jacee Posted January 7, 2015 Report Posted January 7, 2015 state-of-palestine-will-join-the-international-criminal-court-on-april-1-un-chief- Quote
Big Guy Posted January 7, 2015 Author Report Posted January 7, 2015 It will be interesting to see what the reaction of the USA and Israel will be to this news. This will be uncomfortable for Israel in that the facts of the latest invasion will be repeated. It is also possible that the Americans may be indicted for war crimes in their efforts in the same area. Looks like for now, neither the UN nor the ICC will be intimidated. There will probably be reprisals against the Palestinians. This may backfire. There is lots of Arab oil money in the Middle East and some of that may now be directed towards the Palestinians of Abbas and the Gaza refugees. On the other hand, surrounding Arab states may like to see the end to the PA. If the reprisals are effective and the Palestinian Authority is unable to pay its bills the PA may disintegrate leaving a vacuum that would be filled with either Hamas like extremist or by Israel taking complete control of the West Bank. Tensions would increase as would violence with sympathy staying with the Palestinians. I believe that Israel wants no part of governing Palestinians and this would create a bigger problem for them that now exists. This Palestinian acceptance in the ICC is bad news for Israel and the USA. It may become a bargaining chip for the Palestinians if they want to press war crimes charges against Israeli politicians and military officers. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
jbg Posted January 8, 2015 Report Posted January 8, 2015 It will be interesting to see what the reaction of the USA and Israel will be to this news. This will be uncomfortable for Israel in that the facts of the latest invasion will be repeated. It is also possible that the Americans may be indicted for war crimes in their efforts in the same area. Looks like for now, neither the UN nor the ICC will be intimidated. There will probably be reprisals against the Palestinians. This may backfire. There is lots of Arab oil money in the Middle East and some of that may now be directed towards the Palestinians of Abbas and the Gaza refugees. On the other hand, surrounding Arab states may like to see the end to the PA. If the U.N. and the Third World wants to politicize the World Court in this manner, let them pay. I certainly don't see a rush of Arab oil money to fund the U.N., even during the high oil price era. If the reprisals are effective and the Palestinian Authority is unable to pay its bills the PA may disintegrate leaving a vacuum that would be filled with either Hamas like extremist or by Israel taking complete control of the West Bank. Tensions would increase as would violence with sympathy staying with the Palestinians. I believe that Israel wants no part of governing Palestinians and this would create a bigger problem for them that now exists. This Palestinian acceptance in the ICC is bad news for Israel and the USA. It may become a bargaining chip for the Palestinians if they want to press war crimes charges against Israeli politicians and military officers. If the Arabs really want to pursue this course they may seriously rue the consequences. Basically it is yet another declaration of war, on top of the ones still on the shelf from 1948. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jacee Posted January 8, 2015 Report Posted January 8, 2015 Do you mean the consequences in 'collective punishment' by Israel? Isn't that illegal? Might that not lead to consequences at the ICC for Israel? . Quote
jbg Posted January 8, 2015 Report Posted January 8, 2015 Do you mean the consequences in 'collective punishment' by Israel? Isn't that illegal? Might that not lead to consequences at the ICC for Israel? . Let's make one thing clear. Israel is not going to be pushed out of business by international law or the ICC. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jacee Posted January 8, 2015 Report Posted January 8, 2015 Let's make one thing clear. Israel is not going to be pushed out of business by international law or the ICC. Nobody's trying to 'push Israel out of business'. What an odd thing to say. . Quote
jbg Posted January 8, 2015 Report Posted January 8, 2015 Nobody's trying to 'push Israel out of business'. What an odd thing to say.If Israeli leaders and/or business leaders are under trials by capricious tribunals it sure would make life complicated. Why is the West subsdizing this garbage anyway? We can always re-crank Nurenberg or something like it for arrested "leaders." We don't need a permanent body, that take years to conduct one trial, soaking up money. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Rue Posted January 8, 2015 Report Posted January 8, 2015 (edited) Jacee boycotting Israeli products is a collective punishment exercise and I am sure you know that and don't deny it hasn't been used by the Arab League for example in 1967 with the oil boycotts or through pressuring the EU to not purchase products from Israel. Just as collectively punishing Palestinians because of the actions of their terrorist controllers is wrong, so is punishing Israeli civilians because you don't like the policies of its government. Be fair. I am. I cringe every time I see the Israeli government react to Hamas or the PA by doing something in reaction whose net effect only hurts Palestinian civilians. To me I cringe because it just fuels the cycle of anger and retaliation. I say it openly criticizing certain Israeli policies such as when they seize land in reaction to a terror attack. To me that is exactly the knee jerk reaction Hamas wanted. On the other hand I doubt I will ever get an acknowledgement from you that what Hamas and the PA and Fatah and anti Israelis do is blame and want to punish all Israelis simply because they want to live as Jews in Israel in a state that protects their right to being Jewish and unlike Sharia law does not define them as dhimmi. I say it again-Israelis and Palestinians both want the same thing-peace and country to live in. Its that simple yet that complex because at the cruz of the argument is a body of people in the Arab world who perceive of a Palestinian state, but can not and will not allow themselves to accept a Jewish one. That is fact and until the psyche of the Arab collective world, accepts a Jewish state as reality, the conflict will continue. Edited January 8, 2015 by Rue Quote
GostHacked Posted January 8, 2015 Report Posted January 8, 2015 Let's make one thing clear. Israel is not going to be pushed out of business by international law or the ICC. How would that even happen? If anything allowing Palestine to be part of the ICC holds Palestine to be accountable for it's actions. I thought this was a good thing? But if you don't want to play with the global community saying that the rules do not apply, then Israel cannot bitch about others that are doing things illegally to Israel. Would allowing Palestine into the ICC shed more light on the wrongdoings of Israel? Is that why Israel is contesting this? Quote
jacee Posted January 8, 2015 Report Posted January 8, 2015 If Israeli leaders and/or business leaders are under trials by capricious tribunals it sure would make life complicated. Actions have consequences. . Quote
jacee Posted January 8, 2015 Report Posted January 8, 2015 (edited) Jacee boycotting Israeli products is a collective punishment exercise and I am sure you know that and don't deny it hasn't been used by the Arab League for example in 1967 with the oil boycotts or through pressuring the EU to not purchase products from Israel.People are free to buy or not buy whosever products they choose. Just as collectively punishing Palestinians because of the actions of their terrorist controllers is wrong, so is punishing Israeli civilians because you don't like the policies of its government.Withholding money that belongs to someone else is theft. Be fair. I am. I cringe every time I see the Israeli government react to Hamas or the PA by doing something in reaction whose net effect only hurts Palestinian civilians. To me I cringe because it just fuels the cycle of anger and retaliation. I say it openly criticizing certain Israeli policies such as when they seize land in reaction to a terror attack. To me that is exactly the knee jerk reaction Hamas wanted. So why do you defend Israel's actions and try to justify their irrational and tyrannical collective punishment of Palestinians?On the other hand I doubt I will ever get an acknowledgement from you that what Hamas and the PA and Fatah and anti Israelis do is blame and want to punish all Israelis simply because they want to live as Jews in Israel in a state that protects their right to being Jewish and unlike Sharia law does not define them as dhimmi. No you certainly won't get any such ridiculous "acknowlegment" from me, and it continues to astound me that you think Israel needs someone else's permission to be a Jewish state. I say it again-Israelis and Palestinians both want the same thing-peace and country to live in. Its that simple yet that complex because at the cruz of the argument is a body of people in the Arab world who perceive of a Palestinian state, but can not and will not allow themselves to accept a Jewish one.Ridiculous. Your pathetic roadblocks to peace are just getting tedious and boring and don't reflect well on Israel. That is fact and until the psyche of the Arab collective world, accepts a Jewish state as reality, the conflict will continue.There will be no peace until Israel recognizes itself as a Jewish state without whining for approval from others. . Edited January 8, 2015 by jacee Quote
Big Guy Posted January 9, 2015 Author Report Posted January 9, 2015 Abbas appears to be determined to take Israel to the International Court to explain its actions in the last incursion into Gaza. Abbas continues in the process of joining and it looks like he is going to get his wish. The chief prosecutor looks ready to start proceedings against Israel. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2015/01/icc-close-opening-gaza-war-investigation-20151823737595395.html Both America and Israel consider this a "nuclear option" and are strongly criticizing the move. I can understand the Israeli position but why are the Americans so much against a neutral world authority investigating how a nation is treating another nation? Netanyahu has already withheld about $130 million to which Palestine in entitled and now asking America to withhold the annual $400 million that it gives the Palestinians. The last time Israel tried to starve out the Palestinians, Hamas in Gaza got the benefit of cheap armaments and Israel realized its mistake. But to try that again? Saudi Arabia, which has been supportive of the Palestinians and appears to be ready to send funds, is not helping the American cause. It would be interesting for the USA to have to explain to the world why it is trying to starve the Palestinians into not using the ICC to get justice. http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21638151-will-joining-international-criminal-court-further-palestines-cause-see-you Does not look the Palestinians are ready to go away. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Bonam Posted January 9, 2015 Report Posted January 9, 2015 (edited) Palestinians could have had their own state a dozen times by now. It's been offered to them that many times on a silver platter. Reality is their leaders don't care about a state, they just care about being a pain in the ass for Israel, because their religious hatred of Jews overrides anything else. Going to the ICC is yet another in a long string of efforts by the Palestinian leadership to be a thorn for Israel, rather than working to better the future of their own people. Edited January 9, 2015 by Bonam Quote
Big Guy Posted January 9, 2015 Author Report Posted January 9, 2015 Why is trying to get an investigation of what Israel did in Gaza from a neutral world court considered a "pain in the ass"? If there were no transgressions than Israel will be found innocent - won't it? I would think that getting justice is working to better the future of their own people - would it not? I understand that the court would investigate the actions of the Palestinians as well. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Hudson Jones Posted January 10, 2015 Report Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) Palestinians could have had their own state a dozen times by now. It's been offered to them that many times on a silver platter. This is pure fantasy. The best offer, which was never official, included Palestinians living in cantons with the major roads and the borders being controlled by Israel - Oh and no East Jerusalem. That was the generous offer. Which Palestinian leader would accept such an offer? In the Guardian newspaper on 14 April 2001, diplomatic editor Ewen MacAskill wrote: The Israelis portrayed it as the Palestinians receiving 96% of the West Bank. But the figure is misleading. The Israelis did not include parts of the West Bank they had already appropriated. The Palestine that would have emerged from such a settlement would not have been viable. It would have been in about half-a-dozen chunks, with huge Jewish settlements in between - a Middle East Bantustan. The Israeli army would also have retained the proposed Palestinian state’s eastern border, the Jordan valley, for six to 10 years and, more significantly, another strip along the Dead Sea coast for an unspecified period: so much for being an independent state. […] A genuinely generous offer by Barak might have secured peace. That was the missed historic opportunity. If Israel had been more magnanimous at Camp David, it could have had the greater prize of long-term stability. There is a huge danger attached to the Israeli view that Arafat spurned a great offer. Accepting this version perpetuates the Israeli myth that the Palestinians will not be happy until the Jews are pushed back into the sea and that the West Bank and Gaza are full of gunmen and bombers intent on making that happen. There are such people - but most Palestinians are interested less in the destruction of Israel than in establishing a proper Palestinian state. Most are as exercised about the poor quality of the leadership round Arafat and about the endemic corruption and lack of democracy in their own society as they are about Israel. What they want is for the Israeli army to go home and to take the Jewish settlers with them. There will be no peace until that happens. Source: “The real deal; Ewen Macaskill: Israel’s View That Arafat Missed A Chance For Peace Under Barak Is Dangerously Deluded”, The Guardian, 14 April 2001. Edited January 10, 2015 by Hudson Jones Quote When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi
jacee Posted January 10, 2015 Report Posted January 10, 2015 Palestinians could have had their own state a dozen times by now. Irrelevant. It's been offered to them that many times on a silver platter. Reality is their leaders don't care about a state, they just care about being a pain in the ass for Israel, because their religious hatred of Jews overrides anything else. Going to the ICC is yet another in a long string of efforts by the Palestinian leadership to be a thorn for Israel, rather than working to better the future of their own people. This isn't useful. . Quote
Hudson Jones Posted January 10, 2015 Report Posted January 10, 2015 There seems to be so much resistance and even a hint of fear towards justice and equality. Not to worry too much Bonam, et al. All will be done by Israel and the lapdogs in the U.S. government to derail that. Withholding Palestinian tax money by the Israeli government is the first step. Quote When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it--always. Gandhi
jbg Posted January 10, 2015 Report Posted January 10, 2015 If Israeli leaders and/or business leaders are under trials by capricious tribunals it sure would make life complicated.Actions have consequences.I guess you're misreading my post. My point is that the ICC can and will be politicized into becoming a "two-piece suit" version of terror, where Israelis having no connection to the offending policies are "tried." Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jbg Posted January 10, 2015 Report Posted January 10, 2015 Both America and Israel consider this a "nuclear option" and are strongly criticizing the move. I can understand the Israeli position but why are the Americans so much against a neutral world authority investigating how a nation is treating another nation? Netanyahu has already withheld about $130 million to which Palestine in entitled and now asking America to withhold the annual $400 million that it gives the Palestinians. The last time Israel tried to starve out the Palestinians, Hamas in Gaza got the benefit of cheap armaments and Israel realized its mistake. But to try that again?How about having a "neutral world authority" investigate the funding sources of Hamas, ISIS and the various "rogues" that have crashed autos into Israeli crowds? Or having a "neutral world authority" investigate the source and use of funds that are provided for their benefit? Such as how much is used for arms, how much winds up in Swiss bank accounts, etc.? Why is Israel the only proposed target of such an investigation, or prosecution? I don't expect an answer. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Big Guy Posted January 10, 2015 Author Report Posted January 10, 2015 I do not believe that the actions you stated are the purview of the International Criminal Court but I assume that since Israel has the right it could ask that court to look into that activity. At this point in time the ICC is the only impartial world organization to which countries can go for justice. If there is another I would like to know about it. I have no doubt that everything you stated is true and that is probably one of the causes for Israeli actions. Personally, I do not believe in the "The end justifies the means" justification for any action by anybody. I believe that is why the ICC exists - to judge the actions of nations (the "means" that a nation uses) on each other towards attaining an end. If you question the neutrality of the ICC and believe that the ICC and the UN are anti-Semite then I would disagree with you. They may on the other hand question the actions of the government of Israel. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 10, 2015 Report Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) The ICC has completed nine "official investigations" to date...nearly all against African nations. Neutral? .....hardly ! http://iccforum.com/forum/africa Edited January 10, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted January 10, 2015 Report Posted January 10, 2015 And then of course there's that one they did into Bush/ Cheney/Rumsfeld which always seems to ruffles a few feathers. Quote
GostHacked Posted January 10, 2015 Report Posted January 10, 2015 I guess you're misreading my post. My point is that the ICC can and will be politicized into becoming a "two-piece suit" version of terror, where Israelis having no connection to the offending policies are "tried." You mean even more than it is now? If the ICC and UN were really effective, you'd see most of our leaders behind bars. Quote
jacee Posted January 10, 2015 Report Posted January 10, 2015 (edited) jacee, on 08 Jan 2015 - 12:47 PM jbg, on 08 Jan 2015 - 08:39 AM, said If Israeli leaders and/or business leaders are under trials by capricious tribunals it sure would make life complicated. Actions have consequences. I guess you're misreading my post. My point is that the ICC can and will be politicized into becoming a "two-piece suit" version of terror, where Israelis having no connection to the offending policies are "tried."Provide evidence to support the allegations you made re the ICC.Because as your posts stand, they are just nasty allegations with no merit. The people who will be tried will be those giving the orders. . Edited January 11, 2015 by jacee Quote
jacee Posted January 10, 2015 Report Posted January 10, 2015 How about having a "neutral world authority" investigate the funding sources of Hamas, ISIS and the various "rogues" that have crashed autos into Israeli crowds? Or having a "neutral world authority" investigate the source and use of funds that are provided for their benefit? Such as how much is used for arms, how much winds up in Swiss bank accounts, etc.? Why is Israel the only proposed target of such an investigation, or prosecution? I don't expect an answer. Here's an answer: Israel can join the ICC and do any of those things it wants. It isn't up to someone else to do it for them. . Quote
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.