I'm not going to make any excuses, I've seen war first hand and this is war.....It's full of death...and destruction....thats what happens things and people perish...before you completely make up your mind on what is going on over there atleast research the american view from those that are serving over there or have served there...they'll find that war is a two way street with killing and maiming done by both sides....Right now you see a few bodies and are all pissed off ...rightly so....but not the entire US army is to blame ...or for that matter the entire US.... The question is "what is terrorism". In my opinion, many of the things you shrug off as being just part of war are terrorist acts. Let me put it another way: a insurgent suicde bomber that targets U.S. tropps but also claims civilian lives is no more or less a terrorist act than a U.S. bomb targetting insurgents in a civilian neighbourhood. As for the entire US Army not being to blame: well, it's not their country, is is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theloniusfleabag Posted May 30, 2005 Report Share Posted May 30, 2005 Dear Army Guy, destruction of property (such as bulldozing homes and crops),correct me if i'm wrong but the homes that get dozed over are they not the ones of sucide bombers...I shall correct you. To the best of their (IDF's) knowledge, one of the homes they destroy by bulldozing is one in which the 'suicide bomber' previously lived. Usually, as Black Dog points out, the 'terrorist' is dead and the home is still bulldozed to 'teach the others a lesson'. A quote from the book "Intifada", by top Israeli reporters Ze'ev Schiff and Ehud Ya'ari (1989) "I console myself with the thought that this punishment may help lessen the violence," remarked a senior officer in charge of dozens of demolitions and sealing actions, "but deep in my heart I know that what we're doing will prompt others to react violently against us in revenge". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted May 31, 2005 Report Share Posted May 31, 2005 Black dog: Well first, if the home belongs to a suicide bomber, then its safe to assume he or she is dead. Therefore the people being punished are people who quite possibly had no connection to the crime. That's the very definition of collective punishment: punishing one group of people for the actions of others. Flea bag: I shall correct you. To the best of their (IDF's) knowledge, one of the homes they destroy by bulldozing is one in which the 'suicide bomber' previously lived. Usually, as Black Dog points out, the 'terrorist' is dead and the home is still bulldozed to 'teach the others a lesson'. A quote from the book "Intifada", by top Israeli reporters Ze'ev Schiff and Ehud Ya'ari (1989) One of the motivating factors to get these sucide bombers to blow themselfs -up is serveral muslim countries have donated money to the PLO and other causes in the area. Some of this money is donated to the purchase of the bombers home or to pay the rent of the apt as long as the families of the bombers lives there.... This had become a major problem, and still is....hence the IDF implementing the dozing of homes to elemenate that reason from becoming a motivating factor. Is it a form of group punishment "yes"it is but what chioce do they have...what other course of action is left to them... would you deny that these methods of "controlling the population" are designed to instill a measure of fear in order to assure compliance? Under normal circumstances these methods are standard practice, they are to control the population,restrict movement in areas of combat operations, to prevent looting, to restrict the movement of the enemy,to make it easier to secure the area. I'm not willing to put my faith in any government arresting someone just on their own say so. Rarely does the goverment actually pin piont someone out for arrest. arrests are normally done by intel (Goverment or Military)or military police and ground troops. During the FLQ crises Canada done the same thing with Trudeau enacting the War measures act. giving the Military full control of that area of operations, acting with police they made more arrests than they had jail space....I do agree with you that the military is not very good at police work,But they are not going to send policemen into combat zones. Arrests are just as much as part of war as death is....nobody has got it right yet.... What about th epeople too old, too sick, too poor or otherwise unable to leave? Thousands of these people stayed. Without trying to sound cold, but the history of War it is always the innocent that pay the most...it is a fact of war, one that cannot be avoided... Furthermore, there's many eyewitness reports out of Fallujah of civilians being delibirately targeted. I've read of U.S. soldiers saying the streets of Falujah were like Grand Theft Auto: a shooting gallery where everything that moved was targetted. Again, if those reports are true then those incidents should be investigated...and those found guilty charged... However that being said there is no way i can describe to you what it is like to be in combat or fire your Wpn in anger...Once you enter a combat zone, you are concerned with only one thing keeping you and all your buddies alive,and you do what it takes to do that....Because the Bad guys blend in so well with the civilian population makes this task of not targeting civilians very, very hard...most decissions to pull the trigger are made in Milli seconds...A soldier does not always have the time to decide whether civilian or foe... Again without trying to sound cold but this is War....Urban fighting is very brutal perhaps the closest thing there is to hell.... The question is "what is terrorism". In my opinion, many of the things you shrug off as being just part of war are terrorist acts. Let me put it another way: a insurgent suicde bomber that targets U.S. tropps but also claims civilian lives is no more or less a terrorist act than a U.S. bomb targetting insurgents in a civilian neighbourhood. Yes you are right, attacking military targets are not terrorists acts, your also right when saying if civilians die in that attack they would be considered collateral damage....Car bombs,IED, ETC intended for military targets are not considered terrorist attacks.... Terrorist acts are attacking unarmed inocent civilians, for example a crowded store with no military pers or of military value... to send a message to population... As for the entire US Army not being to blame: well, it's not their country, is is? Niether, is Afgan Canada's...Soldiers do not make those decissions on where they go, thier goverments do...I true believe that we are making a difference in Afgan....as for Iraq the jury is still out....i think it will be a long term process.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted May 31, 2005 Report Share Posted May 31, 2005 Is it a form of group punishment "yes"it is but what chioce do they have...what other course of action is left to them... In World War 1, the German army responded to resistance activities in Belgium by holding entire towns and villages responsible, summarily executing large numbers of innocents. Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, such collective punishments were deemed a war crime. Article 33 of the Fourth Convention states: “No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed,” and “collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.” Israel, however, does not accept that the Fourth Geneva Convention or the Additional Protocols apply to the West Bank de jure. In other words, Israel's practice of collective punishment is against international law and thus, an act of terrorism. As for, "what course of action is left", that's easy: get out. End the occupation dismantle the settlements that are the primary motivator of Palestinian terror and help build a viable Palestinian state. Under normal circumstances these methods are standard practice, they are to control the population,restrict movement in areas of combat operations, to prevent looting, to restrict the movement of the enemy,to make it easier to secure the area. But the occupied territories are not a war zone. An dthere's absolutely no disputing the primary targets of such operations are civilian non combatants. Rarely does the goverment actually pin piont someone out for arrest. arrests are normally done by intel (Goverment or Military)or military police and ground troops. During the FLQ crises Canada done the same thing with Trudeau enacting the War measures act. giving the Military full control of that area of operations, acting with police they made more arrests than they had jail space....I do agree with you that the military is not very good at police work,But they are not going to send policemen into combat zones. Arrests are just as much as part of war as death is....nobody has got it right yet.... It seems you are arguing that because an activity is standard practice is is teh right way to go. I disagree and am certain that precision intel work is not only possible, but essential to any counterinsurgency. Arbitrary arrest and detention, braod "terror sweeps" serve mainly to terrorize the population and incite further hatred. The reason Abu Ghriab incited such hatred was because most of the prisoners were innocents. Without trying to sound cold, but the history of War it is always the innocent that pay the most...it is a fact of war, one that cannot be avoided... Sure it can. In Fallujah's case, what strategic value did destroying the city have? It was termed an insurgent stronghold, but the nature of any insurgency is that it is fluid. Just week's after the end of U..S operations in Fallujah, insurgent activity skyrocketed in nearby sectors because the same insurgents the Yanks were gunning for split town for greener pastures wher ethey could continue to operate. now, wither the U.S. is so woefully ignorant about the insurgency and counterinsurgeny tactics in general to the point that they actuallybelieved they could get the insurgents to face them one on one, or the destruction of Fallujah was a calculated act of terrorism, a message to otehr Iraqis about the price of supporting the resistance (which brings us back to the earlier example of the Germans). Again, if those reports are true then those incidents should be investigated...and those found guilty charged... However that being said there is no way i can describe to you what it is like to be in combat or fire your Wpn in anger...Once you enter a combat zone, you are concerned with only one thing keeping you and all your buddies alive,and you do what it takes to do that....Because the Bad guys blend in so well with the civilian population makes this task of not targeting civilians very, very hard...most decissions to pull the trigger are made in Milli seconds...A soldier does not always have the time to decide whether civilian or foe... Again without trying to sound cold but this is War....Urban fighting is very brutal perhaps the closest thing there is to hell.... All the more reason why the standard tactics are miserable failures. The U.S. is using brute force to squash a popular insurgency, which is like using a shotgun to kill a mosquito in a crowded elevator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 1, 2005 Report Share Posted June 1, 2005 Black dog: In World War 1, the German army responded to resistance activities in Belgium by holding entire towns and villages responsible, summarily executing large numbers of innocents. Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions, such collective punishments were deemed a war crime. Article 33 of the Fourth Convention states: “No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed,” and “collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.” Israel, however, does not accept that the Fourth Geneva Convention or the Additional Protocols apply to the West Bank de jure. In other words, Israel's practice of collective punishment is against international law and thus, an act of terrorism. There are many offensives that they (the Families ) are guilty of....Becoming a bomber is not a matter of just strapping on explosives and lighting the fuse. There is religous rights that are given,family affairs that get sorted out, and many meetings with the terror organization ...my piont is that the family is well aware of the bombers intention...and perhaps even the target ...failure to report those intentions is a crime....Becoming a bomber is a great honour for these guys it is also a sure way in to heaven to die while killing infidels.... As for, "what course of action is left", that's easy: get out. End the occupation dismantle the settlements that are the primary motivator of Palestinian terror and help build a viable Palestinian state. The occupation of what? there is no state of palestine so how can it be an occupation....and if one looks at it from a Israelis piont of view they the Palestianians are in Israel occuping Israelis lands.... The Prime motivator for the Palestinians is the complete detruction of the state of Israel and of it's people.... And why should Israel help build a state that is bent on it's total destruction... But the occupied territories are not a war zone. An dthere's absolutely no disputing the primary targets of such operations are civilian non combatants. It is classified as a conflict zone (same thing) tell your insurance company that you wish to traval to the Gaza strip ,ask them if your insurance still covers you in event something happens....The primary targets are terrorists, and thier organizations ....and to weed them out you must go where they live amoungst the other Non combatants.... t seems you are arguing that because an activity is standard practice is is teh right way to go. I disagree and am certain that precision intel work is not only possible, but essential to any counterinsurgency. Intel is the best tool to combating insurgency, and part of the gathering of intel is constant patroling,road blocks,check pionts, sweeps for wpns etc etc...it works because there is no other way, if there is one thing man has perfected and that is how to fight.... Arbitrary arrest and detention, braod "terror sweeps" serve mainly to terrorize the population and incite further hatred. The reason Abu Ghriab incited such hatred was because most of the prisoners were innocents. The arrests are not arbitrary nither is detention....if you are caught breaking the law you are arrested that could include transporting wpns ,Ammo, not having your papers, housing terrorists, etc etc... Those that in Gitmo now where taken from the battle fields of Afgan....They are without a dought Taliban they were captured after the battle was over or gave up in the trenchs ...Innocent my ass...Again i can not comment of those prisons in Iraq, but odds are they are the same... Sure it can. In Fallujah's case, what strategic value did destroying the city have? It was termed an insurgent stronghold, but the nature of any insurgency is that it is fluid. Just week's after the end of U..S operations in Fallujah, insurgent activity skyrocketed in nearby sectors because the same insurgents the Yanks were gunning for split town for greener pastures wher ethey could continue to operate. Take the blinders off, you watched the build-up of the first battle of Fallujah...They actually told the US there would be major reprocutions if they attack the holy city The US had already established it was a major strong hold for insurgents,and was the HQ for a know insurgent leader(i forgret his name) ...So as far as strategic value the capture of the leader alone would have made it valuable....as it being fluid would have made Fallujuh that more important as there was a chance they would stand and fight...which many did.... wither the U.S. is so woefully ignorant about the insurgency and counterinsurgeny tactics in general to the point that they actuallybelieved they could get the insurgents to face them one on one, or the destruction of Fallujah was a calculated act of terrorism, a message to otehr Iraqis about the price of supporting the resistance (which brings us back to the earlier example of the Germans). Many of the insurgents did stay and fight, and the message the US sent was they were there to combat the insurgents where ever they went, it was the insurgents that picked the ground not the US .... All the more reason why the standard tactics are miserable failures. The U.S. is using brute force to squash a popular insurgency, which is like using a shotgun to kill a mosquito in a crowded elevator. Standard tactics are working very well. The US forces will use every wpn available to them to combat insurgents....to save US and coalition soldiers lives....It is after all a combat zone.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 1, 2005 Report Share Posted June 1, 2005 There are many offensives that they (the Families ) are guilty of....Becoming a bomber is not a matter of just strapping on explosives and lighting the fuse. There is religous rights that are given,family affairs that get sorted out, and many meetings with the terror organization ...my piont is that the family is well aware of the bombers intention...and perhaps even the target ...failure to report those intentions is a crime....Becoming a bomber is a great honour for these guys it is also a sure way in to heaven to die while killing infidels.... That's a broad generalization and a highly suspect conclusion. And even you think you can prove the families were somehow involved, the proper course of action is arrest and trial, not collective punishment. You're advocating a disgusting policy based on very bad assumptions here. The occupation of what? there is no state of palestine so how can it be an occupation....and if one looks at it from a Israelis piont of view they the Palestianians are in Israel occuping Israelis lands.... i don't what to say. This is repulsive. Of course there's an occupation. May I suggest you read a bit about it? The Prime motivator for the Palestinians is the complete detruction of the state of Israel and of it's people.... And why should Israel help build a state that is bent on it's total destruction... That's nothing but garbage propaganda and certainly borders on racism (applying a single, neghative charateristic to entire group). Your generalizations (backed with not a shred of supporting evidence) are getting offensive. The Palestinian Authority has recognized Israel's right to exist. It is classified as a conflict zone (same thing) tell your insurance company that you wish to traval to the Gaza strip ,ask them if your insurance still covers you in event something happens....The primary targets are terrorists, and thier organizations ....and to weed them out you must go where they live amoungst the other Non combatants.... Well, your hypothesis falls apart when you take in to account the fact that the opccupation predates the terrorism. Intel is the best tool to combating insurgency, and part of the gathering of intel is constant patroling,road blocks,check pionts, sweeps for wpns etc etc...it works because there is no other way, if there is one thing man has perfected and that is how to fight.... Israel is not fighting an insurgency but, basically, a gang war. The solution is very simple and I've already outlined it. The arrests are not arbitrary nither is detention....if you are caught breaking the law you are arrested that could include transporting wpns ,Ammo, not having your papers, housing terrorists, etc etc... No many of the arrests are arbitrary. Read what Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have to say on the subject. Those that in Gitmo now where taken from the battle fields of Afgan....They are without a dought Taliban they were captured after the battle was over or gave up in the trenchs ...Innocent my ass...Again i can not comment of those prisons in Iraq, but odds are they are the same... You're so wrong. Not all terror suspects in Gitmo are Taliban (and those that are are still entitled to P.O.W. status, as the Taliban was the de facto national government of Afghanistan). As for Iraq, note that CIA and Red Cross estimates are that between 70 and 90 per cent of detainees are innocent. Take the blinders off, you watched the build-up of the first battle of Fallujah...They actually told the US there would be major reprocutions if they attack the holy city The first offensive was cancelled because the U.S. didn't want to risk the PR nightmare. They essentiallyu turned the city over and then decided to go back and level it. The US had already established it was a major strong hold for insurgents,and was the HQ for a know insurgent leader(i forgret his name) ...So as far as strategic value the capture of the leader alone would have made it valuable....as it being fluid would have made Fallujuh that more important as there was a chance they would stand and fight...which many did.... You make it sound like the most powerful military in the world had their hand's ties and no choice but to destroy fallujah. Nope. They had options, but they've clusterfucked things so bad they cannot rely on popular support to curb the insurgencies power. remember: they are an invader. Standard tactics are working very well. The US forces will use every wpn available to them to combat insurgents....to save US and coalition soldiers lives....It is after all a combat zone.... Is that why the insurgency is undiminished? Why the U.S.'s supply lines aere stretched because they can't use the roads? Why the Iraqi police and military have been penetrated by the insurgency? Why U.S soldiers continue to die? Tell me: doe syour unwavering truist in officialdom stem from your military background? it would seem to me that someone conditioned to accept and folloow orders may not be the best equipped to see both sides of the story... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 1, 2005 Report Share Posted June 1, 2005 Black dog: That's a broad generalization and a highly suspect conclusion. And even you think you can prove the families were somehow involved, the proper course of action is arrest and trial, not collective punishment. You're advocating a disgusting policy based on very bad assumptions here. Highly suspect of what, Can you 100 % tell me that the family did not know that thier son or daughter was preparing to become a bomber, said thier good byes ,made last minute arrangements to ensure thier families were looked after....attended religous cermonies ETC ETC.... and yet you are trying to tell me that the act of dozing someones house is disgusting what about the act or the condoning of the act of killing inocent civilians...what about the act of condoning you son or daughter to blow themselfs up.... don't what to say. This is repulsive. Of course there's an occupation. May I suggest you read a bit about it? Perhaps you can show me on the map the state of palestine.... Corrected history of Israel and palestine. History of Israel and Palistine That's nothing but garbage propaganda and certainly borders on racism (applying a single, neghative charateristic to entire group). Your generalizations (backed with not a shred of supporting evidence) are getting offensive.The Palestinian Authority has recognized Israel's right to exist. Below are some links i have many more if you want...Not only has the PLO but other muslim countriesas well stated that the total destruction of Israel was a main concern of thiers....Your total denial of both sides of the story is what is getting old...Your a smart guy atleast read those links EX-PLO terrorist Speaks for Israel Push israel into the sea. Push Isreal into the sea ptii You're so wrong. Not all terror suspects in Gitmo are Taliban (and those that are are still entitled to P.O.W. status, as the Taliban was the de facto national government of Afghanistan). Taliban or Alquida you pick...and we have already been through this they are terrorists or the polictically correct insurgents and are not entitled to protection under the convention with exception of being treated fairly,and given thier day in court.... You make it sound like the most powerful military in the world had their hand's ties and no choice but to destroy fallujah. Nope. They had options, No thier hands where not tied it is one of thier missions to destroy the insurgents where ever they are...and the city was not flattened collateral damage was heavy in some areas but most of the city remains .... but they've clusterfucked things so bad they cannot rely on popular support to curb the insurgencies power. remember: they are an invader. They may of not run the best military campiagn in history, but atleast they are there doing a job that needed to get done unlike most other nations that hide in the corner pionting fingers when it suits them....And yes they are the Invader.... Is that why the insurgency is undiminished? Why the U.S.'s supply lines aere stretched because they can't use the roads? Why the Iraqi police and military have been penetrated by the insurgency? Why U.S soldiers continue to die? Yes you are right the insurgents grow every day, Undiminished i would not say that The US army strength will remain constant regardless of losses, however they are having some recruitment problems... the insurgents recruitment is suffering as well.... The US has unrestricted use of all the roads ,there are problems with mines and IED's but US forces continue to use them....yes the Iraqi army and police have been penetrated, but you failed to mention that even with all thier losses and excutions there is no recruitment problems there...that alone speaks volumes .... Tell me: doe syour unwavering truist in officialdom stem from your military background? it would seem to me that someone conditioned to accept and folloow orders may not be the best equipped to see both sides of the story...No, but i've been to most of these places and have seen with me own eyes what is happening and not through someones interputation of what they think is happening ....then we have something in common.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 1, 2005 Report Share Posted June 1, 2005 Highly suspect of what, Can you 100 % tell me that the family did not know that thier son or daughter was preparing to become a bomber, said thier good byes ,made last minute arrangements to ensure thier families were looked after....attended religous cermonies ETC ETC.... and yet you are trying to tell me that the act of dozing someones house is disgusting what about the act or the condoning of the act of killing inocent civilians...what about the act of condoning you son or daughter to blow themselfs up.... Can you 100 per cent certainly tell me that in 100 per cent of cases, the families were aware? Furthermore, is destruction of property an appropriate punishment? In the western world, the onus is on the accussers to prove the guilt, not the accussed to prove their innocence. Bomber's family hits out at Islamic Jihad The family of a teenage Palestinian suicide bomber, who died in a futile attempt to kill Israelis this week, has made unusual public criticism of the men who recruit human bombs. The parents of 17-year-old Iyad al-Masri accused Islamic Jihad of exploiting his grief following the killing of a brother and a cousin by the Israeli army days earlier. Demolishing Peace Israel exploits its absolute power and demolishes tens and hundreds of houses each year, the number of demolitions rising or falling depending on the political leanings of the government. In August of this year, "administrative" demolitions of houses were openly used as a reprisal and punitive action. The Israeli authorities demolished the homes of dozens of Palestinians in response to terrorist acts, although no one contends the residents of the demolished houses had been involved. Mass demolition of houses also ensures that Palestinians do not build near Israel settlements, bypass roads, or areas over which Israel wants to maintain control in the future. The demolitions, therefore, also realize the second principle. Perhaps you can show me on the map the state of palestine.... Sure if you can show me Israel on a map (pre 1948). In any case, nations are defined as much by the "facts on the ground" as there are lines on the map. for instance, there are many maps in Israel that annihalate any distinction between the territories occupied in 1967 and the territory granted Israel in 1947. The facts are Israel occupioed the west bank and gaza in 1967. Over time, this occupation transformed into a form of colonialism and suppressed and oppressed an entire people, preventing them from the exercise of their right to self-determination and the establishment of a state. People in Palestine, despite living under Israeli rule, have no rights as Israeli citizens and are deprived of basic human rights on a daily basis. There are two solutons: one is to create a viable Palestinian state, the other to absorb the OT into Israel and acord the people living therein all the rights enjoyed by all Israel's citizens. Below are some links i have many more if you want...Not only has the PLO but other muslim countriesas well stated that the total destruction of Israel was a main concern of thiers....Your total denial of both sides of the story is what is getting old...Your a smart guy atleast read those links With all due respect, your links ar evile. From the second: It is no secret that the Arabs hate the Jews. This is pure, unadulterated racism. This also contains this gem: Almost the entire Middle East belongs to Israel. The bible is clear that Israel was to take all the land some were left and made to be a thorn in Israel's side. This is a call for naked aggression and imperialism based on a book of fairy tales. Your cause would be better served by not reaching into the depths of internet wingnuttery for information. For you: LETTER FROM YASSER ARAFAT TO PRIME MINISTER RABIN: SEPTEMBER 9, 1993 The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security. Taliban or Alquida you pick...and we have already been through this they are terrorists or the polictically correct insurgents and are not entitled to protection under the convention with exception of being treated fairly,and given thier day in court.... there's a difference. You may not get it, but they are not the same thing at all. Anyone fighting for the Taliban (again: the de facto national government of Afghanistan at the time) should be accorded P.O.W. status. Intersting too that you mention they are still entitled to fair treatment and a fair trial. So why the continuing allegations of abuse and torture? When can we expect to see some actual charges laid against any of these people (many of whom have been languishing since 2001)? By the way, are you familiar with the practice of "rendering"? It's been common practice for the U.S. to send terror suspects to countries like Syria and Jordan, wher ethey can apply their own unique methods to gatrhering information. Does the name Arar ring a bell? No thier hands where not tied it is one of thier missions to destroy the insurgents where ever they are...and the city was not flattened collateral damage was heavy in some areas but most of the city remains .... With no power, water, sewage, medical facilities... A Return to Fallujah to See What Remains Nearly all of Fallujah's 250,000 residents emptied the city in advance of the military operation. The city partially reopened to residents on Dec. 23, and U.S. military officials now estimate that 60,000 people have come back, although not everyone who has returned has opted to stay. Many structures -- in some places, entire neighborhood blocks -- are uninhabitable. City of Ghosts Reconstructiom Reconstruction of Fallujah, the city which was the scene of fierce battles between US forces and insurgents between November 2004 and January 2005, has been slow according to local officials.Little progress has been made despite Washington allocating US $200 million for rehabilitation efforts and compensation for families. Nearly 80 percent of the population fled Fallujah, which is 60km west of the Iraqi capital Baghdad and so far only half of them have returned, aid officials have said. Local people complain that there are still no basic facilities such as sewage systems, adequate electricity and water supplies and there are disputes over how much compensation has been distributed so far. About 70 percent of buildings, many of them houses, were destroyed during the conflict. The Ministry of Health (MoH) said there were 650 civilian deaths in a report issued in April. However, it has been suggested that the number could be as high as 1,300. They may of not run the best military campiagn in history, but atleast they are there doing a job that needed to get done unlike most other nations that hide in the corner pionting fingers when it suits them....And yes they are the Invader.... Why did the "job" need to be done exactly? Yes you are right the insurgents grow every day, Undiminished i would not say that Iraqi insurgency 'undiminished' : Joint Chiefs Chair "I think their capacity stays about the same. And where they are right now is where they were almost a year ago." The US has unrestricted use of all the roads ,there are problems with mines and IED's but US forces continue to use them....yes the Iraqi army and police have been penetrated, but you failed to mention that even with all thier losses and excutions there is no recruitment problems there...that alone speaks volumes .... An unchastened insurgency sowed devastation across Iraq Wednesday as experts here said the country is either on the verge of civil war or already in the middle of it. This war is costing the U.S. about $177 million per day. How long can they keep it up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 Black dog: Can you 100 per cent certainly tell me that in 100 per cent of cases, the families were aware? Furthermore, is destruction of property an appropriate punishment? In the western world, the onus is on the accussers to prove the guilt, not the accussed to prove their innocence. No i can not, but then again niether can you. What i see is that you have taken a pro palestinian postion and that they have done no wrong or can do no wrong...you have forgotten is that both sides hate each other, because of this so many terriable acts done by "both" sides... this problem is has gone on to far to long and to many have been personally effected to forget it over night... As for the dozing of homes ,i can think of worse ways in which to handle the situation...Because of the situation of all this hate the palestinians are a threat to Israelis, there national security...You propose the "turn the other cheek" method have Israel pull out and then help the palestinians re-build...And after that then what...What will Israel do if the bombings continue....what is there course of action...They are not in the western world...they live under a severe form of marshal law every day...thats both sides....with both sides living in fear.... Mass demolition of houses also ensures that Palestinians do not build near Israel settlements, bypass roads, or areas over which Israel wants to maintain control in the future. The demolitions, therefore, also realize the second principle. Your paper was written in 97, things have change a bit since then, like the wall that is under constrution and nearing completion....what would you do if you could not control the bombing in your cities and you had to live with the rules that you have outlined ...No military sweeps, no retribution ie dozing homes , no check pionts, no curfews...how could you ensure "your" peoples safety....basically giving the palestinians freedom to act as they wish... In any case, nations are defined as much by the "facts on the ground" as there are lines on the map. for instance, there are many maps in Israel that annihalate any distinction between the territories occupied in 1967 and the territory granted Israel in 1947. The facts are Israel occupioed the west bank and gaza in 1967. Over time, this occupation transformed into a form of colonialism and suppressed and oppressed an entire people, preventing them from the exercise of their right to self-determination and the establishment of a state Correct me if i'm wrong, but all the maps that i've checked including one that was purchased in Israel while i was in the Sinia desert, clearly mark those terrortories that have been occupied...Lands that were Taken after a war or conflict...Those lands although clearly marked as occupied lands are now part of Israel those people where given the option to move back to jorden ETC...Why would Israel give those lands back or even allow the establishment of an independant state... With all due respect, your links ar evile. That's nothing but garbage propaganda and certainly borders on racism (applying a single, neghative charateristic to entire group). Your generalizations (backed with not a shred of supporting evidence) are getting offensive. My links are vile, why because i showed you a few examples of what PLO and other Muslim leaders have said...giving you some of the supporting evidence "you " requested. Maybe the links below are more bais...from the BBC etc... More history. BBC history history Sure if you can show me Israel on a map (pre 1948). In the above links there is a maps pre dating 1948... QUOTE] It is no secret that the Arabs hate the Jews. This is pure, unadulterated racism. This also contains this gem: Almost the entire Middle East belongs to Israel. The bible is clear that Israel was to take all the land some were left and made to be a thorn in Israel's side. This is a call for naked aggression and imperialism based on a book of fairy tales. Your cause would be better served by not reaching into the depths of internet wingnuttery for information. You don't get it do you, this conflict is based on history or precieved history depending on your views with both sides claiming stakes to terrortory and lands dating back before christ... ...And yes this conflict is mostly based on Racism....By both sides...My other Gem as you called it is based on bibical references and history as it has been recorded.... Did you not just post on the Koran...and it's misuse...and yet you freely call the bible a book of fairy tales, and it's referances internut wingnuttery... To understand this conflict one must indulge in the book of "fairy tales" and history as it is recorded....perhaps you can piont me to a better source of info one more acceptable to you.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 Black dog: Taliban or Alquida you pick...and we have already been through this they are terrorists or the polictically correct insurgents and are not entitled to protection under the convention with exception of being treated fairly,and given thier day in court.... there's a difference. You may not get it, but they are not the same thing at all. Anyone fighting for the Taliban (again: the de facto national government of Afghanistan at the time) should be accorded P.O.W. status. Why has the international court then filed charges again'st the US and other coalition members in breaking an important convention violation.... Intersting too that you mention they are still entitled to fair treatment and a fair trial. So why the continuing allegations of abuse and torture? When can we expect to see some actual charges laid against any of these people (many of whom have been languishing since 2001)? I believe the abuse and torture have stopped....and those that are coming out are ones that are being investagating with new charges being brought forward...As for charges being laid i know that some charges have been laid...if more are going to be laid i don't know.... I have made it clear that i do not believe in any mistreatment of prisoners or what ever we are calling them. However there are times when info could save lives and mild forms of torture or punishment should be used...I know what the convention says... Nearly all of Fallujah's 250,000 residents emptied the city in advance of the military operation. The city partially reopened to residents on Dec. 23, and U.S. military officials now estimate that 60,000 people have come back, although not everyone who has returned has opted to stay. Many structures -- in some places, entire neighborhood blocks -- are uninhabitable. City of Ghosts Reconstructiom Reconstruction of Fallujah, the city which was the scene of fierce battles between US forces and insurgents between November 2004 and January 2005, has been slow according to local officials. I read your articles....Yes they show that Fallujuh is heavily damaged...But the interviews done a majority are glad that the insurgents are gone...some blame both sides but none have said that they blame the US totally for the damage done...Here is people who have lost almost everything and yet you sitting in your chair here can only blame the US for everything that has happened...Why is that... Why did the "job" need to be done exactly? To rid the world of one more scum bag, Your not going to tell me that the world would have been a better place with Sadam still in charge...Have you rerad any of those interviews from your links....I feel safe now...was mentioned more than once ...yes there pissed off at losing thier homes Your quote to my statement that the insurgents are undimished ...lossing 1200 in the battle of Fallujuh did not hurt them? Yes you are right the insurgents grow every day, Undiminished i would not say that Also from your link the Same guy quoted "I think we're definitely winning - I think we've been winning for some time," he said. Your last link mentions that in one day 79 Iraqi's are killed and 120 are wounded in Insurgent attacks why is it you only count those killed by the US and what is the total count that have been killed by those loveable insurgents... I forgot the US is the Invader....your posts are one sided Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 No i can not, but then again niether can you. What i see is that you have taken a pro palestinian postion and that they have done no wrong or can do no wrong...you have forgotten is that both sides hate each other, because of this so many terriable acts done by "both" sides... this problem is has gone on to far to long and to many have been personally effected to forget it over night... No, my position is not "pro-Palestinian" but pro rule of law. I can acknowledge the problem of Palestinian terrorism without blaming all Palestinians, just as I can recognize the actions of the Israeli state are not the fault of all Israelis or all Jews. I wish more of Israels supporters would adopt as balanced a worldview, as oppossed to the black-and-white, "uas against them" logic that only serve to increase the enimity between the two peoples. As for the dozing of homes ,i can think of worse ways in which to handle the situation...Because of the situation of all this hate the palestinians are a threat to Israelis, there national security...You propose the "turn the other cheek" method have Israel pull out and then help the palestinians re-build...And after that then what...What will Israel do if the bombings continue....what is there course of action...They are not in the western world...they live under a severe form of marshal law every day...thats both sides....with both sides living in fear.... Israel's withdrawl has nothing to do with "turning the other cheek", but is simply the only logical course of action. A withdrawl would enhance Israel's own security by removing aprinciple grievance of the Palestinian and Arab world, not to mention removing the excessive and debilitating social, economic and political costs the occupation is placing on Israel. From my point of view Israel is sacrificing too much (including its humanity) in its quest to appease a faction of extremists trying to fulfill a crude vision of manifest destiny. Your paper was written in 97, things have change a bit since then, like the wall that is under constrution and nearing completion....what would you do if you could not control the bombing in your cities and you had to live with the rules that you have outlined ...No military sweeps, no retribution ie dozing homes , no check pionts, no curfews...how could you ensure "your" peoples safety....basically giving the palestinians freedom to act as they wish Again with the Israel as the helpless victim crap. Israel enjoys total military and economic supremacy over the Palestinians. Israel has chosen to maintain the occupation and the policies of aggressive settlement and expansion. It can undo them as well. the ball is in their court. Correct me if i'm wrong, but all the maps that i've checked including one that was purchased in Israel while i was in the Sinia desert, clearly mark those terrortories that have been occupied...Lands that were Taken after a war or conflict...Those lands although clearly marked as occupied lands are now part of Israel those people where given the option to move back to jorden ETC...Why would Israel give those lands back or even allow the establishment of an independant state... There are such maps. I've seen them. By the way, you do realize you just admitted there's an occupation? As for the "spoils of war" argument, international law specifies the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. "Occupation as a temporary status during which the occupier is obligated first to end the occupation as quickly as possible and second to safeguard the rights of the occupied population during the temporary period in which the occupation is maintained. Any move by the occupier to infringe of the rights of the occupied or change the status of the occupied land through, for example, annexation, confiscation of resources, population transfer, or destruction of civilian property is illegal under the Geneva Conventions."* *http://www.endtheoccupation.org/ My links are vile, why because i showed you a few examples of what PLO and other Muslim leaders have said...giving you some of the supporting evidence "you " requested. Let's compare racist statements: It is no secret that the Arabs hate the Jews. It is no secret that Jews love money. See what I mean? With such racism present, why would I trust your sources? Your BBC link contains nothing that isn't common knowledge. In any case, I point out that Egypt and Jordan have both signed peace treaties with Israel and that the PLO, as indicated, has recognized, opn paper, Israel's right to exist. Of course I am aware that anti-israel sentiment is widespread, but maintain that ending the occupation would be the first logical step in curbing that hatred. Moreover: are you aware that in this conflict the vast majority of violence is takling place within the occupied territories. Suicide bombings are dramatic and shocking events, but not part of the day to day. You don't get it do you, this conflict is based on history or precieved history depending on your views with both sides claiming stakes to terrortory and lands dating back before christ... ...And yes this conflict is mostly based on Racism....By both sides...My other Gem as you called it is based on bibical references and history as it has been recorded.... No I don't think the conflict is based on racism, but racism is a byproduct of the conflict. As for the Bible, Torah or Qu'ran, they are best left out of real debates over policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 Why has the international court then filed charges again'st the US and other coalition members in breaking an important convention violation.... How could they when the U.S. doesn't recognize the ICC? I believe the abuse and torture have stopped....and those that are coming out are ones that are being investagating with new charges being brought forward...As for charges being laid i know that some charges have been laid...if more are going to be laid i don't know.... Yes there are charges being laid against the low level grunts (the "few bad apples" theory). But there's evidence that the authorization for the use of torture came from higher up (google up "Gonzalez" and "torture memo"). Where's the investigation into that? I have made it clear that i do not believe in any mistreatment of prisoners or what ever we are calling them. However there are times when info could save lives and mild forms of torture or punishment should be used...I know what the convention says... I don't believe torture is ever acceptable. I believe that any instances where use of torture can save lives (the "ticking time bomb") are so rare and, considering the unreliability of information extracted under torture, that to us eit as an excuse is, well, inexusable. Here is people who have lost almost everything and yet you sitting in your chair here can only blame the US for everything that has happened...Why is that... The U.S. invaded. No invasion, no insurgency, no destruction of Fallujah. To rid the world of one more scum bag, Your not going to tell me that the world would have been a better place with Sadam still in charge...Have you rerad any of those interviews from your links....I feel safe now...was mentioned more than once ...yes there pissed off at losing thier homes The question was "why"? Why the sudden concern with Iraq, a nation that posed no threat to anyone. I can't really imagine the situation is all the much better for Iraqis today. Your quote to my statement that the insurgents are undimished ...lossing 1200 in the battle of Fallujuh did not hurt them? Probably not because 1,200 more took their place. ]"I think we're definitely winning - I think we've been winning for some time," he said What else is he going to say? "We're losing?" I forgot the US is the Invader....your posts are one sided And yours aren't? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 Black dog: No, my position is not "pro-Palestinian" but pro rule of law. I can acknowledge the problem of Palestinian terrorism without blaming all Palestinians, just as I can recognize the actions of the Israeli state are not the fault of all Israelis or all Jews. I wish more of Israels supporters would adopt as balanced a worldview, as oppossed to the black-and-white, "uas against them" logic that only serve to increase the enimity between the two peoples. And yet you continuely blame the Israelis for the palestinians problems... If you truely acknowledge the problem they you must agree that Israel does have the right to take safety precauations in regards to protecting it's people....The check pionts ,curfews,.or the building of the wall...as for the dozing of homes i agree with you but again what chioce do they have when the bombing continue... Israel's withdrawl has nothing to do with "turning the other cheek", but is simply the only logical course of action. A withdrawl would enhance Israel's own security by removing aprinciple grievance of the Palestinian and Arab world, No it is not the only course, of action,they all could move back into Jordan, as part of the British mandate of palestine. But lets just say that Israel gives them a state of thier own how are the Palstinians going to support such a state...unless you are asking Israel to support them as well....as they do now... Of course the other course of action to give them there state and to complete the wall and to deny palestinians access to Israel... Again with the Israel as the helpless victim crap. Israel enjoys total military and economic supremacy over the Palestinians. Israel has chosen to maintain the occupation and the policies of aggressive settlement and expansion. It can undo them as well. the ball is in their court. Nothing can stop a determined person from killing anyone...it does not matter how large your nations might...Twin towers taught us that...They maintain military forces in the gaza strip because the Palestinian authority can not control it's all of its people ....they must be able to provide security for it's own people first. As for the "spoils of war" argument, international law specifies the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. Really...Have they every enforced it, as the former Yugo is comprised of little countries that have thier borders changed through war...Cyprus and example...there are many more... See what I mean?With such racism present, why would I trust your sources? Your right, all rephrase my statement in say a large number of muslims leaders and ordinary muslims dislike most Israelis...hows that... Your BBC link contains nothing that isn't common knowledge. In any case, I point out that Egypt and Jordan have both signed peace treaties with Israel an dthat the PLO, as indicated, has recognized, opn paper, Israel's right to exist. That of course had nothing to do with presure from the outside world...and signing papers of any kind does not mean that these same leaders have not publicly in there own countries quoted that there nation or group will not rest until the state of Israel and it's people are pushed into the sea... No I don't think the conflict is based on racism, but is a byproduct of western imperialism. As for the Bible, Torah or Qu'ran, they are best left out of real debates over policy. You cannot be serious these to races have been at each other throats long before western imperialism steped on the stage....one of the reason that Israel came into being is because of the hatred of Jews.... How many did Canada except after the war...compared to other races, we accepted in more german soldiers than we did Jews...Nobody wanted them ...hard to say it's not about race... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 Black dog: I don't believe torture is ever acceptable. I believe that any instances where use of torture can save lives (the "ticking time bomb") are so rare and, considering the unreliability of information extracted under torture, that to us eit as an excuse is, well, inexusable. I will agree to disagree. The U.S. invaded. No invasion, no insurgency, no destruction of Fallujah. Your quit right just Sadam and his killing to report ...thats ok because it does not effect Canadians and the US was not involved... And yours aren't? I'm trying to understand why you and others on this board blame the US for all the problems in Afgan and Iraq...and Israel got thrown in there some how...when there is always two sides of the story....atleast i have admitted from the start there is alot i do not agree with on US and Israelis matters...but you seem to defend only those actions taken from the US opposite... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 And yet you continuely blame the Israelis for the palestinians problems... Well, the Palestinians aren't bulldozing their own homes. If you truely acknowledge the problem they you must agree that Israel does have the right to take safety precauations in regards to protecting it's people....The check pionts ,curfews,.or the building of the wall...as for the dozing of homes i agree with you but again what chioce do they have when the bombing continue... I can't agree to that because my argument is that the tactics you mention aren't security precautions, but are being used to subjugate the Palestinians while Israel gobbles up their land. Again: if there was no occupation, such "percautions" would be unecessary. Aside: if the, "fence" is a percaution, why is it not being built along Israel's recognized international borders? No it is not the only course, of action,they all could move back into Jordan, as part of the British mandate of palestine. Many Palestinians can trace their origins to the very land they are being squeezed out of. How many Israelis can do the same (tenuous connections to 3,000 year old nomadic tribes aside)? But lets just say that Israel gives them a state of thier own how are the Palstinians going to support such a state...unless you are asking Israel to support them as well....as they do now... The same way any other state. Trade, education etc etc. Why? Do you believe that Palestinians are congentially unable to function? Of course the other course of action to give them there state and to complete the wall and to deny palestinians access to Israel... Or-and here's a crazy notion- they could move towards developing a co-operative relationship with Palestine. Let';s not forget that Jews and Arabs lived and worked side by side for centuries in relative harmony. It wasn't until the Zionist experiment started (spurred by western imperialism and post-holocaust guilt) to run amuck that the conflicts got so out of hand. Nothing can stop a determined person from killing anyone...it does not matter how large your nations might...Twin towers taught us that...They maintain military forces in the gaza strip because the Palestinian authority can not control it's all of its people ....they must be able to provide security for it's own people first. So, if nothing can stop someone determined to kill someone, why make their job easier with heavy-handed and aggressive tactics? Why provoke them further? Your right, all rephrase my statement in say a large number of muslims leaders and ordinary muslims dislike most Israelis...hows that... getting better. Now ask why that is. That of course had nothing to do with presure from the outside world...and signing papers of any kind does not mean that these same leaders have not publicly in there own countries quoted that there nation or group will not rest until the state of Israel and it's people are pushed into the sea... Funny hw you can get in a tizzy over the propagandistic boasting of a few Arab leaders, but turn around and quote resources that demand Israel take over the whole middle east. The difference is, I don't assume the kooks who want an Eretz Yisrael stretching across the Middle East speak for all Israelis. our quit right just Sadam and his killing to report ...thats ok because it does not effect Canadians and the US was not involved... Don't make me point out again that Saddam was a ally of the U.S. before 1990.... I'm trying to understand why you and others on this board blame the US for all the problems in Afgan and Iraq...and Israel got thrown in there some how...when there is always two sides of the story....atleast i have admitted from the start there is alot i do not agree with on US and Israelis matters...but you seem to defend only those actions taken from the US opposite... I see the U.S. invading a nation that did not threaten them, an act of naked aggression. I don't consider support of this to be a defensible stance. Ditto Israel's policies vis a vis the Occupied Territories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 Black dog: Well, the Palestinians aren't bulldozing their own homes. No they are blowing themselfs up in crowded markets,or school busses....Both sides have shed much blood...it will take more than a few generations to fix this problem. I can't agree to that because my argument is that the tactics you mention aren't security precautions, but are being used to subjugate the Palestinians while Israel gobbles up their land. Again: if there was no occupation, such "percautions" would be unecessary. Correct me if i'm wrong but most of the land that Israel "Occupies" has been given back to the Palestine authority has it not....Again i ask you to read the below links...as a man who enjoys the LAW... the league of nations had agreed on the division of land for not only the ARABS but for the Jews with the ARABS or decendants of the palestinians... getting over 75 % of the slice to start with and the jews left with 25 % of that slice....it was under british rule that the 25 % shrank to 23 % then to even less...given to the Palestinians...Those Palestinians on those contested lands now want even more of the Jewish slice....History is and will repeat itself...when are the palestinians going to be satisified .....And why can you not see that perhaps the Israelis don't want to give any more.... history. BBC Many Palestinians can trace their origins to the very land they are being squeezed out of. How many Israelis can do the same (tenuous connections to 3,000 year old nomadic tribes aside)? Are you saying that the league of nations or the UN's decission should be ingored...as a law abiding man such as yourself...Israel did not make those decissions nor did they decide that the arabs had to leave the jewish zone or the jews had to leave the arab zones ...that was the league of nations... The same way any other state. Trade, education etc etc. Why? Do you believe that Palestinians are congentially unable to function? Yes, the state of palestine as it stands today has been around for how long...it's thriving, it's doing so well in fact as hobbies the send bombers into Israel...the last news special i seen it had quoted that a large number of palestinians are unemployed and the majority that areworking are working in Israel.... Or-and here's a crazy notion- they could move towards developing a co-operative relationship with Palestine. Let';s not forget that Jews and Arabs lived and worked side by side for centuries in relative harmony. Can you give me a link on this I've read a palestinian and Isrealis history of palestine site...and that is harrmony then US and Canada relations must be Bliss.... It wasn't until the Zionist experiment started (spurred by western imperialism and post-holocaust guilt) to run amuck that the conflicts got so out of hand. Correct me if i'm wrong but did i say that 75% of that land was given to the Arabs...and only 25 % to the Jews ....it was not a zionest experiment..well before the first war... So, if nothing can stop someone determined to kill someone, why make their job easier with heavy-handed and aggressive tactics? Why provoke them further? Thats a typical Canadian answer...Shhh don't talk to them they'll go away... Responsable leadership is to provide security to all it's citizens...By doing nothing will allow them to do as they please when they please if they know that there will not be any circumstances... getting better. Now ask why that is. Because you such a good teacher....Or maybe it's because i'm more open minded than you... Funny hw you can get in a tizzy over the propagandistic boasting of a few Arab leaders, but turn around and quote resources that demand Israel take over the whole middle east. A few Arab leaders, Egypt, Jordan,Syria, and a few terrorist groups to include the PLO now PA....leaders of nations, leaders that have influence over millions...it is a big deal ....the sources are using quotes from the bible to illistrate another piont... Don't make me point out again that Saddam was a ally of the U.S. before 1990.... Are you saying that is justifaction for sadam to do as he wanted....that we as Canadains should turn our heads and allow this type of things to happen.... Just like we did in Rwanda....It does not make it right...Sadam was a brute now he spends his days in his underwear in a cell.... see the U.S. invading a nation that did not threaten them, an act of naked aggression. I don't consider support of this to be a defensible stance. Ditto Israel's policies vis a vis the Occupied Territories. If we had this attitude when the Nazi's were take in over the world we would be typing in german today...if all the world stood up and said this type of behavior is no longer tolerable what would happen.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 No they are blowing themselfs up in crowded markets,or school busses....Both sides have shed much blood...it will take more than a few generations to fix this problem. On a strict numbers basis, this occupation has cost the Palestinians far far more than Israel. Yes, both sides have doen wrong. But someone needs to take a stand and stop the cycle of violence. Seeing as how Israel holds the cards, i'd say the onus is on them. Correct me if i'm wrong but most of the land that Israel "Occupies" has been given back to the Palestine authority has it not....Again i ask you to read the below links...as a man who enjoys the LAW... Most of the occupied territories remains under de facto Israeli control. Under Sharon's Gaza "disengagement" plan, Israel will maintain control over Gaza’s airspace, its territorial sea, and all border crossings and the Israeli army and security services will continue to have a free hand to operate there. In other words, Gaza will become a prison state for Palestinians, while Israel continue sto use the wall to effectively annex large portions of the West Bank. the league of nations had agreed on the division of land for not only the ARABS but for the Jews with the ARABS or decendants of the palestinians... getting over 75 % of the slice to start with and the jews left with 25 % of that slice....it was under british rule that the 25 % shrank to 23 % then to even less...given to the Palestinians...Those Palestinians on those contested lands now want even more of the Jewish slice....History is and will repeat itself...when are the palestinians going to be satisified .....And why can you not see that perhaps the Israelis don't want to give any more.... You're incorrect. The original 1947 partition plan gave the Arabs 43 percent of the land and the Jews 57 percent. Moreover, at the time, Jews made up less than one-third of the population of Palestine. Are you saying that the league of nations or the UN's decission should be ingored...as a law abiding man such as yourself...Israel did not make those decissions nor did they decide that the arabs had to leave the jewish zone or the jews had to leave the arab zones ...that was the league of nations... Well, I beleive the original partition plan, which was enforced without the consent or approval of the majority of people in the Mandate, was unjust, but it's too late to undo that now. And no the "population transfer" was not mandated by the UN, but came about as a result of the ensuing conflict. Yes, the state of palestine as it stands today has been around for how long...it's thriving, it's doing so well in fact as hobbies the send bombers into Israel...the last news special i seen it had quoted that a large number of palestinians are unemployed and the majority that areworking are working in Israel.... And that economic paralysis would have nothing to do with the occupation, would it? Economic aspects of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Israeli policies have distorted and weakened the Palestinian economy, particularly in the areas of trade (dependence upon one major trade partner), taxation (loss of revenues to finance development spending) as well as in the labour market (controls on flows of workers) and in Palestinian access to land (including land confiscation). As a result, poverty and unemployment have risen in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Resolution of these economic problems is therefore crucial to building a durable peace. The occupation is also costing Israel. Where have all our shekels gone? Can you give me a link on this I've read a palestinian and Isrealis history of palestine site...and that is harrmony then US and Canada relations must be Bliss.... Key word there: relative. Correct me if i'm wrong but did i say that 75% of that land was given to the Arabs...and only 25 % to the Jews ....it was not a zionest experiment..well before the first war... Al of Israel is a Zionist experiment, in as much as it is the end result of Herzl's call for Jews "to be a free people in our own land." As for your numbers, they are off, as I pointed out above. Responsable leadership is to provide security to all it's citizens...By doing nothing will allow them to do as they please when they please if they know that there will not be any circumstances... Did I say "let the terrorists run free?" No. But end the occupation and you take away a significant plank in the terrorists platform. A few Arab leaders, Egypt, Jordan,Syria, and a few terrorist groups to include the PLO now PA....leaders of nations, leaders that have influence over millions...it is a big deal ....the sources are using quotes from the bible to illistrate another piont... As i pointe dout, Egypt and Jordan have made peace with Israel. Abbas, th enew palestinian PM, seems willing to push for more non-violent solutions. here and now, i'd say there's more of a push for peace coming from the Arab side than the hard-right government of Sharon... Are you saying that is justifaction for sadam to do as he wanted....that we as Canadains should turn our heads and allow this type of things to happen.... Just like we did in Rwanda....It does not make it right...Sadam was a brute now he spends his days in his underwear in a cell.... And there are many moe brutes just like him who we call friend. No I think the selective condemnation of "bad guys" by the west is the problem. We have a tendancy to push for bad guys and deny otehrs teh right to self-determination in order to serve our own interests. And then we're surprised when soem of these thugs turn against us? Interesting you mention Rwanada. i've long said the West failed Rwanada, starting with the Belgians. We ened to be working to correct colonialism's errors and atone for our sins. I don't see that happening. If we had this attitude when the Nazi's were take in over the world we would be typing in german today...if all the world stood up and said this type of behavior is no longer tolerable what would happen.... You can't seriously be comparing a worn down, two bit pisspot dictator like Saddam to one of the mightiest war machines in history, are you? What's funnier is that Germany was an aggressor who invaded countries that posed no threat to them. As far as Iraq goes, it's the U.S. that wears that mantle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcqueen625 Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 QUOTE All religions must be 'put on trial' if the world is to ever become a better place. I agree with that 100%. In fact, all religions should be abolished. They are nothing but an impediment to man's progress. I take it then that you also want to include money and power into that, since in the case of the top corporate executives and our politicians, money and power is their religion. Where do you people think the concept of right and wrong came from? It was religion based, and is taught by all religions across this world. It would certainly be a sad day if religions were abolished, because society as a whole has done everything it can to help destroy this old world of ours, and things certainly are not getting any better, especially here in Canada where politicians now want to change the definition of marriage to suit a small vocal minority. This definition predates Canada even so how do these politicians and a bunch of nut-case appointed judges think that they have the right to change the definition of an institution that they had no part in defining in the first place. The other aspect is that people of belief will never accept same-sex marriages regardless of what legislation get's passed. Terrorist attacks on innocent civilians is an example of what life would be like without the influence of Christian and other types of Faith. Most laws are loosely based on The Ten Commandments. even ancient peoples believed in a Higher Power. What's going on in Quebec today is a result of a justice system gone way too far with the rights of perpetrators. Karla Holmolka even shed a tear at the thought of not being able to get out of jail and resume her twisted lefestyle of abusing and killing innocent victims. I read where some nut-case psychiatrist is willing to testify in Karla's behalf. We here in my city had one of these nut-cases testify that a mother with Maunchaucin Syndrome by Proxy was not a danger to her child, after she had been already caught attempting to make her child dangerously ill. Most psychiatrist's need one in my estimation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 Where do you people think the concept of right and wrong came from? It was religion based, and is taught by all religions across this world The concepts of right and wrong evolved from basic survival needs. It's funny: most religions have, historiclly, had no problem with murder or theft, provided it wa sthe "infidels" being victimized. . The other aspect is that people of belief will never accept same-sex marriages regardless of what legislation get's passed. Then they probably should avoid marrying someone of the same sex. Terrorist attacks on innocent civilians is an example of what life would be like without the influence of Christian and other types of Faith. Huh? The people responsible for 9-11 were religious fanatics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcqueen625 Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 Huh? The people responsible for 9-11 were religious fanatics. I beg to difer, they were not religious fanatics, they were just nutcases, attempting to use the Koran to justify their own madness. Even Muslim clerics attest to the fact that they were not in fact following religious beliefs, Muslim or otherwise. McVey did exactly the same type of thing and it had nothing to do with religion, but everything to do with the fact he was nuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 I beg to difer, they were not religious fanatics, they were just nutcases, attempting to use the Koran to justify their own madness. Even Muslim clerics attest to the fact that they were not in fact following religious beliefs, Muslim or otherwise. McVey did exactly the same type of thing and it had nothing to do with religion, but everything to do with the fact he was nuts. Whether they were right or not is irrelevant. The fact is they believed they were right and were fulfilling the demands of their religion. Ergo, the 9-11 attacks were religiously motivated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcqueen625 Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 As for the international court, the US wisely decided to not sign over their sovereignty to any body controlled by the UN. The UN has proven itself to be an ineffectual, corrupt body controlled by corrupt people including Kofi and his son. This organization sttod by and allowed people to be slaughtered in Sudan and many other places. In other countries they have failed to make sure non-proliferation treaties were neing floowing but at the same time tried to tie up US decision making by wimp countries like Germany & France. My the very country's attempting to to control the EU. Germany waged war twice on their European neighbours in an attempt to conquer them, and if it had not been for the Allies, Brittain, Canada, Australia, and the United States they would all be goose-stepping right now. I would suggest the EU is another attempt at accomplishing this goal only this time without firing a shot. Even the French people are smart enough to vote not to give up their sovereighty, aganist the wishes of Chirac. I would bet if the country's who's parliaments have voted for the Constitution, had been allowed to vote by referrendum, the same result may have been seen right across Europe. Funny how the countries who threatened to use veto power to stop any Iraq invasion, like France, Germany, and Russia are the same countries who have been implicated in the oil for food scam, along with the UN itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moderateamericain Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 I agree with you, upto the piont of the IDF.... and the coalition forces in Iraq. I don't see the use of terror, to rule, or send a message to others etc. Then you'r enot loking hard enough. The IDF uses collective punishment, checkpoits curfews and, when necessary, violence to keep the population they occupy in check. As for the U.S. in Iraq (I speak specificaly of them because others-notably the British forces- have not resorted to the same heavy heandedness), I offer up the "pacification" of Fallujah, an operation that left hundreds of of civilians dead and thousands more homeless, as evidence of terrorism. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> barring irrational answers like "you dont" name a better way to execute a urban warfare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 2, 2005 Report Share Posted June 2, 2005 Funny how the countries who threatened to use veto power to stop any Iraq invasion, like France, Germany, and Russia are the same countries who have been implicated in the oil for food scam, along with the UN itself Oil for food scandal revalations The United States administration turned a blind eye to extensive sanctions-busting in the prewar sale of Iraqi oil, according to a new Senate investigation.A report released last night by Democratic staff on a Senate investigations committee presents documentary evidence that the Bush administration was made aware of illegal oil sales and kickbacks paid to the Saddam Hussein regime but did nothing to stop them. The scale of the shipments involved dwarfs those previously alleged by the Senate committee against UN staff and European politicians like the British MP, George Galloway, and the former French minister, Charles Pasqua. In fact, the Senate report found that US oil purchases accounted for 52% of the kickbacks paid to the regime in return for sales of cheap oil - more than the rest of the world put together. "The United States was not only aware of Iraqi oil sales which violated UN sanctions and provided the bulk of the illicit money Saddam Hussein obtained from circumventing UN sanctions," the report said. "On occasion, the United States actually facilitated the illicit oil sales." arring irrational answers like "you dont"name a better way to execute a urban warfare. Why is "you don't" an "irrational" answer? War is an irrational activity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.