Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 what about the demolition and destruction of civilian buildings? Legitimate and necessary, as terrorists operate in civilian buildings. How do you not understand this? what about the white phosphorus used by the idf? Legitimate and necessary. what about the use of heavy artillery in a densely populated area? Oh, you'd prefer the IDF go in with handguns? The war took place in heavily-populated areas, that's what happens. Have a problem with it? Blame Hamas. what will become of the individuals who went against israel's policy against killing civilians (ex: white flag waving civilians)? What in the world...? what about the school that was hit? What about it? You think the school wasn't being used for terrorism? You swallow every allegation in the Goldstone Report as if Palestinian eyewitness testimony is sufficient grounds to understand what really happened, and as if the IDF has a responsibility to explain itself to people like yourself who have no interest in the truth, anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 So if you were in charge what kind a settlement would you negotiate? would you withdraw from the minor settlements and the jordan valley? would you pay compensation in lieu of right of return to Israel proper? would you "share" jerusalem? would you allow free passage between WB to Gaza? would you allow sovereign rights to the nation of Palestine? In your world, what would a peaceful, meaningful, and sustainable agreement look like? Personally, if there was a real partner for peace among the Palestinians, relinquishing minor settlements would be a worthwhile compromise towards Palestinian statehood. Compensation for refugees? Is that some sort of sick joke? How about this, we'll compensate them for the seven hundred thousand Arab/Palestinian refugees if they compensate us for the million Jewish refugees from Arab/Muslim lands. Jerusalem cannot be divided. It's the Israeli capital. If anything, its borders should be expanded further in "East Jerusalem". If there really was a peace agreement in good faith, safe passage of course should be given between Gaza and Judea/Samaria. The problem is, of course, the Palestinians don't have a legitimate representative in Judea/Samaria and have elected terrorists to rule them in Gaza. We cannot make an agreement that the Palestinian leaders don't have the ability to deliver. A future Palestine could, presumably be largely sovereign. It must be demilitarized, though. Anyways, this is all hypothetical. We will never see a peaceful resolution. Things are getting worse, not better. The situation is so messed up for so many reasons I don't even want to get into, now. There is no reason to be optimistic about a two-state solution with mutual recognition considering how things are going, and have been going, for many decades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) Legitimate and necessary, as terrorists operate in civilian buildings. How do you not understand this? Legitimate and necessary. Oh, you'd prefer the IDF go in with handguns? The war took place in heavily-populated areas, that's what happens. Have a problem with it? Blame Hamas. What in the world...? What about it? You think the school wasn't being used for terrorism? You swallow every allegation in the Goldstone Report as if Palestinian eyewitness testimony is sufficient grounds to understand what really happened, and as if the IDF has a responsibility to explain itself to people like yourself who have no interest in the truth, anyways. once you've had a chance to go over the geneva convention then we can talk about legitimacy of actions. while you're at it, look at all the other information that have not been 'retracted' by goldstone. all of the reports that have come from HRW, the red cross and amnesty international are also a good place for you to learn a little about the situation. until then, you'll continue to sound like a rabid, fanatical extremist. Edited April 6, 2011 by bud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 once you've had a chance to go over the geneva convention then we can talk about legitimacy of actions. Oh Goody... The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favor or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations You were emoting...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 It's also important to remember that whatever Human Rights Watch or Amnesty say is absolutely true, genuine, and devoid of politicization. Their "reports" certainly cannot be questioned or challenged. Because we all know that HRW and AI are firmly committed to honest to goodness human rights. After all, it's right there in their mission statements. Why would they ever lie or misrepresent things?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 In all seriousness, I just don't care what this law or that organization or this expert or that report says. There's right and there's wrong. This isn't that complicated. If there is terrorism coming from an area, it must be stopped. Unfortunately, terrorism against Israel almost exclusively arises from areas that have civilian and civilian infrastructure. Unfortunately, these civilians and the civilian infrastructure often serve a dual purpose and are a part of the terrorist system. Unless the terrorists cease their violence, we'll continue seeing harm befall civilians and civilian infrastructure. Israel cannot sit idly by while under attack, it's that simple. And no amount of fluffy reports from organizations claiming to advocate on behalf of human rights is going to change that. If you have a beef with civilians being harmed, then direct your attention against the terrorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) ..it's too bad that israel refused to cooperate with the original mission that goldstone set out to do. ..ps - naomi is a different person but i don't mind if you want to continue thinking we're the same people. Goldstone's original mission was to engage in admitting as evidence unsubstantiated, second, third and fourth hand evidence and to make conclusions about state and military policy decisions he claimed Israel initiated, without seeking consultation with them. So why would they set out to help Goldstone engage in such a flawed exercise, particulary since he announced that was his intention and would be his method of operation? Love the logic. Its too bad Israel didn't bend over and welcome Goldstone shoving his hand up their collective buttox. Too bad? What a joke. Too bad Israel didn't agree to do a hatchet job on itself. Right. p.s. Naomi, Bud, Dub, lol. The harder you try hide what you are the more obvious it becomes. Regards, Jackie Mason er I mean Wil Smith no I mean Tom cruise no no I mean Jackie Chan no I mean Charlie Sheen Edited April 6, 2011 by Rue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) ..If you have a beef with civilians being harmed, then direct your attention against the terrorists. I do and I urge people to hold Hamas morally culpable for their decision to place civilians in harms way and get them injured and killed. However I also strongly believe it is a basic precept of Zionism and therefore equally as valid for the IDF and Israelis and those of us who support Israel's right to exist and fight terror to speak up when necessary and protect the humanitarian and ethical principles and codes of the IDF and Zionism and so question, challenge and hold IDF soldiers accountable for unecessary or inhumane practices and to strive at all times to try prevent the unecessary suffering of civilians. The point is the Israel legal system and its IDF and its press and its numerous humanitarian organizations hold it accountable and will continue to hold it accountable because that is precisely how Israel and Zionism works. The point is the IDF carried out over 400 investigations and takes the unecessary killing of civilians seriously because its legal and military systems demand it. The point is certain IDF soldiers came back from Gaza and filed complaints against fellow soldiers they felt acted inappropriately and violated the IDF code of ethics. The point is Israel has never asked people to just pay attention to the terrorists and look the other way with them. The IDF has never hidden from criticism. It did not prevent its soldiers from speaking critically to the media nor did it say it was perfect or unaccountable or ever argue the point that everything it does is excused because it fights terrorists. The point is the IDF did not just say, look at Hamas. It said, criticize us-just don't ignore Hamas. The IDF and Israel has never asked for a white wash or a cover up-just to be held to the same standard as everyone else by the UN. Edited April 6, 2011 by Rue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 It's also important to remember that whatever Human Rights Watch or Amnesty say is absolutely true, genuine, and devoid of politicization. Their "reports" certainly cannot be questioned or challenged. Because we all know that HRW and AI are firmly committed to honest to goodness human rights. After all, it's right there in their mission statements. Why would they ever lie or misrepresent things?? that's your defense? if you want to question or challenge them, go right ahead. why do you think that israel has avoided cooperating with investigations with these different HR organizations? don't you think they should cooperate with them in order to show that the allegations of violations of human rights are untrue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 In all seriousness, I just don't care what this law or that organization or this expert or that report says. okay. you don't care about laws, human rights organizations, experts or reports. easy enough. you're off the hook. carry on with your tribal fanaticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 Says our local CJPME member. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) okay. you don't care about laws, human rights organizations, experts or reports. easy enough. you're off the hook. carry on with your tribal fanaticism. Speaking of fanaticism... Have you received your Muslim Brotherhood membership card yet?? You do so much PR work for them I figured you must be working for them? Edited April 6, 2011 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 that's your defense? if you want to question or challenge them, go right ahead. why do you think that israel has avoided cooperating with investigations with these different HR organizations? don't you think they should cooperate with them in order to show that the allegations of violations of human rights are untrue? What I'm saying is that HRW, AI, and the hundreds and hundreds of other NGOs out there that claim to hold the banner of "human rights" have no right to undermine Israel's right to self-defense. It doesn't matter how much obfuscation people like you will use, citing "international law", or resolutions from the UN or its subsidiaries (as if those resolutions are inherently legitimate), attacks and threats against Israel will not be unanswered. You can't throw paperwork in our face and tell us that we must accept rocket attacks, shootings, IEDs, and suicide bombers because "international law" says so. There's nothing fanatic about that. And I'm not part of some "tribe". I'm Jewish. I belong to the Jewish nation. Your choice of the word "tribe" tells us a lot about your intentions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 Speaking of fanaticism... Have you received your Muslim Brotherhood membership card yet?? You do so much PR work for them I figured you must be working for them? eh? what are you babbling about now jack? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) What I'm saying is that HRW, AI, and the hundreds and hundreds of other NGOs out there that claim to hold the banner of "human rights" have no right to undermine Israel's right to self-defense. It doesn't matter how much obfuscation people like you will use, citing "international law", or resolutions from the UN or its subsidiaries (as if those resolutions are inherently legitimate), attacks and threats against Israel will not be unanswered. You can't throw paperwork in our face and tell us that we must accept rocket attacks, shootings, IEDs, and suicide bombers because "international law" says so. There's nothing fanatic about that. And I'm not part of some "tribe". I'm Jewish. I belong to the Jewish nation. Your choice of the word "tribe" tells us a lot about your intentions. you are part of the problem bob. you're contributing to the loss of the meaning of self-defense. systematic land grab, theft of water, brutal occupation and violations of human rights are not 'self-defense'. Edited April 6, 2011 by bud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 "Brutal occupation" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 eh? what are you babbling about now jack? He paints what he sees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 "Brutal occupation" there you go. a non-response. are you going to look into moving into the new cheap housing? you'll be helping to further the dream of greater israel and helping the fat cats who make millions from building these illegal settlements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 there you go. a non-response. are you going to look into moving into the new cheap housing? you'll be helping to further the dream of greater israel and helping the fat cats who make millions from building these illegal settlements. "Fat cats" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted April 6, 2011 Report Share Posted April 6, 2011 "Fat cats" is that a yes? i'm sure you'll look into the cost once the floor plans and prices come out. don't forget to get on the mailing list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 Is it time for a group hug yet? No not you Oleg! I meant Buddy, Bobby and Jackie. You'll just make them all nervous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 okay. you don't care about laws, human rights organizations, experts or reports. easy enough. you're off the hook. carry on with your tribal fanaticism. Oh go one. Tell me you your favourite movie is NOT Lawrence of Arabia. Puhleeze. You know you think you are T.E. Laurence. For that matter jack is Joe Friday from Dragnet and Bob is Gen. Sharon. Oleg is Ryan Seacrest by the way. Me-kind of obvious-Tzipi Levni's secret lover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted April 8, 2011 Report Share Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) Oh go one. Tell me you your favourite movie is NOT Lawrence of Arabia. Puhleeze. You know you think you are T.E. Laurence. For that matter jack is Joe Friday from Dragnet and Bob is Gen. Sharon. Oleg is Ryan Seacrest by the way. Me-kind of obvious-Tzipi Levni's secret lover. Just the facts,M'am... Bob is more Begin than Sharon... Edited April 8, 2011 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted April 11, 2011 Report Share Posted April 11, 2011 Just the facts,M'am... Bob is more Begin than Sharon... Lol, Point taken. Actually all kidding aside he knows I respect him. 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.