Newcastle-Online

Archives => Hall Of Fame => Topic started by: Parky on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:06:32 PM

Title: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:06:32 PM
Is Israel the real blackmailer? Continually saying they will have to sort out their upstart neighbours
if we don't do something about it.
India have had an atomic 'drop' capability since 1986 and this has come through the turbulent
and Hindu fundamentalist era of the BJP.......Pakistan has essentially had a military junta in power
since Bhutto left office...South Africa one of the original most unstable govt has had nuclear
weopans for yonks....
Do people think if Iran had a weapon they would be more dangerous than any of the above?
Are the media leading us a merry dance?
Have we not learnt anything from the lies peddled about Iraq and her 'weapons' and intentions?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:11:00 PM
I think Israel is the real problem in the world.  There's little doubt of that for me. 

However, I do not believe that Iran wouldn't use their weapons.  Particularly their current President. 

I think it goes deeper than the State of Israel though.  They hold insane power in America, and more questions need to be asked why the West have blindly backed them through their land grab.  Or why they were even given the land in the first place, and the Jewish population got rights and the Palestinians were just trodden all over.

A lot of the current problems of the world stem back to that one issue.  Until that is sorted, and properly, we'll never see this end.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:17:33 PM
Why have we? It has taken on mythical resonance for some over the years.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:20:38 PM
I haven't looked at the figures recently but U.S. aid to Israel is astronomical.....One thing I discovered by chance
recently is that they still get huge sums also from Germany and recently in the form of German built stealth submarines.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:27:34 PM
The backing is so blind though, that dodgy reasons can only be why.

I have no problem saying I think there's a Global agenda.  Sadly I can't prove it.  But then, no one seems to be able to give me a decent reasons as to why Israel gets this backing. 

Personally think we're on track for a one world Government, eventually.  And all these wars are just one step closer to doing so. 

First they'll unify the continents.  Much in the way of the United States.  European Union will become a A European state.  North America will become one.  It'll happen all over.  Once you have about 6 Surperstates it's much easy to Govern the world.  Which America is clearly dying to do. 

Only thing is, there will be agressive opposition to this.  Which is going to be horrific, one way or the other.  Let's be honest, over the past 60 years, that's the way it's gone.  Continental Unions never existed until after the World Wars.  They're expanding ever more, and soon they'll put constitutions in place that give them more power over the individual states.  Tell me, is that not what's happening in Europe already?

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:27:36 PM
Ive been there and it is. The whole country is a disgrace IMO, they have ridiculous military when all there nieghbours have small ill equiped armies. They have build there great wall through palitinina houses skols and towns. They have no respect for human rights either. When i went i was threatened with an assaultrifle aimed at my face im not sure why but he checked my passport and he nearly died when he saw GB on it.

The Jewish lobbies in America have far to much power and they play on the holocaust thing to much imo. THe holocaust was a truely dreadful event yes but that doesnt mean the jews have a divne right to take land from other peoples.

They need to be sorted out and loose the american backing then see how things would shape up. The UN cant touch them due to the uproar it would cause in america. Real threat to world peace as they could unsettle the middleeat then things would just escualte.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:28:26 PM
I haven't looked at the figures recently but U.S. aid to Israel is astronomical.....One thing I discovered by chance
recently is that they still get huge sums also from Germany and recently in the form of German built stealth submarines.

Also another reason why I think we're all in it together.  Say one thing do the other.  Actions speak louder than words, and all that.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:32:37 PM
Give the palestines a state and their rights back thats all that is needed.

Cant see it happening tho. A bomb goes off in isreal so they buldoze a refugeu camp ?? How the hell is that helping they simply p*ss more ppl off who are willing to go blow more things up.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:38:08 PM
There's a lot to be said about the oppression of Palestinians.  But suicide bombings isn't an answer.  They're not entirely free of blame. 

There's a particular savagery about the so called freedom fighters.  Both in Palestine and Iraq, or Afgahnistan. 

However, Israel are the more powerful and should lead by example and not an eye for an eye.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:40:05 PM
Actually Bluff me old mucker we have to be a little careful where this thread goes huh? :tongue3:

The holocaust card....tell me about it I live in Germany.
My girlfriend told me off cause I said the lead character in King Kong had bigger nose than the ape himself. bluelaugh.gif

She told me that you have to be careful saying things like that here.
I laughed it off....Makes you wonder like.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:40:19 PM
Give the palestines a state and their rights back thats all that is needed.

Cant see it happening tho. A bomb goes off in isreal so they buldoze a refugeu camp ?? How the hell is that helping they simply p*ss more ppl off who are willing to go blow more things up.

That's all that's needed?  'Fraid not.  Have you not heard of Kashmir?  That's little to do with Israel, but gets about half the air time in the media.  Many Muslims are as outraged at that as they are the Palestinian cause. 

Iraq, Afghanistan too.  These are almost more important than Palestine for future peace at the moment.  No, there's more than just Palestine that needs sorted. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:44:11 PM
I don't think I've said anything out of line.  I'm not having a go at Jews, at all.  It's the leaders of these countries, not the people.

I'm sure many Jewish people share my views, infact I know many do.  I've read the books.  Islamic countries are us much to blame for the problems of the world as Israel in recent times.  Just Israel might as well be America the way they're always backed up.  And the whole Israel thing kicked it off. 

The Holocaust was horrific.  I don't believe I made any reference to it though.

EDIT:  Ah, Adam^ did.  The holocaust wasn't used as the reason to take Palestine, ever.  The movement to take Palestine started way before WW2 was even a remote possiblity.  Try 60/70 years, and read about Zionism.  Please don't use that, as it's wrong and is offensive to people.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:44:24 PM
The Western media subliminally have built up this myth that along the lines that only white christians are safe with
deadly weopans and the 'wogs' can't be trusted.
Although Europe has started 2 world wars and America has used 2 nuclear weopans against civilians.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:46:59 PM
My quote thing ain't working Bluff, but I was only playing you have been the paragon of virtue.
I was alluding to spying 'eyes' rather than any over enthusiatic remarks on our part.
Not quite Guantanamo stuff yet mate.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Tisd09 on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:50:12 PM
The backing is so blind though, that dodgy reasons can only be why.

I have no problem saying I think there's a Global agenda.  Sadly I can't prove it.  But then, no one seems to be able to give me a decent reasons as to why Israel gets this backing. 

Personally think we're on track for a one world Government, eventually.  And all these wars are just one step closer to doing so. 

First they'll unify the continents.  Much in the way of the United States.  European Union will become a A European state.  North America will become one.  It'll happen all over.  Once you have about 6 Surperstates it's much easy to Govern the world.  Which America is clearly dying to do. 

Only thing is, there will be agressive opposition to this.  Which is going to be horrific, one way or the other.  Let's be honest, over the past 60 years, that's the way it's gone.  Continental Unions never existed until after the World Wars.  They're expanding ever more, and soon they'll put constitutions in place that give them more power over the individual states.  Tell me, is that not what's happening in Europe already?



If this question is a bit personal I am sorry. but I am interested to know if you have any religious beliefs?

Its just I remember (not very well mind you) that in the Bilble it talks about or suggest a One World Government with a head figure who will be seen by many as a saviour. As bringing peace firstly to the Middle East with regards to Israel then "sorting out" the rest of the World. It also talks about opposition to this New World Order?

I too find it strange that Israel are backed unconditionally at times, almost as if we are duty bound to defend Israel. They too have commit serious offences against Palastinians.

I wish I could talk more about things like this as it is really interesting but to be honest I don't know enough to comment deeper into the subject.?

DISCLAIMER: In no way anything I have said is meant as any offence if any is taken, and this is just my interpretation of things and the way I have understood things.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:52:39 PM
Bluff what in your opinion is behind this global agenda, I am interested in the same vein as 09?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:53:46 PM
If this question is a bit personal I am sorry. but I am interested to know if you have any religious beliefs?

Its just I remember (not very well mind you) that in the Bilble it talks about or suggest a One World Government with a head figure who will be seen by many as a saviour. As bringing peace firstly to the Middle East with regards to Israel then "sorting out" the rest of the World. It also talks about opposition to this New World Order?

I too find it strange that Israel are backed unconditionally at times, almost as if we are duty bound to defend Israel. They too have commit serious offences against Palastinians.

I wish I could talk more about things like this as it is really interesting but to be honest I don't know enough to comment deeper into the subject.?

DISCLAIMER: In no way anything I have said is meant as any offence if any is taken, and this is just my interpretation of things and the way I have understood things.

No, I am not religious.  And it wasn't offensive, or personal, for me anyway.

But that's where it all comes from and why I believe this one world Government is also inevitable.  Especially with the way America is. 

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:55:10 PM
Tell us more Bluff. bluebiggrin.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 9 January 2006, 11:58:13 PM
Bluff what in your opinion is behind this global agenda, I am interested in the same vein as 09?

A one world Government.  New World Order.  Whatever people want to call it, that's where I think we're headed. 

I'd like to hear other people's takes on it, I know there's many that don't agree, which I respect. 

America already see its self as the, and I quote to the word, 'the leader of the Free World'.  It would be in prime control of any Government.  Only thing is, this is never going to happen over a table, diplomatically.  Only an incredible war could instigate such actions.  Or some sort of Civil War in America, which I can't see, but I guess is as possible as WW3.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 12:05:41 AM
It starts with the Grail Bluff.....
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Shearer9 on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 01:56:06 AM
I seriously doubt that America would ever be in a position to rule very large portions of the world.  We have trouble controlling one of the countries, imagine America attempting to control the entire middle east, or all of Africa or South America.  Wouldn't happen.  I don't think America would ever be leading the way in a one world government.  Sure, we like to have our fingers everywhere and be silently pulling strings, but if any movement towards a one world government will come, I'd imagine the push would be from the EU, with Economic promises to Africa and Asia. 

Bluf does make a good point about Israel, there's not even really a slant in the media about this, it's all Israel-good Muslims-bad.  Despite the fact that the spread of Islam makes me uneasy, I know for a fact that many Muslims want nothing but peace for themselves and the societies they live in.  I just wish that Christians in general had the passion that Muslims do, and feeling strong enough about their beliefs to be willing to die for them.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 02:01:47 AM
That's mainly why I think it would need to happen after something major.  Perhaps a Civil War in America with the EU going in to regain control.  Sounds insane, but at the moment it's as likely as a Nuclear Holocaust (WW3).  Thing is, you have to realise, I think a lot of these things are staged, so that's why I think it's going to happen, because the Elite want it to.

Things can't half change drastically and all of that is years off.  I'm not talking about a one world Government in the next decade.  More 20, if not more years away, but it is inevitable one way or the other.  Human Race is never going to explore space in future times as competing little nations. 

There's a lot left to happen before it, in my opinion. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 80 on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 08:29:33 AM
That's mainly why I think it would need to happen after something major.  Perhaps a Civil War in America with the EU going in to regain control.  Sounds insane, but at the moment it's as likely as a Nuclear Holocaust (WW3).  Thing is, you have to realise, I think a lot of these things are staged, so that's why I think it's going to happen, because the Elite want it to.

Things can't half change drastically and all of that is years off.  I'm not talking about a one world Government in the next decade.  More 20, if not more years away, but it is inevitable one way or the other.  Human Race is never going to explore space in future times as competing little nations. 

There's a lot left to happen before it, in my opinion. 

For the record, I very much agree that a lot of very powerful and influential people have consistantly attempted to move the Earth in the direct of Human unity through various means. I'm not so much thinking of Illuminati-type stuff, though.

There would be a lot of people who would argue that we'll only explore space (with particular vigour, at any rate) if "we" are comprised of competing states. That Human advancements are the result of conflict. Would the USA have put Armstrong and Aldrin on the Moon if there were no Soviets? It would be a total waste of time and money, surely. Shy of more apocalyptic visions (which I'm not averse to), sustainable world governance will only come about if/when we should make contact with aliens, or more to the point, alien civilisations that would be capable of harming us.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Tisd09 on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 09:14:00 AM
Power and fear can lead to World Dominance. Think if someone did "step out of line" in American eyes and they retaliated with all their power they could "wipe out" quite a few nations. This will be an awesome example of power which will lead to fear and thus being easier to "control" things.

The increase in wars over the nex 10-20 years will lead to many nations becoming weaker and many becoming stronger. I see it as a very real possibility that there could be one ruling nation over them all. The Great British Empire dominated a large portion of the world.

Now in this technological and media saturated World this power and dominance can be achived, with the coverage there to enhance the fear factor.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 09:26:44 AM
What gets up my nose is the way everyone is runnign around shouting that Iran is about to blow up the world when the Israelis have had a "secret" (well, non admitted) bomb for years

If I was Iranian I'd be putting absolute maximum effort into getting a bomb - they are surrounded by N powers and any fool can see why Kim Il Sung is still in power and Saddam is sitting in the dock in Baghdad.

Set off one bucket of instant sunshine and watch people back off
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 09:55:21 AM
What gets up my nose is the way everyone is runnign around shouting that Iran is about to blow up the world when the Israelis have had a "secret" (well, non admitted) bomb for years

If I was Iranian I'd be putting absolute maximum effort into getting a bomb - they are surrounded by N powers and any fool can see why Kim Il Sung is still in power and Saddam is sitting in the dock in Baghdad.

Set off one bucket of instant sunshine and watch people back off

 Probably the biggest arsenal in the world at that.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 10:08:20 AM
Aye - a few years back their Air force was bigger than the UK & Jormany combined
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 11:43:56 AM
The war continues on two fronts, the material and the spiritual. In so much as the two are actually intrinsically linked hasn't gone unnoticed by certain parties.
Unfortunately there is less determinism in the last grasp for Ahmerikan supremacy, it is more a case of panic at the site of an emerging uncontrollable near future. Bringing Islam to heel is part of the underlying agenda as it has proven a stubborn foe with regard to rolling over and
accepting the dominance of materialism and what I call the technological construct.
On many fronts US supremacy is failing and found woefully short of ideas and economic surety...The are currently running an admitted
budget deficit of $375 billion dollars, the last reliable figures form 2003. This figure was project for $565 billion in 04 and fast reaching $720 billion if projections for 07 follow trend. The Industrial Arms complex (iac) has continued desperate corrective overspend in the form of wars to regenerate a docile and beleguared economy, where mulitnational after multinaltional (Enron style) has gone to the wall, close on the heels of Japan losing 4 of its biggest banks to fraud and bankcruptcy legislation in the 90's. THE OVERALL PICTURE is not good....AND THEY KNOW THIS.
The near future for the US and EU is fillled with uncertainty, unemployment, which will finally lead to public and society wide unrest, the threat of the atom bomb is the psychic policeman that THEY are unfolding if we don't fall back into line.
The charge for greater land and asset grab is counterconnected to the need for more population and thought control, they are doing it they only way they know how.....LESS DEMOCRACY more darkness.
I will talk more of the darkness later.  bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 12:02:43 PM
actually I'm quite optomistic.................

China and India are taking their place on the world stage and thus have a vested interest in not rocking the boat (do you know how many US$ the russians and chinese hold? - they are keeping the US afloat)

The high oilprice means the Saudis etc can spend more thus cutting employment and undercutting extremism

Japan seems to be growing again and the other "tiger" economies with it and China

The EU  is expanding - which lowers tension in the Balkans, provides plumbers for us and generates more income and higher standards of living

Most of Africa is still a basket case but nothing has changed there in 50 years and its no threat to our comfortable life style

The Russians are still enigmatic but are much less of a threat than they were 15 years ago

All in all  it has been a hell of a lot worse in my lifetime...................................... 


Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 12:24:45 PM
China and India are using the 'old' model of compressing costs and are seen as a threat to the New Empire, they will pay a heavy price for their dalliance. The growth of these economies is reliant on cheap and steady supply of fossil fuels which planet wide is unsustainable and threatens the planet in new and unmeasured ways.
Their time on the stage will be curtailed...and how.
The Gulf Oil market will take a backseat to new oil from the old USSR and especially gas to the U.K.
The thresholds of cost compression that were reached in Old Europe in the late 70's await the 'new' old econimies, but at a much faster rate, due to cannibalism of supply and the lack of host and captive markets as the old European model benifited from.
China has been buying up surplus oil futures at a prodigous rate...the Empire will have no choice but to counter....and soon.
In its final stages Mystical Capitalism can only see huge profits in war and plague........
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 12:51:12 PM
For the record, I very much agree that a lot of very powerful and influential people have consistantly attempted to move the Earth in the direct of Human unity through various means. I'm not so much thinking of Illuminati-type stuff, though.

There would be a lot of people who would argue that we'll only explore space (with particular vigour, at any rate) if "we" are comprised of competing states. That Human advancements are the result of conflict. Would the USA have put Armstrong and Aldrin on the Moon if there were no Soviets? It would be a total waste of time and money, surely. Shy of more apocalyptic visions (which I'm not averse to), sustainable world governance will only come about if/when we should make contact with aliens, or more to the point, alien civilisations that would be capable of harming us.

Aye, contact with Aliens would also be on of those 'major' events that would unite us.  Or atleast be used as the reason to.  Read a few of Terence McKenna's books and that's what he reckons will be happening around 2012, due to his research amongst other things.  You might find him an intriguing read.

With regards to the US/Soviet space race, there's no chance they'd have gone.  Human advancements are generally made after conflicts, more reason for me why half these bullshit wars are fought.  Try and test things 'on the field'.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 12:58:51 PM
Of course when the village becomes unruly, it is time to call in the circus.
Miracles I tell thee...
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 03:19:03 PM
China and India are using the 'old' model of compressing costs and are seen as a threat to the New Empire, they will pay a heavy price for their dalliance. The growth of these economies is reliant on cheap and steady supply of fossil fuels which planet wide is unsustainable and threatens the planet in new and unmeasured ways.
Their time on the stage will be curtailed...and how.
The Gulf Oil market will take a backseat to new oil from the old USSR and especially gas to the U.K.
The thresholds of cost compression that were reached in Old Europe in the late 70's await the 'new' old econimies, but at a much faster rate, due to cannibalism of supply and the lack of host and captive markets as the old European model benifited from.
China has been buying up surplus oil futures at a prodigous rate...the Empire will have no choice but to counter....and soon.
In its final stages Mystical Capitalism can only see huge profits in war and plague........

A bit wild I think

The USA is so concerned about China they are buying half their imports from them - China & India are still growing at HIGH energy prices - in fact high prices drives them to energy efficiency even faster.  The "fossil fuels are running out" has been around since 1900 - pay enough and people will find it and develope it

The middle East oil is both cheap and accesible - ever seen the costs of building pipelines from Siberia at $ 1 million a mile?

"China has been buying up surplus oil futures at a prodigous rate" - evidence???   Not visibly

What "captive markets" did the old Europe benifit from?    Why does Europe have the highest standard of living it's ever had?

"Mystical Capitalism can only see huge profits in war and plague" - which is why stockmarkets fall when  a war breaks out - and PLAGUE?    FFS - when did we last have an outbreak of Plague??? 1665 IIRC (I  remember it as a lad).  And where are the profits in Plague - chemical companies, JCB's, nursing homes, red paint..................   I can see that but its a bit of abummer for the retail, housing, & entertainment business  IIRC

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bobbyshinton on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 05:09:40 PM
actually I'm quite optomistic.................

China and India are taking their place on the world stage and thus have a vested interest in not rocking the boat (do you know how many US$ the russians and chinese hold? - they are keeping the US afloat)

The high oilprice means the Saudis etc can spend more thus cutting employment and undercutting extremism

Japan seems to be growing again and the other "tiger" economies with it and China

The EU  is expanding - which lowers tension in the Balkans, provides plumbers for us and generates more income and higher standards of living

Most of Africa is still a basket case but nothing has changed there in 50 years and its no threat to our comfortable life style

The Russians are still enigmatic but are much less of a threat than they were 15 years ago

All in all  it has been a hell of a lot worse in my lifetime...................................... 



bluelaugh.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 10 January 2006, 07:40:03 PM
Rob W,
You don't work for Arthur Andersen by any chance? :tongue3:
Do you ever catch the news?

The US economy along with Germany and France are a quagmire or debt and inefficency...Erupean countries have reached the point
where they are admitting pensions cannnot be guaranteed and people will need to work to 70.

If you did read my post you will see that the US is running its biggest budget deficit in history....and the underlying trends
which will filter through ie high energy prices, are still to show up...But maybe you know better than George Soros..(Take a look at his
book the crisis of Modern Capitalism)..He is the geezer who took the pound down a few years back.

As for trading with China did you notice the LITTLE DEBATE about NEW TRADE tarrrifs directed against primarily CHINA??
Drugs companies are actually in a profit renaissance mainly due to the spread of AIDS, HEPATITIS, CANCER, new types of
incurable TB and a myriad of new breathing illnesses especially in European...THIS is the underlying COST of your so called
fossil fuel driven 'new economies'...CHINA is now the worlds biggest polluter and has been building one new coal fired power station every
3 months for the last 5 years, with no interntion of stopping.

None of this IS SUSTAINABLE.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 11 January 2006, 11:06:46 AM
The Rothschilds. bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 11 January 2006, 02:03:00 PM
" Rob W,
You don't work for Arthur Andersen by any chance? tongue3"

I wish


Its just that all this doom and gloom seems at variance with life as I know it

I know Soros made zillions on the £ but he lost a bucket load a couple of years back bettign against the $ as well......................

You sound like the "Club of Rome" in 74 who reckoned we were DOOMED within a few years

Get out, look around - things aren't perfect but they are better than they've ever been in human history

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 11 January 2006, 11:33:32 PM
Rob,

Your right I'll try harder. bluecry.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Tooj on Wednesday 11 January 2006, 11:40:27 PM
Aye, contact with Aliens would also be on of those 'major' events that would unite us.  Or atleast be used as the reason to.  Read a few of Terence McKenna's books and that's what he reckons will be happening around 2012
Has he been listening to this man?

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/12/Csm2.jpg)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 11 January 2006, 11:49:27 PM
No, the programme has probably been listening to Terence McKenna though.  He stated it decades ago.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: DJ_NUFC on Thursday 12 January 2006, 01:28:05 AM
Interesting thread.

A couple of points though: No matter what doom-mongerers say, the growth of India and China is a freakin' relief and was only a matter of time someone else saw fruits of their hard work over the years to counter the long-running powers that have been controlling the world.

The fact that the US right now can't stop their own companies from investing in China and India is one that is relished by most observers. Note the recent Supreme Court case that was an attempt to ban a Chinese company from buying out an American company. So much for capitalism and 'free market', eh?

I understand what you mean, Parky, when you say China and India are using up resources at an alarming rate - I can attest they're not exactly using them up, they're simply demanding them as they are going to need a lot of them, and  very soon - but to think this is only a temporary issue, and a bad one at that, is to be extremely short-sighted.

Anyone remember what happened when the world was at war for rubber in the 1900s? Pretty much exactly like the case with India and China right now, the US's middle-class was booming and suddenly everyone needed, wanted, an automobile (a machine that had only recently been invented and was thought of as only for the rich). A short version of the story is: after using up most of the rubber plantations around the globe and realising that they're going to be in short supply in comparison to the demand, the US contacted a man who had been living among the tribes in Amazonian Uruguay for decades. They told him to find a rubber tree there, to check for rubber. The man, unaware of the government's intentions, found a huge forest full of them. Sweet, sap-filled rubber. And down came the Americans with their machetes and cleared the whole f***ing forest - killing all wildlife, people and habitat of that region, and made the biggest f***ing plantation of rubber the world had ever seen.

This, my friends, is how economies are built. This is how you and I can drive to work everyday and can afford our $2 McDonald's meal. The Iraq war is the reason we're only still paying less than a $1 a litre for gas, and not something a lot more in the future.

Of course, none of it is fair. It's sick. But this is the way the world works.

So when I hear in the news, especially in American media, that India and China are the new evils of the world, it gets on my f***ing tits. Why, coz they can finally compete with you on a global level? They're simply doing what you've been doing. What the whole world's been doing.

But I also agree with Rob W. The world really isn't as bad as it many people make it out to be. It's surely a lot worse than you can imagine, but also not as bad as you fear at times.

The world has cycles, and there are balancing acts going on just under the surface. This has been happening forever. Every empire has crumbled. New ones have risen.

And as usual, there is nothing the people can actually do about it. Those in power make the decisions, and those without get affected by them. But hey, you can always vote.

India and China are simply what the Western powers have feared for a long time: competition. And as they say in the world of business, all competition is good for the consumer.

Oh by the way, some people mentioned Kashmir and India's nuclear capabilities on here, putting them in the same boat as Iran, Israel and the lot. Care to explain? Got me rather confused. The only country India would ever drop a nuke on is Pakistan. And even that I have my doubts. We didn't when they attacked us cowardly in Kargil, we simply pushed them back to their homeland, so why would we now that we're on an economic rise?

Remember, when you're making money, everyone's your friend.

 bluewink.gif

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 12 January 2006, 01:36:15 AM
Oh by the way, some people mentioned Kashmir and India's nuclear capabilities on here, putting them in the same boat as Iran, Israel and the lot. Care to explain? Got me rather confused. The only country India would ever drop a nuke on is Pakistan. And even that I have my doubts. We didn't when they attacked us cowardly in Kargil, we simply pushed them back to their homeland, so why would we now that we're on an economic rise?

I mentioned Kashmir in regards to Adam^'s comments that Palestine was the "only problem" and fix that then we're fine.  I just used that as another example of animosity between Muslims and the rest of the world. 

I also made a comment which is the same as yours that India never threatened to wipe Pakistan off the map, or would ever do so, that was in response to Rob W's comments.  Pointing out that Iran and Israel are a different kettle of fish.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 12 January 2006, 09:50:47 AM
Hmmm I seem to remember a couple of years ago there was a panic when it looked as if India was looking at a pre-emptive strike on pakistan - the Foreign Office warned Brits about traveling to teh sub-contitnent IIRC
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 12 January 2006, 12:01:46 PM
I think we need to condense here a bit.
1.America is finished.

The question really is...To what lengths are they going to go to survive?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: DJ_NUFC on Thursday 12 January 2006, 12:04:33 PM
Hmmm I seem to remember a couple of years ago there was a panic when it looked as if India was looking at a pre-emptive strike on pakistan - the Foreign Office warned Brits about traveling to teh sub-contitnent IIRC

Aye, and too bad India didn't.

 bluecool.gif jk, people.

Screw politics. The leaders of nations never, ever represent the people, and 100% of the time act on their own accord. Which is why I just watch football, drink and try to live life to the fullest.

As you never know when the next World War's around the corner.

See Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove. Love that movie.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 12 January 2006, 12:10:11 PM
DJ bluelaugh.gif

Quite a dark film, but not too far off the button. :tongue3:

Obviously some day technology will arrive that will make Nuclear weapons antiques...

Many people have a feeling that the world is strenously trying to balance itself and many
pressure groups and even  big business itself in a small way are trying to moderate their actions...

I think we are in a time of upheveal for many reasons.....But obviously this is being kept from us...
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 12 January 2006, 03:53:49 PM
The Millenium was 6 years ago Parky......................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 12 January 2006, 04:06:39 PM
I don't think I've said anything out of line.  I'm not having a go at Jews, at all.  It's the leaders of these countries, not the people.

I'm sure many Jewish people share my views, infact I know many do.  I've read the books.  Islamic countries are us much to blame for the problems of the world as Israel in recent times.  Just Israel might as well be America the way they're always backed up.  And the whole Israel thing kicked it off. 

The Holocaust was horrific.  I don't believe I made any reference to it though.

EDIT:  Ah, Adam^ did.  The holocaust wasn't used as the reason to take Palestine, ever.  The movement to take Palestine started way before WW2 was even a remote possiblity.  Try 60/70 years, and read about Zionism.  Please don't use that, as it's wrong and is offensive to people.

but until the holocaust, the world was always going to be deaf to the "needs" of the Zionists.  the guilt that major role players in WW2 had from the death camps etc...  meant that zionists had a better grip (if that's the right word) on their future...     sorry, haven't read the whole thread hope i'm not being a minister of the department of redundancy department
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Footsoldier on Thursday 12 January 2006, 04:19:22 PM
I work for a British company in the US and really have to laugh at some of the comments on this and other threads which  display a degree of ignorance on the interplay between the US and Western European markets in particular. Without the free US market which provides multinational companies with profits to churn back into research and development and to keep plants open in less profitable countries for example, many of you in the UK wouldn't have a job. So you can sit back and smirk at any shifts in power that you percieve to be happening but you have to recognize that the EU with it's policy of admitting counties who want to take out of the kitty rather than contribute to it will eventually go down the toilet. It's one thing to open up new markets in the likes of Chinaor India with their vast populations, but what good is it if nobody has the money to drive the need for the goods? Also, are you going to be competitive with a huge labour force making a pound or so an hour and being happy about it? Can you explain to me how you'll afford your season tickets and average house prices of 175,000 pounds?

I'm not sure where your glee comes from if there is economic chaos in the west.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 12 January 2006, 05:02:40 PM
Is that the "free" US market that discriminates against  Canadian lumber even tho the WTO says you are being discriminatory, or the US market that doesn't allow furreners to buy your airlines (or even fly internally) or the "free" market that discriminates against European insurance companies or the "free" market that ...................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Footsoldier on Thursday 12 January 2006, 06:28:28 PM
Again, what are you talking about? Foreign airlines can't fly internally in the US? I'm sure you aren't stupid but comments like that are absurd....are you unaware of BA, KLM,Virgin.....? Where do you get this s*** from?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 12 January 2006, 07:58:55 PM
They can fly TO the USA dear friend but they can't pick up any passengers for flights  WITHIN the USA - BA can't compete on say New York - LA......................

They can't even buy more that 25% of a US airline

Wake up and get out of your cloistered little world
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 12 January 2006, 08:22:08 PM
Rob,

I don't think he'll be wanting any afters.
 :rofl:

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 12 January 2006, 08:23:30 PM
Maybe the problem is only about 40% have passports and don't get out much.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Jimburst on Thursday 12 January 2006, 08:39:20 PM
great thread.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Jimburst on Thursday 12 January 2006, 10:21:42 PM
great thread.

Dont you just hate it when you kill a thread?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 12 January 2006, 10:27:03 PM
Didn't kill it, just didn't give anything to reply to. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 12 January 2006, 11:55:16 PM
ok i didnt really bother reading much of the thread because its quite long, but ive seen some sentences here and there about israel being the devil in the world which i laughed at. first of all people mentioned that israel has tremendous military capability, which is true. israel has no problem blowing apart any of their neighbors yet israel has never been the initiator of the wars in the middle east. israel allowed yassir arafat and his fatah movement enter their country after he's been kicked out of "fellow" muslim countries. they even accepted him as the leader of the palestinian people. now usually a party is judged by its leader and if your leader is a terrorist what would you expect the palestinian cause to be? yet israel still agreed to negotiate peace with him (which reminds me of the double standard when the world doesnt really seem to mind when russians exterminate chechens). now as to the "land grabs", this land was grabbed throughout the wars the arab world waged against israel (spoils of war, strategic points such as the golan heights etc...) and israel has slowly given them back even though terrorist attacks has never ceased! what kind of country would do that? id also like to remind you that last time surveyed, more than 80 percent of the palestine population was in support of suicide bombings! what would you do if someone decided to blow you up at st james's park? to be quite honest israel is the only reason that the middle east has some order. that is everyone in the middle east hates israel and it brings the muslim countries together. when (more of an if) israel is gone muslim countries will have to face their hatred toward each, and i presume the outcome wont be pretty. as for the media no one is more one sided than the BBC. this network has never been sympathetic to the israel side and still has not apologized (at least not that i know about) for the false story about the hebron massacre that never happened.
my biggest problem in the middle east is the arrogance and corruption of the palestinian leaders. no one screwed the palestinians more than their leaders. the biggest mistake was instead of acknowledging their new country in 48 they decided to lunch a massive organized attack against israel which cost them dearly and made them world refugees forever (or so it seems right now)... which reminds me the buldozing of refugee camps is not done to p*ss palestinians off but to destroy weapons labs where terror organizations operate.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 13 January 2006, 12:03:16 AM
ok i didnt really bother reading much of the thread because its quite long, but ive seen some sentences here and there about israel being the devil in the world which i laughed at. first of all people mentioned that israel has tremendous military capability, which is true. israel has no problem blowing apart any of their neighbors yet israel has never been the initiator of the wars in the middle east. israel allowed yassir arafat and his fatah movement enter their country after he's been kicked out of "fellow" muslim countries. they even accepted him as the leader of the palestinian people. now usually a party is judged by its leader and if your leader is a terrorist what would you expect the palestinian cause to be? yet israel still agreed to negotiate peace with him (which reminds me of the double standard when the world doesnt really seem to mind when russians exterminate chechens). now as to the "land grabs", this land was grabbed throughout the wars the arab world waged against israel (spoils of war, strategic points such as the golan heights etc...) and israel has slowly given them back even though terrorist attacks has never ceased! what kind of country would do that? id also like to remind you that last time surveyed, more than 80 percent of the palestine population was in support of suicide bombings! what would you do if someone decided to blow you up at st james's park? to be quite honest israel is the only reason that the middle east has some order. that is everyone in the middle east hates israel and it brings the muslim countries together. when (more of an if) israel is gone muslim countries will have to face their hatred toward each, and i presume the outcome wont be pretty. as for the media no one is more one sided than the BBC. this network has never been sympathetic to the israel side and still has not apologized (at least not that i know about) for the false story about the hebron massacre that never happened.
my biggest problem in the middle east is the arrogance and corruption of the palestinian leaders. no one screwed the palestinians more than their leaders. the biggest mistake was instead of acknowledging their new country in 48 they decided to lunch a massive organized attack against israel which cost them dearly and made them world refugees forever (or so it seems right now)... which reminds me the buldozing of refugee camps is not done to p*ss palestinians off but to destroy weapons labs where terror organizations operate.


Well, maybe you should've read most of the thread because people have been fairly balanced in their criticism.

There wouldn't be half the trouble if the Israeli state wasn't just declared in 1948.  You can claim they're bringing order now, but they created the disorder in the first place, my friend.  Like I said, you should've read the thread, because you've basically repeated what has been said at points.

With regards to your last point, of course it is.  :roll:

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Friday 13 January 2006, 12:39:05 AM
Well, maybe you should've read most of the thread because people have been fairly balanced in their criticism.

There wouldn't be half the trouble if the Israeli state wasn't just declared in 1948.  You can claim they're bringing order now, but they created the disorder in the first place, my friend.  Like I said, you should've read the thread, because you've basically repeated what has been said at points.

With regards to your last point, of course it is.  :roll:



well sorry for putting my two cents in and answering the guys question.
what do you mean there wouldnt be half the trouble? what do you think was happening there before the EU parted the country? smiles and sunshine? and how is israel responsible for syria occupying lebanon, iraq waging war on kuwait/iran, terror attacks against egyptian christians, the opression of the progressive ideologies by conservatives?

roll your eyes all you want but the evidence is there. refugee camps are being used as weapons workshops. im not saying all of them are but there are enough. what do you expect from the israeli government to just ignore terrorism ? 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 13 January 2006, 01:04:26 AM
well sorry for putting my two cents in and answering the guys question.
what do you mean there wouldnt be half the trouble? what do you think was happening there before the EU parted the country? smiles and sunshine? and how is israel responsible for syria occupying lebanon, iraq waging war on kuwait/iran, terror attacks against egyptian christians, the opression of the progressive ideologies by conservatives?

roll your eyes all you want but the evidence is there. refugee camps are being used as weapons workshops. im not saying all of them are but there are enough. what do you expect from the israeli government to just ignore terrorism ?


Now that's being silly.  What I was getting at is that not everyone was laying the problems of the world at Israel's feet and if you'd read through, I atleast, was just as critical of Islamic regimes in the region.  They've not helped cause, at all.  The corruption is awful.  ALso no one is blaming Israel for wars in other areas.  Israel has a lot to do with the rise in terrorism though, they consistantly gave Muslims a cause to fight under by consistant oppression of Palestine.  You can try and point out all the times it gave concessions, but the brutallity of the Israeli Defence Force has been there to see. 

I, personally, have never said the Islamic nations, especially ones surrounding Israel, are free of guilt.  They're absolute idiots.

Refugee camps may have been used as labs, but I'll remember that when I see the homes of many being bulldozed as the children of these said houses watch.  And they wonder why they have enemies. 

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 13 January 2006, 01:49:10 AM
Golem,
What't the point of coming on here and shooting your mouth off and admitting at the same time
you couldn't be bothered to read the thread?
You don't deserve a response, I think Bluff has been overly polite to you.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 13 January 2006, 01:54:22 AM
Bluff,
There is some doubt as to the Jews actual historical connection with the land they were given, I read
summat about this, I wonder if you can dredge something up...
Weren't the Israeli's themselves killing British soldiers back in the day??

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 13 January 2006, 02:08:18 AM
They certainly did, although why they attacked them, I'm not too sure.  They probably attacked them to put more pressure on them to make sure the Jewish population were given more control of the land, and eventual total control. 

I'm not sure about the about the connection.  Muslims, I think, believe all teachings in Judiasm are Islamic teachings, same goes for Christianity.  So, essentially, Moses was a Muslim, as was Jesus.  I think that might be how they dispute the claim.  I'd need to read more into that though.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Friday 13 January 2006, 02:26:29 AM
weren't israeli's killing british soldiers because the british had limited jewish immigration to israel?  the british have been a very strange hybrid in israel's history.  one day supporting the need/right for jews to have their own state, e.g. the balfour declaration and then turning around and issuing the white paper the next.  france has been mixed in their support/opposition as well.  the dreyfus affair etc... 

as for moses and jesus being muslim, muslims and jews both claim abraham as an ancestor, well, i should say arabs not muslims.  arabs are the offspring of ishmael and hebrews the offspring of isaac.  muslims claim that the holy books of jews and christians are corrupted texts, only the qur'an is the true word of allah and then only if read in arabic.

it's a very complex topic and perhaps the problem lies in the desire for we westerners to need to see a clear cut side of right and wrong, when really, both jews and palestinians have many incidents of shame in their past.   i've heard one person say upon returning from a year long excursion to the middle east that the answer to the whole situation over there is exactly what they've got---jews and arabs DESERVE each other!    bluesigh.gif

one other thing i'd like to add to the discussion is that zionism and the current nation of israel is a SECULAR political entity.  when israelis celebrate the birth of their nation there are jews in jerusalem who burn that state's flag to symbolize their opposition to its existence.  in their eyes the true nation of israel will only come about when messiah returns... 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Friday 13 January 2006, 02:28:30 AM
Now that's being silly.  What I was getting at is that not everyone was laying the problems of the world at Israel's feet and if you'd read through, I atleast, was just as critical of Islamic regimes in the region.  They've not helped cause, at all.  The corruption is awful.  ALso no one is blaming Israel for wars in other areas.  Israel has a lot to do with the rise in terrorism though, they consistantly gave Muslims a cause to fight under by consistant oppression of Palestine.  You can try and point out all the times it gave concessions, but the brutallity of the Israeli Defence Force has been there to see. 

I, personally, have never said the Islamic nations, especially ones surrounding Israel, are free of guilt.  They're absolute idiots.

Refugee camps may have been used as labs, but I'll remember that when I see the homes of many being bulldozed as the children of these said houses watch.  And they wonder why they have enemies. 


what im getting from you is that you are assuming there would be no terrorism if israel wasnt created? is that correct?
actually the brutality of the IDF has increased in this latest intefadah and thats simply due to the public getting tired of watching politicians attempt peace talks when people explode in nightclubs and the likes. unfortunately this situation is now a he said she said arguement so its really hard to imagine anything good will happen there soon.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 13 January 2006, 02:33:06 AM
Don't make wild assumptions.  I'm saying by refusing to comprimise they've given a platform, a cause, for them to get behind.  I never said they are the cause though.  I've mentioned previously in the thread that problems with Kashmir, countless wars in the middle east also have fuelled terrorism.  This is why I had a pop at you not reading the thread, because you'd know where I stand, had you done so.

That's all that's needed? 'Fraid not. Have you not heard of Kashmir? That's little to do with Israel, but gets about half the air time in the media. Many Muslims are as outraged at that as they are the Palestinian cause.

Iraq, Afghanistan too. These are almost more important than Palestine for future peace at the moment. No, there's more than just Palestine that needs sorted.

The above quote is what I've said on the issue.  Notice I did NOT say Palestine is the only cause of all these problems, there are many factors.  Although, I do believe it kicked it all off.  I'd like you to tell me what else started it, if you disagree.

The brutallity was there long before the latest intefadah.  And not only in Israel/Palestine.  The trips into Beirut leave a lot to be desired, to say the least.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Friday 13 January 2006, 03:00:50 AM
Don't make wild assumptions. I'm saying by refusing to comprimise they've given a platform, a cause, for them to get behind. I never said they are the cause though. I've mentioned previously in the thread that problems with Kashmir, countless wars in the middle east also have fuelled terrorism. This is why I had a pop at you not reading the thread, because you'd know where I stand, had you done so.

The brutallity was there long before the latest intefadah. And not only in Israel/Palestine. The trips into Beirut leave a lot to be desired, to say the least.

well i have read the thread and here are your statements that cause me to make those assumptions
Quote
"I think Israel is the real problem in the world.  There's little doubt of that for me."
"There wouldn't be half the trouble if the Israeli state wasn't just declared in 1948. You can claim they're bringing order now, but they created the disorder in the first place, my friend"
which made me think that you blame the terrorism in israel completely on israel.
and what comprimise are you talking about? because israel has only been giving land back. if youre talking about full withdrawal how can you expect that when everytime theres an ease on palestinians the terrorists take advantage of that and bomb israel again? if the palestinian government could have been trusted to put an end to the attacks maybe there could have been some progress (and heres the he said she said).
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Friday 13 January 2006, 03:31:40 AM
I can see I'm going to have to actually read this thread, before posting in it, it's too late now, but in the morning, I'll be back.

;)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: DJ_NUFC on Friday 13 January 2006, 04:26:17 AM
Goashem, not wishing to step on your toes here at all, but as an observer, I am going to make a wild assumption - going entirely by your posts - that you believe Israel are absolutely blameless in this whole matter. You paint the Palestinians as bloodhungry lunatics whereas you deny the Israeli army's continuous oppression of Palestinian people, the non-stop destruction and shelling of their homes, the killing of women and children and the constant racism they have to suffer as a non-event.

I think the only person on this thread so far who is one-sided is you, my friend.



Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 13 January 2006, 07:55:01 AM
well i have read the thread and here are your statements that cause me to make those assumptionswhich made me think that you blame the terrorism in israel completely on israel.
and what comprimise are you talking about? because israel has only been giving land back. if youre talking about full withdrawal how can you expect that when everytime theres an ease on palestinians the terrorists take advantage of that and bomb israel again? if the palestinian government could have been trusted to put an end to the attacks maybe there could have been some progress (and heres the he said she said).

To be fair, the Palestinian government can be trusted just as much as the Israelis.  This is the problem either side always tries to paint the other as evil, when both infact have a long way to go.

Israel is a dangerous country because it retains full banking from the US, no matter what they do.  I suppose you're in favour of the wall being constructed, are you?  I hope not, as it really says a lot about the attitude of the state there.  They simply couldn't give a s*** what the world thinks.  You like to point out all the failings of the Arabs, do you feel there is any genuine justification for what is little more than segregation?

How about Israel's Nuclear capabilities, I dare say this is OK too.  Yet big bad Iran isn't allowed them.  Neither should, but that's never going to happen.  I don't blame Iran for wanting a weapon, whether it be as a deterrent or to use.  I fear they would use it, yes, but, we, the West, can no longer play the moral high-ground if Israel retains its own. 

Israel look more like they will strike Iran, than the US does.  This is why they're dangerous, it's going to kick off all sorts.  The implicatons could be nasty, and with Netanyahu in power, I hold out little hope of future peace with Iran, and very little hope of a viable Palestinian state.  Certainly not on the borders declared by UN agreements.

You also point out that Israel have been giving back the land.  Well, how bloody honourable of them.  Try telling that to Palestinian familes that see their communites cut in half by the wall.  Try telling that to the Arab half of Jerusalem, which increasingly looks like it will never be in the hands of the Palestinians.  If that's not a 'land grab', I don't know what is.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 13 January 2006, 09:44:25 AM
Let sface it - it will never stop untill all the Israelis are re located to the USA
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Friday 13 January 2006, 02:28:08 PM
Israel is a dangerous country because it retains full banking from the US, no matter what they do.

come on, bluf, that's not fair.  if it were true, then israel would have booted out the palestinians long long ago and in no nice fashion either.  what were the camp david meetings about if not the usa trying to get both sides to compromise? 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 13 January 2006, 04:43:37 PM
come on, bluf, that's not fair. if it were true, then israel would have booted out the palestinians long long ago and in no nice fashion either. what were the camp david meetings about if not the usa trying to get both sides to compromise?

A bit harsh, maybe.  But they do retain unconditional support.  How many times have the US vetoed moves by the UN against Israel?  With regards to the wall, especially. 

And anyway, yes, they might have been pushing for a comprimise.  Look what happened though, far-right extremists kill that.  Israel is dangerous for that very reason, their backing from the US.  Israel wouldn't have the army they have, if it wasn't for the US.  Israel wouldn't have the LAND they have if it wasn't for the US.  Can point out one occasion where they've tried their hardest, but 50 odd years is a long time to time to finally pull the finger out their arse.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 13 January 2006, 05:47:25 PM
come on, bluf, that's not fair. if it were true, then israel would have booted out the palestinians long long ago and in no nice fashion either. what were the camp david meetings about if not the usa trying to get both sides to compromise?

making sure the Saudis didn't cut off their oil?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 13 January 2006, 07:06:12 PM
Maybe the thread title should have been: Is Israel the centre of evil? :icon_joker:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Friday 13 January 2006, 07:48:59 PM
alright i think this is going to be a long post...
Quote
that you believe Israel are absolutely blameless in this whole matter
no i dont but i did present a very one sided arguement to balance out the claim that israels birth is responsible for what is wrong in the world. i personally believe that the palestinians are more at fault of their own situation, theyve followed the wrong people that dug them into this whole. and i do believe that israel has been more accepting of coexisting with palestinians then the other way around.
Quote
you deny the Israeli army's continuous oppression of Palestinian people, the non-stop destruction and shelling of their homes, the killing of women and children and the constant racism they have to suffer as a non-event.
this statement is just as one sided as my arguements.
Quote
I suppose you're in favour of the wall being constructed, are you

as long as its on israels land and not palestinians they have a right to do whatever. especially if it means stopping suicide bombers.
Quote
They simply couldn't give a s*** what the world thinks
and why do you think that is? when has the world ever came to the aid of the israelis? when was there ever pressure on the palestinians to stop suicide bombings? did anyone ever suggested of putting arafat to trial for all the crimes against humanity he has commited? the EU has been quite one sided against israel and if israel would comply with the EU thered be much more dead israelis.
Quote
How about Israel's Nuclear capabilities, I dare say this is OK too

its more ok for israel to have nuclear capabilities than iran simply because israel never went on the offensive against its neighbors and never called for the elimination of iran and never funded terror attacks in the country.
Quote
Well, how bloody honourable of them
very honourable actually. if giving back the land to the people who attacked you in order to eliminate your existence isnt a proof of willingness to coexist in peace then i dont know what is.
Quote
Try telling that to the Arab half of Jerusalem, which increasingly looks like it will never be in the hands of the Palestinians
actually sharon has been pushing for a palestinian state during his term, which included transfer of half of jerusalem to the palestinians. the only problem is that sharon is also trying to connect maale adumim with the israeli part of jerusalem which will be a land grab. this very arrogant move by the israeli side will probably be the biggest gridlock in negotiations.
Quote
Let sface it - it will never stop untill all the Israelis are re located to the USA
and heres another lovely balanced comment.
Quote
Israel wouldn't have the army they have, if it wasn't for the US.  Israel wouldn't have the LAND they have if it wasn't for the US
and is that a bad thing? israel wouldnt exist if they werent backed by the US and there would be another lovely massacre of jews in the area if israel couldnt defend itself.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Friday 13 January 2006, 07:55:42 PM
Right, I've read the thread now and it's not as controversial as I had expected.

Something, I'd like to add:

The most powerful weapon in the Israeli arsenal,is not "the bomb", it is the label of anti-semitism.

They know this, which is why they use it so often, much more often than even those armoured bulldozers they're so fond of.

The fear of being labelled as an anti-semite, is so great in the western world, that Israel just has to mention it and a lot of people, who would normally object, to similar actions by other countries, fall silent. This thread provides some prime examples of people's fear of being labelled anti-semitic, look at how cautious we're all being, putting disclaimers, skirting around issues, going out of our way to be fair and even handed.

Now look at the "Magic of Jesus" thread:

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,11453.0.html

and see how different it is, people are quite happy to make jokes and take the p*ss, it's all pretty lighthearted and friendly even!! I wonder why? Well no, I don't actually, I know why, it's because people aren't afraid of being anti-Christian, or even anti-Muslim, but they are seriously afraid of being anti-semitic. I'm not religious, by the way, most of you will already know that.

The thing you have to remember is that Israel, is not, and does not represent, the Jewish faith. In the same way that Christian or Muslim countries, do not represent Christianity or Islam.

Therefore, to criticise Israel, is in no way, anti-semitic.

Yes, anti-semites are likely to criticise Israel, but it is not their criticism of Israel that makes them anti-semitic, it is their hatred of Jews, which is not the same thing. Even a hatred of the Israeli government is not anti-semitic.

Yet, the Israeli government's stock response, to any criticism it receives, is to label it's accusers as anti-semitic and usually members of a world-wide anti-semitic plot, against the Jewish people!! This, at first sight, appears rather ironic, considering the accusation's similarity to the anti-semitic myths to which the Jews have been subjected throughout history. However, it is not ironic at all, it is a quite deliberate attempt, by the Israeli government, to use the same underhand tactics that have been used against Judaism for centuries, for their own ends.

This, for me, highlights the issue that is most distasteful about Israel, the sheer hypocracy of it all!!

All countries have dark and dirty histories, most have pretty dark and dirty presents, as well, including Britain, the US, Europe and all the other, self appointed, "Moral Guardians", of the world.

However, Israel stands alone, given the fact that the majority of it's population have direct experience, either first hand, or through immediate relatives, of what it's like to be on the wrong end, of state sponsored persecution. You'd think, well I would anyway, that of all the people on the Earth, Jewish people, would know that it's wrong, for a state to consistantly abuse people's human rights, based upon, the colour of their skin, their race, or their religion.

Yet that's exactly what the Israeli government are doing, every day, in the West Bank and Gaza.

The Israeli government would, and do, say, "But we're being attacked, by Palestinians", yes you are, nobody is denying that, but that doesn't justify the indiscriminate nature of your response. It is this indiscriminate killing and repression of the Palestinian civilians that is the abuse of Human rights.

Yes, groups like Hezbollah and Hamas don't exactly discriminate between killing civilians and military personel, but the difference is, the Israeli government has the use of one of the most highly skilled and best equiped armies in the world, the IDF, the Palastinians have a buch of blokes, with scarves round their heads, waving antique RPGs. What I'm saying is, Israel has the capability to kill almost any individual, on the face of the planet, wherever and whenever they choose (As has been proven on a number of occasions), and the Palestinians don't.

This in no way excuses the indiscriminate killing of civilians, by groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, but it does explain it. Desperate people, employ desperate measures.

Israel's government has the option of discriminating as to who it chooses to kill, however it, more often than not, simply chooses not to do so.

Let's face it, Israel and the Palestinian groups (Hezbollah, Hamas, etc) are at war, the Israelis know this and so do the Palestinians. If you accept that, then the question stops being about, whether or not they should be fighting each other, and becomes about, how they fight each other.

This is a pretty clear cut situation, for me at least.

The Palestinians, given their resources and international political power, have little choice, but to fight dirty. The Israeli government, on the other hand, given it's resources and political clout, has every option available, it just chooses to fight dirty.

The fact that the Israeli government, claims to occupy the moral highground, whilst in reality, it fights in the gutter, just adds to the overwhelming hypocracy of their position.

The argument, often put forward in an attempt to justify the Israeli government's actions, is that, "Israel needs to be strong, so that it doesn't happen again", where "it" is the Holocaust. Well "it", to a certain extent, is happening again, only this time, it's Israel that's doing it to the Palestinians. Right here comes my own disclaimer:

Although, I am comparing the Israeli persecution of the Palestinians, to the Holocaust, I am in no way saying they are the same thing!! Rather, I am comparing them, in the same way that you might compare, someone beating someone else up, to someone murdering someone else, both are wrong, although one is much more wrong than the other. Hopefully, you all understand what I am saying, although somehow I doubt it.

The Holocaust, which was undeniably horrible beyond belief, should not give the Israeli government "carte blanche" to do whatever they feel like, to whoever they feel like. For them to behave as though it does, combined with their continual and deliberate mislabelling of people as anti-semitic, all adds up to a level of hypocracy that is frankly unbelievable. It is also disgraceful, as it taints the memory of what actually happened to many of the people the Israeli government claim to represent.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Allmo on Friday 13 January 2006, 08:05:03 PM
Right, I've read the thread now and it's not as controversial as I had expected.

Something, I'd like to add:

The most powerful weapon in the Israeli arsenal,is not "the bomb", it is the label of anti-semitism.

They know this, which is why they use it so often, much more often than even those armoured bulldozers they're so fond of.

The fear of being labelled as an anti-semite, is so great in the western world, that Israel just has to mention it and a lot of people, who would normally object, to similar actions by other countries, fall silent. This thread provides some prime examples of people's fear of being labelled anti-semitic, look at how cautious we're all being, putting disclaimers, skirting around issues, going out of our way to be fair and even handed.

Now look at the "Magic of Jesus" thread:

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,11453.0.html

and see how different it is, people are quite happy to make jokes and take the p*ss, it's all pretty lighthearted and friendly even!! I wonder why? Well no, I don't actually, I know why, it's because people aren't afraid of being anti-Christian, or even anti-Muslim, but they are seriously afraid of being anti-semitic. I'm not religious, by the way, most of you will already know that.

The thing you have to remember is that Israel, is not, and does not represent, the Jewish faith. In the same way that Christian or Muslim countries, do not represent Christianity or Islam.

Therefore, to criticise Israel, is in no way, anti-semitic.

Yes, anti-semites are likely to criticise Israel, but it is not their criticism of Israel that makes them anti-semitic, it is their hatred of Jews, which is not the same thing. Even a hatred of the Israeli government is not anti-semitic.

Yet, the Israeli government's stock response, to any criticism it receives, is to label it's accusers as anti-semitic and usually members of a world-wide anti-semitic plot, against the Jewish people!! This, at first sight, appears rather ironic, considering the accusation's similarity to the anti-semitic myths to which the Jews have been subjected throughout history. However, it is not ironic at all, it is a quite deliberate attempt, by the Israeli government, to use the same underhand tactics that have been used against Judaism for centuries, for their own ends.

This, for me, highlights the issue that is most distasteful about Israel, the sheer hypocracy of it all!!

All countries have dark and dirty histories, most have pretty dark and dirty presents, as well, including Britain, the US, Europe and all the other, self appointed, "Moral Guardians", of the world.

However, Israel stands alone, given the fact that the majority of it's population have direct experience, either first hand, or through immediate relatives, of what it's like to be on the wrong end, of state sponsored persecution. You'd think, well I would anyway, that of all the people on the Earth, Jewish people, would know that it's wrong, for a state to consistantly abuse people's human rights, based upon, the colour of their skin, their race, or their religion.

Yet that's exactly what the Israeli government are doing, every day, in the West Bank and Gaza.

The Israeli government would, and do, say, "But we're being attacked, by Palestinians", yes you are, nobody is denying that, but that doesn't justify the indiscriminate nature of your response. It is this indiscriminate killing and repression of the Palestinian civilians that is the abuse of Human rights.

Yes, groups like Hezbollah and Hamas don't exactly discriminate between killing civilians and military personel, but the difference is, the Israeli government has the use of one of the most highly skilled and best equiped armies in the world, the IDF, the Palastinians have a buch of blokes, with scarves round their heads, waving antique RPGs. What I'm saying is, Israel has the capability to kill almost any individual, on the face of the planet, wherever and whenever they choose (As has been proven on a number of occasions), and the Palestinians don't.

This in no way excuses the indiscriminate killing of civilians, by groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, but it does explain it. Desperate people, employ desperate measures.

Israel's government has the option of discriminating as to who it chooses to kill, however it, more often than not, simply chooses not to do so.

Let's face it, Israel and the Palestinian groups (Hezbollah, Hamas, etc) are at war, the Israelis know this and so do the Palestinians. If you accept that, then the question stops being about, whether or not they should be fighting each other, and becomes about, how they fight each other.

This is a pretty clear cut situation, for me at least.

The Palestinians, given their resources and international political power, have little choice, but to fight dirty. The Israeli government, on the other hand, given it's resources and political clout, has every option available, it just chooses to fight dirty.

The fact that the Israeli government, claims to occupy the moral highground, whilst in reality, it fights in the gutter, just adds to the overwhelming hypocracy of their position.

The argument, often put forward in an attempt to justify the Israeli government's actions, is that, "Israel needs to be strong, so that it doesn't happen again", where "it" is the Holocaust. Well "it", to a certain extent, is happening again, only this time, it's Israel that's doing it to the Palestinians. Right here comes my own disclaimer:

Although, I am comparing the Israeli persecution of the Palestinians, to the Holocaust, I am in no way saying they are the same thing!! Rather, I am comparing them, in the same way that you might compare, someone beating someone else up, to someone murdering someone else, both are wrong, although one is much more wrong than the other. Hopefully, you all understand what I am saying, although somehow I doubt it.

The Holocaust, which was undeniably horrible beyond belief, should not give the Israeli government "carte blanche" to do whatever they feel like, to whoever they feel like. For them to behave as though it does, combined with their continual and deliberate mislabelling of people as anti-semitic, all adds up to a level of hypocracy that is frankly unbelievable. It is also disgraceful, as it taints the memory of what actually happened to many of the people the Israeli government claim to represent.

What he said.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: johnnypd on Friday 13 January 2006, 08:06:25 PM
come on, bluf, that's not fair.  if it were true, then israel would have booted out the palestinians long long ago and in no nice fashion either.  what were the camp david meetings about if not the usa trying to get both sides to compromise? 

they did!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: johnnypd on Friday 13 January 2006, 08:09:05 PM
indigo, it is shocking how much the israeli govt plays the "anti-semitism" card on ridiculously trivial matters. at least it shocks me cos it pisses on the memory of jewish holocaust and anti-semitism victims but i suppose theyve been exploiting that for ages.

i thought this incident showed the OTT paranoia of the israeli establishment http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1183312,00.html
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 13 January 2006, 08:35:23 PM
Top post Indigo, very impressed.  You're right about the caution.  When Parky told me to be careful I was furiously scanning over everything I said to make sure I hadn't been, as you say, anti semitic. 

Allmo, I totally agree.  The Israelis have been harping on about the BBC for ages, it's almost funny.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Friday 13 January 2006, 08:52:57 PM
I think that the fact that everyone hates the BBC, proves that it's not biased at all.

Also, how ironic that The Guardian is one of Israel's biggest British critics, yet others accuse it of being dominated by Jews.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 13 January 2006, 09:03:17 PM
Indigo,
You saved me taking it to the next level and my (s***) typing fingers will forever be grateful.
I have first hand experience of the paranoia and 'guilt tripping' the Israeli govt play on as I live in Germany......Where if you mention the
holocaust in a bar...the room goes quiet. bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Allmo on Friday 13 January 2006, 09:38:33 PM
Top post Indigo, very impressed.  You're right about the caution.  When Parky told me to be careful I was furiously scanning over everything I said to make sure I hadn't been, as you say, anti semitic. 

Allmo I totally agree.  The Israelis have been harping on about the BBC for ages, it's almost funny.

Yeah that was obiously me posting ,  blueyes.gif no such person as a , what is it ........... Johnnypd, no way.

But seriously, there is a great bais in the world to racism , where Isreal , as a jewish country, is not aloud to be bad mouthed otherwise it is Anti-semetic. But if Britiain is critiscised , is that being Anti- Catholic, or Anti-Protestant. THeres total hypocricy in the world. Catholics suffered great persecution in Britain in the past, a long time ago,but so should we use the same card they use.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Allmo on Friday 13 January 2006, 09:39:12 PM
Top post Indigo, very impressed.  You're right about the caution.  When Parky told me to be careful I was furiously scanning over everything I said to make sure I hadn't been, as you say, anti semitic. 

Allmo I totally agree.  The Israelis have been harping on about the BBC for ages, it's almost funny.

Yeah that was obiously me posting ,  blueyes.gif no such person as a , what is it ........... Johnnypd, no way.

But seriously, there is a great bais in the world to racism , where Isreal , as a jewish country, is not aloud to be bad mouthed otherwise it is Anti-semetic. But if Britiain is critiscised , is that being Anti-Protestant. THeres total hypocricy in the world. Catholics suffered great persecution in Britain in the past, a long time ago,but so should we use the same card they use.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 13 January 2006, 09:45:18 PM
Mine in bold

alright i think this is going to be a long post...
Quote
that you believe Israel are absolutely blameless in this whole matter
no i dont but i did present a very one sided arguement to balance out the claim that israels birth is responsible for what is wrong in the world. i personally believe that the palestinians are more at fault of their own situation, theyve followed the wrong people that dug them into this whole. and i do believe that israel has been more accepting of coexisting with palestinians then the other way around.

You seem to just be taking the wishes of the armed groups such as Hamas and the likes.  Many ordinary Palestinians want peace, to have a decent life and not be in fear of their homes being bulldozed because someone might, and I stress might, live down the hall from them that is a terrorist.  Do you honestly think that is fair?  I didn't see the British army bulldozing all the houses in Leeds when we discovered the bombers and their homes.  No, that is not the best way to win hearts and minds, but of course, Israel couldn't give a s*** about Palestinian hearts and minds.

Quote
you deny the Israeli army's continuous oppression of Palestinian people, the non-stop destruction and shelling of their homes, the killing of women and children and the constant racism they have to suffer as a non-event.
this statement is just as one sided as my arguements.

No, he was pointing out the glaring facts that you ignored, he wasn't presenting a one-sided argument.  Facts that are very much relevent to the problems in the area.

Quote
I suppose you're in favour of the wall being constructed, are you

as long as its on israels land and not palestinians they have a right to do whatever. especially if it means stopping suicide bombers.

That's the problem, it's being build on the Palestinian side.  Now what do you have to say?  They have a right?  No.  How about the fact that they ignore the International Court of Justice?  Something the Americans also do, which has completely undermined it.
 
Quote
They simply couldn't give a s*** what the world thinks
and why do you think that is? when has the world ever came to the aid of the israelis? when was there ever pressure on the palestinians to stop suicide bombings? did anyone ever suggested of putting arafat to trial for all the crimes against humanity he has commited? the EU has been quite one sided against israel and if israel would comply with the EU thered be much more dead israelis.

That is possibly one of the funniest statments ever.  When has the world helped Israel, well, OK the WORLD hasn't, but USA has.  You'd be nothing without them.  The help Israel has received from them is pathetic, whilst Palestine have been given a fraction of that.  Not even a tenth of the aid Israel has received.  Arafat?  Crimes against humanity?  How about Ariel Sharon then?  Not heard of his little excursions into Beirut?  And that's only what I've read so far, he's got a very murky past.  But of course he gets away with it due to being in the army.  State terrorism, nothing more, nothing less.  Double standards strike once again.

Quote
How about Israel's Nuclear capabilities, I dare say this is OK too

its more ok for israel to have nuclear capabilities than iran simply because israel never went on the offensive against its neighbors and never called for the elimination of iran and never funded terror attacks in the country.

Doesn't make it OK.  It's double standards.  This President in Iran is the only one that has used such explicit language.  They've been developing Nuclear plants for over 2 decades now.  Israel has no right to them, largely because it pretends not to have them.  Yuo can't have these double standards, and I don't blame Iran, or any other Middle eastern nation, for wanting them. 

Quote
Well, how bloody honourable of them
very honourable actually. if giving back the land to the people who attacked you in order to eliminate your existence isnt a proof of willingness to coexist in peace then i dont know what is.

Are you for real?  You mean the land you stole in the first place?  Whilst you continually occupy the land you've given back.  What a proud nation it must be.  Really leading the world in morality isn't it.  Next.

Quote
Try telling that to the Arab half of Jerusalem, which increasingly looks like it will never be in the hands of the Palestinians
actually sharon has been pushing for a palestinian state during his term, which included transfer of half of jerusalem to the palestinians. the only problem is that sharon is also trying to connect maale adumim with the israeli part of jerusalem which will be a land grab. this very arrogant move by the israeli side will probably be the biggest gridlock in negotiations.

They'll never give the Palestinians their half of Jerusalem.  It's simply not on the cards.  With Netanyahu, it's never ever going to happen.

Quote
Let's face it - it will never stop untill all the Israelis are re located to the USA
and heres another lovely balanced comment.

For some Arabs/Muslims this may be the case.  Thing is, why can't the Palestinians just take back their land.  The land that used to be Palestine?  After all, God probably promised them it too.   :roll:

Quote
Israel wouldn't have the army they have, if it wasn't for the US. Israel wouldn't have the LAND they have if it wasn't for the US
and is that a bad thing? israel wouldnt exist if they werent backed by the US and there would be another lovely massacre of jews in the area if israel couldnt defend itself.

It is when the other side get virtually nothing.  It is when they're backed by the US through everything they've done, under the name of Israel.  Some how escaping the label terrorism because it's done by an official army.  Jews have lived under Islamic occupation for centuries, to the best of my knowledge there were no massacres until the Zionists started their claim on Palestine.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 13 January 2006, 09:46:23 PM
Top post Indigo, very impressed. You're right about the caution. When Parky told me to be careful I was furiously scanning over everything I said to make sure I hadn't been, as you say, anti semitic.

Allmo I totally agree. The Israelis have been harping on about the BBC for ages, it's almost funny.

Yeah that was obiously me posting , blueyes.gif no such person as a , what is it ........... Johnnypd, no way.

But seriously, there is a great bais in the world to racism , where Isreal , as a jewish country, is not aloud to be bad mouthed otherwise it is Anti-semetic. But if Britiain is critiscised , is that being Anti- Catholic, or Anti-Protestant. THeres total hypocricy in the world. Catholics suffered great persecution in Britain in the past, a long time ago,but so should we use the same card they use.


Whoops!  Johnnypd even!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Allmo on Friday 13 January 2006, 11:18:32 PM
One thing the the Iranian President said after the "wiping isreal off the map " comment.

"Why did'nt 50 years ago the jews relocate into a European state, and cause havoc their"

There is a point coming from the dicator, even though the holy shrine bollocks does contradict this. Isreal in my eyes was just a western satillite state, hence the enormous cash flow by America. But now it has advanced into a too idependant state, which has caused problems for both jews and muslims. It has vast amounts of nuclear weapons, a very good army and is a threat to it's neighbourgh states becasue of this. The Iranian president was very brave with these comments. It will make Isreali pressure even greater on iran, becasue mixed with its nukes, and hatred it will be a deadly combo for the Isreali's too take. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Saturday 14 January 2006, 12:07:27 AM
come on, bluf, that's not fair.  if it were true, then israel would have booted out the palestinians long long ago and in no nice fashion either.  what were the camp david meetings about if not the usa trying to get both sides to compromise? 

they did!

that depends on who you ask.  in 1948 when israel was given nation status by the UN it didn't take hours before the surrounding arab countries declared war on the new nation of israel.  before the actual fighting started, palestinians left/abandoned/were told to leave by both israelis, in the form of vehicles slowly driving the streets of jerusalem with loudspeakers warning them that they'll be blood up to their knees if they stay, AND arabs, in the form of promises made to the palestinians of increased property they would aquire after the jews had been driven into the mediterranean sea.  the sand in the swimsuit for the arabs & palestinians was that israel won the war, leaving many former residents of israel/palestine without homes.  the arabs refused to grant them any place to call home in their countries for reasons of their own, but the suspicion is that they saw an opportunity to use the refugees as a media trump card.  what better way to get the sympathy of the world than to show children throwing stones at tanks as they mercilessly rumble through their streets?  an ironic twist to the david & goliath story.  so, jews use the holocaust to gain world sympathy and it works b/c they got their nation of israel.  now the pendulum is trying to swing back as the arabs use the refugees in the same way.   it's brutal tactics on both sides of two cultures steeped in the razzia blood feuds of the bedouin tradition--both groups claim abraham as their ancestor remember. 


as for the US support of the nation of israel that comes from 2-3 sources: the first, president truman was a bible-believing christian and really saw the new nation of israel as a fulfillment of prophecy; so the usa was the 1st nation to recognize the state of israel in '48.  this began a chain reaction of other nations following that lead in the voting.  second, after ww2 many displaced jews came to america and began to lead very successful lives and make a lot of $.  they remembered and looked after their own by financing a great deal of the costs of european jews who wanted to emmigrate to eretz-israel.  that financial support contiues to this day.  third, the usa, despite its internal problems (which are legion) is still a "christian" nation.  depending on which poll you read, 85-95% of the population claims to believe in God and more than half go to church.  they are always going to support israel all other things being equal, but they certainly are not.  when islamic terrorists are blowing up major US landmarks and killing non-muslims indescriminately throughout the world then for the average american it's a no-brainer--israel has been right all along! 

i think a decent case can be made for the restraint israel has shown on numerable occasions, but they certainly have innocent blood on their hands and don't seem to mind that they do.  as one guy i know put it, would you let your wife be raped twice if you could stop it the 2nd time?

for me it comes down to the fact that westerners want clearcut answers that just aren't there.  we fail to understand the religious passion of either group and we fail to comprehend the history and culture which begat it.  we're too lazy to be bothered to try and understand and so will only go back as far as the oldest point the most high-profile or convenient journalist will take us.

at this point it is helpful to believe in God because it is a problem that only He can sort out. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 14 January 2006, 12:44:53 AM
.....all well and rosy...till Parky decided to introduce into the debate.....the....

























KABALLAH!!!!!!!!! :glasses9:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Saturday 14 January 2006, 01:22:02 AM
lol  we should get madonna's point of view! :idea1:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Saturday 14 January 2006, 01:27:43 AM
well mr bluff, i had a long post to comment on what youve said but i decided to erase it because it really doesnt matter to you what i have to say (it seems you dont even bother reading most of what i say anyway). you also seem to believe that a country can attack another and expect no negative repercussions if it shall lose. if thats the case then theres probably nothing anyone can tell you about the situation in israel that will defend it. and you seem to be either uneducated or choose to ignore(possibly as a counter arguments to what i say) the jewish history in the area (not the religious stuff). so ill tip my hat and say good day. maybe one day people will choose to resolve their differnces on the pitch rather than in the battlefield 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Saturday 14 January 2006, 01:31:39 AM
bummer, i was really enjoying the exchange.   thanks for playing goashem! clapping.gif

did that seem sarcastic?  not meant to be.  i did enjoy your posts.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Saturday 14 January 2006, 01:32:26 AM
I think the problem is that you seem to think Israel do no wrong.  I'm trying to point out they're in the wrong as much as the Palestinians.  Come to your own conclusions about myself if you wish.  If you can't debate, that's not my problem.

You completely ignore the case of the other side.  I'm open to views.  I've completely taken on Bulivye's point of view.  He hasn't given me a one sided argument, and has expressed good points.  You openly admitted your statements were one sided, so I was always going to come back like that. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Saturday 14 January 2006, 01:35:49 AM
so, bluf,  IS israel the real danger to world peace?   
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Saturday 14 January 2006, 01:38:35 AM
so, bluf, IS israel the real danger to world peace?

It could be, just as much as Iran could be.  Like I said earlier in the thread, once Israel's politcal situation is sorted, and if it is Netanyahu, then both he and Ahmadinejad are going to play vital rolls in future peace in the region.  Which will have massive implications for the world.

Israel has two paths it can take.  The hardline way, with Netanyahu, or the current way with the Deputy PM.  Just like Iran had two paths.  It had the reformist root under Rafsanjani, or the hardline Ahmadinejad.  It choose the hardline.

It's a disaster waiting to occur.  The only hope we have is that sanctions work and turn the populas against Ahmadinejad, which I doubt, to be honest.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Saturday 14 January 2006, 01:42:07 AM
I think the problem is that you seem to think Israel do no wrong.  I'm trying to point out they're in the wrong as much as the Palestinians.  Come to your own conclusions about myself if you wish.  If you can't debate, that's not my problem.

You completely ignore the case of the other side.  I'm open to views. I've completely taken on Bulivye's point of view. He hasn't given me a one sided argument, and has expressed good points. You openly admitted your statements were one sided, so I was always going to come back like that.

fair enough. maybe when ill take the time to sort out a balanced arguement ill come back to this thread.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Saturday 14 January 2006, 02:13:07 AM
Oh, how disappointing, I seem to have entered the debate just as it is finishing, back to the "Magic of Jesus" thread then, I guess.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Saturday 14 January 2006, 02:52:25 AM
Oh, how disappointing, I seem to have entered the debate just as it is finishing, back to the "Magic of Jesus" thread then, I guess.

wait!  you can't LEAVE...all the plants'll die. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Saturday 14 January 2006, 02:56:59 AM
Oh, how disappointing, I seem to have entered the debate just as it is finishing, back to the "Magic of Jesus" thread then, I guess.

wait!  you can't LEAVE...all the plants'll die. 

Are you trying to say that the sun shines out of my arse!?!

;)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Saturday 14 January 2006, 02:58:44 AM
Oh, how disappointing, I seem to have entered the debate just as it is finishing, back to the "Magic of Jesus" thread then, I guess.

wait!  you can't LEAVE...all the plants'll die. 

Are you trying to say that the sun shines out of my arse!?!

;)

 

i thought that's where you were getting the fertilizer!   poo.gif snigger.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Saturday 14 January 2006, 03:10:27 AM
It's spelled with an 's' over here.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Saturday 14 January 2006, 03:13:09 AM
It's spelled with an 's' over here.

ahh... good thing i used the picture then!   bluewink.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 14 January 2006, 10:52:10 AM
Historically of course there is a big questionmark against the land that has been given to make the Israeli state.
The Jews themselves never actually lived in that area and it is biblical hocum that has engendered this myth.
The true Jewish homeland would have been more accurately sited in Egypt and there are traces in Iraq.
The homeland of the Jews in the area we now know as Israel is pretty much made up.


The debate continues...... bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 14 January 2006, 11:32:17 AM
Ther original Jews were semetic tribes with a wide diaspora incorporating ancient Mesapotamia, parts of what is now Egypt, Iraq and Jordan.
Their faith was pretty much 'mysticism' and they had trading links to Asia minor. They were often caravan bound and had strong trading and tribal  traditons.
They 'arrived' in Jerusalem 14thC B.C. (inhabted at the time by the Canannites, Hittities and Philistines)and were given a beating by the Philistines.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Saturday 14 January 2006, 01:05:18 PM
Ther original Jews were semetic tribes with a wide diaspora incorporating ancient Mesapotamia, parts of what is now Egypt, Iraq and Jordan.
Their faith was pretty much 'mysticism' and they had trading links to Asia minor. They were often caravan bound and had strong trading and tribal  traditons.
They 'arrived' in Jerusalem 14thC B.C. (inhabted at the time by the Canannites, Hittities and Philistines)and were given a beating by the Philistines.

then where are the philistines (et al) now?   those people groups are extinct and the descendants of abraham i.e. jews and arabs are what remain.  seems like they both have an historical claim to me.  but, then, i do accept the bible as a credible historical document.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Saturday 14 January 2006, 02:11:28 PM
Historically of course there is a big questionmark against the land that has been given to make the Israeli state.
The Jews themselves never actually lived in that area and it is biblical hocum that has engendered this myth.
The true Jewish homeland would have been more accurately sited in Egypt and there are traces in Iraq.
The homeland of the Jews in the area we now know as Israel is pretty much made up.


The debate continues...... bluecool.gif

Well, many think genuine Jews, as in the race, came from modern day Ukraine (Khazar Empire).  Then they slowly migrated down the Caucasus Mountains, to Egypt whilst covering a lot of ground and clearly settling.  The land is as much there's as anyone elses, but by no means have they been there since the dawn of time. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Saturday 14 January 2006, 02:23:55 PM
The Philistines are NOT extinct - they still inhabit  3-4 villages in S Lebanon I believe
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Saturday 14 January 2006, 02:47:51 PM
The Philistines are NOT extinct - they still inhabit  3-4 villages in S Lebanon I believe

didn't know that.  shall we give the land to them?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 14 January 2006, 06:03:57 PM
So the kicker is this:

'On the same day the lord made a covenant with Abram saying, "To your descendants I have given this land"..(Genesis 15:8)

and this:

'For this land will comfort Zion; He will comfort her waste spaces and he will make her wilderness like Eden'...(Isaiah 51:3)

In fact the Jews beleive that the very air in ancient Judea is special and gives special powers to observant Jews!!

and this....

"All the land of Cannan for your everlasting posession"...Genesis 15:8...


This stuff goes down well in America...Well to the tune of One billion dollars which was last years 'aid' package.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Saturday 14 January 2006, 09:20:11 PM
it does, i think the usa has the highest jewish pop. outside israel.  but arabs are the descendants of abram as well, which is where i thought you were going to go with your post.  instead, i'm not sure what you're getting at.  are you saying that america is the real evil in the middle east?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Sunday 15 January 2006, 10:25:23 AM
It seems to be a widely held view  -especially by 99% of the inhabitants
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Sunday 15 January 2006, 08:33:16 PM
It seems to be a widely held view  -especially by 99% of the inhabitants

sorry, the inhabitants of the middle east or america?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Shearer9 on Monday 16 January 2006, 03:14:56 AM
so, bluf, IS israel the real danger to world peace?

It could be, just as much as Iran could be.  Like I said earlier in the thread, once Israel's politcal situation is sorted, and if it is Netanyahu, then both he and Ahmadinejad are going to play vital rolls in future peace in the region.  Which will have massive implications for the world.

Israel has two paths it can take.  The hardline way, with Netanyahu, or the current way with the Deputy PM.  Just like Iran had two paths.  It had the reformist root under Rafsanjani, or the hardline Ahmadinejad.  It choose the hardline.

It's a disaster waiting to occur. The only hope we have is that sanctions work and turn the populas against Ahmadinejad, which I doubt, to be honest.
I think the whole point of this thread, which has yet to come out clearly(I dunno, it may have, I've kind of skimmed the last few pages) is that Israel is essentially in prime position to be the turnkey in a majorly violent world event, if they aren't already.  Whether that's because they're right, or because the Palestinians have legitimate claims to the land, or they have US backing, or they have an anti-Semitism card to play all the time, doesn't really matter.  The fact that there are so many points like that being brought up just shows how many levels this whole ordeal has.  One has to believe that if a major international incident ever kicked off, it would have something to do with the Middle East.  Becuase that's the last major very public battleground in the world, everyone finds it necessary to focus on it or throw their weight around in there.  It's not the conflict itself that's so bad, but the introduction of all the world's superpowers into it.  It's not so much a case of Israel starting conflict unecessarily, but the fact that Israel's actions have gotten so many others involved, rightly or wrongly.

I consider myself a person who keeps up on the news, but I've only ever heard tidbits in the major american media outlets about genocide in Africa, or the Russians fighting in Chechnya.  The USSR is always going to be a place where media access is limited because of the government, the same applies in Africa because it's so poor. 

Any number of issues can be brought up as to why this is a problem, but the point is that when so many world superpowers are throwing their weight around over such a devise issue, it's ripe to really kick off.  I think while the US gives Israel backing, it's also realized that it's not going to be good for anyone when the nukes start flying.  It could start from something like Israel really stepping up against the Palestineans, or Iran decided that the Islamic state has had enough, or even other countries totally outside the debate starting something.  Anyway, good thread, lots of good points and discussion.

And regarding your much earlier points Bluf, I think that while this whole situation could set off world change, I think it's liklier that this situation will spawn major world war than world peace, and one world government type of stuff.  I still think that the parties involved still have enough sense to realize that bad things will happen if nuclear war begins, and it would take alot more build up, and this to become a much more loaded issue than it is now. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 16 January 2006, 09:13:51 AM
It seems to be a widely held view  -especially by 99% of the inhabitants

sorry, the inhabitants of the middle east or america?

Guess...............  :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 16 January 2006, 09:17:39 AM
Way back in teh 19th Century Bismark said "there will be a World War and it will start in the Balkans"

I think a lot of us suspect the same about the Middle East - maybe not a World War as the main players have so much to lose but its easy to see some sort of conventional war breaking out and escallating - if someone drops an A bomb then what happens?????

Luckily the Russians and the Chinese do not really have the involvement they had but the Yanks are so tied to Israel its frightening
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stevie on Monday 16 January 2006, 01:41:03 PM
Hitler was clearly a bad man.  Israel is however the most evil country in the world, and I agree with the arab point of view that Israel is the route of most of the evil in the world.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 17 January 2006, 04:30:59 PM
The thing about attacking Iran is that American only attacks when it is sure a country is virtually defenceless...ie Iraq, Guatamala etc..And in the case of Iran this isn't the case.
So my money is on a sponsored strike using Israel.
The debate around the hunt for chemical weapons and the long programmes devoted to it on US televison, I don't beleive the use of Agent Orange in Vietnam is ever mentioned. This, one of the most carcogenic toxins know is still being felt by the polulation today and this chemical weapon alone is estimated to have killed over 300,000 Vietnamese men women and children. In fact at one point there was some concern amongst advisors that the country might be unhabitable in huge areas to human life. But of course the word genocide is never mentioned in context to Uncle Sam.
History is constantly being effaced, especially in the US, most people over there don't know what time of day it is.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: womblemaster on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 10:39:26 AM
i dont agree that israel is at centre of the NWO.

The blame for that lies off planet.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 11:30:04 AM
I blame Souness
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 12:12:24 PM
Hitler was clearly a bad man.  Israel is however the most evil country in the world, and I agree with the arab point of view that Israel is the route of most of the evil in the world.

are you aware of the clear connections between the arab states and nazi germany during ww2?   certainly the israelis have blood on their hands, but they're not the most evil country in the world.  they are merely protecting their territory and people in the way that they choose.  we can disagree with them about their methods, but hardly the sentiments behind them.  so, unless i'm understanding the word 'evil' differently each nation on earth has skeletons in their closet, and three fingers point back at them for every finger of blame pointed at others.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Dokko on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 12:27:11 PM
Hitler was clearly a bad man.  Israel is however the most evil country in the world, and I agree with the arab point of view that Israel is the route of most of the evil in the world.

are you aware of the clear connections between the arab states and nazi germany during ww2?   certainly the israelis have blood on their hands, but they're not the most evil country in the world.  they are merely protecting their territory and people in the way that they choose.  we can disagree with them about their methods, but hardly the sentiments behind them.  so, unless i'm understanding the word 'evil' differently each nation on earth has skeletons in their closet, and three fingers point back at them for every finger of blame pointed at others.

Its not their territory though is it?

Glorified Gypsy's.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 12:57:48 PM
"are you aware of the clear connections between the arab states and nazi germany during ww2"

No - there were no Arab states at the time except Saudi - we and the French ran the whole shooting match Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, the Gulf, Iraq, Morocco, Tunisia - and Musso ran Libya............................... 
 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 01:18:03 PM
"are you aware of the clear connections between the arab states and nazi germany during ww2"

No - there were no Arab states at the time except Saudi - we and the French ran the whole shooting match Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, the Gulf, Iraq, Morocco, Tunisia - and Musso ran Libya............................... 
 

ok, conceded.  but don't think that the british or the french had complete control over these muslim areas.  they didn't.  remember the need for lawrence of arabia during ww1?     but, i was more talking about the grand mufti and friends.  basically he led the muslim nazi party...

and as for glorified gypsy's...  early in jewish history, definitely true.  but by the founding of the modern state of israel, the zionists had bought, in bits and pieces, a large portion of the current land.  all perfectly legal.  and they didn't act until they were recognized by the UN.   not trying to be the israeli apologist here, just want fair play all around.  i still think the palestinians have gotten a very raw deal!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 01:27:55 PM
Actually, Yasser Arafat's predecessor, Haj Amin al-Husseini, served as special advisor to Hitler in Berlin during WW2 on "the Jewish problem". The intention was to set up Jewish extermination camps in Palestine if the Germans were victorious.

As for Israel being the worlds most evil country, this is utter lunacy. I take it people have never heard of Robert Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe, the Chinese occupation of Tibet, the Sudanese government etc etc.

The only block to Middle East are the Arab rejectionist states who have refused to accept Israel's existence. It was the Arab's who attacked Israel during 48, 67 and 73 with a clear mandate: destruction.

It is the Palastinian terrorist organisations, such as Hmas, Al Aqsa Maryrs Brigade, Hezzbollah and the Muslim brotherhood who repeatdly attempt to kill innocent Jewish civilians (not military targets) and it is states like Iran and Syria who train, finance and equip such organisations.

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East - Arabs have more rights in Israel than in their own countries. They can vote, serve in the army and have complete freedom of speech.

If Israel is the blocker to peace in the Middle East then why has Palestine rejected a two-state-solution on all three occassions where it has been offered? 

 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 02:03:37 PM
"remember the need for lawrence of arabia during ww1?  "

that WAS Saudi Arabia (cough, cough)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 02:06:30 PM
Actually, Yasser Arafat's predecessor, Haj Amin al-Husseini, served as special advisor to Hitler in Berlin during WW2 on "the Jewish problem". The intention was to set up Jewish extermination camps in Palestine if the Germans were victorious.

As for Israel being the worlds most evil country, this is utter lunacy. I take it people have never heard of Robert Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe, the Chinese occupation of Tibet, the Sudanese government etc etc.

The only block to Middle East are the Arab rejectionist states who have refused to accept Israel's existence. It was the Arab's who attacked Israel during 48, 67 and 73 with a clear mandate: destruction.

It is the Palastinian terrorist organisations, such as Hmas, Al Aqsa Maryrs Brigade, Hezzbollah and the Muslim brotherhood who repeatdly attempt to kill innocent Jewish civilians (not military targets) and it is states like Iran and Syria who train, finance and equip such organisations.

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East - Arabs have more rights in Israel than in their own countries. They can vote, serve in the army and have complete freedom of speech.

If Israel is the blocker to peace in the Middle East then why has Palestine rejected a two-state-solution on all three occassions where it has been offered?

 

and how many people has the Israeli Air force killed ????

A "solution" proposed by the guy with the Big Stick is no solution

Why won't Israel accept the right of return?  why not go back to its original frontiers??  Why not give up  E Jerusalem

If I was a Palestinian I wouldn't agree to Israel  "proposals" either
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Kevin Carrs Gloves on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 02:11:56 PM
There is no winner on this argument. Israel and the Arab states are equally to blame for everything to have happened there. The Israeli Zionists for pushing the right wing expansionist agenda (ironically reminice (sp) of the german request for Lebensraum before WWII) And the refusal of the Arabs to recognise Israel. Remember the forces against Israel don't just want some land back. There written laws demand that the state of Israel be turned back into the sea. As far as most of the Israelis see it there is no room for compromise on that. However Israel's human rights record is abysmal.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 03:07:25 PM

Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East - Arabs have more rights in Israel than in their own countries. They can vote, serve in the army and have complete freedom of speech.


An oft quoted, but factually incorrect, statement, in other words a lie.

I'm not saying you're lying, because you might just be unaware of the facts, but most of the people who make that statement, know it to be incorrect and therefore are lying.

Both Iran and Palestine hold elections, at least Palestine would do if Israel would allow them to do so, therefore making them democratic countries, also Iraq has recently held elections, as you probably remember.

Just because we, the west, don't like the way they conduct their democarcies, or in actual fact more likely who they elect, does not mean these countries are not democarcies.

So the statement "Israel is the only democracy in the middle east" is a lie. The fact that Israel itself, is preventing one of the other democracies in the region, from holding elections, means that not only is the staement a lie it is also drenched in hypocracy.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 11:31:44 PM
"remember the need for lawrence of arabia during ww1?  "

that WAS Saudi Arabia (cough, cough)

funny.  the following is from http://www.lawrenceofarabia.info/
1914 - 16
After war broke out, Lawrence spent a brief period in the Geographical Section of the General Staff in London. He was then posted to the Military Intelligence Department in Cairo where he became, among other things, an expert on Arab nationalist movements in the Turkish provinces that now comprise Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, and the Hedjaz region of Saudi Arabia.

In October 1916, he was sent on a fact-finding mission to the Hedjaz, where Sherif Hussein of Mecca had rebelled against Turkish imperial rule. The quality of his reports and his empathy with Arab leaders led to a long-term role as a British liaison officer in the Arab Revolt, serving with the forces led by the Emir Feisal, one of Hussein's four sons.


but enough of your coughing, care to reply to the rest of my post?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 18 January 2006, 11:51:50 PM
Back to brass tacks. Bush2 has made suttle behind the scenes and changes to the American agenda with regard to Israel. Often these swerves of official policy go unnoticed, there is the usual..smoke and mirrors, 'doublethink', erasure etc...But they have been quietly changing stuff...

The U.S. administration doesn't really want a solution........
In Dec 2002 the B2 administraton reversed US policy on Jerusalem. At least, in principle the US had previously gone along with the 1968 Security Council resolution ordering Israel to revoke its annexation, occupation and settlement policies in East Jerusalem. But the B2 admin reversed that policy which had been in place for a might long time. It can only be seen as an instrument to undermine any settlement.

What are these two countries upto? (Israel & U.S.).

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:09:30 AM
Back to brass tacks. Bush2 has made suttle behind the scenes and changes to the American agenda with regard to Israel. Often these swerves of official policy go unnoticed, there is the usual..smoke and mirrors, 'doublethink', erasure etc...But they have been quietly changing stuff...

The U.S. administration doesn't really want a solution........
In Dec 2002 the B2 administraton reversed US policy on Jerusalem. At least, in principle the US had previously gone along with the 1968 Security Council resolution ordering Israel to revoke its annexation, occupation and settlement policies in East Jerusalem. But the B2 admin reversed that policy which had been in place for a might long time. It can only be seen as an instrument to undermine any settlement.

What are these two countries upto? (Israel & U.S.).


i disagree.  i think the US would LOVE to be the broker of the solution to the middle east problem.  whichever president did that would have his legacy set forever!  nothing wrong with looking like the kind magnanimous provider of peace, right?  it's just that pro-israel lobbying forces in washington have tremendous clout so, there's a tightrope to be walked.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:17:00 AM
Bulivye,
You'd would have thought that wouldn't you.
But all indications point the other way.

Israel's greatest role, apart from being the U.S. policeman in the middle east is acting as a middle man who is fascilitating taking American tax dollars and handing them over to the Industrial Arms complex....It really is as simple as that.

A peaceful middle east would remove one mother of  pay day for the arms/technology industry in the U.S.
The take the the billions in aid and give it right back to the US in the form of Arms, surveillance and dual use high tech purchases.

Tax  from the vast majority of average American goes back into the pockets of a wealthy financial elite.
What a scam!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:24:31 AM
I think both of you are right, in ways.  But America doesn't need Israel to create wars, it's doing a good enough job itself.  With its worldwide march for democracy. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:28:37 AM
If anyone has any doubts and it does look a bit like I'm offering simple ans to longevity of the problem, have a close look at companies like Halliburton's role in Iraq. It really is laughable. Again take the money of the average Joe and hand it over to the elite in one easy step.
American citizens? Monkeys more like.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:29:51 AM
 blueyes.gif

Thing is, there's even more companies than that.  Smaller security companies and the likes. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:31:07 AM
Bulivye,
You'd would have thought that wouldn't you.
But all indications point the other way.

Israel's greatest role, apart from being the U.S. policeman in the middle east is acting as a middle man who is fascilitating taking American tax dollars and handing them over to the Industrial Arms complex....It really is as simple as that.

A peaceful middle east would remove one mother of  pay day for the arms/technology industry in the U.S.
The take the the billions in aid and give it right back to the US in the form of Arms, surveillance and dual use high tech purchases.

Tax  from the vast majority of average American goes back into the pockets of a wealthy financial elite.
What a scam!


hmm...  i'm not so sure the US needs israel to take tax dollars and hand them over to industrail arm manufacturer's.  maybe you're right though, i'm open to your view.  the thing is that the pentagon is a huge huge place and it's easy to take advantage of the bureaucracy that exists there. 
i really believe that it's the strong jewish lobby in washington that keeps any US president from making bolder moves in the mid-east.  anther thing to keep in mind, to my shame, is that most american presidents are more interested in 2 things as their priorities: 1. getting re-elected & 2. their legacy.  doing what's right by the rest of the world, sadly is at best a distant 3rd....
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:32:57 AM
Voodoo economics. bluecool.gif

Meanwhile the move rolls..


 :happy1:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:34:27 AM
Bulivye,
You'd would have thought that wouldn't you.
But all indications point the other way.

Israel's greatest role, apart from being the U.S. policeman in the middle east is acting as a middle man who is fascilitating taking American tax dollars and handing them over to the Industrial Arms complex....It really is as simple as that.

A peaceful middle east would remove one mother of  pay day for the arms/technology industry in the U.S.
The take the the billions in aid and give it right back to the US in the form of Arms, surveillance and dual use high tech purchases.

Tax  from the vast majority of average American goes back into the pockets of a wealthy financial elite.
What a scam!


hmm... i'm not so sure the US needs israel to take tax dollars and hand them over to industrail arm manufacturer's. maybe you're right though, i'm open to your view. the thing is that the pentagon is a huge huge place and it's easy to take advantage of the bureaucracy that exists there.
i really believe that it's the strong jewish lobby in washington that keeps any US president from making bolder moves in the mid-east. anther thing to keep in mind, to my shame, is that most american presidents are more interested in 2 things as their priorities: 1. getting re-elected & 2. their legacy. doing what's right by the rest of the world, sadly is at best a distant 3rd....

I also noticed the alarming amount of references to Israel by both Kelly and Bush in the elections over there.  Not one of Palestine though, just the security of the State of Israel.  That's why I also think a President isn't much interested in the solution, a lot of the money backers are of Jewish origin, and could easily withdraw.  Like you've said, they have a lot of power, and there's many a way to use it. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:36:59 AM
Voodoo economics. bluecool.gif

Meanwhile the move rolls..


 :happy1:

all i remember from econ.  is "supply & demand"   but voodoo econ involves tax breaks with the hope of people putting their $ back into the economy, right?    aye yi yi this sort of thing does my head!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:39:08 AM
honestly can't be arsed to read through all this ,but has the balfour decleration been raised yet(yes we had our meddling grubby mits in at the start of it)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:40:04 AM
I still can't figure out how they got over 50% of Americans to beleive that Iraq was a threat to American security and directly responsible for 9/11.
It's not propaganda its fekin mysticism...
That is why I refer to American capitalism as 'Mystical capitalism. :)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:40:18 AM
Yes, it has.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:44:30 AM
I still can't figure out how they got over 50% of Americans to beleive that Iraq was a threat to American security and directly responsible for 9/11.
It's not propaganda its fekin mysticism...
That is why I refer to American capitalism as 'Mystical capitalism. :)

I just think that's blind faith.  The assumption that your Government is telling the truth.  Up until Iraq, I'm sure many British people assumed most that was said was truthful.  I'm not saying all, before you all come out and say so, but the majority.  And a lot of Americans do seem to believe what their Government say, just like us. 

It's all changing though, both sides of the pond, as more lies get revealed.  About everything.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:45:49 AM
:::::holds hands up:::::   i think twas i brought up lord balfour and his declaration...   yes, there's a lot of blame to be shared...
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:48:20 AM
It was us who created Q8 remember...To deny Iraq strategic ports.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:48:27 AM
UK are certainly not blameless.  No.  They've not taken the role the Americans have though.  Which is ultimately what has sustained, what I see as, the biggest mistake on the global scene since the end of WW2.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:50:18 AM
 blueyes.gif
....and you know I really beleive the shadow Govt in America don't really give a feck.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:55:35 AM
UK are certainly not blameless.  No.  They've not taken the role the Americans have though.  Which is ultimately what has sustained, what I see as, the biggest mistake on the global scene since the end of WW2.

right, since 1948 britain has largely washed their hands of the situation, giving the UN the problem which decided on the 2-state solution.   america through the very large bastion of jews currently residing in the USA has kept their grubby little paws in the mix.  i think the Bible has an influence here as well.  people here tend to believe that Israel is God's chosen nation, and that's something that jews play on to maximum effect.   and of course, don't underestimate the power of guilt.  the holocaust still has tremendous affect on people's view of the israelis.

sadly for the palestinian pregnant women blocked at checkpoints from medical attention while in labour are somewhat swept aside...  bluesigh.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Thursday 19 January 2006, 01:04:23 AM
how about the part the US played in the UN  vote to get israel "nation status" in the first place...lots of palme greased apparently
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 19 January 2006, 01:07:39 AM
The magic words are, "...We beleive it is a threat to American security"..They have recurred in every single speech by an US precident in modern times as a prelude to invasion.
Apparently once Americans hear those words their brains switch off.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Thursday 19 January 2006, 01:15:39 AM
The magic words are, "...We beleive it is a threat to American security"..They have recurred in every single speech by an US precident in modern times as a prelude to invasion.
Apparently once Americans hear those words their brains switch off.

prove they were switched  "on" ...
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 19 January 2006, 07:42:29 AM
 bluelaugh.gif bluelaugh.gif bluelaugh.gif bluelaugh.gif bluelaugh.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 19 January 2006, 12:18:18 PM
The magic words are, "...We beleive it is a threat to American security"..They have recurred in every single speech by an US precident in modern times as a prelude to invasion.
Apparently once Americans hear those words their brains switch off.

prove they were switched  "on" ...

fair comment   blueyes.gif   

and i don't know about greased palms, but the US was the FIRST nation to vote in favor of statehood for israel.  as i posted previously, i think that was down to s strong jewish lobby, worldwide guilt/shame/sympathy over the holocaust, and president truman's deeply held christian convictions about the bible and israel...
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 19 January 2006, 03:59:58 PM
When I get to the holocaust this thread will really take off.... coffee.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 19 January 2006, 04:20:48 PM
What holocaust? :wink: :wink:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 19 January 2006, 05:52:40 PM
What holocaust? :wink: :wink:

heh heh 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 19 January 2006, 09:03:31 PM
Rob,
That of course is the 'right' (wrong) ans.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 20 January 2006, 12:34:00 PM
I can recognise a feed line when I see it!

Doesn't seem to have set the world alight tho'..................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Friday 20 January 2006, 12:58:39 PM
When I get to the holocaust this thread will really take off.... coffee.gif

Meaning what exactly?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 20 January 2006, 03:21:49 PM
"Holocaust Denial"

"Anti Semitic"

"Fascist Swine"


etc etc

that's what he's hoping for
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 20 January 2006, 06:24:19 PM
Is he?! bluebigeek.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 23 January 2006, 09:21:49 AM
Article in the Economist pointing out that the President of Isreal, the Head of the Defence Staff and the Minister of Defence are all actually Iranians.................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 28 January 2006, 09:24:48 PM
Rob,

Ultmately mate, history is being erased by fiction...Or summat like that.
Generally  a lot of people just go with what is more entertaining.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Sunday 29 January 2006, 11:13:04 AM
I suspect it was always thus

we know about many of  the cockups, lies and deceit these days but presumably it was exactly the same in the time of Pharoah, King of Egypt  - "Bugger me, I never wanted it to be THAT big!  All I wanted was a Spinx in the garden by the pool"
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 29 January 2006, 12:47:51 PM
 bluelaugh.gif bluelaugh.gif

"...and those pyramids lying everywhere, I wanna be buried in one..."
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Sunday 29 January 2006, 06:28:38 PM
"That bugger Moses promised us there would be a ferry - with Duty Free"
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: scott076q on Tuesday 31 January 2006, 07:11:07 AM
No noisy neighbours and nob's who congregate round mine drinking bellabrusco.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Tuesday 31 January 2006, 09:46:17 AM
Baffled..................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 3 February 2006, 08:14:16 PM
....Not to mention the Jewish mother...Definetely a threat to world peace.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 16 February 2006, 07:33:24 PM
With the current focus on Iran which is transparantly Israel pulling the strings....Is America being used or is Israel being used?
Can't make me mind up about this.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Alan Shearer 9 on Thursday 16 February 2006, 07:33:54 PM
what world peace?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 16 February 2006, 07:35:01 PM
They each think they're using the other and well...


...they are!!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Tom_NUFC on Thursday 16 February 2006, 10:17:49 PM
I think Israel is the biggest danger to world peace. Before I go on, I'd like to state that whilst I may refer to Jews, it is Israel that I see as the problem, and not Judaism.

Firstly, we have to take our share of the blame. After world war 2, the Jewish people understandably felt the need for a Jewish homeland from which they would be protected from persecution and atrocities against them The natural choice was Palestine, which as Israel had been the Jewish homeland in Biblical times. But that was 2000 years before. In that time, most left Palestine for Europe and Russia (and later to America from these areas). Palestine had long been Arabic/Muslim. Since World War 1, it had been a British Mandate - ie, our responsibility. When the Jewish homeland was proposed, we just handed it over to them without any regard for the Palestinians, who had their country just snatched away from them. As if that wasn't bad enough, the settlers went in heavy handed right from the off, and when the British army stepped in, to protect the Palestinians, they took pot shots at us as well.

NOTHING excuses terrorism, there is NO WAY it can be condoned, but it is easy to understand the frustration and grievances of the Palestinian people. They had their country taken from them, their religion replaced as the main religion, they were victims of violence, oppression and maltreatment, had the good land taken from them by the Israelis. They have been fenced in by huge walls, had their movement restricted by Israelis who they have to get permission from, and show their passes at checkpoints.

There was a great piece in the Guardian, last Monday I think, drawing some comparisons between Israel's treatment of Palestinians and Apartheid in South Africa. It was very interesting stuff.

Palestinian terrorism is dreadful. The suicide bombings which have killed Israelis is utterly dispicable. But while it can't be condoned, I feel that much of what the Israeli state has done to Palestinians is nothing short of state terrorism. There are horrific stories, such as the four year old Palestinian boy who watched as Israeli soldiers burst into his family's home one night and shot his sleeping nine month old baby sister in front of him.

I just find it dreadful that Israel was set up as a haven from persecution and terror against Jews, and yet for decades Israel has proceded to do exactly that to others, and the US, the UK, France, and pretty much all of the western world has supported Israel.

The persecuted Palestinians are natural supported by fellow Arabs and Muslims, so its not hard to see why Israel is the problem here.

I think one of the big tragedies was when Yitzhak Rabin was shot by right wing Israeli extremists. Rabin was really trying to sort it out, and he was shot because he was supposedly betraying Israel. His successor Shimon Peres, tried to continue Rabin's work and policies but was forced out by right wingers, and the right wingers in Israel like Benjamin Netenyahu and Ariel Sharon just sent things backwards. In the last few months and weeks before he fell ill, Sharon changed dramatically and looked liked he wanted to get things moving. He, like many western politicians had realised that both Israel and Palestine need to exist as sovereign states, fully independent of each other. The pull outs of Israeli settlers in Gaza and the West Bank were big steps forward. I just hope that whoever succeeds Sharon permanently will carry on in the direction he started to go down.

Nothings certain, but I believe that there is big hope.

Look at Northern Ireland, that was a huge mess, but there seems to be an understanding.
The IRA made a big step in giving  up its arms and handing things over to Sinn Fein to negotiate and sort things out via diplomacy and political means.

Hamas has won the recent Palestinian elections, and if they can follow the IRA's example by being big enough to make the first move/gesture and give up the armed struggle and resolving things via politics and negotiating (and I think right now they look like doing so) then that will have a big positive effect on the West and on large numbers of Israelis.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 16 February 2006, 11:42:46 PM
Great post Tom and a nice roundup. coffee.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 23 February 2006, 12:23:33 AM
well here i am making a triumphant return just to clarify a few misconceptions brought up by Tom,
first of all jews did not leave israel for europe/asia/africa so on, they were exiled by the roman empire who could not subdue jewish revolts. the romans then renamed israel to palestine to eliminate any jewish identity with the land. but there were still jewish communities living in the northern part of what was now known as palestine. the land exchanged hands from romans to byzantines and lastly to the ottoman empire (and alot of miscellaneous arab/christian armies in between). so you see there was never a palestine state governed by palestinians, heres a good quote on the matter:"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism" Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. If you want to talk about palestinians you must include jews and christians as well seeing as they were part of what was to be palestine. what i think my main point in this whole arguement is that eventually the land was divided into two states, one for the jewish population and one for the arab population, so no land was stolen from anyone and no one ethnicity replaced another as the governing majority. the jewish population accepted this partition and the arabs rejected it, quickly waging war on israel with the support of the arab world, which resulted in a major upset for the arabs and royally screwed the palestinians as now they were at the mercy of the israelis.

now to specific points:
"the settlers went in heavy handed right from the off" the what now ? i think you have it backwards. when the british allowed jews to immigrate into palestine, arabs started revolting out of fear of dispossession and instigated riots and pogroms against the jews which forced jewish communities to flee from areas such as hebron (how come we never hear the palestinians welcoming those refugees back?). this forced the british to introduce the "white paper" that stopped jewish immigration into israel which started the jewish/british problems in palestine.

"their religion replaced as the main religion"
yeah this ties in with my first paragraph, the arabs are free to do whatever they want in their autonomy, where islam is the main religion. not to mention that there are plenty of arabs living in israel and have their mosques and are free to practice whatever they want. 

"There was a great piece in the Guardian, last Monday I think, drawing some comparisons between Israel's treatment of Palestinians and Apartheid in South Africa. It was very interesting stuff"
id very much appreciate it if you could dig this piece up for me as im in need of a good laugh.

if you really want to discuss israeli actions or "atrocities" youll have to bring specific cases up so i can analyze each individualy as they are not the same.

"The persecuted Palestinians are natural supported by fellow Arabs and Muslims, so its not hard to see why Israel is the problem here"
unfortunately, and ive already mentioned this previously in this thread, the palestinians are supported by fellow arabs and muslims not because they are fellow arabs and muslims but because of the united struggle against israel. theres plenty of hate to the palestinians especially from lebanon and jordan.

"Hamas has won the recent Palestinian elections, and if they can follow the IRA's example by being big enough to make the first move/gesture and give up the armed struggle and resolving things via politics and negotiating (and I think right now they look like doing so) then that will have a big positive effect on the West and on large numbers of Israelis"
Hamas my friend has decided not to recognize the existence of the state of israel, not to continue negotiations and to "exercise their right to continue the resistance of oppression". so dont expect anything good to come out of there anytime soon.

and just as a conclusion to your post how is israel a danger to world peace? i dont quite see it.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 23 February 2006, 12:37:07 AM
oh and i just like to add that i dont see this conflict ending anytime soon (not in our lifetime for sure) since there just seem to be too many unsolvable issues that either side wont or cant afford to comprimise on (such as the refugee problem, jerusalem, etc...)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 23 February 2006, 12:40:11 AM
Goashem,

That Guardian article you wanted to read.

Part One:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1703245,00.html

Part Two:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1704037,00.html
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 23 February 2006, 12:54:16 AM
Goashem,

That Guardian article you wanted to read.

Part One:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1703245,00.html

Part Two:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1704037,00.html

danke!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 23 February 2006, 09:21:36 AM
Goashem,

That Guardian article you wanted to read.

Part One:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1703245,00.html

Part Two:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1704037,00.html

danke!

Sie sind willkommen.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 23 February 2006, 01:32:32 PM
Can't wait to get back into this one. bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 23 February 2006, 04:35:35 PM
 bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 23 February 2006, 08:07:34 PM
Golem,

Is the debate really about ownership of the land. Of course around the world many peoples can lay claim to many lands, that doensn't really mean anything these days. The winner write history as you know.
Do you not think with all their hi tech military might the Israel's have  carried out a gratuatious and peicemeal demolition and erasure in many areas of Palestine?
We can debate all day whether the Hittites were there first etc, but it is fact is it not that the modern state of Palestine was there before the artificial creation of the place we call Israel?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 23 February 2006, 09:36:00 PM
no it was not, thats exactly my point. there was never a palestine governed by the palestinians. the modern palestinians never had control over this land. it is as much theirs as the jews or christians who live in israel. and the removal of which you are talking about did happen and i dont deny that, but it is of a different type. during the independence war arabs attacked israel and exiled them from several jewish communities, when the israeli side started winning they did the same in several villages, so many palestinians fled or were exiled and thus we have the refugee problem today.
oh and its Goashem  bluewink.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 23 February 2006, 09:52:56 PM
Took you a while. bluecool.gif bluewink.gif

But it is immaterial now I guess.


Are you Jewish? What I mean is are you a follower?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 23 February 2006, 09:59:59 PM
atheist, but if you look at my background im 2 third orthodox christian 1 sixth jewish and 1 sixth azeri muslim... thats about right unless i forgot how to do math.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Thursday 23 February 2006, 10:40:58 PM
no it was not, thats exactly my point. there was never a palestine governed by the palestinians. the modern palestinians never had control over this land. it is as much theirs as the jews or christians who live in israel. and the removal of which you are talking about did happen and i dont deny that, but it is of a different type. during the independence war arabs attacked israel and exiled them from several jewish communities, when the israeli side started winning they did the same in several villages, so many palestinians fled or were exiled and thus we have the refugee problem today.
oh and its Goashem  bluewink.gif

but there was a palestine over which no elected theocracy prevailed,the creation of israel changed that.also if we look at the way israel was created(particularly the role of the US)we can see why we have ended up with todays problems.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 23 February 2006, 11:09:21 PM
"but there was a palestine over which no elected theocracy prevailed,the creation of israel changed that"
1) israel isnt a theocracy
2) palestinians were given their own land within palestine which was divided to two so its not like they were forced to be ruled by jews or something like that
3) whats your point with that again ?

"also if we look at the way israel was created(particularly the role of the US)we can see why we have ended up with todays problems."
please do because i dont quite see what the problem is with the US.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 23 February 2006, 11:19:41 PM
My god we're gonna have to start from scratch with this one.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 23 February 2006, 11:21:24 PM
so it seems. best idea is to just present your entire view point instead of bickering about specifics. but that does require alot of time.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 23 February 2006, 11:24:16 PM
Haven't we been here before?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Thursday 23 February 2006, 11:30:33 PM
"but there was a palestine over which no elected theocracy prevailed,the creation of israel changed that"
1) israel isnt a theocracy
2) palestinians were given their own land within palestine which was divided to two so its not like they were forced to be ruled by jews or something like that
3) whats your point with that again ?

"also if we look at the way israel was created(particularly the role of the US)we can see why we have ended up with todays problems."
please do because i dont quite see what the problem is with the US.

what recognition do palestinians get politically in israel,what requirements are there to vote in israel ?

palestininas were given their own land...so were the irish.

in 1947 the UN special commission on palestine voted to end the british possession,then 7 voted for an israeli/palestinian partition,this vote is often look on as being the result of US governmental(but not truman,strangely)and US financial persuasion. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 23 February 2006, 11:38:05 PM
G,

Imagine if a right wing cabal took over America....Erm...Hold on..Ok! Imagine a right wing zionist group took power in Israel..No..no no good either. Erm imagine if these two groups got together...........Do you see where this is going? :glasses9:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 23 February 2006, 11:43:27 PM
seeing as palestinians are not citizens of israel they dont have the right to vote in israel. they have their own autonomy in which they hold their own elections. they just elected hamas as their governing party. arab israelis though do have the right to vote in israeli elections. and there is an arab pro palestine party that holds several seats in the knesset, led by ahmed tibi which was a senior advisor to yassir arafat. the requirements to vote are you must be an israeli citizen and you must be 18 years of age.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_UN_Partition_Plan
theres the partition plan read all about it.

yes but i dont see how the US is to blame for the problems?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 23 February 2006, 11:44:37 PM
G,

Imagine if a right wing cabal took over America....Erm...Hold on..Ok! Imagine a right wing zionist group took power in Israel..No..no no good either. Erm imagine if these two groups got together...........Do you see where this is going? :glasses9:
no to be honest not quite :S
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Friday 24 February 2006, 12:11:31 AM
seeing as palestinians are not citizens of israel they dont have the right to vote in israel. they have their own autonomy in which they hold their own elections. they just elected hamas as their governing party. arab israelis though do have the right to vote in israeli elections. and there is an arab pro palestine party that holds several seats in the knesset, led by ahmed tibi which was a senior advisor to yassir arafat. the requirements to vote are you must be an israeli citizen and you must be 18 years of age.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_UN_Partition_Plan
theres the partition plan read all about it.

yes but i dont see how the US is to blame for the problems?

and how do you attain israeli citizenship...care to tell about the "law of return".. does it apply to others ????

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Return
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Friday 24 February 2006, 12:40:34 AM
that law is purposely designed to bring jews to israel. the whole purpose of founding israel was so the jews have a state for themselves where they would be free of persecution. however, arabs who chose to stay and live in israel have been given an israeli citizenship and are considered israeli citizens. also if you marry an israeli you will be given israeli citizenship. and israel does allow non jews to immigrate into israel and become israeli citizens so i really dont see the problem.
but what i think youre getting at is the refugee problem from the palestinian side, which is what i called an unresolvable situation. as i mentioned before during the independence war israel was attacked by arabs to eliminate its existence. when israel attempted to drive the arab forces into jordan they enlarged their borders. there were arab villages in the new acquired land from which arabs were told by their leaders to flee or were exiled by israel when those villagers decided to keep fighting. now the descendents of that population grew in a large amount, and if they were to be allowed to return they will create a muslim majority in the state of israel and because of democratic laws of israel they could establish a muslim state, which is why the israelis will never let them back. not to mention they dont have to let them back. and now id like to bring the hypocricy of the muslim world into this conflict, how come we hear the muslim world advocate the right of return of palestinians to israel but they never advocate the return of jews back to hebron and other cities now under the palestinian autonomy ?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: CaliMag on Friday 24 February 2006, 01:10:49 AM
and now id like to bring the hypocricy of the muslim world into this conflict, how come we hear the muslim world advocate the right of return of palestinians to israel but they never advocate the return of jews back to hebron and other cities now under the palestinian autonomy ?

I wouldn't call that hypocracy more standard policy. They don't like Israel and they don't want Israel to exist.

You could argue that we can only change ourselves by taking the higher road... although I am not sure what that is in Israel's case short of immediate self-destruction.

For purely selfish reasons I would prefer the US did NOT support Israel. That relationship is a long term liability for the whole world and should be severed. F*cked up perhaps, but something needs to change and I do not believe US foreign policy can enable any positive change on this front.

Something will eventually give and its going to be horrible. Despite efforts to bolster the population through immigration of Jewish citizens the Muslims and Palestinians are still growing more rapidly while Israel's immigration is declining. Israel will be more an more out-numbered from without and within its own borders eventually.

If Israel could somehow have 50% of its population be Muslim and represented in parliament without civil war - there could be peace, but that seems impossible. Obviously Israel needs lasting peace and it would be easier to do so within its own borders than with the rest of the Muslim world.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 24 February 2006, 11:18:02 AM
How may U.N. security council resolutions have been blocked by the U.S. ? I've lost count, but it must be in the 40's or 50's.
America actually continually stands in the way of a settlement and also protects Israel from further security council pressure.
The U.S. has been the main culprit in blocking a solution.
In principal America has gone along with the 1968 resolution for Israel to revoke the annexation, occupation and settlement policies in East Jerusalem. But the Bush government is the first in a long time to reverse that policy.
In 2002 Dubya made his first big policy statement on the middle east, if you look at it closely it said. "As progress is made toward peace all settlement activities in the occupied territories must end". What they are really saying is that only if the peace process reaches a stage that America endorses, which could easily be far in the future as no one can really tell, Israel can continue to build settlements. Cunning piece of bluff from Bush and his cronies.
Utimately the country who is actually paying for the settlement policy is America to the tune of $100 billion in aid every year, a fraction of that amount is what Palestine gets in aid.
It is well know in military circles that the absolute latest 'special weapons' are provided for the Israeli airforce which flies predominantly American aircraft, this means that they have access to the latest mini nuclear munitions, that they haven't developed themselves (although they have a stockpile of over 100 warheads) these are of medium and oldish technology).
It is not beyond the bounds of imagination that Israel has already role played the use of 'mini-nukes', as they are called.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 24 February 2006, 11:39:13 AM
One thing the Yanks have NEVER handed over are any N weapons  - not even to us - we rent our Trident missiles but had to put our own warheads on them

Most Israeli N weapons are thought to be relatively crude TBH



Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 24 February 2006, 12:46:35 PM
I sadly have to correct you on this matter Rob. bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 24 February 2006, 01:22:59 PM
Source?

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/israel/nuke/

looks as good as source as I can think of  and they don't think the yanks help the Israelis

also

http://www.wisconsinproject.org/countries/israel/nuke.html
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 24 February 2006, 02:34:47 PM
If you read them you'll see the invisible hand of the Yankees.
Most of the weapons are crude as I suggested earlier, but since 1992 they have stepped it up a notch.
Look no further than deliveries of latest American fighter bombers for clues to the alledged mini-nukes capability.
America has also recently let it be know that they are looking again at tactical battlefield nukes.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: CaliMag on Friday 24 February 2006, 03:26:18 PM
I agree with Rob on the nuke thing. Israel might have the same nuclear technologies, but Israel also spies on the US and steals military secrets routinely... yet another reason that I feel they need to end this twisted relationship.

Actually at this point I am backing a fully isolationist US - too many nuts who have never been outside of their own country. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 24 February 2006, 04:19:31 PM
The yanks wouldn't give US sod all at then end of the war even though we'd given them a head start with our research and the Russians were at the gates (allegedly)

They only gave us any co-operation after we developed our own weapons

The fact that the Israelis have bought a few more 1970's designed F15's is neither here nor there - their old 1950's Vautours could carry an A Bomb  - the israelis are thinking about the JSF but they don't seem very keen on the new  F-22 (cost probably) and they've never been given a Stealth fighter - although the RAF have had people fly them in action

the Yanks always have had battlefield nukes - they are actually pondering if they can develop a "Bunker-buster" deep penetration warhead but the Congress is proving very very resisitant

the REALLY worrying weapon they are looking at is a hyper velocity sub orbital missile with a conventional warhead that will enable them to fire it from the USA  and have it arrive in (say) downtown Tehran in about 15 minutes.  I just hope someone tells the Russians before they fire one........................  cos it will look horribly like a first strike N weapon......








Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Friday 24 February 2006, 06:03:39 PM
Parky last time i checked it was 35, those resolutions want israel to basically disarm itself. they fail to realise that as soon as israel eases its control in the occupied territories terrorists will make their way into israel for suicide bombings. these resolutions are not practical! if israel were to follow every resolution there wouldnt be an israel today(how come the UN have not condemned the palestinians for attacks on israel, and never attempted to persuade the palestinian government to crack down on terrorism?). now the settlement problem is not even endorsed by most of the israeli government not to mention the people of israel (except the right wing nuts). and ariel sharon was trying to get rid of them and dubya was one of the main supporters of the disengagement plan and he was constantly pushing for a palestinian state.
i sure hope that israel got their hands on those mini nukes theyll come quite useful when theyll bomb iran.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: The Shaman on Sunday 26 February 2006, 06:25:08 AM
Goashem,

That Guardian article you wanted to read.

Part One:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1703245,00.html

Part Two:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1704037,00.html

Interesting articles. I'm sure, for some people that is, there was plenty in it to have a laugh about.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Sunday 26 February 2006, 09:51:13 AM
Goashem

the problem a lot of us have is that Isral and the palestinians ARE neighbours and common sense tells you that you have to get on with your neighbours otherwise life is hell for everyone - including evreyone else int eh neighberhood

We all understand WHY Israel is highly sensitive to threats to its security but for the last 50 years its been the bully boy on the block - no real attempt has been made to address the real concerns of its neighbours and almost anything is used an excuse to use a vast amount of disproportionate force - 99% of which has fallen on the innocent

Israel desperately needs a Mandela, a Jerry Adams or even a Nixon to break the mold and try and get on with your neighbours instead of counting every bullet fired, every slight, every mad arsed speach  and turning them into an excuse for airstrikes, invasion and border closures
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 26 February 2006, 12:47:12 PM
Long and tedious but well drawn out.


http://www.chomsky.info/debates/20051129.htm



Actually after having read it a second time: Rob, Indigo,Bluff......It is a must read. Save time and start at the bit where Chomsky enters the debate. :P
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Sunday 26 February 2006, 05:08:15 PM
Quote
for the last 50 years its been the bully boy on the block - no real attempt has been made to address the real concerns of its neighbours and almost anything is used an excuse to use a vast amount of disproportionate force - 99% of which has fallen on the innocent

i dont know if i have to take the 50 years literally or you mean ever since 1967. so im going to assume ever since 1967. now thats fair, but this brings me to the point ive made before that its a he said she said argument. palestinians try to annihilate israel, israel conquers their land, israel gives some land back israel is bombed, israel goes back in, israel is oppressing palestinians and subdues terror attacks, israel moves out, israel is bombed again...and so it goes on.
like you said these countries are neighbors and the common sense is to try and live in peace but as long as terrorists will bomb israel everytime they try to ease on palestine and give back their territories there will be no peace. the palestinians must recognize that israel are in fact their neighbor and they continually refuse to do that. latest proof the election of hamas.
now as for the not addressing concerns of palestinians, ehud barak offered to give back 97% of the conquered territories including arab populated areas in israel and the arab half of jerusalem to form a palestinian state but that was rejected, majorily due to the refugee problem. now has the palestinians made effort to address concerns of the israelis? especially the concern of the refugee problem? and thats my problem, you guys seem to think that israel is the only party that brings the negotiations into gridlock and is the devil (or whatever parky first called it).
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Sunday 26 February 2006, 11:37:26 PM
Quote
Long and tedious but well drawn out.


http://www.chomsky.info/debates/20051129.htm



Actually after having read it a second time: Rob, Indigo,Bluff......It is a must read. Save time and start at the bit where Chomsky enters the debate. 

yes and ignore all the valid points brought up by mr. dershowitz, but hey he's just a fundamentalist seeing as me and him share alot of the views.

overall an alright debate, not enough imaginative solution to the problem. i laughed at how they both discredited each other haha.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 26 February 2006, 11:38:35 PM
It's a good read Ghost.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Sunday 26 February 2006, 11:42:43 PM
It's a good read Ghost.
yip, if you have more please dont hesitate to post.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 26 February 2006, 11:44:58 PM
I will.

Remember, we cannot hold the light.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Steven_MB on Monday 27 February 2006, 02:05:14 AM
Israel is no threat to world peace as if they ever use a nuke, then it will only make a small impact on the arab world while Iran, syria, lebannon, Saudi Arabi, pakistan etc could easily wipe out Israel.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 27 February 2006, 07:36:27 AM
I take Steve you would be willing to stand near where the "small impact" is likely to happen - say the middle of CAiro with 12 million people there...............??????

75- 100  bombs could render very large areas unfit for human existance  - suppose they bomb the Saudi oil fields? the Suez Canal?? as well as kill a few tens of millions of Arabs???????





Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ToonFanNorway on Tuesday 28 February 2006, 07:37:14 PM
 bluebiggrin.gif bluebiggrin.gif bluebiggrin.gif

(http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/modules/coppermine/albums/userpics/23655/groundzeroocean.jpg)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 28 February 2006, 08:42:12 PM
I was looking for something with a slighty smaller yield TFN :)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ToonFanNorway on Wednesday 1 March 2006, 08:47:14 AM
 bluebiggrin.gif bluebiggrin.gif bluebiggrin.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 1 March 2006, 11:30:00 AM
Thats the trouble with the Military - no sense of ..  proportion.......
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ToonFanNorway on Wednesday 1 March 2006, 11:45:18 AM
 bluebiggrin.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 31 March 2006, 03:09:01 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1743652,00.html

Quote
A just peace or no peace

Israeli unilateralism is a recipe for conflict - as is the west's racist refusal to treat Palestinians as equals

Ismail Haniyeh
Friday March 31, 2006
The Guardian


Do policymakers in Washington and Europe ever feel ashamed of their scandalous double standards? Before and since the Palestinian elections in January, they have continually insisted that Hamas comply with certain demands. They want us to recognise Israel, call off our resistance, and commit ourselves to whatever deals Israel and the Palestinian leadership reached in the past.

But we have not heard a single demand of the Israeli parties that took part in this week's elections, though some advocate the complete removal of the Palestinians from their lands. Even Ehud Olmert's Kadima party, whose Likud forebears frustrated every effort by the PLO to negotiate a peace settlement, campaigned on a programme that defies UN security council resolutions. His unilateralism is a violation of international law. Nevertheless no one, not even the Quartet - whose proposals for a settlement he continues to disregard, as his predecessor Ariel Sharon did - has dared ask anything of him.

Olmert's unilateralism is a recipe for conflict. It is a plan to impose a permanent situation in which the Palestinians end up with a homeland cut into pieces made inaccessible because of massive Jewish settlements built in contravention of international law on land seized illegally from the Palestinians. No plan will ever work without a guarantee, in exchange for an end to hostilities by both sides, of a total Israeli withdrawal from all the land occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem; the release of all our prisoners; the removal of all settlers from all settlements; and recognition of the right of all refugees to return.

On this, all Palestinian factions and people agree, including the PLO, whose revival is essential so that it can resume its role in speaking for the Palestinians and presenting their case to the world.

The problem is not with any particular Palestinian group but with the denial of our basic rights by Israel. We in Hamas are for peace and want to put an end to bloodshed. We have been observing a unilateral truce for more than a year without reciprocity from the Israeli side. The message from Hamas and the Palestinian Authority to the world powers is this: talk to us no more about recognising Israel's "right to exist" or ending resistance until you obtain a commitment from the Israelis to withdraw from our land and recognise our rights.

Little will change for the Palestinians under Olmert's plan. Our land will still be occupied and our people enslaved and oppressed by the occupying power. So we will remain committed to our struggle to get back our lands and our freedom. Peaceful means will do if the world is willing to engage in a constructive and fair process in which we and the Israelis are treated as equals. We are sick and tired of the west's racist approach to the conflict, in which the Palestinians are regarded as inferior. Though we are the victims, we offer our hands in peace, but only a peace that is based on justice. However, if the Israelis continue to attack and kill our people and destroy their homes, impose sanctions, collectively punish us, and imprison men and women for exercising the right to self-defence, we have every right to respond with all available means.

Hamas has been freely elected. Our people have given us their confidence and we pledge to defend their rights and do our best to run their affairs through good governance. If we are boycotted in spite of this democratic choice - as we have been by the US and some of its allies - we will persist, and our friends have pledged to fill the gap. We have confidence in the peoples of the world, record numbers of whom identify with our struggle. This is a good time for peace-making - if the world wants peace.

· Ismail Haniyeh is the new Palestinian prime minister and a Hamas leader.

He makes a fair argument to be honest.  No uproar about the 'Yisrael Beiteinu' party which was/is calling for all Israeli Arabs to have their citizenship revoked, and basically be packed off to Arab countries.  Never mind the rest of the far-right groups in the Knesset.  I'm glad Netanyahu got trounced though, horrible man. 

No better way of describing it, it is a racist policy they have against them.  As the same standards are never applied on both sides.

Only good thing to take from the election is Kadima didn't do as well as they'd have liked.  A coalition with Labour might force them into negotiations with the PLO instead of unilateral action. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Wednesday 5 April 2006, 05:48:26 PM
Free palestine

I have been to israel and have seen how they treat the arabs. Israel is a nation of of people who belive they are asuperior to everyone. Israel needs to go back to 1967 borders and get out of jerusalm. They only way the conflict will end is if israel makes concessions. If the Palestinians make any concessions there will be no palestine left. Im totally for Hamas they bombing are not right but neither is any Israeli action in Palestine. The real terrorist are the Israel army who can do what thy like and get no action or comments from abroad but a bomb goes off in Israel and the worl comes down on Palestine like a ton of bricks.

I know some of youw il nto like my veiws but when u have been to Israel and seen first hand how they people there act u will understand my point of veiw.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Wednesday 5 April 2006, 06:06:15 PM
Quote
Free palestine

yep.

my ex-missus (we're still mates) has just gone to israel with the International Solidarity Movement. she is going to the west bank to take part in oppossing building the wall/barrier. must admit been a bit worried obviously, it is putting yourself on the frontline-something which a lot of people could not comprehend- am not sure if i would have the botle to do that on my own! anyway there was a wicked article in the guardian equating israel with aparthied era south africa i'll have to have a search for and was quite spot on.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alpal78 on Wednesday 5 April 2006, 06:28:14 PM
You guys (all 3 of you) better watch out, pretty soon u will no doubt be accused of being racist and anti semitic and all hell will break loose.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 5 April 2006, 08:14:47 PM
You guys (all 3 of you) better watch out, pretty soon u will no doubt be accused of being racist and anti semitic and all hell will break loose.

Only by idiots.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Wednesday 5 April 2006, 09:18:22 PM
You guys (all 3 of you) better watch out, pretty soon u will no doubt be accused of being racist and anti semitic and all hell will break loose.

Ive had it befor and its all nonsense tbh. Ive been accused of hating jews when all i dislike is how Israel acts nowt wrong with jews.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Friday 7 April 2006, 06:07:18 AM

 Ismail Haniyeh is the new Palestinian prime minister and a Hamas leader.

Quote


......... and has therefore been targeted for assassination.

Based on what i've previously read i was of the belief that Hamas were going to refrain from naming it's newly appointed leader. I can see the reason behind this change in policy. Having it's elected leaders/representatives assassinated one after the other and dying as official "political matyrs" in the process, which will become the norm from now on imo, will further galvanise the Palestinians in their fight against their oppressors and with it Hamas' position amongst it's people will only become stronger.

Such killings, when inflicted by Israel, will from now on will be deemed as being "political assassinations". It will be interesting as to how the likes of George Dubbaya will react, and the following is a matter of 'when', after Mr Haniyeh is inevitably picked off by a helicopter gunship in a crowded street inflicting some collateral damage in the process ie. unknowing bystanders unlucky enough to be near the missles' blast radius.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 April 2006, 11:23:20 AM
Agree with Adam, Walkerboy and Bluff. No need to add to those sentiments.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Friday 7 April 2006, 11:56:24 AM
Agree with Adam, Walkerboy and Bluff. No need to add to those sentiments.

Saying it how it is. How can there be any measure of representative equality when Isreal and it's backers refuse to negotiate with or recognise any party which isn't a US/Israel-backed puppet. In fact Israel's assassination policy, where Hamas' leaders are concerned, still stands.

The days of Palestine's newly appointed leader are numbered.


..... in addition i'm also a cynical b******  :winking:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 7 April 2006, 02:26:38 PM
This thread is us lefties talking to ourselves - where are the New Right and the Yankee fascists?????
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Friday 7 April 2006, 05:16:47 PM
heres the link to the articles, well worth reading to get some historical perspective
not always written about.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1703245,00.html

just had a txt from ex-
"just got back safe from first demo.got hit with sound grenade but had just put
ear plugs in so am ok. plenty of teargas but no rubber bullets. very scary"
!!!!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Friday 7 April 2006, 08:12:17 PM
Ismail Haniyeh

Kill him.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Saturday 8 April 2006, 10:55:26 AM
> Ismail Haniyeh
Kill him. <

well personally i wouldnt condone the killing of anyone and i've had friends killed in armed conflict but i suppose your allowed your views however skewed.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Saturday 8 April 2006, 01:45:34 PM
Ismail Haniyeh

Kill him.

and what good does that do?

The Israelis have been murdering militant Arabs for donkeys years but it has had no effect whatsoever - I thought we were supposed to learn from the past

Until Israel starts treating Palestinians properly they will always have this problem - and if they are not careful one day someone else will have the whip hand and a lot of chickens will come home to roost

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: womblemaster on Saturday 8 April 2006, 05:32:01 PM
Support israel over land rights.

sadly tho the isreali army are bunch of facist b******s.  They make yankee marines look like professional diplomats!

Am not very pro arab tbh.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Saturday 8 April 2006, 05:46:33 PM
You support them over land grabs?  Re-drawing borders agreed by the UN?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: womblemaster on Saturday 8 April 2006, 05:51:39 PM
let me spell it out,  i think its the arabs who should move not the israelis

(and no i am not jewish)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: johnnypd on Saturday 8 April 2006, 05:54:29 PM
can't really see how anyone can support the israelis in terms of the land issues.  blueconfused.gif if a thief breaks into a house, drives the owners out and says he is entitled to live there cos his great-great-great-great grandfather built it, would you agree with him?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Saturday 8 April 2006, 07:06:30 PM
let me spell it out,  i think its the arabs who should move not the israelis

(and no i am not jewish)

Where are the Arabs meant to go? They have no were to go. The palestinians who got thrown out of their own country do not want to live in Jordan Syria Eygpt etc. They want to live in Palestine. The land grabs are totall illegal. Israel has gone over the heads of the UN as they know they can do what they want as- Israel has the backing of the US so no one is going to try and stop them. Then if the UN does they are all anti-semtic pigs.

Also you hate arabs you ever met any?
Have you ever been to an Arab country?
Im sure you think all of them are suicide bombers and live ni mud huts. Well you are wrong they are the most freindly people i have ever met. Would give you all of there food water etc if u needed it. Israelis on the other had are jst like spoilt little kids who want everything their own way.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Skjære on Saturday 8 April 2006, 08:07:32 PM

We should talk about the refusal of the BBC to deal with Israel and Palestine equally.  blueyes.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Saturday 8 April 2006, 09:20:44 PM
Let's be fair now, BBC's actions don't cost lives.  Bit of perspective.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 8 April 2006, 10:16:32 PM
"let me spell it out,  i think its the arabs who should move not the israelis" Womble'


Let me spell it out. There is a firestorm coming and Israel is on the wrong side.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Saturday 8 April 2006, 10:17:15 PM
I can see why the BBC does this. It has to be impartial so it has to give both sides then let you make the judgement.

BBC simply report the news its the israelis who go about making it however.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Skjære on Saturday 8 April 2006, 10:47:30 PM
I can see why the BBC does this. It has to be impartial so it has to give both sides then let you make the judgement.

BBC simply report the news its the israelis who go about making it however.


 crylaughin.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 8 April 2006, 10:49:01 PM
They're reasonably fair.....Aren't they?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Saturday 8 April 2006, 10:52:10 PM
I love how people latch on to that remark that the BBC is anti-Israel.  As far as I understand it, it all stems back to ONE report, not all it's coverage over the years.  So it's pretty much an invalid comment.

I'm sure someone will remember the report, I certainly can't.  Think it was the late 80s, possibly early 90s.  It has nothing to do with overall coverage though.  I could be wrong, but I don't think so.  I've certainly seen no bias towards Palestine.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 8 April 2006, 11:00:32 PM
.....and in an uncertain sea as the $ struggles from one  economic blunder to another....How long will it be before they start to have a fresh look at 'that' aid budget. blueyes.gif blueyes.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Sunday 9 April 2006, 05:19:31 AM
this should be a good work break  bluebiggrin.gif
first of all he compares HAMAS! to political parties... HAMAS! a terrorist organization, that kills innocent people as a form of "liberation". What liberation i dont quite understand, if they say they are doing what they are doing for the palestinian people then they would have disarmed a long time ago, seeing as most of the IDF operations are a direct reaction to hamas attacks. now when a party like hamas that wants to "drive the jews into the sea" comes to power its more extreme then israel beitenu, a party that wants to ensure a jewish majority within israel.
"We in Hamas are for peace and want to put an end to bloodshed. We have been observing a unilateral truce for more than a year without reciprocity from the Israeli side." biggest piece of lie ive read. and this is exactly what ive talked about in the other isreal palestine thread, palestinians keep making the wrong choices about their leaders. how can they expect anyone to treat them equals and respect them when they constantly choose to be represented by animals???

Quote
I have been to israel and have seen how they treat the arabs. Israel is a nation of of people who belive they are asuperior to everyone.
good that youre not making generalizations, isnt it right to call you a bigot?

Quote
I know some of youw il nto like my veiws but when u have been to Israel and seen first hand how they people there act u will understand my point of veiw
been, seen, and yet hold a totally opposite view.

Quote
can't really see how anyone can support the israelis in terms of the land issues.   if a thief breaks into a house, drives the owners out and says he is entitled to live there cos his great-great-great-great grandfather built it, would you agree with him?
simple, whatever you said didnt happen. the only reason israel is "occupying" palestine is because arab countries (that controlled the land of palestine back then! so it didnt belong to palestinians back then either!) decided to annihilate israel, and after israel beating them gained controled of the area. the UN made a resolution telling israel to give back occupied territories. which meant not all territories. and in any case both palestinians and israelis rejected the resolution so it means nothing.

oh bluf its not one report its constant bias in every report. and as to "Let's be fair now, BBC's actions don't cost lives", after they fabricated the jenin massacre the terrorist groups sure as hell used it as a reason for more killings.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: womblemaster on Sunday 9 April 2006, 08:23:32 AM
Until the arabs admit that the state of israel has a right to exist, and admit this infront of the un then i personally i am not interested in the arab point of view. 

However just like belfast in 73, any army contains arseholes who use the situation to murder innocents......the iraeli army need monitored.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Sunday 9 April 2006, 08:39:51 AM
The issue of equality is once again raised here.

This appeared in The Guardian, September 1 2005. By Chris McGreal.

p.s. sorry if there are any typos.

Quote
Four Arab Israelis shot dead by a soldier opposed to the closure of the Gaza Strip settlements are not victims of "terror" because their killer was Jewish, Israel's defence ministry has ruled, and so their families are not entitled to the usual compensation for life.

The ministry concluded that the law only recognises terrorism as committed by "organisations hostile to Israel" even though the prime minister, Ariel Sharon, describes the killings by Private Eden Nathan Zaada, 19, as "a despicable act by a bloodthirsty terrorist." He shot dead four people on a bus in the Arab Israeli town of Shfaram on August 4 and was then lynched by a mob.

Arab Israeli leaders have condemned the decision. Mohammed Barakeh, an Arab member of the Israeli parliament who lives in Shfaram, said ,"The decision raises a strong scent of racism, which distinguishes between a Jewish terrorist and an Arab terrorist."

The defence ministry proposes to pay the families of the Shfaram victims an undisclosed sum instead of a lifelong monthly amount.

But Mr Barakeh says that denies the dead their recognition as being victims of terrorism. He noted that Arabs who had committed individual attacks but were not members of armed organisations had still been branded by the Israeli government as terrorists.

Mr Barakeh has proposed an amendment to the law recognising anyone harmed by "hostile activities by a terrorist organisation" as a victim of terror and therefore entitled to full compensation. There was pressure to amend the law in 1990 after a 21 year old Israeli soldier, Ami Popper, shot dead seven Palestinian workers. But it was not approved by parliament.

This article will most likely be dismissed by some as it written by a journo of & published by The Guardian........ or The Nazian newspaper.

What i have read previously in relation to these killings is that they have been attributed to those who were members of/ and or had strongs links to, or were sympathisers of the Kach movement - a 30+ year old extremist movement whose political arm was banned in 88 and eventually declared a terrorist organisation in the mid-90's. In the case of Goldstein, of the Hebron Massacre fame - a hero among Israeli right-wingers, he had strong ties to members of the former TNT terror group and was an active member within the Kach movement.

Yet there is an obvious inconsistency, in terms of who is deemed a victim of a terrorist act, where this law is concerned........................ of course those who view the situation through "blue & white" tinted specs will fail to notice this.


Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Sunday 9 April 2006, 10:04:40 AM
I can see why the BBC does this. It has to be impartial so it has to give both sides then let you make the judgement.

BBC simply report the news its the israelis who go about making it however.




 crylaughin.gif

Their reporting is more truthful & impartial than the heavily filtered rubbish often shown on the US based news networks, most notably Murdoch's Fox News.

Judging by your well thought out & insightful response, to the original quoted post, it wouldn't surprise if Fox News is in fact your news channel of choice when it comes to forming an opinion on such affairs.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Skjære on Sunday 9 April 2006, 10:13:57 AM
I can see why the BBC does this. It has to be impartial so it has to give both sides then let you make the judgement.

BBC simply report the news its the israelis who go about making it however.




 crylaughin.gif

Their reporting is more truthful & impartial than the heavily filtered rubbish often shown on the US based news networks, most notably Murdoch's Fox News.

Judging by your well thought out & insightful response, to the original quoted post, it wouldn't surprise if Fox News is in fact your news channel of choice when it comes to forming an opinion on such affairs.

blah blah blah Bush blah blah blah Blair blah blah blah blah Israel blah blah blah oil blah blah blah blah Bush blah blah
blah Blair  bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Sunday 9 April 2006, 10:18:24 AM
Wow................. your indepth insight truly knocks me over  :winking:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 9 April 2006, 11:05:52 AM
America and Israel. :rofl:
Basically two countries run by blind fundamentalists who do a good job in keeping the focus always elsewhere.
The sand is falling through the hourglass. bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Skjære on Sunday 9 April 2006, 11:12:58 AM
Wow................. your indepth insight truly knocks me over  :winking:

Well I'd love to enter an intelligent and equable discourse on the political situation in the middle east and the relative bias of certain television networks vis-a-vis Israel and Palestine. However, I have some particularly slow drying paint to watch this afternoon.  bluebigrazz.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Sunday 9 April 2006, 11:43:10 AM
I was wondering, where do you people get your atlas from? for I have never seen a country called Palestine, though there are areas under the control of the Palestinian Authority, it is not a country, the two state solution hasn't been implemented yet.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alpal78 on Sunday 9 April 2006, 11:48:01 AM
Quote
first of all he compares HAMAS! to political parties... HAMAS! a terrorist organization, that kills innocent people as a form of "liberation". What liberation i dont quite understand, if they say they are doing what they are doing for the palestinian people then they would have disarmed a long time ago, seeing as most of the IDF operations are a direct reaction to hamas attacks. now when a party like hamas that wants to "drive the jews into the sea" comes to power its more extreme then israel beitenu, a party that wants to ensure a jewish majority within israel.

Yes this indeed will be fun! Hamas has indeed declared and honoured a ceasefire for one year++, even Sharon admitted to this, so how you can know more is quite frankly bizarre. What Sharon said though he never proved is that other terrorist groups like the Palestinian Freedom Brigade are still on the prowl and Sharon claims that these groups are funded by Hamas. Get your facts right.

As for the manifesto of parties, u should seriously read the manifesto of Hamas and compare it to Likud and more importantly the ultra right wing Shaz party which include expelling all non Jews from Israeli controlled areas. Both Hamas and Fatah have accepted the right for Israel to exist side by side with Palestine. What is in dispute is the borders, which is still subject to negotiations and all this will fail if Israel completes the wall and highway code of one rod for the Israelis and one road for Palestinians.
 
Quote
"We in Hamas are for peace and want to put an end to bloodshed. We have been observing a unilateral truce for more than a year without reciprocity from the Israeli side." biggest piece of lie ive read. and this is exactly what ive talked about in the other isreal palestine thread, palestinians keep making the wrong choices about their leaders. how can they expect anyone to treat them equals and respect them when they constantly choose to be represented by animals???


Tell me how exactly how is this a lie instead of using empty rhetorics. Dont give me acts of violence pre 2005 coz we all accept that they were a terrorist group back then. What violence has Hamas caused since 2005? As for the Palestinians choosing animals to represent them, apparently Israel and US wasnt very happy with the PA led by Arafat either, so who should they exactly choose as their leaders, oh thats right maybe the Palestinians should elect Sharon as their new leader so he can give away all the land, afterall only one side committing the violence are animals right?


Quote
simple, whatever you said didnt happen. the only reason israel is "occupying" palestine is because arab countries (that controlled the land of palestine back then! so it didnt belong to palestinians back then either!) decided to annihilate israel, and after israel beating them gained controled of the area. the UN made a resolution telling israel to give back occupied territories. which meant not all territories. and in any case both palestinians and israelis rejected the resolution so it means nothing.


You are so misinformed its sad. Before the Balfour Declaration, there was indeed a viable Palestinian State and no these were not controlled by Arabs countries (if by that term you refer to non Palestinian land in the Middle East as if the Palestinians are not Arabs :roll:). You are probably referring to the Golan Heights (Syria) and Sinai Dessert (Egypt) which Israel took over in 1967. The former is still with Israel and the latter has been returned to Egypt. But the Palestinians do not  want these areas. They just want things back to pre 1967 of failing that a viable state not truncated into ghettos, both objectives are being scuppered by the unilateral wall which is why the ICJ has ruled that the building of the wall as illegal. Off course Israel just decided to ignore this ruling.



Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Skjære on Sunday 9 April 2006, 12:12:13 PM
I was wondering, where do you people get your atlas from? for I have never seen a country called Palestine, though there are areas under the control of the Palestinian Authority, it is not a country, the two state solution hasn't been implemented yet.

Who said it was a country? It may not be a sovereign state but it still exists as a place. I know because I've been there!  blueyes.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Sunday 9 April 2006, 04:47:42 PM
Alpal you seemed to be the one who is misinformed:
1)Jan 2, 2005 - Nissim Arbiv, 25, of Nissanit in the Gaza Strip was mortally wounded in a mortar shell attack while working in the Erez Industrial Zone. He died of his wounds on January 11. Two others were wounded in the attack, for which Hamas claimed responsibility.
Jan 13, 2005 - On Thursday night, shortly before the closing of the Karni Crossing, terrorists activated an explosive device on the Palestinian side, blowing a hole in the door through which Palestinian terrorists infiltrated the Israeli side of the crossing and opened fire at Israeli civilians. As a result of the explosion and exchanges of fire, six Israeli civilians and three Palestinian terrorists were killed, and five Israeli civilians were wounded. Hamas and the Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades claimed joint responsiblity for the attack.
Jan 18, 2005 - Oded Sharon, 36, from Gan Yavne, an ISA officer, was killed, an IDF officer seriously wounded, and four IDF soldiers and three members of the ISA were lightly wounded in a suicide bombing attack at the Gush Katif junction in the central Gaza Strip. While search procedures were being implemented at a post at the junction, the suicide bomber with explosives strapped to his body detonated himself. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack
July 14, 2005 - Dana Galkowicz, 22, of Kibbutz Bror Hayil, was killed by a Kassam rocket fired at Netiv Ha'asara north of the Gaza Strip. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah all claimed responsibility for the attack
Sept 21, 2005 - Sasson Nuriel, 55, of Jerusalem was kidnapped and slain by Palestinian terrorists. His body was found on Sept 26 in a garbage dump in the industrial zone of Bitunya, west of Ramallah. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack

hamas never honoured their own proclaimed cease fires for more than 2 months. whenever there is a big lack of activity of hamas its due to the IDF closing down on their operations.

2)"have accepted the right for Israel to exist side by side"
thats the whole point of the article, hamas DOESNT accept Israels right to exist! thats why israel and other countries in the world stop their aid to palestine!

3)"apparently Israel and US wasnt very happy with the PA led by Arafat either"
yeah and thats exactly my point about palestinians choosing animals to represent them, who do you think yassir arafat is? a saint? the guy is one of the main terrorist in the history of the area. his PLO started just like hamas. heres a good quote by arafat: "We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state. We will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion. . . . We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem. "
Stockholm, 1996

4)"What is in dispute is the borders, which is still subject to negotiations and all this will fail if Israel completes the wall and highway code of one rod for the Israelis and one road for Palestinians."
it will fail no matter what, palestine wants everything, israel wants to keep some. israel promised as much as 97% of the land back but palestinians didnt accept it.

5) no there was NO palestinian state, there still isnt! ive already explained this in the previous palestine israel thread but lets do it again shall we. before the belfour declaration palestine was controlled by the ottoman empire. not by palestinians. palestinians were never a governing body of that land. and when you call someone palestinian its is also right to call jews palestinians as they were also living in the country when the romans changed its name from judea to palestine. now during WW1  and no i do not refer to the golan hights i refer to west bank and gaza, gaza is fully withdrawn west bank isnt.
heres a good site that summarizes the history of the area pretty well:
http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm
i really hope youll take the time to read it.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: johnnypd on Monday 10 April 2006, 06:49:49 PM
you may be referring to west bank and gaza, but i wasn't. i'm talking about palestine, and that includes israel.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Aphrodite on Monday 10 April 2006, 06:56:25 PM
BBC is the best news broadcaster in the world IMO, from what I've heard from people living abroad.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 10 April 2006, 07:08:37 PM
All this lark will change when Iran tests her first nuclear weapon.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Monday 10 April 2006, 08:14:23 PM


from the ex out there at the mo-

Where to begin - I’m tired already, life can be exhausting here - dull hours spent at checkpoints ensure this on a sometimes daily basis, and bewildering - as you try to make sense of the cultural and religious customs and ever-changing political landscape. But my most striking impression of Palestine, which will probably stay in my heart forever is the kindness, generosity and humor of the Palestinian people
This is the first time vie felt able to write anything- to be honest it's all been too mind boggling to get enough clarity to get my thoughts down. This welcome and warmth is the same whether from a village farmer, who's gratitude at my presence is humbling to the Jerusalem taxi driver who doesn't know me from any other tourist but will respond with immediate offers of help if I even look vaguely lost.
I'm pleasantly surprised to find this in an area so long under violent occupation

In other ways, the situation here is much as I’d imagined it i.e. road blocks, and endless checkpoints some of which resemble those of Berlin when the wall was there. 'The wall' is immense high and oppressive, meandering and complicated in it's route. The checkpoints are oppressive with Palestinian people (or those who are obviously so) waiting at times for hours to make necessary journeys to school, work, hospital etc. Sometimes as internationals we wait with them out of solidarity or, if they ask us, plead for some clemency for women with children and older people. I'm really struggling to understand the intricacies of the politics from which it's grown. Of course I have a reasonable resident knowledge of the history, but this is history in the making, where policy is changing constantly, arbitrary rule making/changing by the IDF and Israeli government - allegedly in the name of security. This same 'defensive' has involved over the past 4 days, Rockets being fired into Gaza by the IDF where today a 5 year old girl was killed by them. That's Gaza which Israel has withdrawn from and is now free to blow to pieces. There are few human rights activists in Gaza now. Due to the extreme harshness of the situation, kidnappings are a threat. I spoke to two independent activists who's stayed there for 2 months but eventually fled as news that they may be about to be kidnapped reached them. It's unlikely I'll be going there at the moment and don't have a strong desire to.

On Friday I attended a demonstration at a village in the West Bank called Bil'in. The wall is under construction there and cuts through the middle of a village, denying access to the villagers. Every Friday, unarmed locals, and Israeli and internationals peace activists face the army. This is mostly a peaceful demonstration. On this particular day, the army have blocked a gate which is supposed to allow access to those who have passes. The demonstrators manage to break through. There is much struggling, the soldiers using their m16's to push people back. Demonstrators manage to pull away some recently placed barbed wire, then without warning the army throw 20-30 sound grenades. The noise they make is ear-splittingly painful and many of us run away scared. In the confusion, it's difficult not to be afraid when I remember that this is the same army which fired live ammunition on people who were cutting through a settlement fence. Their capacity for violence and injury must be treated with respect. Later about 50 demonstrators made a memorial for a villager He was killed a few days ago when flood waters from heavy rain, trapped by the security wall flushed his car from the road. There are more scuffles, much shouting and tear gas is fired. No rubber coated bullets or live rounds today.

I had a profound moment of sadness and humility when I saw the people of people of Bil’in, men like my father, your brother, my uncle battling against armed 18 year olds. It seemed at times like a lost cause, unarmed, ordinary men against heavily armed combatants. But it is too soon, and not for me in any case to say this is not effective action. The soldiers are mainly very young conscripts. It's hard to know how many of them want to be there. Along with their armory, their Gucci-style sunglasses, lipstick and trendy watches are almost equally disconcerting. I know they must feel afraid and confused too. At this demonstration, a female soldier smiles constantly and I can’t tell if this is fear or friendliness.

Tomorrow I'm going to Nablus to stay in Balata refugee camp. In a few houses near the camp, the army have moved in with families because their homes afford good vantage points from which to shoot alleged terrorists. The family are under house arrest despite being guilty of nothing and one of my jobs will be to take them supplies. The other place I’m needed is Hebron where Palestinian children are stoned by Israeli settlers on an almost daily basis as they try to get to school. Internationals like myself are also stoned and spat on – Nablus seems like the soft option.

few pics on purpleocity http://gallery.purpleocity.net/album183

This is long and rambling and hard to write so thanks to anyone who's managed to read it

Salaam

Linda
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 10 April 2006, 10:49:44 PM
Cracking post Walker/exWalker. bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Monday 10 April 2006, 11:44:07 PM
"you may be referring to west bank and gaza, but i wasn't. i'm talking about palestine, and that includes israel"
please do tell how palestine was stolen from the palestinians because im tired of explaining how it most certainly wasnt.

edit: was i the only one that wasnt able to see this forum for the past day and a half?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:00:07 AM
Yes it was a conspiracy to keep the pro-Israeli posters away.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Skjære on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 09:09:48 AM
I couldn't see the forum either, however I am certainly not pro-Israel just as I am not anti-Palestine. I believe we need to see a balanced reporting of the situation which we certainly do not at this juncture. That includes the BBC and the FOX/SKY network, CNN, The Guardian et al.
Its a shame that zeolots on both sides can't see this.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 09:42:17 AM
Yes it was a conspiracy to keep the pro-Israeli posters away.



.................. no, it was a conspiracy to keep out the zealots from within the Kach movement.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 10:16:56 AM
"you may be referring to west bank and gaza, but i wasn't. i'm talking about palestine, and that includes israel"
please do tell how palestine was stolen from the palestinians because im tired of explaining how it most certainly wasnt.

edit: was i the only one that wasnt able to see this forum for the past day and a half?

well there weren't many jews in palestine in 1914 and all of a suddden 50 years later they owned the lot.............  and a lot of the original folk had .... gone.... amazing eh?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alpal78 on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 12:15:12 PM
Quote
Alpal you seemed to be the one who is misinformed:
1)Jan 2, 2005 - Nissim Arbiv, 25, of Nissanit in the Gaza Strip was mortally wounded in a mortar shell attack while working in the Erez Industrial Zone. He died of his wounds on January 11. Two others were wounded in the attack, for which Hamas claimed responsibility.
Jan 13, 2005 - On Thursday night, shortly before the closing of the Karni Crossing, terrorists activated an explosive device on the Palestinian side, blowing a hole in the door through which Palestinian terrorists infiltrated the Israeli side of the crossing and opened fire at Israeli civilians. As a result of the explosion and exchanges of fire, six Israeli civilians and three Palestinian terrorists were killed, and five Israeli civilians were wounded. Hamas and the Fatah al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades claimed joint responsiblity for the attack.
Jan 18, 2005 - Oded Sharon, 36, from Gan Yavne, an ISA officer, was killed, an IDF officer seriously wounded, and four IDF soldiers and three members of the ISA were lightly wounded in a suicide bombing attack at the Gush Katif junction in the central Gaza Strip. While search procedures were being implemented at a post at the junction, the suicide bomber with explosives strapped to his body detonated himself. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack
July 14, 2005 - Dana Galkowicz, 22, of Kibbutz Bror Hayil, was killed by a Kassam rocket fired at Netiv Ha'asara north of the Gaza Strip. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah all claimed responsibility for the attack
Sept 21, 2005 - Sasson Nuriel, 55, of Jerusalem was kidnapped and slain by Palestinian terrorists. His body was found on Sept 26 in a garbage dump in the industrial zone of Bitunya, west of Ramallah. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack

hamas never honoured their own proclaimed cease fires for more than 2 months. whenever there is a big lack of activity of hamas its due to the IDF closing down on their operations.

Its very easy to just write a few lines and throw in the names of a few cities, but unless you give a link to a neutral website proving all the above attacks allegedly by Hamas, I aint gonna buy it. I quote for you the report on wikepedia on Hamas' truce or as they call it hudna.

"Observed since an attack on the Israeli southern town of Be'er Sheva in August 2004, in which 15 people were killed and 125 wounded, the truce was generally observed. Hamas violated once, in August 2005, with an attack on the same bus station, wounding seven, and in several attacks on Israeli motorists - killing six in several attacks"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas#Anti-Semitism - read the 2004 section

My point is not that Hamas are angels, but you have to understand that in an atmosphere of everyday violence, both sides are guilty of it and you cant just simplify the IDF actions as a reaction every time. Furthermore unlike the Israelis, the Palestinians don’t really have its own army to defend their people beyond some under armed policemen, so really Hamas is the only 'military protection' that the Palestinians will get and more importantly until and unless they get a viable independent state, Hamas will remain to be so. By refusing the peaceful overtures of Hamas for negotiations, and building a unilateral wall condemned by everyone except Israel and US, the Israel government is really leaving only one option to Hamas and the Palestinians.

Quote
2)"have accepted the right for Israel to exist side by side"
thats the whole point of the article, hamas DOESNT accept Israels right to exist! thats why israel and other countries in the world stop their aid to palestine!

If you want to talk about manifesto, lets looks at the Mafdal/Mafleget Dati Leumi and the Shas party, both at different times have been in the Israel coalition government.

Mafdal

"Opposes a Palestinian state, withdrawal from West Bank and Gazza and any Palestinian autonomy in the Land of Israel and the uprooting of any settlement"

Shas

"Believes that no credible peace partner exists and favors strengthening the settlements"

So really both sides have extremist and its time you gave a fairer assessment of the situation.

Quote
3)"apparently Israel and US wasnt very happy with the PA led by Arafat either"
yeah and thats exactly my point about palestinians choosing animals to represent them, who do you think yassir arafat is? a saint? the guy is one of the main terrorist in the history of the area. his PLO started just like hamas. heres a good quote by arafat: "We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state. We will make life unbearable for Jews by psychological warfare and population explosion. . . . We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem. "
Stockholm, 1996

Yeah well anyone can whip out an outdated quote, read this report from the Economist Dec 6th, 2001

"They are right in pointing out that the protection of Israel's security is an obligation that Mr Arafat has accepted. What they do not add is that Mr Sharon's policy of assassinating Palestinian militants, invading Palestinian towns and blowing up police stations has made the obligation unfulfillable..."

Or the fact that it was Arafat who wrote to Rabin pledging PLO’s recognition of the state of Israel, the 2nd Arab leader to do so after Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak. To quote the letter

“I would like to confirm the following PLO commitments: The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel-Palestine_Liberation_Organization_letters_of_recognition#1:_Letter_from_Yasser_Arafat_to_Prime_Minister_Rabi n

The Israel government cant expect to negotiate with someone who will agree with them all the way, that why its called a negotiation. Arafat again was no angel but he did try to balance the interest of his people and the peace process.


Quote
it will fail no matter what, palestine wants everything, israel wants to keep some. israel promised as much as 97% of the land back but palestinians didnt accept it.

I'm sorry thats just bollocks, it took nearly 40 years for Israel to withdraw from Gazza despite UN Resolution 242 in 1967, and although that move by Sharon can be applauded, simultaneous with the withdrawal, he was building more and more settlements in the West Bank so much so that even Bush warned him against it as it would scupper the peace process. So really I'm not sure where you pluck out this 97% withdrawal from?

Read Economist  April 12th, 2005

Quote
5) no there was NO palestinian state, there still isnt! ive already explained this in the previous palestine israel thread but lets do it again shall we. before the belfour declaration palestine was controlled by the ottoman empire. not by palestinians. palestinians were never a governing body of that land. and when you call someone palestinian its is also right to call jews palestinians as they were also living in the country when the romans changed its name from judea to palestine. now during WW1  and no i do not refer to the golan hights i refer to west bank and gaza, gaza is fully withdrawn west bank isnt.

The fact that pre Balfour, Palestine was under the rulings of the Ottoman Empire does not negate that the Muslims and Christians and a minority of Jews were the original inhabitants of the land. It was the Balfour Declaration that decided that Palestine will also be the national home for the Jewish people. Read this excerpt from wikipedia

"At that time Palestine was a part of the Ottoman Empire. Under Ottoman rule, Palestine had substantial regional independence, and the area was inhabitated predominantly by Palestinian Arabs (about 95%, mostly Muslims, some Christians), and Jews (about 5%).
In 1917 the British army took control of Palestine and Transjordan from the Ottomans. In that year, its government issued the Balfour Declaration, viewing "with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people ..."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Israeli-Palestinian_conflict

Clearly now the population balance is not the same anymore and Palestine has no such independence that they used to enjoy even under the Ottoman colonial masters.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 12:34:55 PM
"My point is not that Hamas are angels, but you have to understand that in an atmosphere of everyday violence, both sides are guilty of it and you cant just simplify the IDF actions as a reaction every time. Furthermore unlike the Israelis, the Palestinians don’t really have its own army to defend their people beyond some under armed policemen, so really Hamas is the only 'military protection' that the Palestinians will get and more importantly until and unless they get a viable independent state, Hamas will remain to be so. By refusing the peaceful overtures of Hamas for negotiations, and building a unilateral wall condemned by everyone except Israel and US, the Israel government is really leaving only one option to Hamas and the Palestinians."

Well put that man
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 01:01:44 PM
This is the one thing that really pisses me off about this.

IDF goes and bulldozes some houses shoots little kids and no one cares. This is because they are the army and they can do what they like. This is totally stupid but noone seems to care as they are an army fighting "terrorists". A kid throwning a rock must be a terrorist then.

Hamas and other Islamic militant groups are terror organisations. I do no condone they blowing up buses and kills jews, but the way there actions are reported in thew news is appauling. If the new pal govt. said hamas is our army would the west suddenly have a change of tac ?

At the present much of the IDF's action is seen as acceptable as they are fighting terrorists when hamas fires a rocket they get condemed. The world needs to realise that hamas may be terrorists but when there is no other armed force in palestine to protect their people what else are they meant to do ?

Its similar to the nazi occupation of France in WW2. The french resistance were terrorists but no one cared then, but now when a group of people stand up for them selves in front of heavily armed and very well equiped force its all wrong. 

I understadn Israel needing to protect its self ( from what i do not know however). But the media coverage is appauling and it is biased, even the BBC make more of a bomb in jerusalm than a refuge camp in gaza being bulldozed.

I appolgise for me bad english as well im tired.  :icon_rr:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 04:09:12 PM
"well there weren't many jews in palestine in 1914 and all of a suddden 50 years later they owned the lot.............  and a lot of the original folk had .... gone.... amazing eh? "
yes yes there was, not more than the arab population but there still was. the land didnt belong to palestinians and they immigrated mostly during british rule. and since the land was divided by the UN how can you blame anything on israel? nothing was stolen get over it.

"Its very easy to just write a few lines and throw in the names of a few cities, but unless you give a link to a neutral website proving all the above attacks allegedly by Hamas, I aint gonna buy it. I quote for you the report on wikepedia on Hamas' truce or as they call it hudna."
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/terrorism-+obstacle+to+peace/memorial/2005/Victims/Nissim+Arbiv.htm
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Memorial/2005/Victims/Oded+Sharon.htm
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Memorial/2005/Victims/Dana+Galkowicz.htm
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Memorial/2005/Victims/Sasson+Nuriel.htm

and just as if thats not enough:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/About+the+Ministry/Behind+the+Headlines/Hamas+kidnaps+and+slays+Jerusalem+businessman+28-Sep-2005.htm

just google their names and you will find something like this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4286532.stm

"10 year truce (hudna) offered by senior Hamas official Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi in exchange of Israel's complete withdrawal to the 1967 borders."
"Observed since an attack on the Israeli southern town of Be'er Sheva in August 2004, in which 15 people were killed and 125 wounded, the truce was generally observed"
hahahaha are you kidding me?
and i love the "generally" observed, lovely.
i can further provide you with list of hamas victims following this "truce" if you want to. (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+2000/Victims+of+Palestinian+Violence+and+Terrorism+sinc.htm)

As for the shas and mafdal manifesto, yes they are terrible parties, but the main difference is that israel did NOT elect them as the government! they represent only a small portion of israel. and israels policy isnt run by them, there would have been no problems if the Fatah movement have won the elections and had hamas hold several seats in the parliament. thats the whole difference!


"Furthermore unlike the Israelis, the Palestinians don’t really have its own army to defend their people beyond some under armed policemen, so really Hamas is the only 'military protection' that the Palestinians will get and more importantly until and unless they get a viable independent state, Hamas will remain to be so. By refusing the peaceful overtures of Hamas for negotiations, and building a unilateral wall condemned by everyone except Israel and US, the Israel government is really leaving only one option to Hamas and the Palestinians."

first of all youre calling hamas as palestinian protection???? if anything they are the instigators of more violence against palestinians. since surely after every hamas attack there will be an israeli retaliation. not to mention the whole killing innocent civilians, bombing night clubs, and shopping centers, how can you defend that? and believe it or not when an IDF soldier kills a child or any other innocent person he stands trial and those convicted are sent to jail. second you again completely miss my point. hamas doesnt want any negotiations, hamas wants it all! look israel has been trying to negotiate peace with the palestinians for how long now? and everytime their attemepts being rebuked and more violence ensues. palestinians are simply not interested in negotiating peace with israel and electing hamas was the recent proof of that. in negotiations things are divided evenly usually 50-50, sometimes 60-40, what the palestinians show is that they want 100%. the 97% was offered to mr yassir arafat by mr ehud barak and that plan, "the generous offer", was drawn with bill clinton thats where i pluck it from. so obviously israel will choose to create a unilateral disengagment plan, and unilateral delceration of borders, not drawn upon a peace table, but a security table. if the palestinians finally get a grip on reality maybe this could be changed.

"Yeah well anyone can whip out an outdated quote, read this report from the Economist Dec 6th, 2001"
outdated quote? first of all it was right after rabins murder, which was right after both arafat and him recieved the noble peace award! so i think it is very relevant to show how much of a true monster arafat was. second arafat was the symbol of the palestinians because of his resistence days not his peace days... if there were any. hence i claim that they choose animals to represent them.

 

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: johnnypd on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 04:22:34 PM
there were only 14,000 jews in palestine in 1880. in 1920 jews only made up 11% of palestine. israel is stolen land. so are places like the USA or argentina for instance. the difference with israel is that it's happened in recent memory, not 400 years ago, so the refugees are still around, .
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 04:37:34 PM
aha was the land palestinian? no. the land was given to both sides. its not like the united states, because israel constantly belonged to some sort of a governing body. and if you want to equate usa to israel, it is the israelis whos land been stolen from them.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: johnnypd on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 04:53:17 PM
israel should never have been created in the first place. the act of partitioning palestine in the first place is the robbery. (followed up by israel constantly stealing more land, as "spoils of war" or just incremental encroachment). jews in palestine had absolutely no right to claim the land as a jewish state. no more right than militant muslims in the UK have of establishing an islamic state in england.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 04:56:33 PM


"Yeah well anyone can whip out an outdated quote, read this report from the Economist Dec 6th, 2001"
outdated quote? first of all it was right after rabins murder, which was right after both arafat and him recieved the noble peace award! so i think it is very relevant to show how much of a true monster arafat was. second arafat was the symbol of the palestinians because of his resistence days not his peace days... if there were any. hence i claim that they choose animals to represent them.

 

And one can make a balanced argument, in this sense if they were to view the situation beyond a pair of "blue and white" colored specs, in relation to Ariel Sharon who in light of his days as a military chief is affectionately known amongst many Israelis as "The Bulldozer".

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:01:50 PM
Nice posts Adam and Rob.

Israel is carrying out a carefully orchestrared plan to make a Palestinian state unviable.
They have brought all the agony and tragedy on themselves and it will continue sadly for some time.
In these situations nothing happens till the superiour power shows some restraint and take the high ground, that is the way to disarm the anger and the reactonaries.

I don't for a minute beleive Israel has any real inclination to see the advent of a workable and economically viable Palestinian state....They want to create bantustans and deny the Palestininans access to the sea and steal their water.

Of course the Jewish lobby in America is also very powerful.
Aid stands at $300 billion dollars a year.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:04:22 PM
Quote
Cracking post Walker/exWalker

well would be nice t take the credit but thats for the lass oot there. she's certainly got some balls to go and see the
reality of how it is day to day and to report back realistically and try to keep an open mind.
we could discuss the history, who's right and who's wrong for ever, but until people out there start treating people 'as people'
and giving them their basic rights nothing will change. at the moment it's the palestinians rights that are infringed
on a constant daily basis. wether  people belive israel should be there or not and wether they have a right to be or not doesnt alter the fact that they treat people as an occuppying force in the only place they have lived and they have no control over that.
sad!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: johnnypd on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:07:02 PM
parky where did you get the $300 billion aid figure from? Israel receives $3billion per year in direct US aid, and $3billion in indirect US aid. Egypt receives $2billion per year in peace bribes to ensure Israel's viability.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:10:54 PM
Jonny yes it is $3 billion in direct aid.
I will dig up the $300 billion figure....Sound wild don't it?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:14:50 PM
Walker,

You tell your missus that change will come. Israel cannot win. I am a 100% confident that Palestinians will have their state, with or without Israel's co-operation. Ideas are bullet proof.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:27:35 PM
http://www.washington-report.org/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm


Here is a huge chunk of it...I can't be arsed to work it all out....Fuuck load more than the official $3billion figure.
12% of their total foreign aid budget or summat.

If you start factoring special deals they have with Jewish American companies and banks, yes we are approaching $300 billion.

I know its unbelievable. bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:29:10 PM
"israel should never have been created in the first place. the act of partitioning palestine in the first place is the robbery. (followed up by israel constantly stealing more land, as "spoils of war" or just incremental encroachment). jews in palestine had absolutely no right to claim the land as a jewish state. no more right than militant muslims in the UK have of establishing an islamic state in england"
umm according to your logic the arab population also has no right for a state, and if thats what you mean i see your point. oh and i really dont understand your analogy at the end there.

"They have brought all the agony and tragedy on themselves and it will continue sadly for some time"
 blueeek.gif
how can you even say that? its the arabs who reject israel not israel who rejects palestine.

"I don't for a minute beleive Israel has any real inclination to see the advent of a workable and economically viable Palestinian state....They want to create bantustans and deny the Palestininans access to the sea and steal their water"
heh? would you please go into some detail on that one please.

"at the moment it's the palestinians rights that are infringed on a constant daily"
maybe when palestinians accept the most basic right of israelis, the right to LIVE, there wouldnt be a need to make palestinian lives miserable for security purposes.

"Israel cannot win. I am a 100% confident that Palestinians will have their state, with or without Israel's co-operation. Ideas are bullet proof. "
it is ISRAEL thats pushing for a palestinian state. that would be a victory for them.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alpal78 on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:40:00 PM
Quote
"well there weren't many jews in palestine in 1914 and all of a suddden 50 years later they owned the lot.............  and a lot of the original folk had .... gone.... amazing eh? "
yes yes there was, not more than the arab population but there still was. the land didnt belong to palestinians and they immigrated mostly during british rule. and since the land was divided by the UN how can you blame anything on israel? nothing was stolen get over it.


I just quoted to you in my previous posting that during the Ottoman period the population composition was "and the area was inhabitated predominantly by Palestinian Arabs (about 95%, mostly Muslims, some Christians), and Jews (about 5%)." Do you not think that the shift to a substantially bigger Jewish population was to a certain extend due to the Balfour Declaration declaring part of Palestine as the Jewish homestate? and if that is not taking over others land, by way of immigration, then forcing them out after winning wars, followed by refusing the rights of refugee return, then I dont know what is?


Quote
"Its very easy to just write a few lines and throw in the names of a few cities, but unless you give a link to a neutral website proving all the above attacks allegedly by Hamas, I aint gonna buy it. I quote for you the report on wikepedia on Hamas' truce or as they call it hudna."
http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/terrorism-+obstacle+to+peace/memorial/2005/Victims/Nissim+Arbiv.htm
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Memorial/2005/Victims/Oded+Sharon.htm
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Memorial/2005/Victims/Dana+Galkowicz.htm
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Memorial/2005/Victims/Sasson+Nuriel.htm

and just as if thats not enough:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/About+the+Ministry/Behind+the+Headlines/Hamas+kidnaps+and+slays+Jerusalem+businessman+28-Sep-2005.htm

just google their names and you will find something like this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4286532.stm

"10 year truce (hudna) offered by senior Hamas official Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi in exchange of Israel's complete withdrawal to the 1967 borders."
"Observed since an attack on the Israeli southern town of Be'er Sheva in August 2004, in which 15 people were killed and 125 wounded, the truce was generally observed"
hahahaha are you kidding me?
and i love the "generally" observed, lovely.
i can further provide you with list of hamas victims following this "truce" if you want to. (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+2000/Victims+of+Palestinian+Violence+and+Terrorism+sinc.htm)


Dear Goashem, whilst I compliment your effort in 'substantiating' your claims, you must have missed out on the word "neutrel" when I asked you to provide me with "links to a neutral website proving all the above attacks allegedly by Hamas."

All the links your provided barring the one from BBC were from Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, yup very neutrel blueyes.gif. Surely you dont expect the Foreign Minsitry to declare that Hamas is a partner for peace and a wonderful organization. Thats what I mean when I said you need to give a fairer assessment, u can begin by reading more neutrel websites and not believing everything the Israeli Foreign Mionistry says.

As for the BBC link, u must have missed out on this part from the same article "Hamas said in a statement on Wednesday that it "was preparing to swap the Zionist prisoner for prisoners of the Palestinian people. "But the campaign of random arrests by the occupation forces in West Bank cities forces our unit to kill him." . This does not justify the killing of Mr Nuriel as all life are sacred but it shows that both sides are responsible for the violence. The next thing you should do after getting to the neutrel websites, is stop reading selectively.


Quote
As for the shas and mafdal manifesto, yes they are terrible parties, but the main difference is that israel did NOT elect them as the government! they represent only a small portion of israel. and israels policy isnt run by them, there would have been no problems if the Fatah movement have won the elections and had hamas hold several seats in the parliament. thats the whole difference!


Yes for your information, the Shas party was part of the Likud coalition before Sharon left for Kadima. And no judging from how the US and Israel treated the Fatah party during Arafat's time, they were not too keen on Fatah either. Like I said they wanted a yes man in the negotiations and thats something that they are not going to get. Do tell me who exactly do you think are the non animals on the Palestinian side coz the Israel government had problems with each and every key player in Palestine at different point of time.

Quote
first of all youre calling hamas as palestinian protection???? if anything they are the instigators of more violence against palestinians. since surely after every hamas attack there will be an israeli retaliation. not to mention the whole killing innocent civilians, bombing night clubs, and shopping centers, how can you defend that? and believe it or not when an IDF soldier kills a child or any other innocent person he stands trial and those convicted are sent to jail. second you again completely miss my point. hamas doesnt want any negotiations, hamas wants it all! look israel has been trying to negotiate peace with the palestinians for how long now? and everytime their attemepts being rebuked and more violence ensues. palestinians are simply not interested in negotiating peace with israel and electing hamas was the recent proof of that. in negotiations things are divided evenly usually 50-50, sometimes 60-40, what the palestinians show is that they want 100%. the 97% was offered to mr yassir arafat by mr ehud barak and that plan, "the generous offer", was drawn with bill clinton thats where i pluck it from. so obviously israel will choose to create a unilateral disengagment plan, and unilateral delceration of borders, not drawn upon a peace table, but a security table. if the palestinians finally get a grip on reality maybe this could be changed.

You again refuse to believe that whilst some of the actions by the IDF might be out of retaliation, some also constitute the beginning of a fresh round of violence. Surely even you dont believe that the IDF only reacts! and yes Hamas after they won the elections is willing to negotiate, but such offers have not been accepted, in fact the Israel and American governments even refuse to recognize that Hamas were the result of a free and fair democratic election by the Plestinian people. But when Sharon the man partially responsible for the Sabra & Shatila massacre in 1982 which resulted in up to 3500 civilian casualty in refugee camps, people were happy to accept him and Bush even had the audacity to declare him a "man of peace".

When u refer to the peace plan offered by Barak, you must be referring to Camp David 1 peace process, first of all the land offered were not up to 97% but there were other problems with the Camp David Deal

1) Sovereignity of East Jurusalem i.e the Al Aqsar mosque remained predominantly with the Israeli government

2) The agreement denied the right of refugee return of over 2.3 million refugees which is enshrined as an individual right in international law, which cant be signed away by any national leader and also demanded by UN Resolution 194 passed in 1948.
 
So no it had fundamental problems and on fairer assessment is definitely not as "generous" as u make it out to be.

 





Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: johnnypd on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:41:52 PM
"israel should never have been created in the first place. the act of partitioning palestine in the first place is the robbery. (followed up by israel constantly stealing more land, as "spoils of war" or just incremental encroachment). jews in palestine had absolutely no right to claim the land as a jewish state. no more right than militant muslims in the UK have of establishing an islamic state in england"
umm according to your logic the arab population also has no right for a state, and if thats what you mean i see your point.

that is my point. i believe it was stupid to partition. i'd have had no problem with there being a state called Palestine where were majority are non-jewish palestinians. i don't think it should've become an "arab state", it should've been a secular state, where the majority are arabs. of course because of Jewish lobbyists in the USA, anti-semitism in europe and militant zionist lunatics, the push for a jewish state overcame sensible considerations. i also think it is right that palestinian refugees are able to return home (a move that would end israel).

Quote
oh and i really dont understand your analogy at the end there.

simple really, muslims in the UK are a minority, as were jews in palestine. can't see any justification for a minority group instituting a state for themselves in a place where other people already live. the jewish population of palestine at the end of the second world war was around 25% of the total population of palestine. now say for the sake of the argument that the muslim population of london is around 25%, would it be ok for the muslims to institute a muslim zone over half the capital, aggressively populating this zone with more and more muslims from around the world? of course not, and it's just as ridiculous to think israel can get away with the same thing.

probably a better comparison would be with Syria. christians make up around 10% of Syria at the moment. The christian "homeland" is the middle east, birthplace of jesus. using the zionist's logic, christians should start swamping into Syria, launching terrorist attacks against the non-christian arabs. when syria is up to 20% christian, the country should be broken up into two states, with the christians claiming half the country (and aggressively filling up this nation with christians from around the globe), and the rest left to non-christian arabs. if you agree with the idea of israel, you must also agree with this plan of action, otherwise your fundamental beliefs are inconsistent.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 05:47:54 PM

If you want to talk about manifesto, lets looks at the Mafdal/Mafleget Dati Leumi and the Shas party, both at different times have been in the Israel coalition government.

Mafdal

"Opposes a Palestinian state, withdrawal from West Bank and Gazza and any Palestinian autonomy in the Land of Israel and the uprooting of any settlement"

Shas

"Believes that no credible peace partner exists and favors strengthening the settlements"

So really both sides have extremist and its time you gave a fairer assessment of the situation.


It's time that some people research the rhetoric delivered by Menachem Begin, whose Likuud party was elected in the late 70's - so Begin wasn't just some "fringe lunatic". And so when it comes to a respective set of idealogies, where the non-sharing of land is concerned, they might just realise it isn't a one-way-street where there's just one set of people, or "they", choosing a bunch of harsh & unrelenting animals to represent them.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 06:01:22 PM
Johnny and Alpal rock the house. :thup: :thup: :thup:


Johnny the aid is a lot bigger than you realised huh?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 06:07:16 PM
Here Goashem...Feel the love. :)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 06:13:24 PM
Quote
maybe when palestinians accept the most basic right of israelis, the right to LIVE, there wouldnt be a need to make palestinian lives miserable for security purposes.

so she's just arrived in nablus in a refugee camp that holds 32,000 people from the 1940's and 1960's conflicts as well as their descendents
being unable to LIVE in the country you were born in-think theres a slight differnce there to what you your implying mate. respect that you have your own opinion but it does sound bit like an armchair view. oh and i'm someone who has put myself on the front line against the national front to protect the rights of israelis,arabs etc etc in this country so i'm not some biased uninformed poster.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 06:14:20 PM
B-b-b-bump!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 06:31:48 PM
"Balfour Declaration declaring part of Palestine as the Jewish homestate? and if that is not taking over others land, by way of immigration, then forcing them out after winning wars, followed by refusing the rights of refugee return, then I dont know what is?"
no, because a, they were given the right to immigrate by the british, b they created settlements on uninhibited land, c the wars were started in order to annihilate the jews and take their land away from them. i think it is very noble of israel to actually give that land back.

as for the neutrality of the isreali MFA, i really dont see the problem as it simply records the death of victims and provides who claimed responsibility, it is only stating facts not giving any personal bias on the circumstance around the incident. i posted the BBC article to show you that the government of israel doesnt lie about the claim of responsibility of the issues. i cant provide you a neutral source because they simply dont exist in this conflict. the wikipedia source stated "generally" meaning that it wasnt constant, and provided the incidents when they didnt. i dont think the major news outlets keep an archive of every attack in israel, it will simply take up all their space.

"But the campaign of random arrests by the occupation forces in West Bank cities forces our unit to kill him"
they kidnapped him in order to release terrorists, and killed him because arrests were being made in order to bring terrorists to justice. all i see is blood thirsty animals on one side and the people who are trying to bring them to justice on the other.

"The next thing you should do after getting to the neutrel websites, is stop reading selectively."
i do read a neutrel site, and from everything i read i cant help but see that israel is the victim in this conflict. heres the site http://www.mideastweb.org/

"Yes for your information, the Shas party was part of the Likud coalition before Sharon left for Kadima. And no judging from how the US and Israel treated the Fatah party during Arafat's time, they were not too keen on Fatah eiether. Like I said they wanted a yes man in the negotiations and thats something that they are not going to get. Do tell me who exactly do you think are the non animals on the Palestinian side coz the Israel government had problems with each and every key player in Palestine at different point of time."

yes shas was part and will continue to be a part of coalition governments in the future but israelis elected main party will not adopt their kill all arabs take their land position. and if they will, for the love of god pull the plug on all support to israel. i already explained the problem with arafat, and its not that they wanted a yes man its that they wanted someone that will actually want to create peace, someone that will be willing to work on issues instead of wanting a unilateral peace plan. abu mazen was seen by israeli politicians as that someone, but he didnt have enough control and support.

"some are also constitute the beginning of a fresh round of violence"
please do give examples. the IDF operations that begin a round of fresh violence are things like assasinating a hamas leader who is responsible for planning major suicide bombing, which i think is the right thing to do.

"and yes Hamas after they won the elections is willing to negotiate, but such offers have not been accepted."
negotiate what? a short truce? negotiating borders is out of the question since hamas doesnt recognize israels right to exist! thats the problem ive stated it a million times by now stop ignoring it.
"But when Sharon the man partially responsible for the Sabra & Shatila massacre in 1982 which resulted in up to 3 500 civilian casualty in refugee camps, people were happy to accept him and Bush even had the audacity to declare him a "man of peace"."
yes it is the same as when yassir arafat the terrorist was accepted as the peace partner of israel. all israel asks is for hamas to recognize its existence and right to exist.

"When u refer to the peace plan offered by Barak, you must be referring to Camp David 1 peace process, first of all the land offered were not up to 97% but there were other problems with the Camp David Deal

1) Sovereignity of East Jurusalem i.e the Al Aqsar mosque remained predominantly with the Israeli government

2) The agreement denied the right of refugee return of over 2.3 million refugees which is enshrined as an individual right in international law, which cant be signed away by any national leader and also demanded by UN Resolution 194 passed in 1948.
 
So no it had fundamental problems and on fairer assessment is definitely not as "generous" as u make it out to be."

this was realistically the best offer palestinians could ever hope for and instead of working with it they rejected it without trying to come with a counter offer. like i said its a negotiation, in negotiations it goes 50-50 maybe 60-40, in best cases 70-30. israel offered them more but they want it all.

"it should've been a secular state, where the majority are arabs. of course because of Jewish lobbyists in the USA, anti-semitism in europe and militant zionist lunatics, the push for a jewish state overcame sensible considerations."
here is where your logic breaks down. you assume that a secular state would have worked whereas both parties wanted a religious state with a clear ethnic distinctiveness, so if there were a secular state established for both one side would have massacared the other.

"can't see any justification for a minority group instituting a state for themselves in a place where other people already live"
the jewish state was established over a land where jews had a majority of population.

"probably a better comparison would be with Syria. christians make up around 10% of Syria at the moment. The christian "homeland" is the middle east, birthplace of jesus. using the zionist's logic, christians should start swamping into Syria, launching terrorist attacks against the non-christian arabs. when syria is up to 20% christian, the country should be broken up into two states, with the christians claiming half the country (and aggressively filling up this nation with christians from around the globe), and the rest left to non-christian arabs. if you agree with the idea of israel, you must also agree with this plan of action, otherwise your fundamental beliefs are inconsistent."

again you make the assumption that palestine belonged to palestinians at the time and it was not. it never did. hence this analogy is faulty.



Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alpal78 on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 06:34:17 PM
B-b-b-bump!

Thats cheeky of you to bump this thread and solicit replies on this one as well. We're doing fine on the other one. I have to do my dissertation too you know bluebiggrin.gif. Anyway most of the issues can be crossed referred with the other thread. I've already posted on the deal offered by Barak that Goashem keeps on referring to and how it had fundamental problems, in the other thread.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 06:35:23 PM
No, no.  Parky did it, a few threads seem to be getting them, that's all.  Look one more post up!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 09:42:54 PM
Here Goashem...Feel the love. :)
*heart* :D
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 80 on Tuesday 11 April 2006, 10:43:05 PM
simple really, muslims in the UK are a minority, as were jews in palestine. can't see any justification for a minority group instituting a state for themselves in a place where other people already live. the jewish population of palestine at the end of the second world war was around 25% of the total population of palestine. now say for the sake of the argument that the muslim population of london is around 25%, would it be ok for the muslims to institute a muslim zone over half the capital, aggressively populating this zone with more and more muslims from around the world? of course not, and it's just as ridiculous to think israel can get away with the same thing.

That's exactly what's happening, mate :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 07:24:52 AM
"Balfour Declaration declaring part of Palestine as the Jewish homestate"

always thought it was good of us that - giving away someonelse's country to a third party..............

we should try it with the USA - maybe give it to Mexico.........

"The RobW Declaration" - like the sound of that I do..............
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 07:27:11 AM
we need two forums TBH - one run by Goashem and Co  the "Israel is  Friend to all" Forum and the one run by Parky and Co, "Israel OUT!"

that way we can avoid these arguements which convince neither side.......................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 10:32:17 AM
We need more than that Rob we also need a great big fekin wall between the two forums. bluewink.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 10:36:05 AM
Perhaps Nicaragua would be a better recipient. :P
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 11:32:59 AM
About Palestine supposedly being a country.


"The Zionist movement began in 1882 with the first wave of European Jewish immigration to Palestine.

At that time, the land of Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire. However, this area did not constitute a single political unit. The northern districts of Acre and Nablus were part of the province of Beirut. The district of Jerusalem was under the direct authority of the Ottoman capital of Istanbul because of the international significance of the cities of Jerusalem and Bethlehem as religious centers for Muslims, Christians and Jews."

http://www.merip.org/palestine-israel_primer/intro-pal-isr-primer.html


Martin Gilbert writes in "Israel A History", that Palestine was an "integral part of Syria".

"On 29 December 1901 the Fifth Zionist Congress, meeting in Basle, set up a special fund, the Jewish National Fund, to buy land in Palestine."

"The money for the fund was to be collected from Jews in the Diaspora. 'The Jewish National Fund shall be the eternal possession of the Jewish people,' the Congress declared. 'Its funds shall not be used except for the purchase of lands in Palestine and Syria.' Palestine was then an integral part of Syria; some of the lands purchased in the coming few years were on the high ground just to the west of Damascus, known today as the Golan Heights."

Chapter 2, Towards Zion, Page 19.


So, there never was an independent self governing country called Palestine. And although the Jews were not a majority in the area of Palestine, they did constitute a majority in Jerusalem since the 1850's and by 1889 they reached 25,000 compared to 14,000 Arabs. According to Gilbert, Chapter 1, Ideals of statehood, Page 9.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 11:39:37 AM
What's your point Rehagel. America was never a single country until relatively recently, does that make it any less legitimate?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 11:49:28 AM
Yeah. Might as well just give it back to the Red Indians. :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 11:57:58 AM
My school is older than america, does that mean my school can claim america ?

Havent read all of the essays above im jsut about to give me half an hour.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 12:03:10 PM
Yeah. Might as well just give it back to the Red Indians. :lol:
Native Americans if you please ;)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 01:20:17 PM
:lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 01:23:54 PM
Aztecs!  Give them their home back, God gave it to them!

About as much sense.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 03:04:44 PM
The point is that Rob W's statement:

 "always thought it was good of us that - giving away someonelse's country to a third party.............."

Is nonsense.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 03:18:09 PM
The point is that Rob W's statement:

 "always thought it was good of us that - giving away someonelse's country to a third party.............."

Is nonsense.

People who called themselves Palestinians still lived there even if a state called 'Palestine' didn't exist. Basically land was taken away by the west and given solely to the Jewish people to set up their own homeland at the expense of those already living there. The arbitrary manner in which this was done is the cause of many of the problems now taking place in the region. Incidentally, if we are to rely solely on ancient boundaries, Jerusalem was never part of Israel.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 03:49:48 PM
"Is Israel the real danger to world peace? "

Of course, if Israel no longer existed then:
- there would no longer be Islamic terrorist attacks in parts of Russia such as Chechnya and Dhagestan with the aim of setting up an Islamic state.
- there would no longer be conflict in Kashmir as India and Pakistan and those that want it to be independent of both countries, would just shake hands and leave it unresolved.
- there would no longer be conflict in Nepal as the Moaists would just surrender knowing Israel is gone.
- the tribal Baluchistan Liberation Army will no longer conduct terrorist attacks in Pakistan and no longer desire their own country.
- The Marxists in Colombia will end their insurgency after decades.
- The Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda will end their Christian reign of terror.
- Taiwan will let China conquer it peacefully.
- Sunnis and Shias will stop killing each other in Iraq.
- The Tamil Tigers will end their campaign.
- The Sunni Jundallah will stop carrying out attacks in Iran.
- Arabs in Iran's south-western province of Khuzestan will stop protesting and rioting.
- Terrorist attacks on oil facilities in Nigeria would end.
- North Korea would abandon Communism.
- The IRA will stop robbing banks and other organised crime.
- Afghanistan would be free of the Taliban.
- Instead of settling for a global Caliphate, Islamic groups will be content with setting up an Islamic state in a new country called Palestine.
- Somehow the various terrorist groups in PA Authority areas will stop fighting each other for power.


If only Israel was gone, there would be peace throughout the world as insurgent groups and terrorist groups will put down their arms, they only started fighting because the state of Israel was formed and still exists. The root of global ethnic, tribal, religious, national and ideological violence is due to Israel.


"Is Israel the real danger to world peace? "

On second thoughts, no.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 03:52:52 PM
 bluelaugh.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 03:57:43 PM
Quote
People who called themselves Palestinians still lived there even if a state called 'Palestine' didn't exist. Basically land was taken away by the west and given solely to the Jewish people to set up their own homeland at the expense of those already living there. The arbitrary manner in which this was done is the cause of many of the problems now taking place in the region. Incidentally, if we are to rely solely on ancient boundaries, Jerusalem was never part of Israel.

not quite, land was not taken away since noone was deported they just ruled it. also land was not solely given to the jewish population, it was also given to the arab population to create their homeland. they refused because they wanted the entire area for themselves and all hell broke loose.

Quote
always thought it was good of us that - giving away someonelse's country to a third party..............
Great Britain, the real danger to the world?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 03:58:30 PM
To be honest Rehagel, not that bothered in this thread about parts of Africa, Korea and Central Asia. You get me rasta. :wink:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 04:01:00 PM
"The point is that Rob W's statement:

"always thought it was good of us that - giving away someonelse's country to a third party.............."

Is nonsense. " Rehagel.


I am eager in my anticipation of Rob's return to this thread. :P
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 05:16:18 PM
from the lass (on big chill forum   )

thanks for the support, but i feel uncomfortable having any praise for doing something i really wanted to do!
having said that, i had my work cut out last night. i'm staying in a refugee camp which is home to 32,000 people displaced in 1948 and 1967. It's a hell hole but still the people are amazing considering what they have to suffer here.
It's a gorgeous sunny day here in nablus and ive popped out to use the net cafe. Last nights events already seem like a surreal, distant nightmare
So, we arrive at balata camp to be greeted by Ayesh who gives us our briefing and cultural orientation. He tells us we can move around the camp alone during the day but by night we should always be accompanied by a palestinian and be aware of curfews which are regularly imposed by the IDF. We should be careful about taking photgraphs as 'fighters' (armed resistance) may think we're spies. We should be friendly to the fighteres who will be pleased we are there but not become to freindly with them, lest we get caught up in something difficult. Alreday i'm feeling a little out og my depth when ayesh tells us what our work may entail. We may be telephoned by the emergency medical team, probably in the middle of the night and asked to escort them to anyone who'ds been injured by the IDF during their attacks. He warns us there may be 'rivers of blood if someone has been shot but we must stay calm. If there is a clash (between fighters and the IDF, we must step to the side (i had no problem with that!). If a house is occupied (the army occupy houses to get good sniper positions and imprison the occupants sometimes for days) we may have to take food and water supplies and show the family they have support. We tour of the camp and takes us to some martyr houses (houses where people have died as a direct result of the occupation). Even though we have been joined by a belgian human rights group of 20 people, we somehow squeeze into the houses and are given tea at each one!
I am nervous but amazingly manage to sleep, my colleague persuades me that i don't need to sleep in my clothes. At 3.30 am we are awoken by gunfire, apparently this is normal. However, 'normal' soon gives way to terrifying as the gunfire escalates, we hear several loud explosions outside our flat and what sounds like tanks or hummers coming up the street. Then we hear shouting in hebrew on our stairwell and anothere huge exposion. I think we could be under rocket attack, then i belive it could be a clash when i hear soldiers take up sniper positions on our roof. This makes us a target. We dress quietly, not wanting to draw attention to ourselves and whisper about what we should do. I suddenly become calm when it occurs to me that the locals live with this the majority of the time. I remind myself what I came for and become really calm. We really don't know what to do. Should we go out and see if support is needed or will we risk brining more danger to ourselves and others. We decide to stay inside which later turns out to be the worng decision as 6 18year olds are arrested and taken into custody where they will certainly be tortured according to a local social worker. These young men were not wanted either, just casual trophies of the night. Why? By showing an international presence it turns out we may have been able to prvent their arrest.
On a more positive note. Today I visited a women's centre which was amazingly progressive in terms of the therapies they offer. I'm making the most of the day and the sun because i don't know what tonight will bring but hope i have the courage to face it.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 05:30:27 PM
This stuff is like fekin gold-dust. Keep it coming. Genuinely moving.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 05:47:06 PM
yeh it is parky. thats one of the reasons behind the ISM-to keep
people informed of the realities of the situation. thats where the pro israeli argument breaks down for me
- the disproportionate reaction from a well equipped force such as the israeli army  who at this moment are
firing 300 rounds a day into Gazza (think about the calculated mental thinking behind that.there exact about what they are going to fire, when and where??-mental torture to people living there or what). theres defending yourself and thens theres systematic opression which imo this is.
 hope she keeps her head down.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 05:58:37 PM
What are the local charities and ngo's called get me the names from her.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alpal78 on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 06:25:02 PM
yeh it is parky. thats one of the reasons behind the ISM-to keep
people informed of the realities of the situation. thats where the pro israeli argument breaks down for me
- the disproportionate reaction from a well equipped force such as the israeli army  who at this moment are
firing 300 rounds a day into Gazza (think about the calculated mental thinking behind that.there exact about what they are going to fire, when and where??-mental torture to people living there or what). theres defending yourself and thens theres systematic opression which imo this is.
 hope she keeps her head down.

Hats off to your missus for having the courage to put herself in danger, the compassion to help others less fortunate and the honest desire of finding out the truth. Send her my best regards and ask her to stay safe.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alpal78 on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 06:26:48 PM
What are the local charities and ngo's called get me the names from her.

Sorry if I get you wrong, but sounds like u're trying to ascertain whether Walkerboy is telling the truth by checking out whether he can come out with the facts via his missus. Why do you ask bout the name of NGOs and charities?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 06:36:45 PM
cheers for the thoughts alpal
think parky was just interested

http://www.palsolidarity.org/
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 06:51:47 PM
Alpal,
Cause they have a board meeting coming up where one of the things they decide is which charities, emergency response organisations, aid funds, or risk consultancies we give money to.
Also to see if any are already on the list.
Nothing more than that mate.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 08:58:23 PM
"thanks for the support, but i feel uncomfortable having any praise for doing something i really wanted to do!
having said that, i had my work cut out last night. i'm staying in a refugee camp which is home to 32,000 people [and is home to many terrorists] displaced in 1948 and 1967 [I wonder if this group fought Egyptian and Jordanian occupation of Palestine between these two periods?] . It's a hell hole but still the people are amazing considering what they have to suffer here.
It's a gorgeous sunny day here in nablus and ive popped out to use the net cafe. Last nights events already seem like a surreal, distant nightmare
So, we arrive at balata camp to be greeted by Ayesh who gives us our briefing and cultural orientation. He tells us we can move around the camp alone during the day but by night we should always be accompanied by a palestinian and be aware of curfews which are regularly imposed by the IDF. We should be careful about taking photgraphs as 'fighters' (armed resistance) [terrorists] may think we're spies. We should be friendly to the fighteres who will be pleased we are there [because they have the moral support of westerners, known as useful idiots] but not become to freindly with them, lest we get caught up in something difficult [I guess being "too" friendly means taking up arms alongside them, and getting caught up in "something difficult" is either a rival terrorist fire fight or getting shot by Israeli soldiers]. Alreday i'm feeling a little out og my depth when ayesh tells us what our work may entail. We may be telephoned by the emergency medical team, probably in the middle of the night and asked to escort them to anyone who'ds been injured by the IDF during their attacks [terrorists] . He warns us there may be 'rivers of blood if someone has been shot but we must stay calm. If there is a clash (between fighters and the IDF, we must step to the side (i had no problem with that!). If a house is occupied (the army occupy houses to get good sniper positions and imprison the occupants sometimes for days) [terrorists, sometimes with support of house holders, if not then forcibly, hide in houses and use them to smuggle weapons undergound] we may have to take food and water supplies and show the family they have support. We tour of the camp and takes us to some martyr houses (houses where people have died as a direct result of the occupation) [terrorists, usually who have just murdered a bus full of innocents]. Even though we have been joined by a belgian human rights group of 20 people, we somehow squeeze into the houses and are given tea at each one!
I am nervous but amazingly manage to sleep, my colleague persuades me that i don't need to sleep in my clothes. At 3.30 am we are awoken by gunfire, apparently this is normal. However, 'normal' soon gives way to terrifying as the gunfire escalates, we hear several loud explosions outside our flat and what sounds like tanks or hummers coming up the street. Then we hear shouting in hebrew on our stairwell and anothere huge exposion. I think we could be under rocket attack, then i belive it could be a clash when i hear soldiers take up sniper positions on our roof. This makes us a target. We dress quietly, not wanting to draw attention to ourselves and whisper about what we should do. I suddenly become calm when it occurs to me that the locals live with this the majority of the time [Israeli's are constantly under fire of rocket attacks]. I remind myself what I came for [to support terrorists] and become really calm. We really don't know what to do. Should we go out and see if support is needed or will we risk brining more danger to ourselves and others. We decide to stay inside which later turns out to be the worng decision as 6 18year olds are arrested and taken into custody [they probably aren't terrorists, maybe they were arrested for speeding?]  where they will certainly be tortured according to a local social worker [*rubs hands* goody, I love the smell of tortured terrorists in the morning]. These young men were not wanted either, just casual trophies of the night. Why? By showing an international presence it turns out we may have been able to prvent their arrest.
On a more positive note. Today I visited a women's centre which was amazingly progressive in terms of the therapies they offer. I'm making the most of the day and the sun because i don't know what tonight will bring but hope i have the courage to face it.  "



Generally, if you don't support terrorist groups, you don't post a press release from them on your web site with no comment.

http://www.palsolidarity.org/main/2006/04/09/a-press-release-from-al-aqsa-martyer-troops/


"We in the al- Aqsa Martyer Brigades issue these points:

1- We give our support to the international solidarity ..."

*High 5* now that's teamwork.

 



"The International Solidarity Movement (ISM) is a Palestinian-led movement "

"ISM aims to support and strengthen the Palestinian popular resistance "

 http://www.palsolidarity.org/main/about-ism/



Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 09:03:04 PM
Africa, Korea and Central Asia? ok, sorry, I thought they belonged to the world, damn, so are they the one's that reside in planet Neptune?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Howaythelads on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 09:38:51 PM
No
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 10:52:33 PM
 Rehhagel  .  my first instinct was just to say w*****! howevr i do see how in your 'safe european home' it's easy to polarise events. the time it took you to edit the mail ,to construe your version/picture of what someone  on the ground is trying to portray, towards your own interpretation, unfortunatelyjust lists you as a daily mail reader to me. cant you see that the demonisation of a whole people just lumps you in with a great historical record of despots from stalin,hitler,thathcher,pol pot, mao tse tung, bush,putin, castro etc etc. these are people we are talking about and the daily lives they lead. they have as much chance of changing the situation they live in as you and we do (slim and no chance) !!

if you feel so strongly bout it what the f*** are you doing to change it .
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 12 April 2006, 11:47:09 PM
Quote
if you feel so strongly bout it what the **** are you doing to change it
haha what do you want him to join the IDF?
anyway its very noble of your missus to be doing that, tell her to be extra careful though. people like her have been taken advantage of by the wrong people on one side and shot at by the other.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Thursday 13 April 2006, 08:30:47 AM
Rehhegal is a zealot and an idiot of the highest order.

And the following exists on the other side of the equation as well.

What some of the rabbis must be teaching their "next generation" beggars beyond belief. With this sort of bigotry on display it leaves little to the imagination as to why there have been instances where Palestinian children - or "they" - have been shot by Settlers/Right-Wingers while praying on the side of the street............... i guess they must've been drawing a terrorist attack plan in the dirt on the side of the road.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Thursday 13 April 2006, 08:36:40 AM
Quote
if you feel so strongly bout it what the **** are you doing to change it
haha what do you want him to join the IDF?
anyway its very noble of your missus to be doing that, tell her to be extra careful though. people like her have been taken advantage of by the wrong people on one side and shot at by the other.

Actually he'd be well suited - plenty of ultra-right wingers masquerading as soldiers occupy ranks within the IDF. Rehhegal, judging the by the rhettoric spouted off, sounds like he's dying to make a head-shot.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Thursday 13 April 2006, 09:33:32 AM
"Is Israel the real danger to world peace? "

Of course, if Israel no longer existed then:
- there would no longer be Islamic terrorist attacks in parts of Russia such as Chechnya and Dhagestan with the aim of setting up an Islamic state.
- there would no longer be conflict in Kashmir as India and Pakistan and those that want it to be independent of both countries, would just shake hands and leave it unresolved.
- there would no longer be conflict in Nepal as the Moaists would just surrender knowing Israel is gone.
- the tribal Baluchistan Liberation Army will no longer conduct terrorist attacks in Pakistan and no longer desire their own country.
- The Marxists in Colombia will end their insurgency after decades.
- The Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda will end their Christian reign of terror.
- Taiwan will let China conquer it peacefully.
- Sunnis and Shias will stop killing each other in Iraq.
- The Tamil Tigers will end their campaign.
- The Sunni Jundallah will stop carrying out attacks in Iran.
- Arabs in Iran's south-western province of Khuzestan will stop protesting and rioting.
- Terrorist attacks on oil facilities in Nigeria would end.
- North Korea would abandon Communism.
- The IRA will stop robbing banks and other organised crime.
- Afghanistan would be free of the Taliban.
- Instead of settling for a global Caliphate, Islamic groups will be content with setting up an Islamic state in a new country called Palestine.
- Somehow the various terrorist groups in PA Authority areas will stop fighting each other for power.


If only Israel was gone, there would be peace throughout the world as insurgent groups and terrorist groups will put down their arms, they only started fighting because the state of Israel was formed and still exists. The root of global ethnic, tribal, religious, national and ideological violence is due to Israel.


"Is Israel the real danger to world peace? "

On second thoughts, no.

Fantastic post.  blueyes.gif

The blaming of Israel for world problems is absurd and inverts terroriser and victim. The allegation sits behind the typical leftist narrative of the all-powerful Zionist conspiracy, which is part of an obbsessional hatred of Israel.

Israel is repeatedly singled out for unfair and biased criticism and is taken to task for merely defending its existance against genocidal Islamists who wish to annihalate her. This occurs on 3 fronts:

1) Existential wars - as waged in 48, 67 and 73 by the Arab states against Israel, merely for existing

2) Suicide Bombing - targeting hositals, civillians and innocents (and not military targets)

3) Brainwashing and mass propeganda, which includes suicide bombing recuitment adverts on state-controlled media, anti-semitic teachings in schools and the hailing of suicide bombers as martyrs and heros.

The Palestinians have recently elected a terrorist organisation in Hamas, a rejectioinist group whose charter (which can be found on google) calls for the destruction of Israel and an ending to all negotiations.

In March alone, Israel received 50 general and 11 specific terror warnings from Iranian-funded terror groups. If America or the UK were facing such an onslaught, they would call it war. When Israel is the victim, it is different, because in the eyes of some it has no right to exist, and therefore no right to defend itself.

 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 13 April 2006, 10:34:31 AM
Yeah obviously poor Israel is the victim here. :rofl:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Thursday 13 April 2006, 11:01:24 AM
Personally i see no diference between hamas and the IDF they are both terror groups who kill inocent people. Its just that the IDF can get away with it as it is "protecting Israel" when hamas is obviously just trying to p*ss everyone off.

I know what israeli armed forces are like, few years back i went in to Israel from eygpt (Wasjust passing thru tog et to jordan) at the taba checkpoint. I got throught with my parents and they went off along the road to a newsagents to get a drink and some food. I was sitting on a wall waiting for the bus that would take us toth e jordaian border. This israel soldier walked up to me and mutter sumthing in hebrew, i have got a clue what he said and he repeated him self a few times. He them pointed his m16 assault rifle at me and shoted. I showed him my passport then, he looked at it and seemed gutted that i was british and if he did anything to me he was screwed. He then dropped my passport on the ground and walked off.

All this showed to em was that he thought he was better than me, he was ready to resort to shooting me far to readily and he was hoping he could possibly aresst me for some pointless reason.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Thursday 13 April 2006, 11:42:17 AM
"Is Israel the real danger to world peace? "

Of course, if Israel no longer existed then:
- there would no longer be Islamic terrorist attacks in parts of Russia such as Chechnya and Dhagestan with the aim of setting up an Islamic state.
- there would no longer be conflict in Kashmir as India and Pakistan and those that want it to be independent of both countries, would just shake hands and leave it unresolved.
- there would no longer be conflict in Nepal as the Moaists would just surrender knowing Israel is gone.
- the tribal Baluchistan Liberation Army will no longer conduct terrorist attacks in Pakistan and no longer desire their own country.
- The Marxists in Colombia will end their insurgency after decades.
- The Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda will end their Christian reign of terror.
- Taiwan will let China conquer it peacefully.
- Sunnis and Shias will stop killing each other in Iraq.
- The Tamil Tigers will end their campaign.
- The Sunni Jundallah will stop carrying out attacks in Iran.
- Arabs in Iran's south-western province of Khuzestan will stop protesting and rioting.
- Terrorist attacks on oil facilities in Nigeria would end.
- North Korea would abandon Communism.
- The IRA will stop robbing banks and other organised crime.
- Afghanistan would be free of the Taliban.
- Instead of settling for a global Caliphate, Islamic groups will be content with setting up an Islamic state in a new country called Palestine.
- Somehow the various terrorist groups in PA Authority areas will stop fighting each other for power.


If only Israel was gone, there would be peace throughout the world as insurgent groups and terrorist groups will put down their arms, they only started fighting because the state of Israel was formed and still exists. The root of global ethnic, tribal, religious, national and ideological violence is due to Israel.


"Is Israel the real danger to world peace? "

On second thoughts, no.

Fantastic post.  blueyes.gif

The blaming of Israel for world problems is absurd and inverts terroriser and victim. The allegation sits behind the typical leftist narrative of the all-powerful Zionist conspiracy, which is part of an obbsessional hatred of Israel.

Israel is repeatedly singled out for unfair and biased criticism and is taken to task for merely defending its existance against genocidal Islamists who wish to annihalate her. This occurs on 3 fronts:

1) Existential wars - as waged in 48, 67 and 73 by the Arab states against Israel, merely for existing

2) Suicide Bombing - targeting hositals, civillians and innocents (and not military targets)

3) Brainwashing and mass propeganda, which includes suicide bombing recuitment adverts on state-controlled media, anti-semitic teachings in schools and the hailing of suicide bombers as martyrs and heros.

The Palestinians have recently elected a terrorist organisation in Hamas, a rejectioinist group whose charter (which can be found on google) calls for the destruction of Israel and an ending to all negotiations.

In March alone, Israel received 50 general and 11 specific terror warnings from Iranian-funded terror groups. If America or the UK were facing such an onslaught, they would call it war. When Israel is the victim, it is different, because in the eyes of some it has no right to exist, and therefore no right to defend itself.

 

1. Suicide Bombing - attacking civilian & non-military targets. Once again it's a two-way-street isn't it. Right-wing Israeli's, in the mould of Barach Goldstein, have conducted similar missions which were designed to inflict maximum civilain toll....... missions, like suicide bombers, where the perpetrator fully expected to not survive ie. the likes of Goldstein, and the other example given in this thread where an off-duty IDF soldier shot dead 4 civilians, were immediately lynched and killed.

2. Brainwashing, teachings, terrorist recruitment etc. Once again it is a 2-way-street if one were able look beyond a pair of "blue & white" colored specs.. In the late 70s to mid 80's the TNT terror group  - ie. established by Jewish settlers in the West Bank - actively recruited civilians & flourished during the Begin regime because of the leniency showed towards them by the aformentioned government. As for teachings & brainwashing one can only wonder, in terms of what he was taught, as to why a Goldstein - knowing that it was a suicide mission - would walk into a mosque and shoot dead nearly 30 civilians. And there are some heavy rhetoric-laden pro-Israel sites as well, one of which is an American based blog-site belonging to an attractive young lass who proudly claims that she is a Zionist. There are heretic teachers on both sides..... muslim clerics and rabbis alike. Read up on a certain Rabbi Meir Kahane, a key player within the Kach movement.

one more thing re- the martyr issue. In Barach Goldstein's memory a memorial was built to honour what many believed to be a heroic & courageous act.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Thursday 13 April 2006, 11:57:56 AM
Isn't Rehagel an American who supports AC Milan, Juve and Barcelona? 'Nuff said really.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Thursday 13 April 2006, 12:08:44 PM

The Palestinians have recently elected a terrorist organisation in Hamas, a rejectioinist group whose charter (which can be found on google) calls for the destruction of Israel and an ending to all negotiations.


 

In 1977 the Israeli populace elected a hard-line organisation fronted by a leader, in the form of Menachem Begin whose dream was to eventually annex the West Bank by flooding it with settlements - incorporating the West Bank into it's own already established territory, who in his younger days was a militant within the Irgun terror group.

Sorry to break the ice to you sunshine, because i've added an obvious parrallel.................... i guess that makes me a supporter of suicide bombing ie. "i have no problems with innocents being blown up on buses" as you've previously accused me of.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 13 April 2006, 01:25:11 PM
Alex.
 :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 13 April 2006, 02:13:44 PM
The point is that Rob W's statement:

 "always thought it was good of us that - giving away someonelse's country to a third party.............."

Is nonsense.

what is nonesense?

the British decided to allow the Zionists to enter and take over teh country.................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 13 April 2006, 02:15:30 PM
"Martin Gilbert writes in "Israel A History","


And Martin Gilbert is......................   what religion?

He is a known supporter of Zionism for sure
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 13 April 2006, 02:29:27 PM
"The allegation sits behind the typical leftist narrative of the all-powerful Zionist conspiracy,"

I thought it was a RIGHT WING narrative TBH.....................  or maybe no-one loves you?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 13 April 2006, 03:39:43 PM
Quote
Personally i see no diference between hamas and the IDF they are both terror groups who kill inocent people. Its just that the IDF can get away with it as it is "protecting Israel" when hamas is obviously just trying to p*ss everyone off.
no one is getting away with anything in the IDF, when innocent people, be it children women or palestinian men are killed the israeli court puts the soldiers on trial, and if they are found guilty of murder they are sentenced to prison.

Quote
know what israeli armed forces are like
do you know what those soldiers are going through? do you know what they have to deal with everyday? these people arent robots, they have emotions. when youre threaten everyday, when people are trying to kill you and everyone you love everyday your attitude will change quite a bit. i know two ex soldiers that were in IDF and one of them had to serve as a border guard for a week (something that is mandatory for all soldiers?) and just the stories he told me from that week are enough to make your skin crawl. mind you many (like that soldier that i know) of those border guards dont even want to serve in the army. imagine that, being thrown against your will into a position of almost certain death or the promise of mental illness.
palestinians who suffer from the violence are poor victims and therefore we "understand" why they commit suicide bombings. but israelis ,who daily encounter those bombers, with attitude are assholes. the refusal to deal with israel and palestine equally indeed.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Thursday 13 April 2006, 04:35:49 PM
The article originally posted in this threat was by Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas's prime minister. It doesnt really surpise me that it was published in the Guardian, one of the most sanctimonious and ludicrously hostile opponents of Israel.

If ever we needed proof of the ludicrous distortion of the facts of the Middle East situation, it is the fact that this thread was started by the poster who claimed the writer of the original article made some good points, and completely brushed over the background to this man.

The Hamas charter states the following (and I challenge any of the Palestinian appeaseniks to deny it):

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

and:

"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."

And perhaps most chillingly, it pushes the Anti-Semitic libel of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion:

"After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying."

Other videos recently mounted on the Hamas website includes one that appeared just before the elections and features Hamas leader Khaled Masha'al stating that Hamas will continue with terrorism and work for Israel's destruction, promising that ‘the homeland is returning through blood’



There is  distinct reason why many critics of Israel are labelled anti-Semitic. It is not that criticism of the Jews and Israel is not allowed - far from it, fair and just criticism of any government policy should be encouraged.

But to single out Israel for attempting to exist and defend itself against genocidal Arab fanatics and to deny Israel's very right to exist is grossly unfair.

This board has contained many anti-Israel posts and yet not a single mention about the Chinese occupation of Tibet, the persecution of Christians in Arab states or the funding of terrorist organisations by Syriah and Iran. Worst still, in the case of the latter, many people on here are hellbent on excusing the activities of such governments (particularly Iran).

Yes, some of the measures employed by Israel against the Palestinians are harsh. But we need to contextualise these. Israel was attacked in 48, 67 and 73. It has been continually bombarded with terrorist attacks by suicide bombers. Is is honestly supposed to allow its people to be murdered?

In Palestine, UN relief funds are given to the families of suicide bombers, the country has rejected the two-state solution on every opportunity offered to it, it is rampant with anti-Semitism (Mahmoud Abbas has a PhD on debunking the Holocaust), terrorist organisations are openely active,
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 13 April 2006, 05:01:26 PM
Goashem

The Poor Bloody Infantry are always left to pick up the pieces left behind by the politicians I'm afraid

The problem that the rest of us see is that you can't IMPOSE your views in a case like this and hope to get any sort of settlement

God knows the British tried in Cyprus, the USA, Palestine, Iraq, Egypt etc etc

We eventully realised you HAVE to work with the opposition - even EOKA and the IRA - if you are going to get anything like a lasting peace.  Constantly beating the s*** out of them doesn't solve the problem

You might reflect on that rather your politicians might - and Israeli politicians seem to find it very very difficult to put themselves in anyone else's shoes............................   




Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Thursday 13 April 2006, 06:37:16 PM
Adam

"I know what israeli armed forces are like... This israel soldier walked up to me and mutter sumthing in hebrew,.. He them pointed his m16 assault rifle at me and shoted. I showed him my passport then, he looked at it and seemed gutted that i was british and if he did anything to me he was screwed. He then dropped my passport on the ground and walked off."

The armed forces (Army, Navy, AirForce) of a nation does not consist of 1 soldier.





Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Thursday 13 April 2006, 07:07:27 PM
Alex

"Isn't Rehagel an American who supports AC Milan, Juve and Barcelona? 'Nuff said really."

You found the answer to that question quick, did he send you a pm to tell you? this "Rehagel" member, his name is similar to mine, which is strange because on the old forum I was Gattuso and another member was named gasuso, so maybe it's him.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Thursday 13 April 2006, 08:56:14 PM
Goashem

The Poor Bloody Infantry are always left to pick up the pieces left behind by the politicians I'm afraid

The problem that the rest of us see is that you can't IMPOSE your views in a case like this and hope to get any sort of settlement

God knows the British tried in Cyprus, the USA, Palestine, Iraq, Egypt etc etc

We eventully realised you HAVE to work with the opposition - even EOKA and the IRA - if you are going to get anything like a lasting peace. Constantly beating the s*** out of them doesn't solve the problem

You might reflect on that rather your politicians might - and Israeli politicians seem to find it very very difficult to put themselves in anyone else's shoes............................






dear Rob:
Quote
israel has been trying to negotiate peace with the palestinians for how long now? and everytime their attemepts being rebuked and more violence ensues. palestinians are simply not interested in negotiating peace with israel and electing hamas was the recent proof of that. in negotiations things are divided evenly usually 50-50, sometimes 60-40, what the palestinians show is that they want 100%. the 97% was offered to mr yassir arafat by mr ehud barak and that plan, "the generous offer", was drawn with bill clinton thats where i pluck it from. so obviously israel will choose to create a unilateral disengagment plan, and unilateral delceration of borders, not drawn upon a peace table, but a security table. if the palestinians finally get a grip on reality maybe this could be changed.
i think given the history of palestinian "acceptance" of israel, israeli politicians were more than generous to them, yet its never enough. palestinians have to realise that israel isnt going anywhere and if they want peace they will have to accept the other and reach a compromise, a lose lose situation. you simply cant get everything in negotiations.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Thursday 13 April 2006, 10:21:10 PM
Adam

"I know what israeli armed forces are like... This israel soldier walked up to me and mutter sumthing in hebrew,.. He them pointed his m16 assault rifle at me and shoted. I showed him my passport then, he looked at it and seemed gutted that i was british and if he did anything to me he was screwed. He then dropped my passport on the ground and walked off."

The armed forces (Army, Navy, AirForce) of a nation does not consist of 1 soldier.

I never said it did, but when u hear reports of soilder shooting kids in the head then you go to the country and u get threatened for sitting on a wall you get that impression.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Thursday 13 April 2006, 10:33:07 PM
Rob W

"We eventully realised you HAVE to work with the opposition - even EOKA and the IRA - if you are going to get anything like a lasting peace.  Constantly beating the s*** out of them doesn't solve the problem"

Germany - Nazis defeated without working with them.
Malaya - Communist insurgency defeated by British without working with them.

There can be no compromise when Hamas wants Israel to no longer exist.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 14 April 2006, 10:52:44 AM
Israel's downfall will come via America, America's downfall will come via black Americans and other sections of the underclass and dispossesed. The rope is taut and overstretched, it will break in our lifetimes.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 14 April 2006, 10:57:04 AM
No Rob apparently the KKK and various Neu Nazi groups in former East Germany winning votes by the dozen including Le Pen are all cosy left wingers mate.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Friday 14 April 2006, 11:02:27 AM
Rob W

"We eventully realised you HAVE to work with the opposition - even EOKA and the IRA - if you are going to get anything like a lasting peace.  Constantly beating the s*** out of them doesn't solve the problem"

Germany - Nazis defeated without working with them.
Malaya - Communist insurgency defeated by British without working with them.

There can be no compromise when Hamas wants Israel to no longer exist.

So your going to keep bulldozing their houses and rading refugee camps ? Congrats that will work, cant see hamas wanting to destryo Irael if you keep doing that.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ChezGiven on Friday 14 April 2006, 12:02:17 PM
"Is Israel the real danger to world peace? "

Of course, if Israel no longer existed then:
- there would no longer be Islamic terrorist attacks in parts of Russia such as Chechnya and Dhagestan with the aim of setting up an Islamic state.
- there would no longer be conflict in Kashmir as India and Pakistan and those that want it to be independent of both countries, would just shake hands and leave it unresolved.- there would no longer be conflict in Nepal as the Moaists would just surrender knowing Israel is gone.
- the tribal Baluchistan Liberation Army will no longer conduct terrorist attacks in Pakistan and no longer desire their own country.
- The Marxists in Colombia will end their insurgency after decades.
- The Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda will end their Christian reign of terror.
- Taiwan will let China conquer it peacefully.
- Sunnis and Shias will stop killing each other in Iraq.
- The Tamil Tigers will end their campaign.
- The Sunni Jundallah will stop carrying out attacks in Iran.
- Arabs in Iran's south-western province of Khuzestan will stop protesting and rioting.
- Terrorist attacks on oil facilities in Nigeria would end.
- North Korea would abandon Communism.
- The IRA will stop robbing banks and other organised crime.
- Afghanistan would be free of the Taliban.
- Instead of settling for a global Caliphate, Islamic groups will be content with setting up an Islamic state in a new country called Palestine.
- Somehow the various terrorist groups in PA Authority areas will stop fighting each other for power.



The ones in bold are threats to world peace, not the rest. Risk assessment groups would not place those other conflicts into high risk cateogories.

I do think that a country that establishes itself in the middle of arab land (1948) and lays claim to this land based on the bible (ffs) does have to accept responsibility for causing a bit of bother. I'm not going to to get into religion but doesnt anyone have any doubts that this is fair???

If the Danes came over to whitley bay in the 50's and partitioned cullercoats i'd have had a few words to say to them. They could easily look to the writings of Vortigern from the 5th century and say 'well, we owned it then, we want it now'.

If you apply the logic of the settlers in particular, we would have to accept our fate and get tucked into the smorgasbord.  bluebigeek.gif

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 14 April 2006, 12:08:03 PM
I  wouldn't put it past the pesky Danes.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 14 April 2006, 01:33:47 PM
IKEA is just the first step in Scandanavian World Domination
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ChezGiven on Friday 14 April 2006, 01:58:00 PM
If you drive a Volvo, your part of the problem not the solution.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Friday 14 April 2006, 02:10:03 PM
All those blonde people are Scandinavian infiltrators.

If you meet a blonde who claims they're not a Scandinavian agent it's because they're a sleeper, so if you overhear them getting a phone call and all you can hear on the other end is an ABBA song then run for your life!!!

Some of them have been programmed to explode upon hearing the words "Can you hear the drums fernando?".
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ChezGiven on Friday 14 April 2006, 02:16:32 PM
I just got back from Oslo last week and one night there i got really drunk with colleagues and woke up the next morning in the hotel with no recollection of the last 2 hours of the night and with a very sore arm.

I can feel this object under the skin in my forearm, its about 1/2 inch square and feels metallic and for some reason i can hear distant drums and the sound of bugle calls coming from afar.

Weird.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Friday 14 April 2006, 02:31:07 PM
I just got back from Oslo last week and one night there i got really drunk with colleagues and woke up the next morning in the hotel with no recollection of the last 2 hours of the night and with a very sore arm.

I can feel this object under the skin in my forearm, its about 1/2 inch square and feels metallic and for some reason i can hear distant drums and the sound of bugle calls coming from afar.

Weird.

You're one of them now!!

I'm afraid I can't continue this conversation in light of what I now know, goodbye.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 14 April 2006, 03:20:36 PM
The metallic ones are about 2 years out of date though...strange. The new ones are embedded in a synthetic cartelidge coating and virtually undetectable. I am told you get a ringing in your left ear for a few moments when 'they' transmit.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 14 April 2006, 04:15:26 PM
I just got back from Oslo last week and one night there i got really drunk with colleagues and woke up the next morning in the hotel with no recollection of the last 2 hours of the night and with a very sore arm.

I can feel this object under the skin in my forearm, its about 1/2 inch square and feels metallic and for some reason i can hear distant drums and the sound of bugle calls coming from afar.

Weird.

the first part is actaully quite common in Norway
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Friday 14 April 2006, 04:26:19 PM
I just got back from Oslo last week and one night there i got really drunk with colleagues and woke up the next morning in the hotel with no recollection of the last 2 hours of the night and with a very sore arm.

I can feel this object under the skin in my forearm, its about 1/2 inch square and feels metallic and for some reason i can hear distant drums and the sound of bugle calls coming from afar.

Weird.

the first part is actaully quite common in Norway

Why is the skag good there?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Saturday 15 April 2006, 10:55:24 AM
heres another update for those interested. she sends her thanx for  those who sent best wishes and says its much appreciated!

   
This is gonna sound dreadful but i'm actually getting used to the nightlygunfire in Balata. To be fair though, we haven't experienced anything as bad as that first night.
Had a wonderful day yesterday where I actually felt useful. The farmers of the nearby village Salem needed to work on their nearby fields. We have a meeting, our co-ordinater Ayesh tells us that we'll be needed to protect the farmers as the fields come within half a kilometere of an Isreali setllements and the farmers are pretty much guaranteed to be attacked buy the settlers some of whom are (and are allowed to be) armed with guns. The surrounding mountainous countryside is breathtaking. i feel nervous becasue there are only 3 of us (internationals} which won't be enough to stop a settler attack. As we near the land that is to be ploughed, around 20 settlers walk over the brow of the hill - it's like high noon but not as feel-good or entertaining. There are far more farmers but the settlers are by far more dangerous, and if they attack a palestininan, past evidence suggests they will get away with it. In, reverse this yields a the oppsoite results with many palestininans being arrested for even argiu\uing with settlers. (this settler issue is a whole other thing which i am profoundly shocked by and which has been a huge learning curve during this trip) 'Fortunately, the army who enforce such 'appartheid' laws are also there to protect the farmers and will do so if we internationals insist upon it. There are around 15 soldiers today and we are relieved to have them there. They are rude and agressive and break international law when they insist that there is an imaginery line which the farmers must not plough beyond. It is clear whose side they're on yet they dare not allow a settler attack with an international presence. The farmers begin work. Meanwhile, we are joined by around 15 Iraeli activists from nearby kibbutz and tel aviv. It's good to work with them and a relief to leave them to argue with the settlers in hebrew. Many of us believe that the most successful resistance must come from the ground and include a united Isreali/Arabic force.........
I have a few arguments with soldiers, 'why can't i take a photograph of the settlement?' (actually I'm trying to photograph a donkey but the settlement just happens to be in the background). I'm told it isn't allowed and my camera will be taken. Meanwhile, the settlers snap freely at us for which i give them the peace rather then the victory sign!.
I help a young farmer to hoe round an olive tree - it's exhausting in the hot sun but he is polite about my poor effort! the harratz newspaper snap several photos of me for reasons unknown but i am totally embarrassed in case the farmer thinks i'm seeking a photo opportunity.
After a few hours, of traipsing up and over steep slopes to maintain broad security lunch is announced. The farmers privide a wonderful local picnic of homemade bread, tomatoes, cheese and olives and some other local vegetable dishes. It's wonderful to be in such gorgeous surroundings doing 'useful' work in such company. A few more hours, and very few settler problems later and the farmers finish. They're hugely grateful to have been able to get so much work done due to our presence. I feel a some small gratittude to, to have been able to help without having to experience teargas, live ammunition and extreme violence.
We return to the stinking, overcrowded hot camp of frightening, beautiful resistance where the fighters are hard to defend or criticise in equal measure I hope that the camp me like jenin where the fighters are hero worshipped as they are the only element of protection for the people there. I hope that Balta doesn't go this way as it is the road of no rerturn for the oyng men involved and any future peace process. Our return to the camp is troubled by rumours of an army invasion but tonight the noise of gunfire is subservient to dawn prayers broadcast udspeaker on our roof!
thanks so much for all the support think i'm coping ok but feel tired all the time.

to balance things a little...........
pleasures
olives
HUGE strawberries and fresh produce in general
local friendliness
lovely scarves!
ps sorry about typos ; )
ive heard gaza is under constant attack, but you all probably know more than me as communications are somwhat limited
ma'a hoby
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 80 on Saturday 15 April 2006, 01:41:28 PM
(http://www.palsolidarity.org/springcampaign.jpg)

For some reason, I find this picture hysterically funny.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Saturday 15 April 2006, 02:21:31 PM
Quote
For some reason, I find this picture hysterically funny.

fair enough. can i just say thats the complete opposite of what i find your avatar/pic to be. any explaination?  i could be missing something?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 80 on Saturday 15 April 2006, 02:25:51 PM
Quote
For some reason, I find this picture hysterically funny.

fair enough. can i just say thats the complete opposite of what i find your avatar/pic to be. any explaination?  i could be missing something?

Little black and white scarves. Mocked it up a while back when people were getting a bit hysterical about the "Toon Ultras".
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Saturday 15 April 2006, 02:30:11 PM
ah so its a dig at some others (being little hitlers).
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 80 on Saturday 15 April 2006, 02:32:34 PM
You can interpret it that way if you want :D No, though, that was the image conjured up in my mind by some who couldn't disassociate "Ultra" from the whole Italian Fascist/Communist thing, even went as far as to suggest that they were closet racists and would attract the like-minded from allover Tyneside, little Geordie Nazis marching off to the match, kinda thing

Here's the actual image...

(http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/8140/hitler1230pg.jpg)

Felt quite pleased with it at the time, despite it being a rubbish MSPaint job :D
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Saturday 15 April 2006, 03:17:26 PM
fair enough. i used this one on up in me house-always used to phase people.

(http://www.wintergardens.plus.com/images/popeposterbg.jpg)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Tuesday 18 April 2006, 05:53:36 PM
for anyone interested-

   
hi
thanks for all the wonderful support and comments.
Nearly all of the palestinians i have spoken too are opposed to yesterdays bombings and that's from nablus which is real hamas country and a stronghold of resistance of the occupation. At the same time I spoke to a 70 year old man this morning who also got very angry and started shaking as he said stuff like "how many people have we lost, how many children have died?". The numbers killed on the palestinian side of the occupation outway those of the israeli side yet i see very little coverage of what is going on here. Why? If anyone has any coverage of yesterdays events in Nablus and Jenin, could you mail me a link. Reuters were with us when the boy got shot next to us but i can't find any coverage of it.
i almost don't have the somach to write today and am on the verge of moving my flight home to an earlier date - as we think balata and jenin camps are going to be invaded again - just exploring my safest options really
it's frightening a lot of the time now, as for the past few days the army have been carrying out 'operations' of random arrests. To do this they need to raid many houses after which they take away many inoccent men -they don't treat them well. Ive seen horrific images of torture on a par with iraqi photos but tenfold.
Yesterday (17th)
We recieve a call at 10am to say that a house has been occupied by the army and the family held prisoner inside. We are needed to approach the house and give support to the family, and generally check that they are ok. The army are more likely to resond to 'internationals' and to allow food to be sent in. In pal people shop on a daily basis so food can run put very quickly and there is no knowing how long the amry will stay. When the children of this family's friends called for them to go to school, it was discovered that the army were in the house. The local shebab (youth) then began to pelt the house with stones.
The stone throwing is relentless and continues for about an hour. This is the only way they feel they can offer reistance and it is not alogehter futile)Meanwhile children are coming and going from schools (two of which were next to us) and we escort them to safety past the occupied house as by now the army has begun shooting live ammunition. I have to admit i was shocked that they were using live ammo. Live ammo against stone-throwing kids? Every time i cross in front of the house I think of Tom Hurndall and think '@!#$ i'm not brave enough and i don't want to die even heroically'. I'm very aware of the fact that the TV crews are about 100 metres further back than us and had bullet proof vests and helmets. We move back a little for safety and a bullet wings the wall next to the film cameraman. My mouth is very dry and i become aware that i am shaking but then quickly realise i'm cold (we'd rushed out without coats and the weather is very changeable here) and am usure where fear starts and cold begins. We moved forward again (why??) and a bullet misses my friend by centimetres which she doesn't actually notice. By now i'm feeling really shaken when suddenly i see a boy standing very close (halk a metre maybe) get hit by a bullet. He calps his neck and groans and cries but doesn't scream. He is also running, to safety as it turns out because he reaches a wall, his legs buckle. We kneel beside him but the ambulance which has been on standby, is right there and takes him away before we can help him.
Now i am really shocked, yet for some reason i feel i have to stay as the rest of my group seem braver. There is lots more ammo an some very close yet our co ordinater wants us to stay so we can check out the family if and whe the army evacuate the house. Tear gas is fired, shebab are everywhere, i am trying to ring the press. Generally, there is chaos and i begin to realise that i have lost my focus and am thinking only about about injury and my family. I decide to leave and two people (including one of our guides achmed) accompany me. After 5 hours of dodging bullets, it is only when we are back in the camp do I feel safe again.
when the group returns i heare that another chiold has been shot beside thew (also an innocent bystander) and our co-ordinater took him to hospital in a taxi. I haven't heard today how both boys are. We are then asked for volunteers to go to jenin to the suicide bombers family house to help prevent or at leats witness collective punishments which the army usually carry out. We hear from the mayor of the village that the whole village is scared and would like us to go in solidarity. I volunter because i feel i must.........
'luckily' this morning we are told it is too late because the father and brother of the family have been taken by the army in the night. No doubt i will soon hear of their fate.
I am aware that there have not been enough palestininan deaths as punishment for the tel aviv crime.
Today there is some semblance of 'normality' and the checkpoints are open again. yet the army have occupied a shopping 'mall' (due to be opened in a month) right in the centre of nablus. It is in a very corwded place. shebab can't reach the high building with stones so they burn tyres, the army is using live ammo from a 6th or 7th floor wondow (i can hear it as i write and i jump at every round). Absolute madness..........
If you read anything in the press about the shot youths being armed or looking in anyway supsicious it is a lie. I am an eye witness to malicious wounding (maybe murder) yet no case will be brought...
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 19 April 2006, 12:27:04 PM
you're braver than the rest of us Walker

FFS take care
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Wednesday 19 April 2006, 12:48:41 PM
Alex

"Isn't Rehagel an American who supports AC Milan, Juve and Barcelona? 'Nuff said really."

You found the answer to that question quick, did he send you a pm to tell you? this "Rehagel" member, his name is similar to mine, which is strange because on the old forum I was Gattuso and another member was named gasuso, so maybe it's him.


Stick to Islamaphobia mate, since comedy clearly isn't your strongest suit.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 19 April 2006, 01:18:13 PM
Comedy - Rehhagel......... 

Nooooooooo

Does not compute

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Thursday 20 April 2006, 03:23:05 PM
Comedy - Rehhagel......... 

Nooooooooo

Does not compute




A probable example...... "How many Muslims does it take to change a  household lightbulb?"

Answer - "None............. Muslims, terrorists being the more appropriate word, still live in mud brick huts."
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Thursday 20 April 2006, 05:35:06 PM
another update

the army were in town again today firing rubber abd live ammo. I saw one of the resistance firing a handgun at a jeep. Our co-ordinator was furious and described it as pointless and dangerous. Not that he is completely against armed resistance but to fire a gun amongst civilians without care is more of an army activity.
I elected to stand back today, whenever i hear shooting now i jump so i was media contact. There were around 30 jeep and a bulldozer near the old city. It wasn't only the shebab throwing stones - it was nearlyevery man and boy some in suits and, get this, the police were throwing them too - made my day!
We then visited a representative from the governers office to discuss actions for the summer campaign. This woman is in high office, in all the danger and chaos it is still good to be in place where the resistance is so strong at every level. Ive heard from my colleaguied that in Hebron, they are all but defeated having been terrorised by settlers and the army to a pint they can't fight back from.
But yesterday we went to a wedding. Someone who knew our co-ordinater just heard we were in the city and invited us. It was amazing. I was made so welcome and from people who my government has helped oppress. It was good to see some normality, love and hapiness. The women danced first, then the men, after which the women made us dance with the men. This is not normally allowed but it seems an exception could be made for us. Think they all just wanted to have a good laugh at our attempts at arabic dancing!
So it's not all bad!
we're not sure what the army are doing but think they might be building up for a full invasion of Nablus - hope
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: walkerboy on Monday 24 April 2006, 05:12:39 PM
update from the lass-

thanks once again for the support but te admiration is misplaced - this has been my peronal journey as much as anything. But thanks anyway!
Maroud and sameh's stories
we meet maroud, the sister of a martyr 17 year old sameh in the internet cafe in nablus. She spots some photos of her dead brother on our photgrapher's computer. A bried and urgent exchange follows where she obtains copies and invites us to her family home. She wants us to understand the impact of sameh's murder on the family. We understand very quickly their trauma, they seem broken. Samehs mother can't speak but looks at us as if searching for answers. His father moves between calm and anger. Maroud (a softly spken intelligent woman) tells us she just wnts sameh's story to be heard in the western world. I don't have the heart to tell her that the western press isn't interested, that maybe they think life is cheap here compared to Isreal, America or 'the west'.
It is very hard to hear their story, they have lost their beautiful blue-eyed smiling child and their lives will never be the same again. The only thing that will help is that he didn't die for nothing - but maybe he did. A family friend shows us footage of Sameh's shooting shot by Asia tv. The footage coroborates the family's version of events. I watch in horror as I see sameh walk acoss a field after his school had closed following an army invasion. As he nears an army jeep i see him raise both arms in the air to show he is unarmed. Then I hear a shot and see him fall to the ground. Further footage shows his blood soaked broken head. I choke back tears - they won't help the family and have no business in this house
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 5 May 2006, 05:10:57 PM
Didn't want to start a fresh thread.  Just nice to see the Knesset has standards...

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article362153.ece

Quote
Israeli demands execution of pro-Hamas MPs
By Donald Macintyre
Published: 05 May 2006

A right-wing Israeli party leader yesterday called for the execution of Israeli Arab politicians who had had contacts with Hamas or failed to celebrate the state's independence day, overshadowing the swearing-in of the new coalition government.

Avigdor Lieberman, leader of the mainly Russian immigrant party Yisrael Beieinu, told the Israeli parliament that Arab members who met with Hamas should be tried for "co-operating with the enemy".

Mr Lieberman, who failed to reach a deal to join the new coalition government of Ehud Olmert which was sworn in yesterday, declared: "The Second World War ended with the Nuremberg trials and the execution of the Nazi leadership. Not only them, but also those who collaborated with them. I hope that will also be the fate of the collaborators in this house."

Outraged Arab Knesset members warned that the comments of Mr Lieberman, whose party was one of the surprise successes of the March elections, securing 12 seats, would lead to violence against Arab citizens of Israel. "You are a racist," the Labour member Raleb Majadele told the Moldova-born party leader. "You do not accept the decisions of the nation. You are two-faced."

The exchanges cast a shadow over a session of the Knesset in which the new Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, sealed the formation of his Kadima-led coalition with Labour, the ultra-orthodox party Shas, and the new Pensioners' Party.

Mr Olmert restated his plan to move tens of thousands of Jewish West Bank settlers to settlement blocks in most cases nearer to - but still on the other side of - the 1967 eastern border of Israel; blocks which he intends to annex under the "convergence plan" which was at the centre of his election campaign.

Warning that the maintenance of settlements throughout the West Bank "creates an intermingling of populations which is impossible to separate, and which endangers the state of Israel as a Jewish state", Mr Olmert made clear his determination to establish borders for Israel which would ensure a Jewish majority. Mr Olmert said: "The achievements of the settlement movement in main concentrations will forever be an integral part of the sovereign state of Israel."

Mr Olmert cannot yet be sure of commanding a Knesset majority in favour of his proposal, and Shas entered the coalition without signing up to the ideal of unilateral "disengagement" which Mr Olmert has said will happen if he cannot negotiate it with the Palestinian leadership.

* A Palestinian taxi driver, Zakhariah Daragmeh, 37, was shot and killed by Israeli troops after he advanced towards a checkpoint near Nablus to pick up passengers. The army was reported to have designated the area where he was shot a prohibited zone.

The last part says it all about the reactions of their army, too.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 5 May 2006, 06:37:52 PM
Ah! The return of one of my favourite threads.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Saturday 6 May 2006, 12:36:32 AM
Wondered why it was so quiet................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ChezGiven on Friday 23 June 2006, 01:32:43 PM
This should set this one off again tbh

http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1634
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 23 June 2006, 01:38:40 PM
Or if you're too lazy to read, then this:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5359685624521924184&q=The+Philosophy+of+Zionism+%26+Israel+-
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Chrissy Bee on Friday 23 June 2006, 01:58:52 PM
Or if you're too lazy to read, then this:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5359685624521924184&q=The+Philosophy+of+Zionism+%26+Israel+-

It has to be said, that is a VARY GOOD VIDEO.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 23 June 2006, 02:05:11 PM
:lol:

Didn't notice that bit. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Ridzuan on Friday 23 June 2006, 02:20:53 PM
The real dangers to world peace right now is Iraq,Iran and N.Korea.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ChezGiven on Friday 23 June 2006, 02:25:53 PM
The real dangers to world peace right now is Iran, Angola and S.Korea.

Aye if they qualify there will be a f***ing riot...
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 23 June 2006, 02:30:38 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ChezGiven on Friday 23 June 2006, 03:37:56 PM
Its a whole new angle on the 9/11 conspiracy this zionism s***. Not sure if i'm looking at anti-semitic propapanda tbh.....
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 23 June 2006, 03:41:41 PM
Like I said, Zionism and Judaism aren't the same thing, just Zionism has hijacked it for its own purposes.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 23 June 2006, 10:52:00 PM
Indeed - Judaism is a religion whereas Zionism is a Nationalist agenda

The Zionists have sucessfully hijacked the religion to the point where they claim that anyone who criticises them is "anti-semitic" and/or "anti jewish"
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 24 June 2006, 12:01:51 AM
Correct. bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 26 June 2006, 01:36:58 AM
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1095841.ece

Quote
Olmert: Israeli lives worth more than Palestinian ones
By Donald Macintyre in Khan Yunis, Gaza Strip
Published: 23 June 2006

Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, expressed "deep regret" for army operations that have killed 14 Palestinian civilians in Gaza in just nine days but said the lives of Israeli citizens threatened by Qassam attacks were "even more important".

The deaths in three separate missile attacks overshadowed Mr Olmert's first meeting with the Palestinian President, Mahmoud Abbas, since taking office, as grieving relatives gathered here to mourn the two latest civilian victims, Fatima Ahmed, a 37-year-old pregnant mother of two small children, and her brother Zakaria, 45.

The siblings were killed by an Israeli missile which had been launched in the second bungled attempt to assassinate militants in less than 24 hours. The attack wounded 13 other members of the family, including six children, and partly wrecked the house in which they had all been concluding a celebratory meal in honour of Mr Ahmed, who had been on a week-long visit from Saudi Arabia to see his 83-year-old mother.

A pile of fallen masonry and a gaping hole in the house's straw roof were still visible yesterday at the house, about 20 metres from the main Salahadin north-south Gaza road at the entry to Khan Yunis.

The Israeli Defence Forces say that the attack early on Wednesday evening was aimed at a pick-up truck carrying members of militant Palestinian Resistance Committees. Witnesses said a six-inch crater on the other side of the road from the house was from a second missile.

The dead victim's sister-in-law, Amtiaz Ahmed, 47, described how she had been in the kitchen preparing coffee and tea at the end of the meal when the missile struck. Displaying a dozen shallow cuts on the back and arms of her 15-month-old nephew, Ahmed Sufian Ahmed, which she said were from shrapnel, Mrs Ahmed exclaimed: "Is he a terrorist? Does he have a rocket-propelled grenade? It is the Zionists who are the terrorists."

Three children were killed in an assassination attempt designed to curb Qassam rocket attacks from Gaza on Israel on Tuesday.

Mr Olmert said last night in Caesarea: "I am deeply sorry for the residents of Gaza, but the lives, security and well-being of the residents of Sderot [the Israeli border town which has borne the brunt of Qassam attacks] is even more important. I reject the attacks on the IDF and its commanders. No one is more dedicated or more cautious, and will continue to be so in the future."

Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, this week called on Israel to ensure its responses were "proportionate and do not put civilians at grave risk ". Almost three times as many Palestinian civilians have been killed in Gaza in the past nine days as Israeli civilians in Sderot killed by Qassam rockets in the past five years.

Maj-Gen Eliezer Shakedi, the Israeli air force commander entrusted with investigating how the civilian deaths occurred, told Army Radio: "We have to make a great effort to try everything possible to avoid hitting civilians." But he added: "We have to fight terrorism and we are doing it... This is... the most accurate and the best possible option without launching a broad and very significant [ground] operation."

The dead woman's husband, Nidal Wahba, 39, said the couple's 18-month-old son Khaled was in hospital after having emergency surgery for injuries to his head. With heavy irony, he added: "He has been shooting rockets at Amir Peretz", the Israeli Defence Minister who lives in Sderot.

But Mr Wahba, who works for an aluminium fabrication firm, said he wanted to see an end to violence on both sides. "We are against all this. We don't want to teach our children violence. I wouldn't like to see this happen to Israeli people."

The attack came amid signs of progress in talks between Fatah and Hamas designed to reach an agreement on a two-state solution to the conflict with Israel. Mr Wahba said: "There are people in Gaza who want to make war against Israel and people who want to make peace. I want the Palestinians to have one goal and that should be peace."

Of the missile strike which killed his wife and brother-in-law, he added: " I hope it will be the last one."
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 26 June 2006, 07:44:41 AM
Look sliek the Israelis will make targets of EVERY palestinian politician if they kill that hostage

talk about disproportionate response.................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 26 June 2006, 07:54:00 AM
looking bad this morning Parky..................   
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 26 June 2006, 10:43:51 AM
How so?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Monday 26 June 2006, 11:21:25 AM
Ok aint posted in this for ages but nevermind

Iraq - Yes they are a danger bunch of arabs shooting each other in the street.
Iran - They have no WMD's so cant see the threat
N.Korea - Some WMD's not sure if they would use them possible threat, but surrounded by China and the s*** wud hit the fan with USA if they did anything.

Now Israel they have wmds a staye of the art army and american backing. Also if they attacked one of their neighbours no-one would come to stop them.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 26 June 2006, 11:26:58 AM
Infact I beleive behing the scenes they are often encouraged to interfere with their neighbours by 'friendly' govt.
Also they are pretty active in America who they try and manipulate the whole time.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5133.htm

200 or so Israeli's deported after 9/11
Private Israeli phone company who do the billing data for a large parts of America are suspected of using this phone info for its own purposes and spying.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Monday 26 June 2006, 05:09:11 PM
Ok aint posted in this for ages but nevermind

Iraq - Yes they are a danger bunch of arabs shooting each other in the street.
Iran - They have no WMD's so cant see the threat
N.Korea - Some WMD's not sure if they would use them possible threat, but surrounded by China and the s*** wud hit the fan with USA if they did anything.

Now Israel they have wmds a staye of the art army and american backing. Also if they attacked one of their neighbours no-one would come to stop them.

Britain - has WMD, has a long history of invading countries and opressing the native populace, is still invading countries and torturing civilians, is a member of the UN security council, has the backing from the almighty superpower the US.
i say we blow the lot of you tbh.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Monday 26 June 2006, 06:37:18 PM
Britain is the worst, did you know that the recent riot in the World Cup was not related to football? MI5 were dressed as footballers to attack Germans for not supporting the war. It's all at www.conspiracytheory.com.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 26 June 2006, 06:44:37 PM
MI6 (exterior) have never stopped attacking Germans dear. :roll:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Monday 26 June 2006, 06:48:19 PM
No it was definately M15 as no one would suspect them for getting involved in matters from outside the country.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Tuesday 27 June 2006, 10:54:41 AM
Wrong Rehhangel - they can't buy tickets to leave the country - won't be able to get it through their expenses
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Tuesday 27 June 2006, 10:55:16 AM
Ok aint posted in this for ages but nevermind

Iraq - Yes they are a danger bunch of arabs shooting each other in the street.
Iran - They have no WMD's so cant see the threat
N.Korea - Some WMD's not sure if they would use them possible threat, but surrounded by China and the s*** wud hit the fan with USA if they did anything.

Now Israel they have wmds a staye of the art army and american backing. Also if they attacked one of their neighbours no-one would come to stop them.

Britain - has WMD, has a long history of invading countries and opressing the native populace, is still invading countries and torturing civilians, is a member of the UN security council, has the backing from the almighty superpower the US.
i say we blow the lot of you tbh.

ahhhh

but we left the countries we adminstered ........................................ 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 27 June 2006, 07:36:48 PM
"Administered."

Nice euphamism. :wink:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Tuesday 27 June 2006, 11:51:59 PM
Gonna be a war by this time tomorrow, if not sooner.

Bad news.

:(
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Tuesday 27 June 2006, 11:53:08 PM
War?  Steam-rollered in minutes, just a resumption of the occupation.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Tuesday 27 June 2006, 11:56:35 PM
War?  Steam-rollered in minutes, just a resumption of the occupation.

That's a battle you're talking about, the first battle of a new war, I think.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:01:00 AM
What war? :(
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:05:08 AM
What war? :(

You know about that Israeli soldier that is being held by Hamas?

Well the Israelis have moved a load of tanks to the border and have carried out three airstrikes (last I heard) destroying two bridges leading into/out of Gaza City.

Jeremy Bowen on Newsnight said, and I quote: "Something's happening" then pulled a rather stupid looking sad face.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:08:48 AM
"Breaking News" on News 24, apparently Israeli tanks "on the move".
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:09:58 AM
These are situations for the U.N. they really are. It makes me sick the way they stand by and let Israel carry on. :wullie:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:11:48 AM
doesnt a war includes 2 or more armies? i dont think the army of mohammad counts.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:12:25 AM
It's remarkable, a rogue group do something, so they take it out on the nation.  They, though, blow up some random civilians on a beach, and are free to carry on, nothing done to them. 

To be fair Parky, it's the US blocking any movement the UN council tries to make that lets them go free.  Although, if there was genuine will from them, they'd do something themselves.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:12:48 AM
These are situations for the U.N. they really are. It makes me sick the way they stand by and let Israel carry on. :wullie:

There needs to be changes made to the UN charter to take the emphasis away from preserving Nation States and towards protecting individuals.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:15:15 AM
doesnt a war includes 2 or more armies? i dont think the army of mohammad counts.

War on Terror?

War on Drugs?

War of the Worlds?

The definition of War has changed somewhat in recent years.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:16:14 AM
It's remarkable, a rogue group do something, so they take it out on the nation.  They, though, blow up some random civilians on a beach, and are free to carry on, nothing done to them. 

To be fair Parky, it's the US blocking any movement the UN council tries to make that lets them go free. Although, if there was genuine will from them, they'd do something themselves.

actually it wasnt the israeli army that killed the family. the shells didnt match the shells israel uses and its suspected that it was a mortar the palestinians was shooting.

now that family that was having dinner and hit by a stray ... ehhh ... missle, is a different story of course.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:16:46 AM
Interesting idea Indigo. Something we should look at.

Iran really need to get cracking with their rickety old nuclear weopan you have to drop from a baloon. :P
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:17:22 AM
It's remarkable, a rogue group do something, so they take it out on the nation.  They, though, blow up some random civilians on a beach, and are free to carry on, nothing done to them. 

To be fair Parky, it's the US blocking any movement the UN council tries to make that lets them go free. Although, if there was genuine will from them, they'd do something themselves.

actually it wasnt the israeli army that killed the family. the shells didnt match the shells israel uses and its suspected that it was a mortar the palestinians was shooting.

now that family that was having dinner and hit by a stray ... ehhh ... missle, is a different story of course.

Er, that's bollocks.  They did match, unless just about every report and article I've read over the weeks was just talking s****.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:19:55 AM
really? cuz every report ive been reading said the army is suspected of killing them since they were firing into the general area. where the palestinians where firing as well. another great reporting by the bbc and the guardian?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:21:14 AM
Goashem Israel is evil. Why are you in denial about this?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:23:54 AM
israel is just as evil as any country out there. well maybe except for canada and switzerland.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 12:25:20 AM
The state of Isreal was born out of an abject failure of the UN (league of nations) to resolve the centuries old Arab/Jewish situation

There never existed an Arab state of Palestine, no-one was conquered in the creation of Isreal, they just stood up for themselves when everyone else washed their hands of them
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 08:44:04 AM
"There never existed an Arab state of Palestine, no-one was conquered in the creation of Isreal, they just stood up for themselves when everyone else washed their hands of them"...Itoon

Rubbish.

"Israel has received more direct aid from the United States since World War II than any other country, but the amounts for the first half of this period were relatively small. Between 1949 and 1973, the U.S. provided Israel with an average of about $122 million a year, a total of $3.1 billion (and actually more than $1 billion of that was loans for military equipment in 1971-73) . Prior to 1971, Israel received a total of only $277 million in military aid, all in the form of loans as credit sales. The bulk of the economic aid was also lent to Israel...."


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


"The category of direct bi-lateral aid alone is staggering. The House of Representatives has appropriated $2.04 billion in military aid to Israel for next year (up from $1.98 billion this year) in addition to $840 million in economic support funds. The total amount of US aid of this sort has been constant, at around $3 billion, for many years, but there is a current ten year plan to phase out economic aid and provide corresponding increases in military aid.
 
Israel is the single largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid nearly one-third of the total direct bi-lateral aid. If we exclude Egypt whose disproportionate share of aid came as a result of agreements made with Israel at Camp David, and Columbia, which receives enormous aid to prosecute a brutal military campaign allegedly aimed at drug trafficking, Israel receives more than all of Latin America, the Caribbean, and Africa combined. That is, one of the richest countries in the world, a country of around 6 million people, receives more aid than two entire continents including some of the poorest regions in the world. This aid amounts to around $500 per year for every Israeli citizen and more if we exclude the Palestinian citizens of Israel who receive few if any benefits from the money (none of this aid goes directly to Palestinians living in the occupied territories). To take one other comparison, the US has put forward less than $300 million to fight AIDS in Africa. So roughly 10 times more money goes to Israel than goes to fight the greatest plague the earth has seen since the middle ages.
 
Other aid to Israel is harder to calculate. Much is buried in DoD (Department of Defense) budgets and some costs such as lost interest from early disbursement, forgiven loans, etc. is difficult to calculate. Nonetheless, many estimates put total aid at near $5.5 billion. One should not be confident of any particular number here, but there are clear categories of aid not included in the foreign aid budget: research and development support for weapons systems, joint military training, loan guarantees, loans that are later forgiven, gifts of military hardware, access to US military intelligence, special grants for refugee resettlement, and early disbursement of funds.
This last category is not widely known. There are at least two ways in which Israeli aid is different from that of any other country. First, it is transferred to Israel in one lump sum at the beginning of each fiscal year. Other countries’ aid is disbursed throughout the year. This, of course, costs the US interest on the money. Second, Israel needn’t account for specific purchases. Most countries receive aid for very specific purposes and must account for how it is spent. Israel is allowed to place US aid into its general fund, effectively eliminating any distinctions between types of aid."

Israel usually receives roughly one third of the entire foreign aid budget, despite the fact that Israel comprises less than .001 of the worldÿs population and already has one of the world's higher per capita incomes. In other words, Israel, a country of approximately 6 million people, is currently receiving more U.S. aid than all of Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean combined when you take out Egypt and Colombia.


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




The aid pipeline................

There are at least three ways in which aid to Israel is different from that of any other country. First, since 1982, U.S. aid to Israel has been transferred in one lump sum at the beginning of each fiscal year, which immediately begins to collect interest in U.S. banks. Aid that goes to other countries is disbursed throughout the year in quarterly installments.

Second, Israel is not required to account for specific purchases. Most countries receive aid for very specific purposes and must account for how it is spent. Israel is allowed to place US aid into its general fund, effectively eliminating any distinctions between types of aid. Therefore, U.S. tax-payers are helping to fund an illegal occupation, the expansion of colonial-settlement projects, and gross human rights violations against the Palestinian civilian population.

A third difference is the sheer amount of aid the U.S. gives to Israel, unparalleled in the history of U.S. foreign policy. Israel usually receives roughly one third of the entire foreign aid budget, despite the fact that Israel comprises less than .001 of the worldÿs population and already has one of the world's higher per capita incomes. In other words, Israel, a country of approximately 6 million people, is currently receiving more U.S. aid than all of Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean combined when you take out Egypt and Colombia.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 09:40:31 AM
It's remarkable, a rogue group do something, so they take it out on the nation. They, though, blow up some random civilians on a beach, and are free to carry on, nothing done to them.

To be fair Parky, it's the US blocking any movement the UN council tries to make that lets them go free. Although, if there was genuine will from them, they'd do something themselves.

actually it wasnt the israeli army that killed the family. the shells didnt match the shells israel uses and its suspected that it was a mortar the palestinians was shooting.

now that family

hat was having dinner and hit by a stray ... ehhh ... missle, is a different story of course.

the israeli navy were active in the area I understand
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 10:59:17 AM
Ok what i dot get one of your soilders gets kidnapped. So you blow up a bridge destroy the power station as that will obv not p*ss of the locals. Tbh i hope the isrealsis go in and get shot to s*** and the arabs push them out. I dont like seeing war and people dying but they need to be taught that they cant p*ss about with palestine as they have more tanks.

p.s yes i dont like israel.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 01:33:14 PM
Anyone else think that Israel's sudden over-reaction, and attack on Gaza is to try and stop Hamas from finally recognising Israel?  All seems very convenient in timing.

Quote
Hamas takes step towards recognition of Israel
By Donald Macintyre in Gaza
Published: 28 June 2006

Hamas bowed to the combination of an ultimatum from the Palestinian President, Mahmoud Abbas, and relentless international pressure last night by committing itself for the first time to a two-state solution of the conflict with Israel.

In an important step towards the recognition of Israel sought from Hamas by the international community, the Islamic faction agreed to a deal intended to pave the way for a new coalition government which Mr Abbas hopes will bolster his standing as a potential partner for peace negotiations with Israel.

Faced with Mr Abbas's threat of a referendum next month on agreement to a two-state solution, Hamas agreed to a document based on that drawn up by a group of Fatah and Hamas prisoners which envisages a "final" settlement of the conflict with Israel. This is based on two states along the borders which existed before the 1967 occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

The deal, initialled by negotiators yesterday and presented later to Mr Abbas and the Hamas Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh, provides for a new " national unity" government including Fatah, long committed to a two-state solution. Mr Abbas hopes the deal will start meeting the conditions set by the international community for lifting its economic blockade.

The potentially historic deal embracing all the Palestinian factions, except Islamic Jihad, was the most positive development in an otherwise deteriorating atmosphere of crisis. Israeli warplanes late last night attacked two bridges in central Gaza in the first military response to last Sunday's seizure by militants ­including members of Hamas's military wing of an Israeli soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit, 19.

The Israel Defence Forces said its missiles had been launched at the main north-south road in Gaza to limit any efforts by Cpl Shalit's captors to move him north. As military aircraft flew repeatedly over Gaza City early today, the airforce attacked a power station in central Gaza with missiles in order to cut electricity to much of the northern Strip, including Gaza City.

The army said artillery rounds were also fired at open areas at the southern end of Gaza. The attacks came as police investigated claims by one of the militant factions involved in Cpl Shalit's abduction, the Palestinian Resistance Committees, that they had also seized a teenager from a Jewish settlement in the West Bank. Eliyahu Asheri, 18, from the Itamar settlement, near Nablus, has been missing since Sunday.

As the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, called for time to be given to a diplomatic solution, Mr Abbas urged Israel not to send the army into Gaza.

But Israeli troops were last night seen crossing the Gaza border after the Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, told the Knesset: "We are preparing for a broad and forceful action drawing on all means at our disposal."

The immediate effect of yesterday's deal between the factions is likely to be internal preventing the threat of a Palestinian armed civil conflict rather than external. But it was praised by the EU as a positive first step. The US said it wanted to see more details of the final document. Both emphasised that they still required Hamas to make it clear that it recognises Israel and renounces violence.

The prisoners' document on which the deal is based also paves the way for Hamas to join the Palestinian Liberation Organisation whose charter in stark contrast to that of Hamas recognises Israel. But instead of renouncing violence, it suggests that armed resistance should be concentrated in the occupied territories rather than on the Israeli side of the 1967 green line.

Walid Awad, of Mr Abbas's office, said the President was "very pleased" by the outcome of yesterday's final negotiating meeting in Gaza. He added: " This is what the President has been working for, for a long time."

The leader of one of the smaller factions to sign the agreement, Qais Samarrai, of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which was the first to propose a two-state solution a generation ago, said it was " more important" than the decision of the PLO in 1988 to move towards recognition of Israel. Referring to amendments which Hamas succeeded in securing in the document, Sami Abu Zuhri, the Hamas spokesman in Gaza, declared that the document would allow Hamas to stick by its "agenda of resistance" to Israel.

He added: "The document included a clear clause referring to the non-recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation."

The gloss put on the deal by Hamas elements is likely to be seized on by Israel as evidence reinforcing the earlier dismissal of the prisoners' document by Mr Olmert because of its failure among other things ­explicitly to recognise Israel and renounce all violence.

Three months of rising tensions

* 29 March Abbas swears in Hamas government headed by Prime Minister Ismail Haniyehr.

* 7 April US and EU suspend aid to try to force Hamas to recognise Israel's right to exist.

* 9 April Israel severs all direct contact with the government.

* 17 April Islamic Jihad bomber kills 11 people in Tel Aviv. Hamas calls it self-defence.

* 20 May Palestinian intelligence chief, an Abbas ally, hurt in assassination attempt.

* 7 June Hamas agrees to pull its militia off Gaza streets.

* 9 June Hamas calls off 16-month-old truce, blaming Israeli forces for killing 10 in Gaza.

* 10 June Abbas sets referendum on statehood proposal for 26 July. Hamas rejects it.

* 25 June Palestinian militants kill two Israeli soldiers and abduct Corporal Gilad Shalit.

* 27 June As more than 3,000 Israeli troops and armour surround Gaza, Palestinian militants begin erecting barricades.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: HTT on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 03:15:38 PM
The real danger to world peace is public sector IT systems...
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 03:52:56 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 03:57:13 PM
"There never existed an Arab state of Palestine, no-one was conquered in the creation of Isreal, they just stood up for themselves when everyone else washed their hands of them"...Itoon

Rubbish.


yep, proved me wrong there tbh  :roll:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 04:04:56 PM
......and I suppose Israel has always existed? :roll:

My main counter argument was against this idea that they had no help as you infer.

Tomnufc put it well earlier in this thread:
Firstly, we have to take our share of the blame. After world war 2, the Jewish people understandably felt the need for a Jewish homeland from which they would be protected from persecution and atrocities against them The natural choice was Palestine, which as Israel had been the Jewish homeland in Biblical times. But that was 2000 years before. In that time, most left Palestine for Europe and Russia (and later to America from these areas). Palestine had long been Arabic/Muslim. Since World War 1, it had been a British Mandate - ie, our responsibility. When the Jewish homeland was proposed, we just handed it over to them without any regard for the Palestinians, who had their country just snatched away from them. As if that wasn't bad enough, the settlers went in heavy handed right from the off, and when the British army stepped in, to protect the Palestinians, they took pot shots at us as well.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 04:18:32 PM
Historical perspective from the Jewish pov.....It too has its merits.

"Zionism did not spring full blown from a void with the creation of the Zionist movement in 1897. Jews had maintained a connection with Palestine, both actual and spiritual. This continued even after the Bar Kochba revolt in 135, when large numbers of Jews were exiled from Roman Palestine, the remains of their ancient national home. The Jewish community in Palestine revived. Under Muslim rule, it is estimated to have numbered as many as 300,000 prior to the Crusades, about 1000 AD. The Crusaders killed most of the Jewish population of Palestine or forced them into exile, so that only about 1,000 families remained after the reconquest of Palestine by Saladin. The Jewish community in Palestine waxed and waned with the vicissitudes of conquest and economic hardship. A trickle of Jews came because of love of Israel, and were sometimes encouraged by invitations by different Turkish rulers to displaced European Jews to settle in Tiberias and Hebron. At different times there were sizeable Jewish communities in Tiberias, Safed, Hebron and Jerusalem, and numbers of Jews living in Nablus and Gaza. A few original Jews remained in the town of Peki'in, families that had lived there continuously since ancient times. Jewish History. History of Zionism,Zion, anti-Semitism, Zionism on the Web, Zionism and the Creation of Israel

In the Diaspora, religion became the medium for preserving Jewish culture and Jewish ties to their ancient land. Jews prayed several times a day for the rebuilding of the temple, celebrated agricultural feasts and called for rain according to the seasons of ancient Israel, even in the farthest reaches of Russia. The ritual plants of Sukkoth were imported from the Holy Land at great expense. A Holy-Land centered tradition persisted in Diaspora thought and writing. This tradition may be called "proto-nationalist" because there was no nationalism in the modern sense in those times. It was not only religious or confined to hoping for messianic redemption, but consisted of longing for the land of Israel. It is preserved in the poetry of Yehuda Halevi, a Spanish Jewish physician, poet and philosopher, who himself immigrated to "the Holy Land" and died there in 1141.

From time to time, small numbers of Jews came to settle in Palestine in answer to rabbinical or Messianic calls, or fleeing persecution in Europe. Beginning about 1700, groups of followers led by rabbis, reached Palestine from Europe and the Ottoman empire with various programs. For example, Rabbi Yehuda Hehasid and his followers settled in Jerusalem about 1700, but the rabbi died suddenly, and eventually, an Arab mob, angered over unpaid debts, destroyed the synagogue the group had built and banned all European (Ashkenazy) Jews from Jerusalem. Rabbis Luzatto and Ben-Attar led a relatively large immigration about 1740. Other groups and individuals came from Lithuania and Turkey and different countries in Eastern Europe."
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 04:20:30 PM
none of what you posted refers to anything around the time of Isreal's creation. The bulk of the aide was during the cold war when Isreal was a major US ally, and now, when the new world order is America vs The Arab World. Not surprising that they are going to be best mates with Israel now is it?

As soon as Isreal declared independance it was invaded by all of its neighbours. Is it any surprise that they have more than a passing interest in defence spending?

The hotly contested so-called occupied territories were originally intended to be part of the FIRST Arab state (for Palestinians) complementing a newly created Jewish state, as defined in a United Nations plan, which was supported by the Jews, but voted against by all Arab UN members, who subsequently invaded those lands, and occupied them for 19 years without any effort at unification of them into a Palestinian state, a policy that goes hand in hand with the fact that no Arab state has ever given a s*** about so called Arab refugees of Palestine
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 04:30:44 PM
The U.N. take on things:   


General Assembly Resolution 181 (1947)
     The General Assembly approves by a 33 to 13 vote a UN plan to partition Palestine into Arab and Jewish states, with Jerusalem under international control. Despite its rejection by the Arab states, the resolution presages the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine.

     General Assembly Resolution 194 (1948)
     Passed after the 1948 war, UNGAR 194 establishes a "Palestine Conciliation Commission" to act as mediator between the two   sides. It also states that all refugees must be given the choice of returning to their homes or receiving compensation for their lost property.

     Security Council Resolution 242 (1967)
     UNSCR 242, passed following the 1967 war, calls for the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories (West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, and Sinai Peninsula), in exchange for a peace settlement ("land for peace") and forms the basis of all subsequent attempts to negotiate a peace settlement.
 
     Security Council Resolution 338 (1973)
     Called for a ceasefire following the 1973 Yom Kippur War.
     
     General Assembly Resolution 3236 (1974)
     Reaffirmed the right of Palestinians to national sovereignty as well as their return to their homes and property. The resolution also
recognized the resolution of the Palestinian crisis as integral to peace in the Middle East, appealed to states for their support of
Palestinian rights, and requested that the UN Secretary General establish contacts with the PLO. 
     
     General Assembly Resolution 3379 (1975)
     UNGAR 3379 equated Zionism to racism after Recalling UNGAR 1904 which aimed to eliminate all forms of racism and UNGAR 3151 G which condemned the alliance between South African racism and Zionism. It also considered the sentiments and declarations of various international organizations.
     
     Security Council Resolution 465 (1980)
     Requested Israel to rescind settlement activity in the Palestinian territories and asked member states not to assist Israel in its settlement program.
     
     Security Council Resolution 681 (1990)
     Deplored Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians and urged Israel to abide by provisions set forth by the Geneva Convention in regards to the protection of civilians in time of war.
     
     Security Council Resolution 1402 (2002)
     After the escalation of violence in Palestine and the Israeli attack upon the headquarters of the President of the Palestinian Authority UNSCR 1402 called for a cessation to all acts of violence, an immediate ceasefire, and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian cities.


The main stumbling block has been Israel's refusal to include the return of 150,000 Palastinian refugees.


General Assembly Resolution 194 (1948)
     Passed after the 1948 war, UNGAR 194 establishes a "Palestine Conciliation Commission" to act as mediator between the two   sides. It also states that all refugees must be given the choice of returning to their homes or receiving compensation for their lost property.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 04:55:57 PM
As far back as 1931 when it was a British mandate and before it was handed over to the U.N. - East and West of the Jordan river was divided by us and one side became Jordan and the other side was known as 'The Palestine mandate' with summat like a 90% Arab popoulation. This began to grow with European Jews fleeing to Israel which began in earnest in 1936/37 or so. But there are no accurate no's for this.
So yes it was a predominantly Arab/Palestinian homeland no one denies this.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 04:59:32 PM
so basically, after Israel was created following a UN resolution, with complete agreement on their side about provision of an Arab state for Palestinians, and after all Arab states rejected the plan and invaded, and after they were repelled by Israel with the loss of 1% of its population, and after which most of the original Arab lands were now in the control of Jordan, Egypt and Syria who did nothing for their Palestinian brothers, Israel is expected to give a s*** about Palestinian refugees from the bits of land they clawed back from their invaders?

Has anyone ever compensated all the Jewish refugees from Arab states? By various accounts, between 758,000 and 866,000 Mizrahi Jews were expelled, fled or emigrated from Arab Middle East and North Africa between 1945 and 1956. A Jewish study carried out in 2003 estimated the amount of the confiscated property at $1 billion

A few minor points about resolution 194:

-All the Arab member states of the UN voted against it
-The term Palestinian refugee as used by UNRWA was never formally defined by the United Nations
-Unlike Security Council resolutions, General Assembly Resolutions are not binding and have no effect in International Law
-The resolution's text is actually "refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours"

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 05:08:43 PM
I see you are ignoring Security council resolution 242. bluecool.gif

Of course they don't want Palestinian refugees to return, it is Israel after all that is playing the numbers game with Jewish settlements.

The U.N. is owned by the U.S. I have no illusions about them coming to Palestine's aid.

You don't need to lecture me on Jews and their prediliction for compensation payments. I live in Germany who is still paying vast sums, so vast infact that they don't publish the figures anymore.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 05:11:25 PM
As far back as 1931 when it was a British mandate and before it was handed over to the U.N. - East and West of the Jordan river was divided by us and one side became Jordan and the other side was known as 'The Palestine mandate' with summat like a 90% Arab popoulation. This began to grow with European Jews fleeing to Israel which began in earnest in 1936/37 or so. But there are no accurate no's for this.
So yes it was a predominantly Arab/Palestinian homeland no one denies this.

you're not getting it are you? There has never been a Palestinian Arab state ever. An Arab state was part of the deal in the original UN plan for the creation of Israel, supported by the Jews, and completely negleted by the UN once it failed due to Arab aggression. Nowhere in the creation of the Jewish state was the demand that the arabs within the state be forced to leave. The idea was wholly inclusive. In contrast, the Hamas charter specifically includes the extermination of all Jew on ANY LAND that has EVER been muslim. Starting around 1200BC, a series of Jewish kingdoms and states existed intermittently in the region for more than a millennium. The first wave of modern immigration to Israel started in 1881
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 05:15:02 PM
If we 're going back to  1200BC the map of the world is going to change a bit eh?

And wasn't the whole thing owned and run by the Moslems from around 750 AD to 1947?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 05:20:18 PM
1881 Yes I'm aware, I covered it in my post at 4.18 today. I have no truck with this.

That is why I said 'homeland'. :lol:


Yes it was Rob and we have agreed the Hittites and Philistines before that.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ChezGiven on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 05:22:41 PM
If we 're going back to  1200BC the map of the world is going to change a bit eh?

And wasn't the whole thing owned and run by the Moslems from around 750 AD to 1947?

I think so sure other know more than me. As i posted earlier in the thread, i find it a bit weird all this zionist stuff as i'm sure that they lay claim to the land in Israel on the basis of the bible.

Sure you can point to Jewish people living in the area for centuries but to pick up on the earlier analogy there have been scandanavians living in Britain for centuries, lots of us will have descended from them. Does that mean they can point to owning and occupying the area that is north tyneside in the 5th century and now come over and partition cullercoats or something? Its the same logic isnt it??? 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 05:41:28 PM
If we 're going back to  1200BC the map of the world is going to change a bit eh?

And wasn't the whole thing owned and run by the Moslems from around 750 AD to 1947?

yes, the Ottoman Empire, in the same way that Rome owned and ran London for centuries
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 05:53:27 PM
I see you are ignoring Security council resolution 242. bluecool.gif

19 years after the UN created the whole mess in the first place. Yes, a true moral high ground there

Of course they don't want Palestinian refugees to return, it is Israel after all that is playing the numbers game with Jewish settlements.

These are the same settlements that are being bulldozed by the Isreali Army against the wishes of their own people in yet another attempt at acheiving peace with the Palestinians, who give nothing in return

The U.N. is owned by the U.S. I have no illusions about them coming to Palestine's aid.

The same UN that passed all those resolutions? The same America that has brokered the last peace deals?

You don't need to lecture me on Jews and their prediliction for compensation payments. I live in Germany who is still paying vast sums, so vast infact that they don't publish the figures anymore.

why bring this up? what relevence is it to the Arab Isreali confilct?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 06:39:23 PM
Bluff

Quote
Anyone else think that Israel's sudden over-reaction, and attack on Gaza is to try and stop Hamas from finally recognising Israel? 


The article you posted quotes a Hamas spokesman as saying: "The document included a clear clause referring to the non-recognition of the legitimacy of the occupation."

So the answer to your question is no. The spokesman says they won't recognise Israel and will carry on the "resistance", there is no change.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 06:51:18 PM
It's the first step towards it though.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 07:00:21 PM
bluf, the fatah recognized israel, did it stop them from bombing the hell out of palestine?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 07:04:14 PM
Did it stop Israel's occupation, I believe Fatah recognised Israel's right to exist back in the 80s, yet the oppression continued.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 07:10:31 PM
exactly, so why would israel develop some sort of a ploy to stop hamas from recognizing its existence if that wouldnt change anything anyway?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 07:19:47 PM
exactly, so why would israel develop some sort of a ploy to stop hamas from recognizing its existence if that wouldnt change anything anyway?

It would change everything though, as it would meet, although it they didn't go that far mind, the expectations of the International community, that includes the US.  It suits Israel's elite to have Hamas, and the other factions, resisting, as it gives them carte blanche in the region.  They can do as they wish. 

It will also gives them, in their view, the right to decide the borders between the two regions, rather than having a negotiated settlement.  Olmert has already lined out what he wants, and it's not the '67 borders, he cuts right into Palestinian lands.  Like I said, it suits Israel (not its people, but the Government) to have an 'aggressive' Palestine. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 07:27:08 PM
ah ok i see your point (more the whole idea of borders than doing as they wish).
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 07:46:48 PM
Just realised that the article Bluf posted is from The "Independent", if you look at their front page today (it's also displayed on its web site), you will find a very good example of media bias.

It contains a picture split in two. The top half shows an Israeli tank with the word WAR covering it, the bottom half shows an Arab with a green flag (representing Hamas I assume) with the word PEACE? covering it. In the middle of the two pictures is the word OR.

So Israel is committed to war while Hamas is committed to peace...so committed to peace it kidnaps an Israeli soldier and still refuses to recognise Israel and give up attacking it.

If you want balanced reporting, don't read The "Indepedent"
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 10:27:19 PM
P>I see you are ignoring Security council resolution 242.

IT>19 years after the UN created the whole mess in the first place. Yes, a true moral high ground there

Yes that is one of their specialities...Have you noticed?

P>Of course they don't want Palestinian refugees to return, it is Israel after all that is playing the numbers game with Jewish settlements.

IT>These are the same settlements that are being bulldozed by the Isreali Army against the wishes of their own people in yet another attempt at acheiving peace with the Palestinians, who give nothing in return

No, actully contrary to recent claims Israel is expanding in other areas of the WEST BANK and BUSH has given assurances that this will be recognised as part of Israel**

P>The U.N. is owned by the U.S. I have no illusions about them coming to Palestine's aid.

IT>The same UN that passed all those resolutions? The same America that has brokered the last peace deals?

I am sure you  are aware that they days of Carter and to some extent Clinton are long gone

P>You don't need to lecture me on Jews and their prediliction for compensation payments. I live in Germany who is still paying vast sums, so vast infact that they don't publish the figures anymore.

IT>why bring this up? what relevence is it to the Arab Isreali confilct?

I brought this up to build on your point of the dislocation of North African Jews and their case for compensation. Just to put your mind at rest, it is an example where Jews are well able to fight their corner and prosecute over long periods their cause for vast fianancial compensation.


**The Geneva Convention
It is widely accepted that under international law, the Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel are illegal.
Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war states:

"The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."

Within the international community the overwhelming view is that Article 49 is applicable to the occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.


Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 10:54:33 PM
Ok only thing i can see from the random un gibberish above is that the un is spineless and ownt stand up to israel. GB should invade tbh kick them out again and igive the land back to the arabs, that wud stop the jihadding us.

p.s I didnt read all fot he above too much writing and im tired

p.s2 i was not trying to offend anyone and it was meant as a joke, dont kill me.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 10:56:45 PM
You are unique Adam. There will be no easy death for you. bluebiggrin.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 11:00:33 PM
Na im jst sick of the crap that goes on in the world. I have sides on ever conflict and im with the arabs on this one, israel blowing up a bridge and a power sub station just shows how they respect the arabs. Maybe is they respected everyone and didnt think they were the best race in the world they might not get suicide bombers blowing up buses.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 28 June 2006, 11:28:56 PM
Na im jst sick of the crap that goes on in the world. I have sides on ever conflict and im with the arabs on this one, israel blowing up a bridge and a power sub station just shows how they respect the arabs. Maybe is they respected everyone and didnt think they were the best race in the world they might not get suicide bombers blowing up buses.

perhaps if there wasn't too much writing and you read something before commenting you might not have such simplistic views
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 29 June 2006, 12:14:38 AM
The real problem here is not Israel, not the Palestinians, but the US. It is the US's seemingly unconditional support for Israel and the massive levels of funding they provide them with, that means that this problem will go on, and on, and on.

The only hope for a peacefull solution is for the US to stop funding Israel and stop providing arms and other support as well. This doesn't mean that they have to oppose Israel just not support it.

You see the problem at present is that the Israeli's have little or no motivation to enter into peace negotiations due to their huge military superiority. In fact, a full scale war would probably benefit them, as they would undoubtedly emerge victorious with significant territorial gains and a severely weakened foe. In a way it is to their credit that they have not taken this option already and in my view it shows that without the US's interference Israel might be a willing participant in a peace process.

US involvement also means that the Palestinians are not motivated towards a peaceful solution either. The US support of Israel means they have little or no chance of entering any negotiations as equals and a therefore unlikely to be able to secure acceptable terms in any peace deals. As Israel appears to be unwilling to commit to a full scale war, there is also little chance of the Palestinians being forced to the table at the end of the barrel of a gun.

If the US were to withdraw its medling fingers from the area, then the chances of peace would increase dramatically. The Israelis would need to reasses their whole economy as the cost of a constant state of war with the Palestinians would be prohibitively expensive. Peace would subsequently become much more attractive - possibly essential - Israel would need to increase trade with her Arab neighbours, which would necessitate dialogue and negotiations. The Palestinians would feel able to come to the table as equals rather than see it as a signal of defeat. The EU could step in to the US's shoes and use trade incentives, rather than the threat of military action, to encourage the two sides to come together and see each other as partners, who are essential for one another's long-term well being, rather than enemies. I don't have the figures, but I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of both side's foreign trade is with the EU - especially if you take away the American involvement - so the prospect of favoured access to the largest market in the world would undoubtedly prove to be a massive incentive.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 29 June 2006, 12:17:25 AM
Well thought through Indigo. :thup:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 29 June 2006, 12:18:24 AM
I think you're underplaying the motives of the Zionist movement itself.  If they had their way, they'd have the whole of the land, if anything it's the pressure of the US/UN that made them give back the territories when they took them decades ago.  I'm not sure how you can think if the US backed off, Israel would offer peace, or be more inclined to, I think they'd be far more likely to just re-take the land.  Sharon only went ahead with the withdrawal due to massive pressure from Bush, who was in dire need of something to give back to the Muslim population after the disastrous decision of Iraq. 

If that pressure wasn't there, Sharon simply wouldn't have pulled the settlers out.  He made that clear up until a year or so before he was pressured into it.  I'm not saying the US isn't part of the problem here, but they've sometimes been the ones to have that quiet word in the ears of the Israeli establishment, the ones that have actually stopped them steamrollering Palestine into the ground.  Remember, a lot of people in Israel believes that land is their's, they'd happily take it.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Thursday 29 June 2006, 08:01:07 AM
Adam


Quote
israel blowing up a bridge and a power sub station just shows how they respect the arabs

Why would they respect a people that elected a terrorist group that targets Israeli civilians?

Below is why they blew up a bridge and attacked a power station.

Quote
The Air Force has begun to attack targets in Gaza City.  Tuesday night a bridge in the central Gaza Strip was bombed to lessen the danger that the kidnapped Israeli soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit, would be moved around.  An electrical power station in southern Gaza was also attacked to handicap and disrupt operations of the terrorist organizations connected, directly or indirectly, to the kidnapping.

In addition, an IDF ground force took over control of the Dahaniya airfield in the southeastern Gaza Strip.  Dahaniya is a strategic post for observation and command of the vicinity of Rafah and southern Gaza.  It was taken over so as to make it more difficult for terrorists to smuggle their captive out of the area.
IDF

The terrorists have also kidnapped and murdered an 18 year old Israeli civilian.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 29 June 2006, 08:07:28 AM
So the IDF goes into Gaza and arrests a load of Hamas.............




.....POLITICIANS!!!

Well that's a constructive step, isn't it!?!

Didn't even bother to say why.

Arresting the moderates of the organisation, are not really the actions of people who want peace.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Thursday 29 June 2006, 08:57:47 AM
Hamas is an organisation comprised of politicians and terrorists, they both have the same aim, the politicians direct the terrorists, the terrorists carry out the actions as they are subordinate to them. What is the purpose of differentiating them? they are both responsible and should be punished.

War is a continuation of policy by other means. Hamas wants an Islamic state and hopes to achieve it using several methods including terrorism and politics. It should be primarily opposed for the aim of setting up an Islamic state, whether it be by destroying Israel of even with the 2 state solution.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 29 June 2006, 09:48:35 AM
Butthey were democratically elected Rehhagel - one of the few democratic govts in the area

So who are you going to talk to?

If the Brits learn't and relearnt one thing its that you have to talk to the opposition - even (or especially) when they are men of "violence".   It takes two sides to make peace and if you don't meet them don't whine on to us about continued violence - 'cos you are not offering them anything else
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Thursday 29 June 2006, 03:53:05 PM
Na im jst sick of the crap that goes on in the world. I have sides on ever conflict and im with the arabs on this one, israel blowing up a bridge and a power sub station just shows how they respect the arabs. Maybe is they respected everyone and didnt think they were the best race in the world they might not get suicide bombers blowing up buses.

As i said in my previous post i do not have time to read all of that. I have studied the conflict and neither side is right but they should get along. IDF going in to gaza and doing what it is doing isnt right. If they had given the PA at least osme time to get the soilder back maybe he would of been returned, but they just went in as its what they do.

perhaps if there wasn't too much writing and you read something before commenting you might not have such simplistic views
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Thursday 29 June 2006, 06:14:27 PM
Indigo

Quote
POLITICIANS!!!

Well that's a constructive step, isn't it!?!

Didn't even bother to say why.

Arresting the moderates of the organisation, are not really the actions of people who want peace.


Quote
Jacob Dalal, an army spokesman, said: "They are not being used as bargaining chips. These are people with terrorist records, with allegations and charges pending against them." - Israel arrests Hamas leaders, Reuters via Yahoo


Haaretz reports that the arrests were planned weeks ago, and that soldiers carried out arrest warrants signed by judges.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 29 June 2006, 06:46:50 PM
Indigo

Quote
POLITICIANS!!!

Well that's a constructive step, isn't it!?!

Didn't even bother to say why.

Arresting the moderates of the organisation, are not really the actions of people who want peace.


Quote
Jacob Dalal, an army spokesman, said: "They are not being used as bargaining chips. These are people with terrorist records, with allegations and charges pending against them." - Israel arrests Hamas leaders, Reuters via Yahoo


Haaretz reports that the arrests were planned weeks ago, and that soldiers carried out arrest warrants signed by judges.

I'm not saying that's a lie - because I don't know - but I'm going to refrain from believing it until I've seen it confirmaed by an independent source - ie not an IDF officer.

Also, as Israel regards Hamas as a terrorist organisation surely they would see any Hamas member as someone with a "terrorist record", wouldn't they?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 29 June 2006, 08:10:59 PM
I read an interesting viewpoint today, from Palestinians, that the vote for Hamas was a protest vote against what was seen as a corrupt Fatah party, and nobody really expected or wanted Hamas to gain power

Also, the people who gave the most aid to the Palestinian authority are the US and the EU, which was withdrawn after the election, and which Hamas has singularly failed to replace with donations from even their most ardent supporters Iran and Syria

As for arresting Hamas politicians, I wonder if there might have been less bombings if Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness had been arrested every time a bombing/kneecapping/ambush occured
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Thursday 29 June 2006, 08:38:00 PM
Adam


Quote
israel blowing up a bridge and a power sub station just shows how they respect the arabs

Why would they respect a people that elected a terrorist group that targets Israeli civilians?

Below is why they blew up a bridge and attacked a power station.

Quote
The Air Force has begun to attack targets in Gaza City.  Tuesday night a bridge in the central Gaza Strip was bombed to lessen the danger that the kidnapped Israeli soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit, would be moved around.  An electrical power station in southern Gaza was also attacked to handicap and disrupt operations of the terrorist organizations connected, directly or indirectly, to the kidnapping.

In addition, an IDF ground force took over control of the Dahaniya airfield in the southeastern Gaza Strip.  Dahaniya is a strategic post for observation and command of the vicinity of Rafah and southern Gaza.  It was taken over so as to make it more difficult for terrorists to smuggle their captive out of the area.
IDF

The terrorists have also kidnapped and murdered an 18 year old Israeli civilian.
they should respect them as a democratically elected government,in much the same way we had to respect Monachem Begin,he of the stren gang and irgun(king davids hotel bombing,worst peace time killings of british service men and all that)

as for the rest it is really tit-for-tat since the founding of israel, in particul since 1967.would israel have survived without US backing ? was the US  right to back israel ? did the backing and other US policies lead us to the situation we face today ?

the terrorists have also kidnapped and murdered an 18yr old israeli citizen....................i'll bet the israelis have killed more then the arabs,but what does that prove ? nothing ,only that one side is more effective at murder than the other,not that one side is right or wrong.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Thursday 29 June 2006, 08:39:58 PM
Hamas is an organisation comprised of politicians and terrorists, they both have the same aim, the politicians direct the terrorists, the terrorists carry out the actions as they are subordinate to them. What is the purpose of differentiating them? they are both responsible and should be punished.

War is a continuation of policy by other means. Hamas wants an Islamic state and hopes to achieve it using several methods including terrorism and politics. It should be primarily opposed for the aim of setting up an Islamic state, whether it be by destroying Israel of even with the 2 state solution.
that paragraph could equally be turned the other way round with israelis who are cited by the UN ,now being members of the knesset
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 29 June 2006, 09:47:33 PM
I read an interesting viewpoint today, from Palestinians, that the vote for Hamas was a protest vote against what was seen as a corrupt Fatah party, and nobody really expected or wanted Hamas to gain power

Also, the people who gave the most aid to the Palestinian authority are the US and the EU, which was withdrawn after the election, and which Hamas has singularly failed to replace with donations from even their most ardent supporters Iran and Syria

As for arresting Hamas politicians, I wonder if there might have been less bombings if Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness had been arrested every time a bombing/kneecapping/ambush occured



There'd have been more and the situation wouldn't be anywhere near as close to a resolution, as it is now.

Surely the aim is to move these organisations away from the bullet and bomb and towards to negotiating table, how do you encourage that by cracking down on and arresting the only people within them who even consider that an option!?!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Adam^ on Thursday 29 June 2006, 11:28:52 PM
No one can win this arguement, i saw IDF did this you say Hamas blew up this bus. Simple truth is they are both if not worse than each other. So until some one is sent in to stop them shooting each other its going no where.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 29 June 2006, 11:32:08 PM
Telephone call for the U.N!! bluesleep.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Friday 30 June 2006, 10:04:24 AM
Tzipi Livini's family ties makes for some interesting reading ie. her father was a leading player within the Irgun group.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlueStar on Friday 30 June 2006, 10:55:42 AM
I had to laugh when a missile hit that beach in Gaza - Israel:  "Wasn't us"  :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 30 June 2006, 12:26:26 PM
According to the Israelis its a very very common occurance throughout the Mediterranean.............
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 30 June 2006, 12:29:18 PM
I had to laugh when a missile hit that beach in Gaza - Israel:  "Wasn't us"  :lol:

What is worse, is people believed it.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 30 June 2006, 01:31:39 PM
"According to the Israelis its a very very common occurance throughout the Mediterranean............." Robbie Coltrane


 :obi:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Saturday 1 July 2006, 02:39:55 PM
No one can win this arguement, i saw IDF did this you say Hamas blew up this bus. Simple truth is they are both if not worse than each other. So until some one is sent in to stop them shooting each other its going no where.

The UN should have done that in '48 when their own partition plan went to s****
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 6 July 2006, 02:43:49 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1813488,00.html

Quote
Israel steps up Gaza campaign after Hamas strike

· Tanks move in to create 'security zone' in north
· Israeli town hit by rocket for second night running


Conal Urquhart in Beit Lahiya
Thursday July 6, 2006
The Guardian


Israeli forces moved further into northern Gaza early this morning after Palestinian militants succeeded in hitting the Israeli city of Askelon with rockets for the second night running.

Palestinian sources said gunmen tried to engage the tanks and armoured personnel carriers after they moved from border areas to positions close to settlements that were evacuated by Israel 10 months ago, and near the town of Beit Lahiya.

A spokeswoman for the Israeli army said she had no immediate information about the advance into Gaza. Local hospitals reported no injuries, but crowds of gunmen roamed around northern towns in readiness for a deeper Israeli incursion. Seven Palestinians were injured when Israel fired missiles at a beach area in the north of Gaza last night.
 
Earlier Israel's security cabinet approved the reoccupation of parts of the Gaza Strip after a Hamas rocket hit the grounds of a school in the centre of Askelon, causing no injuries. Officials told the Associated Press that the army would create a "security zone" in northern Gaza.

The Israeli army has already moved into areas of the south and north of Gaza as part of its campaign to free Corporal Gilad Shalit, who was abducted on June 25.

Palestinian militants have improved the capability of their crude rockets in recent years. The town of Sderot has been a frequent target, but only a few rockets have reached the outskirts of Askelon.

Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime minister, called the strike a "major escalation" and vowed harsh retaliation, while his cabinet colleague, Zeev Boim, said: "As far as I'm concerned, the people of Beit Hanoun and Beit Lahiya [northern Gaza] can start packing."

Israel's reaction to Palestinian rocket fire from Gaza has been complicated by the need to ensure the safety of Cpl Shalit.

Yesterday morning the Israeli airforce hit several targets around the Gaza Strip. In previous attacks it has used small missiles which damaged the target and little else. The missiles used yesterday were more powerful, damaging the target and buildings close by as well as risking civilian casualties. Missiles hit the interior ministry for the second time in a week, damaging a corner of the building, but injuring no one. The blast also damaged one side of an adjacent six-storey apartment, injuring five people. On the first floor windows were blown out, doors knocked down and apartments covered in dust and glass.

Abed Abu Marak, 64, a doctor, said he was in his apartment with his wife, daughter and niece. "I wasn't quite asleep at around 1.30am. I heard a massive bang; when I opened my eyes it was like I was in a fog. There was no electricity but we all managed to get out without injury, but who knows what could have happened if we had been in the sitting room or kitchen at the time of the blast," he said. He said his family would clean the house and repair the damage. The home of Abdel Halim Abed on the fourth floor, however, was gutted. The owner and his son were injured by shrapnel and relatives were removing their furniture and possessions.

The airforce also hit a school in a suburb of Gaza City, destroying the wall and sending scores of desks into the crater.

Elsewhere some of northern Gaza's poorest residents took advantage of Israel's invasion to loot an industrial zone. Palestinians climbed over walls to take plastic, metal, wood, concrete and anything they could find from deserted factories after local security forces were told by the Israelis to vacate the area around the Erez crossing and industrial zone while Israeli troops searched for tunnels.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 09:54:57 AM
can't really see how anyone can support the israelis in terms of the land issues.  blueconfused.gif if a thief breaks into a house, drives the owners out and says he is entitled to live there cos his great-great-great-great grandfather built it, would you agree with him?

if my next door neighbors broke into my house FIRST, and tried to wipe me off the map (despite the local council telling him to respect my property), damn sure when i'm finished kicking his f***ing arse and conquering his house in a defensive action, i'll f***ing occupy his house for as long as I want, and definitely for as long as he's lobbing missiles inton my garden from the street.

so f*** him the charva c***
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 6 July 2006, 04:04:07 PM
I knew the voice of reasoned debate would soon be heard

and teh Israelis took over Palestine land a long time before teh Palestinians hit back
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 6 July 2006, 06:45:59 PM
can't really see how anyone can support the israelis in terms of the land issues.  blueconfused.gif if a thief breaks into a house, drives the owners out and says he is entitled to live there cos his great-great-great-great grandfather built it, would you agree with him?

if my next door neighbors broke into my house FIRST, and tried to wipe me off the map (despite the local council telling him to respect my property), damn sure when i'm finished kicking his f***ing arse and conquering his house in a defensive action, i'll f***ing occupy his house for as long as I want, and definitely for as long as he's lobbing missiles inton my garden from the street.

so f*** him the charva c***

I think you've got your timings back to front.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 08:12:28 PM
can't really see how anyone can support the israelis in terms of the land issues.  blueconfused.gif if a thief breaks into a house, drives the owners out and says he is entitled to live there cos his great-great-great-great grandfather built it, would you agree with him?

if my next door neighbors broke into my house FIRST, and tried to wipe me off the map (despite the local council telling him to respect my property), damn sure when i'm finished kicking his f***ing arse and conquering his house in a defensive action, i'll f***ing occupy his house for as long as I want, and definitely for as long as he's lobbing missiles inton my garden from the street.

so f*** him the charva c***

I think you've got your timings back to front.

1947 UN pass partition plan, partitioning British Mandate into 2 states, Arab and Jewish:

population        total           Arabs                      Jews
Arab State        725,000     99%      10,000      1%    735,000
Jewish State    407,000      45%      498,000    55%  905,000

1948 Israel declares independance

Approximately 1,000 Lebanese, 5,000 Syrian, 5,000 Iraqi, 10,000 Egyptian and 4,000 Transjordanian troops invaded the newly-established state

"This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades" - Arab League Secretary-General, Abdul Razek Azzam Pasha

following several battles and truces, and a loss of 1% of its population (that equates to 600,000 UK residents), fighting stops at the green line, with Israel now occupying 50% more than the partition Jewish state, and the Arab nations occupying the remains of what was supposed to be the Palestinian state.

In contrast to the so called Palestinian refugees, an estimated 758,000 - 866,000 of the Jews living in Arab countries and territories left or were forced to leave the countries of their birth following the Arab invasion in 1948 becoming "refugees" in everything but name, compared to the estimated 711,000 Palestinians

19 years later, after the Arab nations make not a single move forward in their declared aim of creating a "United State of Palestine", Israel occupies further territories from them, in a pre-emptive strike following further serious aggresive moves in the region by the Arab nations

I think that pretty much covers the above timeline, no?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 6 July 2006, 08:21:15 PM
To be perfectly frank my dear ISRAEL has no reason to be there in the FIRST PLACE.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 80 on Thursday 6 July 2006, 08:33:47 PM
Just as a quick question to everyone, what do you make of Israel's "right" to exist, being an internationally recognised nation-state and all that?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 08:39:38 PM
On June 24, 1922 the League of Nations agreed upon a document called the Palestine Mandate, Article 2 of which states that the administration of the Mandate would "secure the establishment of the Jewish national home".

Jews were in 'Palestine' 3,000 years ago, 1,500 years before Hamas even knew they were muslims, who claim all lands ever inhabited by Muslims anywhere as Muslim 'homeland'

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 6 July 2006, 08:56:54 PM
If you ignore the religious bullshit, then it's pretty obvious that the Palestinians are the native people of the area, they happen to be Muslims or Christians. The people who happen to be Jews, the Israeli's are mainly native Europeans and therefore are the latecomers to this particular party.

All this religious bollocks just obscures the actual facts, which are that one group of people moved into an area where another group of people were living, and after a while declared that the land was now theirs. What's religion got to do with that?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: DJ_NUFC on Thursday 6 July 2006, 09:03:32 PM
Does history matter right now? Does it really f*king matter who came first? Ask any normal-minded Isreali or Palestinian and they'll tell you it matters not one jot.

What is important is to live with each other, stop the f*king violence, from both sides, and move forward without looking backwards. Same goes to Kashmir.

Anyone with an ounce of brain would understand that the power to change things lies in the hands of a state. The ones with an army, with a parliament and international aid. Of course, the other party will have to stop and listen as well, and cooperate.

But an eye-for-an-eye will continue the making of blind children in that region.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 6 July 2006, 09:06:46 PM
The ball is firmly in Israel's court I agree.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 6 July 2006, 09:14:56 PM
Does history matter right now? Does it really f*king matter who came first? Ask any normal-minded Isreali or Palestinian and they'll tell you it matters not one jot.

What is important is to live with each other, stop the f*king violence, from both sides, and move forward without looking backwards. Same goes to Kashmir.

Anyone with an ounce of brain would understand that the power to change things lies in the hands of a state. The ones with an army, with a parliament and international aid. Of course, the other party will have to stop and listen as well, and cooperate.

But an eye-for-an-eye will continue the making of blind children in that region.



Well said Deej. :thup:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 09:16:21 PM
If you ignore the religious bullshit, then it's pretty obvious that the Palestinians are the native people of the area, they happen to be Muslims or Christians. The people who happen to be Jews, the Israeli's are mainly native Europeans and therefore are the latecomers to this particular party.

All this religious bollocks just obscures the actual facts, which are that one group of people moved into an area where another group of people were living,


aye thats never happened anywhere before has it? Poor argument tbh.

Quote

and after a while declared that the land was now theirs. What's religion got to do with that?

the partition plan and other international initiatives for a Jewish homeland preceed any declaration of independance by Jews themselves, an outcome that was inevitable in the situation upto 1947

the Jewish civilisation preceeds countless borders. Isreal is actually the THIRD jewish kingdom

I merely point you to the populations of the Jewish state earlier. Does that look like a minority? Do they no have the right to self determination?

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 6 July 2006, 09:34:30 PM
If you ignore the religious bullshit, then it's pretty obvious that the Palestinians are the native people of the area, they happen to be Muslims or Christians. The people who happen to be Jews, the Israeli's are mainly native Europeans and therefore are the latecomers to this particular party.

All this religious bollocks just obscures the actual facts, which are that one group of people moved into an area where another group of people were living,


aye thats never happened anywhere before has it? Poor argument tbh.

It wasn't an argument, it was a statement.

Yes it's happened before and it usually results in a war, repression of the indiginous people and Human Rights abuses gallore - so no change there then.

Quote

and after a while declared that the land was now theirs. What's religion got to do with that?

the partition plan and other international initiatives for a Jewish homeland preceed any declaration of independance by Jews themselves, an outcome that was inevitable in the situation upto 1947

the Jewish civilisation preceeds countless borders. Isreal is actually the THIRD jewish kingdom

I merely point you to the populations of the Jewish state earlier. Does that look like a minority? Do they no have the right to self determination?


I'm fully aware of that - apart from the 3rd Kingdom bit, where were the other two?

It's all very well the rest of the world deciding that the Jews should have their own homeland knowing full well that it was never going to involve giving away any of their own territory. Were the Palestinians consulted? Were they bollocks!! The rest of the world felt guilty about the Halocaust - and rightly so - but not guilty enough to sacrifice their own land, so they did what they always do and f***ed over the little guy!!

Re the population thing, you know as well as I do that Israel has rigged it so that there will always be a Jewish majority, they are doing all they can to grow that majority by encouraging Jews to live in Israel, whilst simultaneously doing all they can to reduce the numeber of non-Jewish Israeli citizens.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 09:41:24 PM

Re the population thing, you know as well as I do that Israel has rigged it so that there will always be a Jewish majority, they are doing all they can to grow that majority by encouraging Jews to live in Israel, whilst simultaneously doing all they can to reduce the numeber of non-Jewish Israeli citizens.

the figures are from the time of partition, not the future. how is that rigged?

of course the number of Jews going to live in Israel is going to increase. It is the first Jewish homeland of the modern era, and there are millions of Jews around the world. A lot of the immigration is due to the intolerance of the Arab world. Like i say, 758,000 - 866,000 of the Jews living in Arab countries and territories left or were forced to leave the countries of their birth following the Arab invasion in 1948 becoming "refugees" in everything but name
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 09:49:23 PM

It's all very well the rest of the world deciding that the Jews should have their own homeland knowing full well that it was never going to involve giving away any of their own territory. Were the Palestinians consulted? Were they bollocks!! The rest of the world felt guilty about the Halocaust - and rightly so - but not guilty enough to sacrifice their own land, so they did what they always do and f***ed over the little guy!!


no they weren't consulted - they were given their own state for the first time in their history! something they were unwilling to accept at the time, and only now after decades of futile conflict, are coming round to accept as the only fair solution. They are campaigning now for the lands they originally rejected in the first place!

Excert of the Mandate: "safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine" NOT some wishy washy idea of the native population from some undefined era in the mists of time. I don't see any celtic movement kicking up a fuss nowadays  about Saxon or Viking migration into their 'homeland'
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 6 July 2006, 09:52:17 PM

Re the population thing, you know as well as I do that Israel has rigged it so that there will always be a Jewish majority, they are doing all they can to grow that majority by encouraging Jews to live in Israel, whilst simultaneously doing all they can to reduce the numeber of non-Jewish Israeli citizens.

the figures are from the time of partition, not the future. how is that rigged?

of course the number of Jews going to live in Israel is going to increase. It is the first Jewish homeland of the modern era, and there are millions of Jew around the world. A lot of the immigration is due to the intolerance of the Arab world. Like i say, 758,000 - 866,000 of the Jews living in Arab countries and territories left or were forced to leave the countries of their birth following the Arab invasion in 1948 becoming "refugees" in everything but name

You were talking about then, I was talking about now, crossed wires I think, anyway what I said still applies to the present.

I'd like to know the figures for 50 or so years before that, I bet they wouldn't be anything like those.

The Arab world seemed to tolerate those people prior to the formation of the state of Israel, as you say, it is only since it's creation that they have been made to/opted to leave. I think it would be fair to say that these people have also suffered due to the actions of the Israelis, as I said it's not really about religion, just yet another example of religion being used as a tool to further people's own selfish desires.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 10:05:53 PM
another view on Isreali 'aggression' and Palestinian 'peacemaking'

http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=2348
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 6 July 2006, 10:13:50 PM
There were hardly any Jews there. Just some religious zealots who started encouragind the diaspora to come quick and build up numbers.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 6 July 2006, 10:15:27 PM
another view on Isreali 'aggression' and Palestinian 'peacemaking'

http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=2348

:lol:

You really do have a phenomenal number of links to websites pushing the views of right-wing nutters, don't you I-T!!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 10:26:36 PM
was just up on google news tbh

good read i thought
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 6 July 2006, 10:27:09 PM

It's all very well the rest of the world deciding that the Jews should have their own homeland knowing full well that it was never going to involve giving away any of their own territory. Were the Palestinians consulted? Were they bollocks!! The rest of the world felt guilty about the Halocaust - and rightly so - but not guilty enough to sacrifice their own land, so they did what they always do and f***ed over the little guy!!


no they weren't consulted - they were given their own state for the first time in their history! something they were unwilling to accept at the time, and only now after decades of futile conflict, are coming round to accept as the only fair solution. They are campaigning now for the lands they originally rejected in the first place!

Excert of the Mandate: "safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine" NOT some wishy washy idea of the native population from some undefined era in the mists of time. I don't see any celtic movement kicking up a fuss nowadays  about Saxon or Viking migration into their 'homeland'

And the civil and religious rights of the Palestinians have been protected have they?  f***ing hell, I hope my rights never get protected like that!!

The only people who talk about "some wishy washy idea of the native population from some undefined era in the mists of time" are the Israelis, who go back to biblical times in an attempt to say: "It's mine, I had it first, so nur-nur, nur, nur-nur!!"
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: DJ_NUFC on Thursday 6 July 2006, 10:29:11 PM
OMG, Invicta, are you unwilling to live in the present world and sort the conflict out using present, feasible solutions, or are you going to spend your whole life playing the blame game? Do you want Israel to obliterate all Arabs around the world because Arabs, from the way you point them out to be, are obviously nothing but bomb-strapping terrorists who just wish to eat Jewish babies for a cause that in your mind is non-existent?

Now we know exactly the source of thinking that has resulted in the continuing of all this violence in the region. Not bothered to sort out the problem, just fingerpoint. Both sides are guilty of that. And you're just willing to rise above that. Go read some more right-wing propaganda bullshit, dig up some more history, at the end of the day, to the parents who've lost their child, be they Jewish or Arab, it's all f***ing bollocks.

Have you sat down with actual liberal-minded people who've lived in that region? They certainly do not think like you or like terrorists. People want change for the better. The longer we keep this fingerpointing bullshit going on the longer the bloodshed will continue.

But of course, solutions are hard, problem-finding is easier.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 10:37:47 PM

It's all very well the rest of the world deciding that the Jews should have their own homeland knowing full well that it was never going to involve giving away any of their own territory. Were the Palestinians consulted? Were they bollocks!! The rest of the world felt guilty about the Halocaust - and rightly so - but not guilty enough to sacrifice their own land, so they did what they always do and f***ed over the little guy!!


no they weren't consulted - they were given their own state for the first time in their history! something they were unwilling to accept at the time, and only now after decades of futile conflict, are coming round to accept as the only fair solution. They are campaigning now for the lands they originally rejected in the first place!

Excert of the Mandate: "safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine" NOT some wishy washy idea of the native population from some undefined era in the mists of time. I don't see any celtic movement kicking up a fuss nowadays  about Saxon or Viking migration into their 'homeland'

And the civil and religious rights of the Palestinians have been protected have they?  f***ing hell, I hope my rights never get protected like that!!

excert from the mandate lat led to the partition plan that was rejected by the Arabs. i.e. so don't come crying to me in 60 years time when you haven't acheived what you tried to do by force

Quote
The only people who talk about "some wishy washy idea of the native population from some undefined era in the mists of time" are the Israelis, who go back to biblical times in an attempt to say: "It's mine, I had it first, so nur-nur, nur, nur-nur!!"

both claim so, but only one side wants the complete anhialation (sp?) of the other. If I said I want all Viking descendants in England wiped off the map, how much sympathy would I get?

They have had plenty of chances to shape their own future, time to get real. Look at the article above. The Isrealis could do MUCH worse in this conflict than they have done so far. 'Peace in our time' - remember that?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 10:47:13 PM
OMG, Invicta, are you unwilling to live in the present world and sort the conflict out using present, feasible solutions, or are you going to spend your whole life playing the blame game? Do you want Israel to obliterate all Arabs around the world because Arabs, from the way you point them out to be, are obviously nothing but bomb-strapping terrorists who just wish to eat Jewish babies for a cause that in your mind is non-existent?

Now we know exactly the source of thinking that has resulted in the continuing of all this violence in the region. Not bothered to sort out the problem, just fingerpoint. Both sides are guilty of that. And you're just willing to rise above that. Go read some more right-wing propaganda bullshit, dig up some more history, at the end of the day, to the parents who've lost their child, be they Jewish or Arab, it's all f***ing bollocks.

Have you sat down with actual liberal-minded people who've lived in that region? They certainly do not think like you or like terrorists. People want change for the better. The longer we keep this fingerpointing bullshit going on the longer the bloodshed will continue.

But of course, solutions are hard, problem-finding is easier.



I havent the slightest bit interest in how it is resolved, as it is not my place to say (something a good many others do not realise)

I merely fingerpoint as you put it, to try and counter the overwhelming perception that this is a one side good v bad conflict. Only when each side has a realistic view of the situation and stops pandering to the bleeding heart brigade will anything be achieved, namely parents losing their children. The situation is f***ed up, but that is real life. Again, something both sides and observers need to realise before moving anywhere

There is a famous quote somewhere about, not making the future without one eye on the past.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Thursday 6 July 2006, 10:55:14 PM

excert from the mandate lat led to the partition plan that was rejected by the Arabs. i.e. so don't come crying to me in 60 years time when you haven't acheived what you tried to do by force

Rejected by the Palestinian people or the governments of the neighbouring countries? I'm unaware of any vote taking place.



both claim so, but only one side wants the complete anhialation (sp?) of the other. If I said I want all Viking descendants in England wiped off the map, how much sympathy would I get?

One side talks about anihilation, the other gets on with it.

They have had plenty of chances to shape their own future, time to get real. Look at the article above. The Isrealis could do MUCH worse in this conflict than they have done so far. 'Peace in our time' - remember that?

They could, but even they realise that they can only go so far and not force the international community to get off their fat arses and do something.

To compare this to the rise of the Nazis is frankly laughable!! - why do you do that, by the way? You'll be saying stuff I disagree with, but can respect as an alternative opinion, then you'll chuck something like that in and it just makes you look ridiculous!! (Which you aren't). The Nazis were a global threat and it should have been obvious that they were intent on not just the re-emergence of Germany as a world power, but the total domination of Europe and in fact the whole world!! The Palestinians are not even aserious threat to their enemy - Israel - and have no aims other than achieving their own state, either beside Israel or at worst instead of it. Not the same at all!!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 6 July 2006, 10:59:22 PM
was just a throwaway comment about always coming back with a peace plan to have it chucked back in your face - try not to read too deeply into it LOL
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 6 July 2006, 11:02:39 PM
The West Bank barrier.

http://www.icrc.org/Web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/iwpList393/777E22F74C2C681DC12571490043C81A

"After the completion of the Barrier, some 80% of the land passed down through the generations was cut off from the village. Like the rest of the villagers, the bulk of Mr Amarneh's income stems from agriculture. Since February 2003, when the West Bank Barrier was completed, he has to depend on his sons for help and on humanitarian organizations like the ICRC.

When he had free access to his lands, Abu Ayman grew crops all year round: tobacco, okra, wheat, cucumber, tomatoes, and of course the olive trees – about 600 of them. The crops, which require daily attention, have vanished. The olive trees' yield has dropped by 50 % due to the lack of proper care...."
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Thursday 6 July 2006, 11:08:18 PM
About this land grab as a cause of the conflict.

Jordan ruled the West Bank and East Jerusalem from 1948-1967. Did any of the Palestinians attack Jordan for taking their land and denying them self rule?

The Gaza Strip was occupied by Egypt from 1947-1956, then 1957-1967. Did any of the Palestinians attack Egypt for taking their land and denying them self rule?

I don't know when it was claimed that Israel stole Palestinian land, let's say 1948, and the ownership of land was by 18 year olds. That would make the owners of the land, if still alive, aged 76. I don't know but, I'd say the great majority of "resistance fighters/leaders" were not even alive when this happened.

At present, the leaders of the Palestinians are Hamas, their aim is for an Islamic government based on Shariah law, probably Taliban like.

Would you support that state?
Would it have a right to exist?


Do you think the Israeli Palestinians/Arabs have a better standard of living than Arabs living under the PA?

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 7 July 2006, 02:12:09 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1814687,00.html

Quote
Israeli army in for the long haul in Gaza Strip

· Settlements reoccupied in wake of Ashkelon attacks
· Crisis could go on even if kidnapped soldier is freed


Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Friday July 7, 2006
The Guardian

Israel faces the prospect of a long-term reoccupation of parts of the Gaza Strip after Palestinian rockets for the first time struck a major Israeli city, escalating a crisis that began with the capture of a single soldier.

The Israeli army launched an assault on the Gaza town of Beit Lahiya and reoccupied three former Jewish settlements in response to the attacks on Ashkelon, until now well beyond the range of the rudimentary Palestinian missiles.

Politicians and the army acknowledge that now the tanks and troops are in again it may be politically impossible to withdraw them swiftly even if the captured Israeli soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit, is freed.

Palestinian rocket attacks on Israeli communities have not killed anyone since Israel pulled Jewish settlers and ground forces out of the Gaza Strip in October. But they have become a huge political embarrassment, in part because of the fear they strike in Sderot, the home town of Israel's defence minister, Amir Peretz, close to Gaza's border.

The rocket attacks are likely to resume once the troops are withdrawn - as has happened in the past - so there is considerable political and military pressure on the government to keep them in Gaza. The mayor of Sderot has called for the destruction of a Palestinian town from which the rockets are fired.

Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, a former defence minister and member of Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert's security cabinet, said Israel had no intention of returning permanently to the Gaza Strip.

"The entries and exits will take place from time to time. There is no motivation to stay there. We have no interest in returning. We have a simple interest to prevent the continuation of firing at our communities," he said.

But the chairman of the Israeli parliament's foreign and defence committee, Tzahi Hanegbi, said the army could remain in the territory for a long time.

"It could be years. The goal is to prevent high-trajectory fire at Israeli civilians in Israeli communities. If this result is not achieved do you expect that the [Israeli military] will tell the residents of Ashkelon and then southern Ashdod and then Kiryat Gat: look, we tried, and it's not working. So we're going back," he said.

Yossi Alpher, a military analyst and former Israeli intelligence officer, said that the government and military will be trying to avoid becoming entrenched back in Gaza but they will also face political difficulties in extracting the army.

"They are very well aware of the dangers," he said. "But there are catches in trying to leave. The range [of the rockets] can improve further so you have to keep moving south and you move into highly urban areas, and it begins to look like an occupation again."

Mr Alpher said it was possible the government might reach an agreement with the Palestinian leadership that would see Cpl Shalit freed and an end to the rockets - the stated aims of the present Israeli incursion - but without both the army is likely to stay. "Either there is an agreement that gets us out or that presence is expanded," he said. "Then you have the problem you can't get out because you don't have anything to show for it."

The politicians and military agreed early on in the crisis that Cpl Shalit's capture offered the opportunity to curb the firing of Palestinian rockets. Military leaders urged Mr Peretz and Mr Olmert to authorise a large-scale ground invasion deep into the Gaza Strip. But the politicians were cautious, warning the army should be prepared for a long operation that must retain foreign governments' backing.

Cpl Shalit's father, Noam, cautioned against using the capture of his son, in a cross-border raid by Palestinian militias nearly two weeks ago, as a justification for a wider military operation.

"It seems unrealistic to me to say that Israel can restore its deterrent capability at the expense of Gilad," he said. "My son does not have such broad shoulders. If Israel had wanted to regain its deterrent capability, in my humble opinion it ought to have done so before the abduction."

But there are indications of a wider agenda to bury the Hamas-led government. Israel has detained eight Hamas cabinet members and 20 of its MPs, and targeted government infrastructure, including missile attacks on the offices of the prime minister and interior ministry.

"There's a school of thought in the Israeli security establishment that said since the Hamas victory this is going to end up in confrontation and the sooner we pre-empt that conflict the better; remove their leadership, destroy their infrastructure," said Mr Alpher. "That is certainly some of the hidden agenda of this operation but it's not a declared goal. But it could become a declared goal."

Timeline

June 25 Eight Hamas militants seize Corporal Gilad Shalit during raid into Israel from Gaza, the first since Israeli pullout last year

June 28 Israel shells bridges and power plant, and amasses troops and tanks at Gaza's northern border and at Rafah refugee camp in south

June 29 Israeli troops detain one third of Palestinian cabinet and nearly two dozen Hamas lawmakers

June 30 Israeli missile destroys offices of interior minister in Gaza city

July 1 Factions who captured Cpl Shalit demand release of women and children prisoners and further 1,000 captives. Israel rejects demands

July 2 Israel threatens to target Hamas political leadership in Gaza. Air strike destroys office of Palestinian prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh. Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, says he will do whatever necessary to secure Cpl Shalit's release

July 3 Captors give Israel less than 24 hours to meet demands. Israel refuses. Israeli ground forces move into north Gaza. Aircraft bomb Gaza targets. Three Palestinians shot dead.

July 4 Deadline set by militants expires. Militants pull out of negotiations with Egyptian mediators

July 6 Israeli forces and Palestinian gunmen fight fiercest battle since abduction, with reports of at least 17 Palestinian deaths
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 07:20:30 AM
"The young Hamas men in the black pick-up truck seemed strangely happy as they stopped to ask directions to the fighting. They laughed and waved goodbye then bounced off up the rutted road to where the Israelis were waiting for them.

The bass throb of heavy machinegun fire, mixed with the patter of automatic rifles, drifted from over the hill. The machineguns belonged to the Israelis. The rifles were in the hands of a ragbag of Palestinian militiamen...."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=BZWZPY1IRQMNNQFIQMGSFGGAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2006/07/07/wmid107.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/07/07/ixnews.html

The Palestinians' futile bravery defies that reality. The resulting deaths and injuries are considered worth paying in order to keep morale up and dreams alive. Throughout the morning small groups of gunmen launched grenade and rifle attacks on the Israeli tanks parked on the edge of the Atatra area of Beit Lahiya. The Israelis responded with tank and machinegun fire and air strikes.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 7 July 2006, 09:47:24 AM
I get sick of the bloody futility of the whole thing
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 01:16:43 PM
Most of the Palestinian irregular forces are just kids as well, which makes it doubly sad.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Friday 7 July 2006, 01:26:29 PM
I get sick of the bloody futility of the whole thing
Aye, what a waste.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 01:31:38 PM
Give me two tank divisions and an air strike capability outta any Nato base and I would clear wipe the floor with the Kosher boys. blueeek.gif bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 7 July 2006, 02:31:02 PM
I'm not so sure Parky - those lads practise seriously plus they have the second best the yanks can give them
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Friday 7 July 2006, 03:14:06 PM
I'm not so sure Parky - those lads practise seriously plus they have the second best the yanks can give them

some of their own kit is better than any american s****
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Friday 7 July 2006, 03:15:41 PM
Most of the Palestinian irregular forces are just kids as well, which makes it doubly sad.

who is training these kids and putting them in harms way? Sending a kid to war is as wrong as having to fight kids
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Friday 7 July 2006, 03:20:16 PM
Give me two tank divisions and an air strike capability outta any Nato base and I would clear wipe the floor with the Kosher boys. blueeek.gif bluecool.gif
i hear hamas is recruiting
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Friday 7 July 2006, 03:20:25 PM
"The young Hamas men in the black pick-up truck seemed strangely happy as they stopped to ask directions to the fighting. They laughed and waved goodbye then bounced off up the rutted road to where the Israelis were waiting for them.

The bass throb of heavy machinegun fire, mixed with the patter of automatic rifles, drifted from over the hill. The machineguns belonged to the Israelis. The rifles were in the hands of a ragbag of Palestinian militiamen...."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=BZWZPY1IRQMNNQFIQMGSFGGAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2006/07/07/wmid107.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/07/07/ixnews.html

The Palestinians' futile bravery defies that reality. The resulting deaths and injuries are considered worth paying in order to keep morale up and dreams alive. Throughout the morning small groups of gunmen launched grenade and rifle attacks on the Israeli tanks parked on the edge of the Atatra area of Beit Lahiya. The Israelis responded with tank and machinegun fire and air strikes.



The missiles they fire at neighbouring Israeli towns have been knocked up in backstreet workshops.

Many of the casualties were civilians, but the family members hanging around for news of their condition seemed to bear no animosity towards the militants whose abduction of the 19-year-old Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit and rocket attacks sparked the incursion.

The Israelis could re-occupy Gaza, which they evacuated late last summer, any time they wanted.

Ten months after the Israelis pulled out, war is still Gaza's natural condition. On the road back to Gaza City the traffic was halted by a funeral procession for a militant killed the previous night. "What do we want?" yelled a cheerleader. "Martyrdom, for the sake of God!" the column of young men roared back. It will be easy enough for them to get their wish.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Friday 7 July 2006, 03:22:59 PM
Give me two tank divisions and an air strike capability outta any Nato base and I would clear wipe the floor with the Kosher boys. blueeek.gif bluecool.gif

don't think so

they defeated the entire forces of Egypt, Syria and Jordan in 6 days
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 7 July 2006, 04:23:31 PM
They were s**** of course altho the Syrians and the Egyptians gave them a run for their money a few years later

The Arabs will only win if they can trap the Israelis into the sort of WWI Iraq-Iran War situation - the Israelis cant take casualties on any scale - thats why they go for the quick knockout in conventional war
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 04:25:26 PM
That was the old air superiority and American satellite data though mate. Before I take Israel I would obviously disable America....Re-runs of Oooopragh should do it.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 7 July 2006, 04:27:00 PM
There wasn't any Middle East satellite data in 66...............

but the yanks did feed them stuff in the Yom Kippur War I beleive
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 04:30:05 PM
Blokes in air baloons then. bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 7 July 2006, 04:31:51 PM
the odd U2 and SR71 I believe - plus our little operation in Cyprus of course
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 04:41:15 PM
Of course XCyprus: softly softly catchee monkey. They probably picked up all of the chatter.

And all that duff Russian gear. :roll:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 7 July 2006, 04:48:09 PM
Merged another thread with this, if anyone's wondering why it jumped about 10 pages.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Friday 7 July 2006, 04:48:25 PM
That was the old air superiority and American satellite data though mate. Before I take Israel I would obviously disable America....Re-runs of Oooopragh should do it.

more like crap training and switching off your own air defence system so rebels in your own country don't target your armed forces commander!


and where do you get these aircraft that can defeat the best the americans and isrealis have?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 04:55:54 PM
I've had Mikoyan(sp) working round the clock since 86 on that force protection interceptor mate. :wink:

You know your stuff Invicta, its a pleasure to have our little chats even though we seem to be on different sides.

If only others could act the same way.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 7 July 2006, 05:21:42 PM
I understand the Indian Su-31's turned the USAF F-15's over big time in an exercise last year
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 7 July 2006, 05:22:48 PM
Of course XCyprus: softly softly catchee monkey. They probably picked up all of the chatter.

And all that duff Russian gear. :roll:

Lots of Big aerials on top of large mountains in our "sovereign Bases"

Plus refueling U2s of course
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 05:25:38 PM
That's true Rob. Although I heard a rumour that the F15's weren't allowed to use their deepest radar. Whatever that is.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 7 July 2006, 06:09:44 PM
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1164566.ece

Quote
Palestinian death toll rises as Israel pushes into Gaza
By Donald Macintyre in Beit Lahiya
Published: 07 July 2006

At least 20 Palestinians were believed dead, dozens more were wounded and an Israeli soldier was killed yesterday as Israel moved in to reoccupy a swath of the northern Gaza Strip for the first time since its forces and settlers pulled out 11 months ago.

The incursion precipitated the heaviest fighting since Israeli forces converged on Gaza eight days ago in response to the abduction of the 19-year-old army corporal Gilad Shalit and the firing of Qassam rockets.

In the northern Gaza Strip, six people were killed and dozens wounded in what the army said had been three separate aerial strikes aimed at gunmen.

Elsewhere, Palestinian sources said that eight people, including civilians, were among victims of separate attacks, at least one of whom had been killed by an unmanned aerial drone. Five Palestinian militants were later killed in two missile strikes on cars.

The Israeli soldier died after being shot by a Palestinian sniper in a Beit Lahiya house taken over by his unit. Said Siyam, the Palestinian Interior Minister and Hamas leader, last night called on security service personnel fulfill their "duty to stand up to this aggression and cowardly Zionist invasion".

Amir Peretz, Israel's Defence Minister, insisted yesterday: "We have no intention of drowning in the Gaza swamp." He said later: "Return Gilad alive and healthy, stop firing rockets and we will return our soldiers to their bases."

Arab states yesterday called on the UN Security Council to demand that Israeli forces immediately withdraw from Gaza, but France and the US criticised their proposed resolution as unbalanced.

With little sign of a breakthrough in the continuing international diplomatic efforts to broker a solution to the crisis, the fighting between a heavily armoured Israeli incursion force with air support and militants in the northern Strip was the most serious since the disengagement from Gaza ordered by Ariel Sharon last August.

Two other Hamas gunmen, among many who converged on the area with anti-tank and other missiles, were killed in an earlier incident in northern Gaza. And two Palestinians were killed in a separate Israeli air strike outside the southern Gaza town of Khan Yunis. The Israeli military said that both had been militants seeking to attack its forces while Palestinian sources said that one had been a civilian.

But the heaviest machine gun fire ­and most casualties were in western Beit Lahiya as Israeli forces, with tanks, armoured vehicles, drones and helicopter gunships, sought to secure control of the north-west corner of the Gaza Strip, a sector bounded by five kilometres of the northern border and about the same length of the Mediterranean coast. The area includes the ruins of the three northernmost former Jewish settlements abandoned last August and the Atatra district of Beit Lahiya.

Although most of the dead were militants, one civilian who was killed was Mohammed al-Atta, 25. His uncle, Abdul Ahmed al-Atta, 34, a taxi driver, said he had been at home with his nephew, wife and children when a tank fired at the house. Mr Atta, his shirt caked with blood from carrying his nephew to the ambulance, said: "They targeted our house; there was shooting and then I saw my nephew on the ground. There was a tank 100 metres away. We are civilians and there was no resistance in the area at the time."

He added that the Israeli forces had entered the area at about 7am, advancing through orchards rather than using the main streets.

Mr Atta said there had been a long delay after he called an ambulance, which he understood was because Palestinian liaison officers had been unable to co-ordinate safe passage with the Israeli military for emergency vehicles through the area and said he was obliged to telephone a friend in the Red Cross before the co-ordination could take place.

His nephew died on the way to hospital. The army said it had not been able to verify the incident. A group of relatives and friends stormed the ambulancemen's quarters shouting that they had received calls telling them that ambulances had still not arrived to pick up two other dead neighbours and several wounded.

There was no immediate confirmation of the civilian deaths in Atatra. Ambulances were forced to wait near the American School in Atatra for clearance as heavy machine-gun fire from Israeli armoured vehicles, as well as semi-automatic gunfire from militants, sounded across the district.

Later, mourners for the militants who marched through Gaza City were told through a loudspeaker that there would be a "response from Hamas to what Israel is doing."

With Israel still rejecting any suggestion of a prisoner exchange to secure the release of Cpl Shalit, the captured soldier's father Noam said: "In the end, it will be necessary to pay a price for Gilad's freedom. I don't understand why the government is delaying negotiations on this price."
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 06:23:46 PM
With Israel still rejecting any suggestion of a prisoner exchange to secure the release of Cpl Shalit, the captured soldier's father Noam said: "In the end, it will be necessary to pay a price for Gilad's freedom. I don't understand why the government is delaying negotiations on this price."

Do the deal. blueupset.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Friday 7 July 2006, 06:41:22 PM
It's not like they haven't done it before.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Friday 7 July 2006, 06:43:30 PM
It's not like they haven't done it before.

part of the problem tbh
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 06:46:26 PM
It is the reality of this situation and better just to accept it instead of this sickening killing (on both sides).
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Friday 7 July 2006, 06:49:16 PM
accept it and wait for the next time it happens
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 06:51:34 PM
That is the macro debate yes and why this thread is so long. But as for saving lives now in this situatin I'd do the deal. I would also like my troops to see that their save return is paramount.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Friday 7 July 2006, 06:59:12 PM
I think a job in your army would be the safest job on the planet tbh
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 7 July 2006, 07:00:12 PM
It's good for morale. bluewink.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Saturday 8 July 2006, 10:38:48 AM
"nothing improves the morale of the troops in the front line like seeing the occasional dead General"

Genl. Slim in Burma
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Saturday 8 July 2006, 10:40:35 AM
That's true Rob. Although I heard a rumour that the F15's weren't allowed to use their deepest radar. Whatever that is.

Mmmm a story that came out several months after the "event"

The USAF have invited the Indians to some Red Flag type exercises (complete with the Russian AWACS they use)  in the USA this year I believe - obviously want to find out more, quickly
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 11 July 2006, 12:15:48 PM
Israel Creates Humanitarian Crisis

By MARJORIE COHN

The daily horrors emerging from Iraq have caused a majority of people in the United States to oppose Bush's war there. Meanwhile, the humanitarian crisis Israel has created in the occupied territories hovers below the radar for most Americans.

Israel has used the killing of two Israeli soldiers and the capture of a third by Palestinians as an excuse to invade Gaza with overwhelming military force and demolish its infrastructure. What Israel and its benefactor--the United States--really want is to destroy the democratically-elected Hamas government.

During the preceding weeks, Israel instigated events that resulted in the capture of the Israeli soldier. The Israeli military had killed more than 30 civilians, including three children and a pregnant woman.

In the week since the Israeli soldier was captured, Israel's US-supplied artillery has pounded the northern Gaza Strip. Its aircraft struck bridges on the main roads. And its helicopters knocked out Gaza's main power plant, leaving half of Gaza's 1.5 million people and its two main hospitals without electricity and running water. The United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross have warned of a humanitarian crisis.

Israeli troops and tanks rolled into the southern Gaza Strip, in the biggest raid since Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005. Israel has kidnapped 64 Palestinian governmental ministers and politicians. It bombed the home of Palestinian Prime Minister Ismael Haniyeh.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert made the astounding statement, "I am deeply sorry for the residents of Gaza, but the lives, security and well-being of the residents of [Jewish] Sderot is even more important to me." The Associated Press quoted Olmert as saying, "I want no one to sleep at night in Gaza. I want them to know what it feels like."

The crisis caused by the Israeli government has upset many Israeli citizens.

Hundreds of Israelis protested outside Olmert's home, denouncing the government as war criminals and demanding an end to the Gaza invasion. "We call for our government to stop targeting Palestinian civilians--the targeting of civilians is a war crime--and start negotiating with the elected Palestinian leaders, not to arrest them," said Yishai Menuhin, a spokesman for the peace group Yesh Gvul.

Israeli newspaper Haaretz commentator Gideon Levy also criticized the Israeli actions. He wrote, "A state that takes such steps is no longer distinguishable from a terror organization."

Israel's brutal retaliation against Palestinian civilians constitutes collective punishment. Attacks on a civilian population as a form of collective punishment violate article 50 of the Hague Regulations, which provides: "No general penalty, pecuniary or otherwise, shall be inflicted upon the population on account of the acts of individuals for which they cannot be regarded as jointly and severally responsible."

The Fourth Geneva Convention also prohibits collective punishment. Article 33 says: "No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed." The Convention requires all states party to it to search for and ensure the prosecution of perpetrators of the war crime of "causing extensive destruction ... not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly." Amnesty International called the deliberate attacks by Israeli forces against civilian property and infrastructure war crimes.

Collective punishment is likewise forbidden by Article 75 of Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions. As four US Supreme Court justices agreed in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld last week, Article 75 is "indisputably part of the customary international law."

Before Israel's invasion of Gaza last week, Hamas was beginning to retreat from its position that Israel has no right to exist. But Financial Times quoted Efraim Halevy, Israel's most widely respected security expert, as saying, "Why should Israel care whether Hamas grants it the right to exist. Israel exists and Hamas's recognition or non-recognition neither adds to nor detracts from that irrefutable fact."

The state of Israel is in no danger of perishing. Israel is the fourth largest military power in the world. Its "enemy"  the Palestinian people have no tanks, no airplanes, no heavy artillery.

The United States' loyal and consistent support for Israel's policies--to the tune of more than $3 billion in aid per year--has enabled the Israeli government to conduct a war of terror against the Palestinians. Yasser Arafat once told an American journalist, "I'll tell you what this war taught us. It taught us that the real enemy is the United States. It is against you that we must fight. Not because your bombs killed our people but because you have closed your eyes to what is moral and just."

If the US really wished to act on its human rights rhetoric, it should apply political and economic pressure that Israel could not resist. Under the Arms Export Control Act of 1976, military hardware sold by the United States can only be used for defensive purposes or to maintain internal security. Israel has used F-16 fighter jets, Apache and Cobra attack helicopters, 15mm howitzers, M-16 automatic rifles, M50 machine guns and many other weapons and ammunition supplied by the United States. Retired US Army General James J. David, in a letter to Colin Powell in January, 2002, wrote: "If you're going to deny the Palestinians weapons to defend themselves, then you must stop all military and economic aid to Israel."

The Foreign Assistance Act prohibits the United States from rendering assistance to the government of any country " which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights."

The United States should halt Israel's aggression against the Palestinians by suspending all economic and military aid to Israel until Israel's military forces have been withdrawn from the occupied Palestinian territories.

But Israel is the US client-state in the Middle East and Bush is just the latest US president to continue that symbiotic relationship.

Hamas has responded to the recent Israeli aggression with threats of retaliation. This probably means the resumption of the suicide bombings which Hamas halted more than a year ago. A statement signed by Hamas spokesman Abu Obeidi said, "We reiterate that the continued aggression and terrorist acts of the tyrannical occupation against the Palestinian people, amid the silence of the international community, will plunge the region in a sea of blood."

A 2002 New York Times editorial said, "The growing harshness of Israeli military practices in the West Bank and Gaza is creating thousands of potential suicide bombers and Israel haters as well as coarsening a generation of young Israeli soldiers."

United for Peace and Justice has called for an immediate end to the assault on Gaza by the Israeli military forces; the cutting off of US financial and military aid to Israel as well as US support for the Israel occupation of the Palestinian territories; and immediate shipments by the US government of humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza.

It is time for the American people to demand that the US government stop its support for Israel's aggression against the Palestinian people.

Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, president-elect of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the American Association of Jurists.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Tuesday 11 July 2006, 01:18:38 PM
so the US is wrong to send aid to Israel, but it must send aid to the Palestinians because they are threatening to start suicide bombing again?

hypocritical in the extreme
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Tuesday 11 July 2006, 01:27:09 PM
so the US is wrong to send aid to Israel, but it must send aid to the Palestinians because they are threatening to start suicide bombing again?

hypocritical in the extreme
As I see it, it's the huge discrepancy in the levels of aid to those two that is the problem. Or at least a huge part of the problem.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Tuesday 11 July 2006, 01:42:26 PM
so the US is wrong to send aid to Israel, but it must send aid to the Palestinians because they are threatening to start suicide bombing again?

hypocritical in the extreme
As I see it, it's the huge discrepancy in the levels of aid to those two that is the problem. Or at least a huge part of the problem.

who says they have to send aid to anyone? when did the US become the UN (who is actually to blame for the whole mess)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Tuesday 11 July 2006, 01:51:14 PM
so the US is wrong to send aid to Israel, but it must send aid to the Palestinians because they are threatening to start suicide bombing again?

hypocritical in the extreme
As I see it, it's the huge discrepancy in the levels of aid to those two that is the problem. Or at least a huge part of the problem.

who says they have to send aid to anyone? when did the US become the UN (who is actually to blame for the whole mess)
The US decide who they send aid to and they send a lot more to Israel than Palestine. They have a lot more influence over Israel than the UN too. The UN depends upon the major powers backing up its resolutions. In Israel's case, this doesn't seem to happen very often.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Tuesday 11 July 2006, 05:14:09 PM
so the US is wrong to send aid to Israel, but it must send aid to the Palestinians because they are threatening to start suicide bombing again?

hypocritical in the extreme
As I see it, it's the huge discrepancy in the levels of aid to those two that is the problem. Or at least a huge part of the problem.

who says they have to send aid to anyone? when did the US become the UN (who is actually to blame for the whole mess)
The US decide who they send aid to and they send a lot more to Israel than Palestine. They have a lot more influence over Israel than the UN too. The UN depends upon the major powers backing up its resolutions. In Israel's case, this doesn't seem to happen very often.


The antithesis of what you've said, or the UN's resolutions unravelling due to pressure applied being by the US upon it's major backers, being the UN's withdrawal from Rwanda.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Tuesday 11 July 2006, 11:48:10 PM
so the US is wrong to send aid to Israel, but it must send aid to the Palestinians because they are threatening to start suicide bombing again?

hypocritical in the extreme
As I see it, it's the huge discrepancy in the levels of aid to those two that is the problem. Or at least a huge part of the problem.

who says they have to send aid to anyone? when did the US become the UN (who is actually to blame for the whole mess)

The UN may be responsible for creating the situation, but it is the US that perpetuates it.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 12 July 2006, 10:15:46 AM
Does the U.N. need its own army?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 12 July 2006, 10:38:23 AM
VETO!!!!!!!

No-one would vote for it, no-one would pay for it
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 12 July 2006, 12:31:37 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5171616.stm

Quote
Hezbollah seizes Israel soldiers

The Lebanese Shia militant group Hezbollah has captured two Israeli soldiers during clashes across the Lebanese-Israeli border.

There has been heavy fighting in the area, with Hezbollah firing rockets and Israel responding with tank and artillery fire, as well as air strikes.

Aircraft struck roads, bridges and guerrilla posts, Lebanese sources say, and there are reports of casualties.

Israel's PM said anyone trying to test its resolve would "pay a heavy price".

Israel says it is holding the Lebanese government responsible for the fate of the two soldiers, and demands immediate action.

Israeli ground troops have entered southern Lebanon to search for the two soldiers, Israeli officials said.

The news comes as a major Israeli offensive is under way in the Gaza Strip. An Israeli soldier was kidnapped by Palestinian militants in Israel over two weeks ago.

Overnight, Israel carried out an air strike on a Gaza City house, killing at least six people and injuring 15.

On Wednesday morning, Hezbollah launched dozens of Katyusha rockets and mortar bombs at the Israeli town of Shlomi and at Israeli outposts in the disputed Shebaa Farms area.

An Israeli military spokeswoman said there had been a number of casualties, while at least two Lebanese civilians have been killed in Israel's retaliatory raids.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has called a special cabinet session later on Wednesday.

Eying swap

Hezbollah said it captured the two Israeli soldiers at 0904 (0704 GMT).

A statement from the group said the two were taken to a "safe place". It did not mention whether they were alive or dead or injured.

The group says it has captured the soldiers to secure the release of detainees held in Israeli prisons. 

"This operation has taken place as a kind of materialisation to the promise that Hezbollah has kept to the Lebanese, that they are going to do everything possible to make the swap," the chief news editor of Hezbollah Television, Ibrahim Moussawi, told the BBC's World TV.

"[That is] because Israelis still occupy parts of Lebanon, and still hold hostages in their prisons. Some of them have been there more than 25 years."

Hezbollah captured three Israeli soldiers in 2000.

They died during the operation, but four years later, the group was able to exchange their bodies for 430 Palestinians and Lebanese held in Israeli jails.

BBC Middle East analyst Roger Hardy says the capture of two Israeli soldiers is a dramatic gesture of solidarity with the Palestinians - and at the same time adds to the pressures on the Israeli government.

Complicating the picture is the fact that the Lebanese group has the backing of both Syria and Iran.

Israel and American officials are already saying Syria must bear some of the blame for the capture of a young Israeli soldier last month - because it plays host to part of the Hamas leadership.

Pressure on Syria - as well as on the Lebanese government - will now intensify, our analyst adds.

Bad move, in my opinion.  This is bound to kick off proper eventually now...
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 12 July 2006, 01:17:16 PM
aye - looking grim
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 12 July 2006, 02:19:41 PM
Brave lads the old Hezbollah. I don't think any of us would fancy it up against the IDF with those odds. Agree with Rob and Bluf....Unfortunate timing. bluesigh.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Wednesday 12 July 2006, 05:45:45 PM
Co-ordinated with, or inspired by, the Hamas raid, do you reckon?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 13 July 2006, 12:08:13 AM
A solidarity thing more than likely Indi.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 13 July 2006, 02:35:58 AM
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article1174097.ece

Quote
Israel launches ferocious assault on Lebanon after capture of troops
By Donald Macintyre in Jerusalem
Published: 13 July 2006

Israeli forces launched their most serious military assault on southern Lebanon in six years yesterday by land, sea and air after Hizbollah militants seized two soldiers in a cross-border raid described as an "act of war" by the Israeli Prime Minister. Seven Israeli soldiers were killed in the raid, and the response.

The capture of the two soldiers and the killing of three in the same guerrilla operation embroiled Israel in a second front two weeks after its forces mounted an incursion into Gaza in response to the abduction of a 19-year-old army corporal. The army later reported heavy fighting over the Lebanese border.

More than 150 miles to the south, Gaza suffered one of its worst days since the incursions began with medics reporting at least 24 Palestinians dead. These included seven children from the same family killed when a quarter-ton bomb was dropped on their home in an attempt to assassinate the Hamas militia leader Mohammed Deif. Israel signified its intent to continue to fight on two fronts by destroying the Palestinian foreign ministry in Gaza City in an air strike at 1.30am this morning.

Four Israeli soldiers were killed when a tank was blown up by Hizbollah guerrillas as it crossed the border into Lebanon. The eighth soldier was killed as soldiers tried to reach the tank.

Ehud Olmert, who is facing his most difficult test since winning the Israeli general election in March, said its operations would be "restrained but very, very painful". Meanwhile, the Israeli army reported sporadic Katyusha fire into northern Israel.

The Israel Defence Forces said its warplanes had hit 30 targets in Lebanon, including roads, bridges and Hizbollah positions in what it said had been strikes designed to restrict the movements of the soldiers' captors. At least two civilians were killed.

The Israeli army's chief of staff, Lt-Gen Dan Halutz, was reported by Israeli television as warning the Lebanese government that the military would target infrastructure and "turn back the clock in Lebanon by 20 years", if the soldiers were not returned.

The Israeli cabinet last night authorised a "severe" response and issued a statement saying it held the Lebanese government responsible for the attacks and the safe return of the abducted soldiers. It said offered no specific details of the action it planned to take. The Arab League called for an emergency meeting of Arab foreign ministers.

The Israeli army said Hizbollah guerrillas fired a volley of Katyusha rockets before executing their raid on an Israeli military vehicle as it patrolled on the Israeli side of the border, north of Zarit. Seven hours earlier, in the most lethal single incident of the present military campaign in Gaza, an air strike destroyed the two-storey house in the Sheikh Radwan area of Gaza City. It killed a Hamas activist, his wife and his seven children, aged between four and 15.

The Israelis failed to kill the target of the attack, the Hamas militant leader long at the top on Israel's wanted list, Mohammed Deif. But as Hamas militants mounted a guard at the intensive care unit of Gaza City's Shifa hospital last night, unnamed Palestinian security officials reported that he might be paralysed.

Rescue workers pulled a four-year-old child out of the rubble. He had on a red T-shirt but his body was cut in two. Palestinian doctors said the owner of the house, Nabil Abu Salmiyeh, a lecturer at the Islamic University and a Hamas activist, had been killed along with his wife and seven of his nine children.

Rami Samour, 25, who lives near by, said the blast blew the mutilated body of a woman into a neighbouring house. A neighbour, Safwan Amamour, 39, said he and his wife were hit by flying rubble. He said: "No words can describe this destruction, this hellish damage, which I will remember of the rest of my life."

In separate attacks in central Gaza, Israeli troops killed at least nine Palestinians, including a policemen and at least two Islamic Jihad militants in a car. Troops had moved into the area in the early morning, in effect cutting north Gaza from the south.

In another attack, Israeli soldiers killed four gunmen planting explosives in a road used by the army to enter central Gaza. In a third incident, Palestinian security officials said an Israeli aircraft fired a missile into a police station in the central Gaza town of Khan Yunis, killing a policeman and wounding two others.

The outcome of the Lebanon engagement is seen as critical for Mr Olmert and his Defence Minister, the Labour leader, Amir Peretz. Both lack the military experience of their recent predecessors. Military failure would seriously weaken the government, triggering an increasingly influential role for other figures inside and outside the cabinet with more notable military and intelligence backgrounds.

The Hizbollah raid was also thought likely to strengthen the hand of those ministers preferring a military escalation over the pursuit of diplomatic efforts to secure the release of Cpl Gilad Shalit, still presumed to be alive in Gaza. Their argument will be that yesterday's raid vindicates Mr Olmert's stated argument that negotiations on prisoner releases will encourage more seizures of Israeli soldiers.

The Hizbollah leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, told a reporters in Beirut that no military operation would return the captured soldiers and added: " The prisoners will not be returned except through one way: indirect negotiations and a trade."

Israel said it would not agree to a prisoner swap. "You don't negotiate with terror organisations," said Gideon Meir, at the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

Geir Pedersen, the senior UN official in Lebanon, met Lebanon's Prime Minister and said Hizbollah had crossed the border into northern Israel. He said: "Hizbollah's action escalates the already tense situation and is an act of very dangerous proportions."

The Lebanese Information Minister, Ghazi Aridi, said: "The government did not know, and does not bear responsibility nor embrace what happened."

Basically at a point of no return now.  Olmert seems pretty determined to prove himself.  Would be pretty shocking if Lebanon's government was held responsible for this.  Hizbollah are clearly a law onto their own.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ChezGiven on Thursday 13 July 2006, 02:43:42 AM
Things just got a lot worse didnt they.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 13 July 2006, 02:48:22 AM
f***ing right.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 13 July 2006, 03:32:46 AM
An article from Robert Fisk.  Got a lot of time for what he has to say on these issues.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article1174059.ece

Quote
Robert Fisk: Beirut waits as Syrian masters send Hezbollah allies into battle
Published: 13 July 2006

It's about Syria. That was the frightening message delivered by Damascus yesterday when it allowed its Hizbollah allies to cross the UN Blue Line in southern Lebanon, kill three Israeli soldiers, capture two others and demand the release of Lebanese prisoners in Israeli jails.

Within hours, a country that had begun to believe in peace - without a single Syrian soldier left on its soil - found itself once more at war.

Israel held the powerless Lebanese government responsible - as if the sectarian and divided cabinet in Beirut can control Hizbollah. That is Syria's message. Fouad Siniora, Lebanon's affable Prime Minister, may have thought he was running the country but it is President Bashar Assad in Damascus who can still bring life or death to a land that lost 150,000 lives in 15 years of civil conflict.

And there is one certain bet that Syria will rely on; that despite all Israel's threats of inflicting "pain" on Lebanon, this war will run out of control until - as has so often happened in the past - Israel itself calls for a ceasefire and releases prisoners. Then the international big-hitters will arrive and make their way to the real Lebanese capital - Damascus, not Beirut - and appeal for help.

That is probably the plan. But will it work? Israel has threatened Lebanon's newly installed infrastructure and Hizbollah has threatened Israel with further conflict. And therein lies the problem; to get at Hizbollah, Israel must send its soldiers into Lebanon - and then it will lose more soldiers.

Indeed when a single Merkava tank crossed the border into Lebanon yesterday morning, it struck a Hizbollah mine, which killed three more Israelis.

Certainly Hizbollah's attack broke the United Nations rules in southern Lebanon - a "violent breach" of the Blue Line, it was called by Geir Pedersen, the senior UN official in the country - and was bound to unleash the air force, tanks and gunboats of Israel on to this frail, dangerous country. Many Lebanese in Beirut were outraged when gangs of Hizbollah supporters drove through the streets of the capital with party flags to "celebrate" the attack on the border.

Christian members of the Lebanese government were voicing increasing frustration at the Shia Muslim militia's actions - which only proved how powerless the Beirut administration is.

By nightfall, Israel's air raids had begun to spread across the country - the first civilians to die were killed when an aircraft bombed a small road bridge at Qasmiyeh - but would they go even further and include a target in Syria? This would be the gravest escalation so far and would have US as well as UN diplomats appealing for that familiar, tired quality - "restraint".

And prisoner swaps is probably all that will come of this. In January 2004, for example, Israel freed 436 Arab prisoners and released the bodies of 59 Lebanese for burial, in return for an Israeli spy and the bodies of three Israeli soldiers.

As long ago as 1985, three Israeli soldiers captured in 1982 were traded for 1,150 Lebanese and Palestinian prisoners. So Hizbollah knows - and the Israelis know - how this cruel game is played. How many have to die before the swaps begin is a more important question.

What is also clear is that for the first time Israel is facing two Islamist enemies - in southern Lebanon and in Gaza - rather than nationalist guerrillas. The Palestinian Hamas movement's spokesmen in Lebanon yesterday denied that there was any co-ordination with Hizbollah. This may be literally true but Hizbollah timed its attack when Arab feelings are embittered by the international sanctions placed on the democratically elected Hamas government and then the war in Gaza. Hizbollah will ride the anger over Gaza in the hope of escaping condemnation for its capture and killing of Israelis yesterday.

And there is one more little, sinister question. In past violence of this kind, Syria's power was controlled by the Hafez Assad, one of the shrewdest Arabs in modern history. But there are those - including Lebanese politicians - who believe that Bashar, the son, lacks his late father's wisdom and understanding of power. This is a country, remember, whose own Minister of Interior allegedly committed suicide last year and whose soldiers had to leave Lebanon amid suspicion that Syria had set up the murder of Rafik Hariri, Lebanon's former prime minister, last year. All this may now seem academic. But Damascus remains, as always, the key.

Some perfectly good points made. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ChezGiven on Thursday 13 July 2006, 03:35:22 AM
Fisk is a great journalist.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Thursday 13 July 2006, 04:02:26 AM
Fisk is a great journalist.

 blueyes.gif :thup:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 13 July 2006, 10:49:55 AM
This is in many ways an escalatory development which is no doubt being orchestrated by Iran and Syria, Hizbollah's primary backers. Yet tactically imo and looking at it from their pov, this was for them the best time to strike with Israel under a cloud in Palestine.

Hizbollah do carry the torch of being relatively successful in getting Israel out of Lebanonn and have acces to funding in the U.S. and infact all around the world from rich Lebanese benefactors. They are a no-nonsense 'high body count' outfit who have rattled the mighty Israel in the past and again I think the negotiations will end up in Damascus and Tehran the main string pullers.

"But when the group won eight seats in the Lebanese parliament in 1992, it gained that crucial legitimacy which made it much more entrenched. The decision to abandon its call for a strict Islamic fundamentalist government made Hezbollah palatable to Lebanon's Christians and Sunni Muslims. Its focus on social services in a country with virtually no government infrastructure made it flat-out popular. Not many terrorist organizations have their own television network. Hezbollah does. They run Al-Minar ("the lighthouse"), a worldwide satellite TV station from Lebanon. And its successes against Israel made the organization into an icon across the Middle East. In 2000, Israel withdrew the last of its troops from Lebanon, a development almost entirely credited to Hezbollah.

Hezbollah today is led by Hassan Nasrallah, who styles himself as "secretary-general of the party," a clear sign that the group isn't planning to yield its veneer of respectability any time soon. As a young man, Nasrallah studied in Iraq with a radical Shi'ite cleric named Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr (whose nephew Muqtada al-Sadr is currently making life difficult for the United States in Iraq)."

Although in the short term there will be punitive strikes agaisnt Lebanon, in the long term Israel will come to the table.

"Hezbollah used terrorist tactics to push its political agenda, which slowly but surely drove Israel out of Lebanon, inch by bloody inch. It became famous as an innovator in suicide bombing, as well as kidnapping Westerners, hijacking aircraft, and other terrorist activity.

A 1983 terrorist bombing in Beirut that killed 241 Marines has been tied to Hezbollah and Iran (although it's also been tied to half a dozen other groups as well). This attack is widely considered to mark the dawn of the modern age of terrorism.  After a similar attack in 1984, the tough-talking Reagan Administration got the hell out of Lebanon, an embarrassing retreat that most Americans don't like to talk about or even remember."

In a lot of ways far more dangeroous than Hamas and far better connected. There is also some rumours that they have been developing their 'sleeper cell' capability in the U.S.

 bluesigh.gif bluesigh.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlueStar on Thursday 13 July 2006, 09:52:26 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060713/pl_nm/mideast_un_gaza_dc

Quote
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States on Thursday vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution put forward by Qatar on behalf of Arab states that would have condemned  Israel's two-week military incursion into Gaza.
 
The vote on the draft resolution was 10-1, with the United States voting no, and four countries abstaining -- Britain, Denmark, Peru and Slovakia.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said Washington had voted against the text because it was "untimely and already outmoded."

A resolution requires at least nine votes -- and no veto from any of the council's five permanent members -- for approval. The five are Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States.

The veto was the first by the United States since October 2004 when former Ambassador John Danforth opposed a resolution calling on Israel to end an earlier incursion into Gaza.

What exactly has Israel got on the US, pics of Lincon in drag or something?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: optimistic nit on Thursday 13 July 2006, 09:57:08 PM
Britain abstaining. what does this mean? lack of unity with the us, yet not the backbone to vote yes, or very little.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 13 July 2006, 10:00:59 PM
Good point Nit. One of the big 5 abstaining kills it anyway.
I think the U.S. have used the veto over 20 times in favour of Israel so far.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Thursday 13 July 2006, 10:01:22 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060713/pl_nm/mideast_un_gaza_dc

Quote
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States on Thursday vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution put forward by Qatar on behalf of Arab states that would have condemned  Israel's two-week military incursion into Gaza.
 
The vote on the draft resolution was 10-1, with the United States voting no, and four countries abstaining -- Britain, Denmark, Peru and Slovakia.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said Washington had voted against the text because it was "untimely and already outmoded."

A resolution requires at least nine votes -- and no veto from any of the council's five permanent members -- for approval. The five are Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States.

The veto was the first by the United States since October 2004 when former Ambassador John Danforth opposed a resolution calling on Israel to end an earlier incursion into Gaza.

What exactly has Israel got on the US, pics of Lincon in drag or something?

very rich and influential jewish/americans,and the knowlage that jesus wasn't islamic.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Thursday 13 July 2006, 10:08:10 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060713/pl_nm/mideast_un_gaza_dc


What exactly has Israel got on the US, pics of Lincon in drag or something?


In recent times? The Mossad somehow managed to secure Clinton's cigar and/or the missing phone records relating to Marilyn Monroe's final hours.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 13 July 2006, 10:18:25 PM
They had a problem with Clinton's phones for sure.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Friday 14 July 2006, 09:56:50 AM

They had a problem with Clinton's phones for sure.


There has been talk concerning the CIA's ranks, and it's flow of information as well, and the possibility that both aspects - ie. concerning US intel - were breached & compromised by the Mossad.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 14 July 2006, 09:58:39 AM
plus their habit of stealing US technology and passing it on to the Indians etc for a small fee
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Friday 14 July 2006, 11:45:23 AM
Did anyone catch Dubya on Ch. 4 news last night talking about the current situation in Israel / Lebanon. He said it was a simple case of peace loving nations on one side and terrorists on the other. The reporter sarcastically added afterwards that some in the Middle East thought it was slightly more complicated than that. Is the bloke for real or what?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Friday 14 July 2006, 12:02:43 PM

Did anyone catch Dubya on Ch. 4 news last night talking about the current situation in Israel / Lebanon. He said it was a simple case of peace loving nations on one side and terrorists on the other. The reporter sarcastically added afterwards that some in the Middle East thought it was slightly more complicated than that. Is the bloke for real or what?


The bloke's political ideology, which are simplistic at best, and the goals associated were clearly obtained over Supper at a ranch in Texas.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Friday 14 July 2006, 04:35:01 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060713/pl_nm/mideast_un_gaza_dc

Quote
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States on Thursday vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution put forward by Qatar on behalf of Arab states that would have condemned Israel's two-week military incursion into Gaza.
 
The vote on the draft resolution was 10-1, with the United States voting no, and four countries abstaining -- Britain, Denmark, Peru and Slovakia.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said Washington had voted against the text because it was "untimely and already outmoded."

A resolution requires at least nine votes -- and no veto from any of the council's five permanent members -- for approval. The five are Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States.

The veto was the first by the United States since October 2004 when former Ambassador John Danforth opposed a resolution calling on Israel to end an earlier incursion into Gaza.

What exactly has Israel got on the US, pics of Lincon in drag or something?

very rich and influential jewish/americans,and the knowlage that jesus wasn't islamic.

That is a repulsive comment using racist stereotypes. I didnt think it would be long before the classic accusation of "a sinister group of powerful jews who pull the strings in America" was used.

Some of the entirely one-sided and unbalanced comments on here regarding Israel and the Jews are appalling.   blueyes.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Friday 14 July 2006, 04:36:38 PM
This is perhaps a fair appraisal of the situation by Melanie Phillips:

Syria and Iran wage war on Israel

Israel is now at war with Iran and Syria, which are waging war against Israel through their proxies Hezbollah and Hamas in pursuit of their declared aim to exterminate it. The 1000-plus rocket attacks from Gaza, the incursions into Israel and murder and kidnap of its soldiers, the murder and kidnap of more of its soldiers in northern Israel and the shelling of Israel’s northern towns from Lebanon, with two killed in Nahariya and Safed and more injured, and now the rocket attacks on Haifa, all are acts of war — in the latest of which which Lebanon itself is complicit — to which Israel has no option but to respond with force.
Yossi Klein Halevi writes:

The next Middle East war — Israel against genocidal Islamism — has begun…The war will go on for months, perhaps several years. There may be lulls in the fighting, perhaps even temporary agreements and prisoner exchanges. But those periods of calm will be mere respites.

At the very heart of this war is Iran. Earlier this week the Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrullah said the world would soon see the demise of Israel. What we are now seeing may be the start of a new offensive by Iran against the free world. Israel is our collective front line; Iran has made that plain enough, even though we have not had ears to listen. Thanks to the pusillanimity of the world, Iran is on a roll. It has repeatedly threatened to destroy Israel and wage war against the west and yet the free world has done nothing except wring its hands. Iran has watched with scarcely concealed contempt as Europe and the UN pursue their farcical attempts to pressure it into abandoning its nuclear weapons programme while America, the wounded behemoth, licks its wounds over Iraq.

In light of this fact, the reaction of the British and western media and chattering classes to Israel’s current behaviour is beyond farce. So blinded are they by their fixation that Israel is the aggressor and regional bully that even when Israel is plainly attacked in acts of unprovoked aggression they still blame Israel for causing the crisis.

The BBC, as ever, has been playing a sickening role in this propaganda. On the World Service, it denied the fact that Israeli soldiers had been kidnapped on Israel’s own soil, calling the kidnapping of Cpl Shalit a ‘capture in (sic) Gaza’ and the kidnap of the two soldiers in the north of Israel a capture in ‘south Lebanon’.

It has repeatedly presented the Israelis as the aggressors. BBC News Online described Israel’s actions as a ‘major offensive’. On the Today programme this morning (0810) it blamed Israel for ‘upping the ante’. The assumption is — fantastically —that it is Israel, rather than Iran, which is the danger to peace. Israel, it seems, must therefore not be allowed to defend itself when rockets are fired at its towns and cities. When it does so it is called ‘collective punishment’ or a ‘disproportionate response’ involving ‘massive collateral damage’, as was said on BBC Radio Four’s Moral Maze last night.

As this emergency escalates and the casualty toll inevitably mounts, let us just remind ourselves at this stage what this alleged ‘collective punishment’ or ‘disproportionate response’ in Gaza consisted of.

As this report notes:

At the Karni crossing [from Israel into Gaza], over 100 truckloads of food and 14 generators were allowed in and at the Nahal Oz fuel terminal, 500,000 litres of diesel, 100,000 litres of gasoline and 125 tons of natural gas were allowed in. Earlier in the week, more than 265 tons of food, a truckload of medicine, over a 1,000,000 liters of fuel, 65,000 litres of chlorine and additional supplies were transferred in. Last week, more than 200 truckloads of food, 1,500,000 litres of fuel, and over 400 tons of natural gas passed into Gaza. Israel also continues to provide Gaza with an uninterrupted supply of water.

The claims of a humanitarian disaster were therefore wholly untrue.

Much of the electricity supply which went down after the strike on Gaza’s power station was restored within hours. Gaza obtains fifty percent of its electricity from the Ashkelon power station in Israel — a plant which, incidentally, Hamas has repeatedly tried to hit —and following the strike on the Gaza power station Israel upped this percentage to compensate. Some collective punishment!

The Kassam rockets which were being fired into Israel from Gaza were dismissed (by Channel Four News’s Jon Snow and the BBC) as crude home made devices that threatened no-one. In fact, they have killed 13 Israelis and wounded more than forty others. By contrast, the vast majority of Palestinians who have been killed have been armed gunmen and terrorist godfathers. Yes, there have been Palestinian civilian casualties and these are always tragic. But in war, this happens. And the fact is that Israel has not gone in for indiscriminate bombing in Gaza. Indeed, this morning’s news was almost comic in the circumstances — that it had bombed the Gaza foreign ministry building at night when it was empty, precisely to avoid civilian casualties, only wounding three people.

This crisis has developed because the world has failed to deal with Iran and Syria. President Bush described Hezbollah as a ‘group of terrorists who want to stop the advance of peace’. Not so. Iran is a terrorist state and Hezbollah is its army. The US is sitting on its hands over Iran while urging ‘restraint’ upon Israel, its victim. The world will not be safe unless and until Iran and Syria are stopped. And there is only one country that can do that, and it is not Israel.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Friday 14 July 2006, 04:50:19 PM
aye - looking grim
Brave lads the old Hezbollah. I don't think any of us would fancy it up against the IDF with those odds. Agree with Rob and Bluf....Unfortunate timing. bluesigh.gif

So you're saying a terrorist organisation, committed to Islamicising the world and the destruction of Israel are "brave".

I'm afraid your comment is absurd. Terrorism - and specifically strapping bombs to women and children in order to deliberately attack civillians is the highest form of cowardice, rather than the bravery you mention.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlueStar on Friday 14 July 2006, 04:51:37 PM
Bush taking the whole incredibly-volatile-and-dangerous situation in the middle east very seriously I see

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BA3gA_cuInc

 :lol: for f***s sake

EDIT: 
Quote
This is perhaps a fair appraisal of the situation by Melanie Phillips:

 Ah yes, good to see a fair appraisal of the situation in the Middle East from the un-biased author of "Londonistan" and journalist for the Daily Mail and Jewish Chronicle.  If only there were more impartial people giving such fair appraisals of the situation instad of all these news organisations being incredibly one-sided by actually reporting what happens.

Coming up after the break - A fair appraisal of Alan Shearer's career by the contributors of readytogo.net, stay tuned.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: DJ_NUFC on Friday 14 July 2006, 06:08:57 PM
This is perhaps a fair appraisal of the situation by Melanie Phillips:

Syria and Iran wage war on Israel

Israel is now at war with Iran and Syria, which are waging war against Israel through their proxies Hezbollah and Hamas in pursuit of their declared aim to exterminate it. The 1000-plus rocket attacks from Gaza, the incursions into Israel and murder and kidnap of its soldiers, the murder and kidnap of more of its soldiers in northern Israel and the shelling of Israel’s northern towns from Lebanon, with two killed in Nahariya and Safed and more injured, and now the rocket attacks on Haifa, all are acts of war — in the latest of which which Lebanon itself is complicit — to which Israel has no option but to respond with force.
Yossi Klein Halevi writes:

The next Middle East war — Israel against genocidal Islamism — has begun…The war will go on for months, perhaps several years. There may be lulls in the fighting, perhaps even temporary agreements and prisoner exchanges. But those periods of calm will be mere respites.

At the very heart of this war is Iran. Earlier this week the Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrullah said the world would soon see the demise of Israel. What we are now seeing may be the start of a new offensive by Iran against the free world. Israel is our collective front line; Iran has made that plain enough, even though we have not had ears to listen. Thanks to the pusillanimity of the world, Iran is on a roll. It has repeatedly threatened to destroy Israel and wage war against the west and yet the free world has done nothing except wring its hands. Iran has watched with scarcely concealed contempt as Europe and the UN pursue their farcical attempts to pressure it into abandoning its nuclear weapons programme while America, the wounded behemoth, licks its wounds over Iraq.

In light of this fact, the reaction of the British and western media and chattering classes to Israel’s current behaviour is beyond farce. So blinded are they by their fixation that Israel is the aggressor and regional bully that even when Israel is plainly attacked in acts of unprovoked aggression they still blame Israel for causing the crisis.

The BBC, as ever, has been playing a sickening role in this propaganda. On the World Service, it denied the fact that Israeli soldiers had been kidnapped on Israel’s own soil, calling the kidnapping of Cpl Shalit a ‘capture in (sic) Gaza’ and the kidnap of the two soldiers in the north of Israel a capture in ‘south Lebanon’.

It has repeatedly presented the Israelis as the aggressors. BBC News Online described Israel’s actions as a ‘major offensive’. On the Today programme this morning (0810) it blamed Israel for ‘upping the ante’. The assumption is — fantastically —that it is Israel, rather than Iran, which is the danger to peace. Israel, it seems, must therefore not be allowed to defend itself when rockets are fired at its towns and cities. When it does so it is called ‘collective punishment’ or a ‘disproportionate response’ involving ‘massive collateral damage’, as was said on BBC Radio Four’s Moral Maze last night.

As this emergency escalates and the casualty toll inevitably mounts, let us just remind ourselves at this stage what this alleged ‘collective punishment’ or ‘disproportionate response’ in Gaza consisted of.

As this report notes:

At the Karni crossing [from Israel into Gaza], over 100 truckloads of food and 14 generators were allowed in and at the Nahal Oz fuel terminal, 500,000 litres of diesel, 100,000 litres of gasoline and 125 tons of natural gas were allowed in. Earlier in the week, more than 265 tons of food, a truckload of medicine, over a 1,000,000 liters of fuel, 65,000 litres of chlorine and additional supplies were transferred in. Last week, more than 200 truckloads of food, 1,500,000 litres of fuel, and over 400 tons of natural gas passed into Gaza. Israel also continues to provide Gaza with an uninterrupted supply of water.

The claims of a humanitarian disaster were therefore wholly untrue.

Much of the electricity supply which went down after the strike on Gaza’s power station was restored within hours. Gaza obtains fifty percent of its electricity from the Ashkelon power station in Israel — a plant which, incidentally, Hamas has repeatedly tried to hit —and following the strike on the Gaza power station Israel upped this percentage to compensate. Some collective punishment!

The Kassam rockets which were being fired into Israel from Gaza were dismissed (by Channel Four News’s Jon Snow and the BBC) as crude home made devices that threatened no-one. In fact, they have killed 13 Israelis and wounded more than forty others. By contrast, the vast majority of Palestinians who have been killed have been armed gunmen and terrorist godfathers. Yes, there have been Palestinian civilian casualties and these are always tragic. But in war, this happens. And the fact is that Israel has not gone in for indiscriminate bombing in Gaza. Indeed, this morning’s news was almost comic in the circumstances — that it had bombed the Gaza foreign ministry building at night when it was empty, precisely to avoid civilian casualties, only wounding three people.

This crisis has developed because the world has failed to deal with Iran and Syria. President Bush described Hezbollah as a ‘group of terrorists who want to stop the advance of peace’. Not so. Iran is a terrorist state and Hezbollah is its army. The US is sitting on its hands over Iran while urging ‘restraint’ upon Israel, its victim. The world will not be safe unless and until Iran and Syria are stopped. And there is only one country that can do that, and it is not Israel.


This is the scariest article I've ever read. I didn't even finish reading it as it is so one-sided it's f***ing unbelievable.

Yes, that's it, the way to solve all problems is supporting Israel, who constantly battles "terrorism" by shelling civilian housing, killing whole families and ghettoising the West Bank. It's never tit-for-tat, is it? Blame the f***ing "genocidal Islamists", who exist, I don't disagree, but to see Israel as blameless in this matter is juvenile.

Grow up and stop reading s*** like this.

f***.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlueStar on Friday 14 July 2006, 06:11:23 PM
She didn't get the title of "Most Islamophobic Journalist Of The Year 2003" for nothing  :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Friday 14 July 2006, 06:25:30 PM
Bush taking the whole incredibly-volatile-and-dangerous situation in the middle east very seriously I see

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BA3gA_cuInc

 :lol: for f***s sake

EDIT:
Quote
This is perhaps a fair appraisal of the situation by Melanie Phillips:

 Ah yes, good to see a fair appraisal of the situation in the Middle East from the un-biased author of "Londonistan" and journalist for the Daily Mail and Jewish Chronicle.  If only there were more impartial people giving such fair appraisals of the situation instad of all these news organisations being incredibly one-sided by actually reporting what happens.

Coming up after the break - A fair appraisal of Alan Shearer's career by the contributors of readytogo.net, stay tuned.

Don't forget she had the honour of being named Most Islamophobic Journalist of the Year in 2003.

Furthermore her scaremongering bullshit "journalism" concerning the "dangers" of the MMR vaccine, proves that she is happy to write complete bollocks, even about things that she knows absolutely nothing about!!


Stubbs, if you actually want to redress the balance of opinion on here in Israel's favour, then try and post stuff that has some semblance of fairness about it, this crap is just way too easy to refute.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlueStar on Friday 14 July 2006, 06:31:18 PM
Quote
She didn't get the title of "Most Islamophobic Journalist Of The Year 2003" for nothing   

Don't forget she had the honour of being named Most Islamophobic Journalist of the Year in 2003.

I wont ;)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Friday 14 July 2006, 07:26:25 PM
Quote
She didn't get the title of "Most Islamophobic Journalist Of The Year 2003" for nothing   

Don't forget she had the honour of being named Most Islamophobic Journalist of the Year in 2003.

I wont ;)

:lol:

It took me a while to write that, sorry.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Saturday 15 July 2006, 10:04:40 AM
"fair appraisal of the situation by Melanie Phillips"

Using the words "fair" and "melanie phillips" in teh same sentence would get you failed in  both Logic and  Grammar at GCSE
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Saturday 15 July 2006, 10:06:30 AM
"Terrorism - and specifically strapping bombs to women and children in order to deliberately attack civillians is the highest form of cowardice"

I'd also put sending jet aircraft to bomb totally inocent and defenceless women & children in another country to be a high form of cowardice - or a War Crime
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Saturday 15 July 2006, 06:29:57 PM
aye - looking grim
Brave lads the old Hezbollah. I don't think any of us would fancy it up against the IDF with those odds. Agree with Rob and Bluf....Unfortunate timing. bluesigh.gif

So you're saying a terrorist organisation, committed to Islamicising the world and the destruction of Israel are "brave".

I'm afraid your comment is absurd. Terrorism - and specifically strapping bombs to women and children in order to deliberately attack civillians is the highest form of cowardice, rather than the bravery you mention.

 Terrorist organisation? Who told you that? CNN? Fox? Sky? I very strongly urge you to get educated.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Saturday 15 July 2006, 06:44:42 PM

 My country is burning to the ground, and there's c***s like that Melanie Philips making judgements about a topic she has no clue about, from the comfort of her dildo-fitted chair at the office. The issue at hand here is that Israel is a barbaric renegade state, and it's high time the international community took a real stance to put a halt to all its crimes against humanity and its bloodless, gutless murderous regime.

 Any by the way, before any racist c***s have a go, I am a Greek Orthodox Christian, and speaking purely as a Lebanese/Cypriot who is watching his motherland burn to the ground.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: ChezGiven on Saturday 15 July 2006, 07:18:46 PM

 My country is burning to the ground, and there's c***s like that Melanie Philips making judgements about a topic she has no clue about, from the comfort of her dildo-fitted chair at the office. The issue at hand here is that Israel is a barbaric renegade state, and it's high time the international community took a real stance to put a halt to all its crimes against humanity and its bloodless, gutless murderous regime.

 Any by the way, before any racist c***s have a go, I am a Greek Orthodox Christian, and speaking purely as a Lebanese/Cypriot who is watching his motherland burn to the ground.

 :lol:

My mate Bash is Lebanese, had been planning to go back with his kids to see the family in august. been planned for 6 months and had to cancel.

I understand your anger.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Saturday 15 July 2006, 09:07:17 PM

This is perhaps a fair appraisal of the situation by Melanie Phillips:


A Tom Gross article will be posted next.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Saturday 15 July 2006, 09:52:02 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060713/pl_nm/mideast_un_gaza_dc

Quote
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States on Thursday vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution put forward by Qatar on behalf of Arab states that would have condemned Israel's two-week military incursion into Gaza.
 
The vote on the draft resolution was 10-1, with the United States voting no, and four countries abstaining -- Britain, Denmark, Peru and Slovakia.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said Washington had voted against the text because it was "untimely and already outmoded."

A resolution requires at least nine votes -- and no veto from any of the council's five permanent members -- for approval. The five are Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States.

The veto was the first by the United States since October 2004 when former Ambassador John Danforth opposed a resolution calling on Israel to end an earlier incursion into Gaza.

What exactly has Israel got on the US, pics of Lincon in drag or something?

very rich and influential jewish/americans,and the knowlage that jesus wasn't islamic.

That is a repulsive comment using racist stereotypes. I didnt think it would be long before the classic accusation of "a sinister group of powerful jews who pull the strings in America" was used.

Some of the entirely one-sided and unbalanced comments on here regarding Israel and the Jews are appalling.   blueyes.gif


Actually AIPAC - ie. The American Israeli Public Affairs Committee - otherwise known as "the lobby" in Washington, whose annual operating budget is upwards of 50 million, is reportedly backed by prominent Jewish businessmen ie. TV mogul Haim Saban is one. Ironically the very same Saban also pumped over 10 million dollars into the Democrats coffers during the Clinton Administration, one lump sum contribution amounted to around 7.5 million.

Do very rich & influential Jewish *businessmen - *edit - have "secret meetings" with the President inside the Oval Office? No, i dont think they do. But the lobby group - ie. AIPAC... which is regarded as being America's 2nd most powerful and influential lobby group behind the National Rifle Association - which does receive financial backing from the sort people that Madras has alluded to, certainly does influence US foreign policy where Israel and the Middle East is concerned. You only have look at the official AIPAC website, where their "achievements" are listed, in order to discover that this is in fact the case.

There is certainly a degree of base to Madras' earlier comment and one would have to be stupidly naive if they were to unequivocally dismiss it.

Actually AIPAC's origins make for some interesting reading. They were originally - back in 50's - called the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs -  the lobbying arm for the old American Zionist Council. They initially broke away from the AZC due to taxation reasons, eventually becoming & renaming themselves AIPAC, dropping the word 'Zionist' from their title in the process.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Sunday 16 July 2006, 09:46:36 AM
A lot of Jews outside Israel support Israel and the Zionists; quite a few don't

Many feel they "have to" - much in the same way that idiot "Irish"- Americans support the IRA

To deny that bodies like AIPAC are largelly funded by jews is nonsense

To blame jews in general for the situation in the Middle East is also dangerous nonsense


Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Sunday 16 July 2006, 10:48:44 AM
A lot of Jews outside Israel support Israel and the Zionists; quite a few don't

Many feel they "have to" - much in the same way that idiot "Irish"- Americans support the IRA

To deny that bodies like AIPAC are largelly funded by jews is nonsense

To blame jews in general for the situation in the Middle East is also dangerous nonsense




 And by that surely you mean that it's specifically ISRAEL that's to be blame. I can;t for the life of me fathom how one can see it in any other light.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Sunday 16 July 2006, 11:12:29 AM
I'm trying to point out that while almost Zionists are jews not all jews are Zionists

Not even all Israelis are Zionists
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: sicsfingeredmong on Sunday 16 July 2006, 12:25:26 PM

I'm trying to point out that while almost Zionists are jews not all jews are Zionists

Not even all Israelis are Zionists


TBH from what i've read i haven't seen that point, or generalisation to be exact, raised.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 17 July 2006, 09:31:42 AM
I was adding to your post - or thought I was...........
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 06:46:56 PM

 I know most if not all on this forum are unaffected by what is going on in the Middle East right now, but I'm quite surprised that no one is having a real conversation about it. Israel is being allowed to get away with daily murders of civilians, using not only their cowardly military might, but internationally banned weapons such as phosphoric bombs and cluster bombs. 20 people were killed while sat on the back of a pick up truck begging the UN peacekeepers to let them into their camp, and being turned away. The bodies were so badly burned from the direct hits that they could barely be recognised as human. 9 of them were children.

 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 17 July 2006, 06:54:34 PM
As you can see, this thread is 30 pages long.  Israel's response on Lebanon is brutal, but there's nothing so surprising, in terms of their tactics, that we can say anything different from the last six months of this thread, sadly. 

What's happening to Lebanon now is what has happened to the Palestinians, on and off for decades. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 06:59:29 PM
As you can see, this thread is 30 pages long.  Israel's response on Lebanon is brutal, but there's nothing so surprising, in terms of their tactics, that we can say anything different from the last six months of this thread, sadly. 

What's happening to Lebanon now is what has happened to the Palestinians, on and off for decades. 

 Right, just seen the other thread. Good to know ppl care about the truth.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 07:15:26 PM
T4life,

This is probably one of the best theads on the internet with a meaty discussion on Israel and we are more than proud of it.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Howaythelads on Monday 17 July 2006, 07:24:08 PM
There's always going to be two sides to the story, isn't there? Israel is bound to feel threatened by the idea that none of the countries around them want them to exist, then they go OTT with a reaction and so it goes on. Nobody knows who's at fault anymore and I'm not sure it even matters now. What matters is to stop it all and somehow get these people to reach a situation where they can live without blowing each other up. How the hell that can happen is beyond me and I seriously think it's beyond them.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Monday 17 July 2006, 07:36:48 PM
There's always going to be two sides to the story, isn't there? Israel is bound to feel threatened by the idea that none of the countries around them want them to exist, then they go OTT with a reaction and so it goes on. Nobody knows who's at fault anymore and I'm not sure it even matters now. What matters is to stop it all and somehow get these people to reach a situation where they can live without blowing each other up. How the hell that can happen is beyond me and I seriously think it's beyond them.

Yep.

Only way I can see anything ever getting sorted out, is for the UN to intervene militarily to seperate the two sides, but for this to happen it's going to need a monumental shift in US policy towards Israel, and although that is possible, it is an extremely remote possibility.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 07:40:45 PM
There's always going to be two sides to the story, isn't there? Israel is bound to feel threatened by the idea that none of the countries around them want them to exist, then they go OTT with a reaction and so it goes on. Nobody knows who's at fault anymore and I'm not sure it even matters now. What matters is to stop it all and somehow get these people to reach a situation where they can live without blowing each other up. How the hell that can happen is beyond me and I seriously think it's beyond them.

Yep.

Only way I can see anything ever getting sorted out, is for the UN to intervene militarily to seperate the two sides, but for this to happen it's going to need a monumental shift in US policy towards Israel, and although that is possible, it is an extremely remote possibility.

 I don't trust the UN to p*ss on a 1 legged pony if it were on fire. The UN is run by the US and Israel. How else can anyone explain the tens of UN SC resolutions that have been ignored by the two? Iraq refuses to bow down by ignoring ONE f***ing resolution, and it's all blown up to hell. Same goes with Lebanon, etc.. etc..

 Israel has not abided by a SINGLE UN SC resolution since its inception. Renders the UN useless tbh
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Monday 17 July 2006, 07:47:48 PM
There's always going to be two sides to the story, isn't there? Israel is bound to feel threatened by the idea that none of the countries around them want them to exist, then they go OTT with a reaction and so it goes on. Nobody knows who's at fault anymore and I'm not sure it even matters now. What matters is to stop it all and somehow get these people to reach a situation where they can live without blowing each other up. How the hell that can happen is beyond me and I seriously think it's beyond them.

Yep.

Only way I can see anything ever getting sorted out, is for the UN to intervene militarily to seperate the two sides, but for this to happen it's going to need a monumental shift in US policy towards Israel, and although that is possible, it is an extremely remote possibility.

 I don't trust the UN to p*ss on a 1 legged pony if it were on fire. The UN is run by the US and Israel. How else can anyone explain the tens of UN SC resolutions that have been ignored by the two? Iraq refuses to bow down by ignoring ONE f***ing resolution, and it's all blown up to hell. Same goes with Lebanon, etc.. etc..

 Israel has not abided by a SINGLE UN SC resolution since its inception. Renders the UN useless tbh

Like I said it would need a massive shift of US policy, which would need them to believe it was in their interests to do so, how that happens I have no idea, what do you think needs to happen T4L?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 17 July 2006, 07:52:11 PM
I think a possible idea would be needed two vetoes for a resolution to be blocked.  No doubt that would just mean the UK taking up the role, but on occasions, like on the wall Israel built, they may vote against it.  The problem is all any proposal needs is one veto, and with regards to Israel, the US will always give it, blindly. 

I'm not too sure how it all works, and some how I've probably over simplified the process, but may that's what it needs.  A bit of simplification (common f***ing sense).
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Monday 17 July 2006, 07:55:58 PM
Any of the permenant members can veto any resolution.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 17 July 2006, 07:57:42 PM
Yeah, I know that, but only one always vetoes in favour of Israel.  We occasionally do, or abstain.  China now seem to be doing with other countries, Iran, Sudan etc. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:00:50 PM
There's always going to be two sides to the story, isn't there? Israel is bound to feel threatened by the idea that none of the countries around them want them to exist, then they go OTT with a reaction and so it goes on. Nobody knows who's at fault anymore and I'm not sure it even matters now. What matters is to stop it all and somehow get these people to reach a situation where they can live without blowing each other up. How the hell that can happen is beyond me and I seriously think it's beyond them.

Yep.

Only way I can see anything ever getting sorted out, is for the UN to intervene militarily to seperate the two sides, but for this to happen it's going to need a monumental shift in US policy towards Israel, and although that is possible, it is an extremely remote possibility.

 I don't trust the UN to p*ss on a 1 legged pony if it were on fire. The UN is run by the US and Israel. How else can anyone explain the tens of UN SC resolutions that have been ignored by the two? Iraq refuses to bow down by ignoring ONE f***ing resolution, and it's all blown up to hell. Same goes with Lebanon, etc.. etc..

 Israel has not abided by a SINGLE UN SC resolution since its inception. Renders the UN useless tbh

Like I said it would need a massive shift of US policy, which would need them to believe it was in their interests to do so, how that happens I have no idea, what do you think needs to happen T4L?

 Well, in an ideal world? The best thing would be for Israel to start respecting its neighbors, and stop all the paranoid tactics. The Palestinian state is a MUST. The wall must come down. The arab prisoners in jails for over 20 yrs must be released. The palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan must all be taken back, and given as much aid to rebuild their lives as Israel receives from the US every year. Hizbollah must then be disarmed and integrated into the Lebanese political structure.

 The above will be the only path to secure real peace for Israel and its people, as well as those of the neighboring countries. Any diversion from the above, and Israel will be the biggest and probably only loser. Hizbollah realise that they are no match military wise for Israel, but it's psychological warfare now, and Hizbollah are winning it. Comfortably.

 Time for a change.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Howaythelads on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:08:19 PM
There's always going to be two sides to the story, isn't there? Israel is bound to feel threatened by the idea that none of the countries around them want them to exist, then they go OTT with a reaction and so it goes on. Nobody knows who's at fault anymore and I'm not sure it even matters now. What matters is to stop it all and somehow get these people to reach a situation where they can live without blowing each other up. How the hell that can happen is beyond me and I seriously think it's beyond them.

Yep.

Only way I can see anything ever getting sorted out, is for the UN to intervene militarily to seperate the two sides, but for this to happen it's going to need a monumental shift in US policy towards Israel, and although that is possible, it is an extremely remote possibility.

 I don't trust the UN to p*ss on a 1 legged pony if it were on fire. The UN is run by the US and Israel. How else can anyone explain the tens of UN SC resolutions that have been ignored by the two? Iraq refuses to bow down by ignoring ONE f***ing resolution, and it's all blown up to hell. Same goes with Lebanon, etc.. etc..

 Israel has not abided by a SINGLE UN SC resolution since its inception. Renders the UN useless tbh

Like I said it would need a massive shift of US policy, which would need them to believe it was in their interests to do so, how that happens I have no idea, what do you think needs to happen T4L?

 Well, in an ideal world? The best thing would be for Israel to start respecting its neighbors, and stop all the paranoid tactics. The Palestinian state is a MUST. The wall must come down. The arab prisoners in jails for over 20 yrs must be released. The palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan must all be taken back, and given as much aid to rebuild their lives as Israel receives from the US every year. Hizbollah must then be disarmed and integrated into the Lebanese political structure.

 The above will be the only path to secure real peace for Israel and its people, as well as those of the neighboring countries. Any diversion from the above, and Israel will be the biggest and probably only loser. Hizbollah realise that they are no match military wise for Israel, but it's psychological warfare now, and Hizbollah are winning it. Comfortably.

 Time for a change.

Israel would probably say that in an ideal world the best thing would be for the countries around them to recognise that they have a right to exist. It is true that Israel is marked out on maps used in the Middle East, is it not? Used to be in the 80's when I was there, anyway. It's only a small point, but it's a symbol of denying a country a right to exist and that can't do anything but cause fear and paranoia in that country.

I've got no axe to grind on this mate, I think it's bloody terrible what is going on, but there is always two sides, mate. Always. Someone has to make the first move and it could be either side.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:13:17 PM
There's always going to be two sides to the story, isn't there? Israel is bound to feel threatened by the idea that none of the countries around them want them to exist, then they go OTT with a reaction and so it goes on. Nobody knows who's at fault anymore and I'm not sure it even matters now. What matters is to stop it all and somehow get these people to reach a situation where they can live without blowing each other up. How the hell that can happen is beyond me and I seriously think it's beyond them.

Yep.

Only way I can see anything ever getting sorted out, is for the UN to intervene militarily to seperate the two sides, but for this to happen it's going to need a monumental shift in US policy towards Israel, and although that is possible, it is an extremely remote possibility.

 I don't trust the UN to p*ss on a 1 legged pony if it were on fire. The UN is run by the US and Israel. How else can anyone explain the tens of UN SC resolutions that have been ignored by the two? Iraq refuses to bow down by ignoring ONE f***ing resolution, and it's all blown up to hell. Same goes with Lebanon, etc.. etc..

 Israel has not abided by a SINGLE UN SC resolution since its inception. Renders the UN useless tbh

Like I said it would need a massive shift of US policy, which would need them to believe it was in their interests to do so, how that happens I have no idea, what do you think needs to happen T4L?

 Well, in an ideal world? The best thing would be for Israel to start respecting its neighbors, and stop all the paranoid tactics. The Palestinian state is a MUST. The wall must come down. The arab prisoners in jails for over 20 yrs must be released. The palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan must all be taken back, and given as much aid to rebuild their lives as Israel receives from the US every year. Hizbollah must then be disarmed and integrated into the Lebanese political structure.

 The above will be the only path to secure real peace for Israel and its people, as well as those of the neighboring countries. Any diversion from the above, and Israel will be the biggest and probably only loser. Hizbollah realise that they are no match military wise for Israel, but it's psychological warfare now, and Hizbollah are winning it. Comfortably.

 Time for a change.

Israel would probably say that in an ideal world the best thing would be for the countries around them to recognise that they have a right to exist. It is true that Israel is marked out on maps used in the Middle East, is it not? Used to be in the 80's when I was there, anyway. It's only a small point, but it's a symbol of denying a country a right to exist and that can't do anything but cause fear and paranoia in that country.

I've got no axe to grind on this mate, I think it's bloody terrible what is going on, but there is always two sides, mate. Always. Someone has to make the first move and it could be either side.

 Of course Israel has a right to exist, and for this to work, you're right, this right must be recognised by its neighbors. However, the only way it will get that is by respecting its neighbors, and realising that threatening militry might will only intimidate those around it. Also it has to stop inciting hatred towards it by respecting human rights and UN/International laws and resolutions.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Howaythelads on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:16:03 PM
There's always going to be two sides to the story, isn't there? Israel is bound to feel threatened by the idea that none of the countries around them want them to exist, then they go OTT with a reaction and so it goes on. Nobody knows who's at fault anymore and I'm not sure it even matters now. What matters is to stop it all and somehow get these people to reach a situation where they can live without blowing each other up. How the hell that can happen is beyond me and I seriously think it's beyond them.

Yep.

Only way I can see anything ever getting sorted out, is for the UN to intervene militarily to seperate the two sides, but for this to happen it's going to need a monumental shift in US policy towards Israel, and although that is possible, it is an extremely remote possibility.

 I don't trust the UN to p*ss on a 1 legged pony if it were on fire. The UN is run by the US and Israel. How else can anyone explain the tens of UN SC resolutions that have been ignored by the two? Iraq refuses to bow down by ignoring ONE f***ing resolution, and it's all blown up to hell. Same goes with Lebanon, etc.. etc..

 Israel has not abided by a SINGLE UN SC resolution since its inception. Renders the UN useless tbh

Like I said it would need a massive shift of US policy, which would need them to believe it was in their interests to do so, how that happens I have no idea, what do you think needs to happen T4L?

 Well, in an ideal world? The best thing would be for Israel to start respecting its neighbors, and stop all the paranoid tactics. The Palestinian state is a MUST. The wall must come down. The arab prisoners in jails for over 20 yrs must be released. The palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan must all be taken back, and given as much aid to rebuild their lives as Israel receives from the US every year. Hizbollah must then be disarmed and integrated into the Lebanese political structure.

 The above will be the only path to secure real peace for Israel and its people, as well as those of the neighboring countries. Any diversion from the above, and Israel will be the biggest and probably only loser. Hizbollah realise that they are no match military wise for Israel, but it's psychological warfare now, and Hizbollah are winning it. Comfortably.

 Time for a change.

Israel would probably say that in an ideal world the best thing would be for the countries around them to recognise that they have a right to exist. It is true that Israel is marked out on maps used in the Middle East, is it not? Used to be in the 80's when I was there, anyway. It's only a small point, but it's a symbol of denying a country a right to exist and that can't do anything but cause fear and paranoia in that country.

I've got no axe to grind on this mate, I think it's bloody terrible what is going on, but there is always two sides, mate. Always. Someone has to make the first move and it could be either side.

 Of course Israel has a right to exist, and for this to work, you're right, this right must be recognised by its neighbors. However, the only way it will get that is by respecting its neighbors, and realising that threatening militry might will only intimidate those around it. Also it has to stop inciting hatred towards it by respecting human rights and UN/International laws and resolutions.

Well nowt personal you understand, but I'd like to read what an Israeli has to say about it because I virtually guarantee it would be almost the same as what you're saying, except they'd be talking about the issues of the other side.

I don't know the way forward, but someone has to make a move.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:19:43 PM
Historically nothing happens till the stronger partner makes 'the move'.
Israel have been eyeing Lebanon since the Syrians moved out.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:22:54 PM
There's always going to be two sides to the story, isn't there? Israel is bound to feel threatened by the idea that none of the countries around them want them to exist, then they go OTT with a reaction and so it goes on. Nobody knows who's at fault anymore and I'm not sure it even matters now. What matters is to stop it all and somehow get these people to reach a situation where they can live without blowing each other up. How the hell that can happen is beyond me and I seriously think it's beyond them.

Yep.

Only way I can see anything ever getting sorted out, is for the UN to intervene militarily to seperate the two sides, but for this to happen it's going to need a monumental shift in US policy towards Israel, and although that is possible, it is an extremely remote possibility.

 I don't trust the UN to p*ss on a 1 legged pony if it were on fire. The UN is run by the US and Israel. How else can anyone explain the tens of UN SC resolutions that have been ignored by the two? Iraq refuses to bow down by ignoring ONE f***ing resolution, and it's all blown up to hell. Same goes with Lebanon, etc.. etc..

 Israel has not abided by a SINGLE UN SC resolution since its inception. Renders the UN useless tbh

Like I said it would need a massive shift of US policy, which would need them to believe it was in their interests to do so, how that happens I have no idea, what do you think needs to happen T4L?

 Well, in an ideal world? The best thing would be for Israel to start respecting its neighbors, and stop all the paranoid tactics. The Palestinian state is a MUST. The wall must come down. The arab prisoners in jails for over 20 yrs must be released. The palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan must all be taken back, and given as much aid to rebuild their lives as Israel receives from the US every year. Hizbollah must then be disarmed and integrated into the Lebanese political structure.

 The above will be the only path to secure real peace for Israel and its people, as well as those of the neighboring countries. Any diversion from the above, and Israel will be the biggest and probably only loser. Hizbollah realise that they are no match military wise for Israel, but it's psychological warfare now, and Hizbollah are winning it. Comfortably.

 Time for a change.

Israel would probably say that in an ideal world the best thing would be for the countries around them to recognise that they have a right to exist. It is true that Israel is marked out on maps used in the Middle East, is it not? Used to be in the 80's when I was there, anyway. It's only a small point, but it's a symbol of denying a country a right to exist and that can't do anything but cause fear and paranoia in that country.

I've got no axe to grind on this mate, I think it's bloody terrible what is going on, but there is always two sides, mate. Always. Someone has to make the first move and it could be either side.

 Of course Israel has a right to exist, and for this to work, you're right, this right must be recognised by its neighbors. However, the only way it will get that is by respecting its neighbors, and realising that threatening militry might will only intimidate those around it. Also it has to stop inciting hatred towards it by respecting human rights and UN/International laws and resolutions.

Well nowt personal you understand, but I'd like to read what an Israeli has to say about it because I virtually guarantee it would be almost the same as what you're saying, except they'd be talking about the issues of the other side.

I don't know the way forward, but someone has to make a move.

 It takes nothing more than a quick glance at history to see that when the plans for an Israeli state began to be carried out, it was the Palestinians who were thrown out of their homes, stripped of all their land and all their human rights. That was over 50 yrs ago. What's happened has happened, and we are where we are. Since Israel was the original aggressor, then it wouldn't be asking too much (logically) for them to start a true and lasting peace. The arabs can't expect the Israelis to leave, and vice versa. What's done is done, and the way forward is for Israel to extend its hand in sincere friendship to the people it massacred to get to where it is today.

 Why is it that Israel is the one who has to defend itself from the Palestinians and Arabs, when they were the original aggressors? Why is it Israel that receives the largest chunk of US aid every year to continue to develop its massive arsenal of mass destruction? If Israel's cause was just and pure, it wouldn't need all this help. However, I have a feeling that they themselves know and realise the ugly truth of what they've done, and are paranoid about it.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:24:38 PM
"However, I have a feeling that they themselves know and realise the ugly truth of what they've done, and are paranoid about it."

Nice sentiment but I wouldn't count on it mate.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:27:55 PM
"However, I have a feeling that they themselves know and realise the ugly truth of what they've done, and are paranoid about it."

Nice sentiment but I wouldn't count on it mate.

 Oh I am 100% convinced they know what they've done. Only the paranoid constantly feel the need to protect themselves this well. And if you're paranoid, then you must know that you've done something wrong.

 Either way, as you've said, it's always been the more powerful entity that has made the first move on the road to peace. There is no other way.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:29:19 PM
You might not want to hear it, but I think there are elements at work in this scenario who have decided to ' go for it'. They will try and draw Syria in, but the real target is Iran.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Footsoldier on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:30:31 PM
Although I couldn't give a rat's arse about either side as you are all f****d up, IMO, I'd be paranoid if I lived in Israel surrounded by a bunch of arabs strapping expolsives to themselves.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:32:57 PM
You might not want to hear it, but I think there are elements at work in this scenario who have decided to ' go for it'. They will try and draw Syria in, but the real target is Iran.

 Well, i do believe that Israel is mentally weak, but they're not stupid. At least they haven't been stupid until this latest stunt (attacking Lebanon with such ruthless ferocity). They will lose the war to Hizbollah (remember its psychological warfare at this point), and should they enter a duel with Syria OR Iran, I guarantee you that they will be in "a world of pain".
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:35:08 PM
Although I couldn't give a rat's arse about either side as you are all f****d up, IMO, I'd be paranoid if I lived in Israel surrounded by a bunch of arabs strapping expolsives to themselves.

 As stupid a comment as you are likely to hear from a blissfully ignorant soul. Stay that way little one. Tell me why u'd be paranoid living in Israel? Wasn;'t Israel the original aggressor? Yes it was. Fact. End of.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:40:41 PM
The strategy imo is to put pressure on Syria to put pressure on Hizbollah and to an extent Iran as well. Israel won't risk war with these two, but they are playing this game of poker in such a way as to widen the debate and the agenda. Remember Iraq is going badly for the Americans who are tiring in Iraq. 2000 soldiers dead now and estimated 24,000 injured. The US and Israel are just raising the stakes. Syria can't call in Hizbollah and won't and Israel is gambling on this so they can condemn Syria and negatively affect the psychological war with Iran. They want Iran, this conflict is the first marker in the battle. The goal for me is clear.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:41:24 PM
The Israeli response is all about Ehud Olmert trying to prove his tough guy right-wing credentials. Whereas for Sharon this was a given - so he had less to prove - Olmert still feels he has to convince the Israeli public he has the balls to "protect" them, to be honest I think he's gone too far in the eyes of a lot of the Israelis and might suffer a backlash from his own people if this all goes tits-up. His actions smack of a little-boy lost to me and I think he's got himself in over his head, but doesn't know what to do other than keep digging.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:45:24 PM
This might go badly wrong for Israel and I suspect is already going badly wrong. It will just double the 'aid' and logistics Hizbollah get from their sponsors and will re-solidify anti-Israeli sentiment across the Arab world. This is a gross overeaction. The question is have they thought it through?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:46:45 PM
There's always going to be two sides to the story, isn't there? Israel is bound to feel threatened by the idea that none of the countries around them want them to exist, then they go OTT with a reaction and so it goes on. Nobody knows who's at fault anymore and I'm not sure it even matters now. What matters is to stop it all and somehow get these people to reach a situation where they can live without blowing each other up. How the hell that can happen is beyond me and I seriously think it's beyond them.

Yep.

Only way I can see anything ever getting sorted out, is for the UN to intervene militarily to seperate the two sides, but for this to happen it's going to need a monumental shift in US policy towards Israel, and although that is possible, it is an extremely remote possibility.

 I don't trust the UN to p*ss on a 1 legged pony if it were on fire. The UN is run by the US and Israel. How else can anyone explain the tens of UN SC resolutions that have been ignored by the two? Iraq refuses to bow down by ignoring ONE f***ing resolution, and it's all blown up to hell. Same goes with Lebanon, etc.. etc..

 Israel has not abided by a SINGLE UN SC resolution since its inception. Renders the UN useless tbh

Like I said it would need a massive shift of US policy, which would need them to believe it was in their interests to do so, how that happens I have no idea, what do you think needs to happen T4L?

 Well, in an ideal world? The best thing would be for Israel to start respecting its neighbors, and stop all the paranoid tactics. The Palestinian state is a MUST. The wall must come down. The arab prisoners in jails for over 20 yrs must be released. The palestinian refugees in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan must all be taken back, and given as much aid to rebuild their lives as Israel receives from the US every year. Hizbollah must then be disarmed and integrated into the Lebanese political structure.

 The above will be the only path to secure real peace for Israel and its people, as well as those of the neighboring countries. Any diversion from the above, and Israel will be the biggest and probably only loser. Hizbollah realise that they are no match military wise for Israel, but it's psychological warfare now, and Hizbollah are winning it. Comfortably.

 Time for a change.

Israel would probably say that in an ideal world the best thing would be for the countries around them to recognise that they have a right to exist. It is true that Israel is marked out on maps used in the Middle East, is it not? Used to be in the 80's when I was there, anyway. It's only a small point, but it's a symbol of denying a country a right to exist and that can't do anything but cause fear and paranoia in that country.

I've got no axe to grind on this mate, I think it's bloody terrible what is going on, but there is always two sides, mate. Always. Someone has to make the first move and it could be either side.

 Of course Israel has a right to exist, and for this to work, you're right, this right must be recognised by its neighbors. However, the only way it will get that is by respecting its neighbors, and realising that threatening militry might will only intimidate those around it. Also it has to stop inciting hatred towards it by respecting human rights and UN/International laws and resolutions.

Well nowt personal you understand, but I'd like to read what an Israeli has to say about it because I virtually guarantee it would be almost the same as what you're saying, except they'd be talking about the issues of the other side.

I don't know the way forward, but someone has to make a move.

 It takes nothing more than a quick glance at history to see that when the plans for an Israeli state began to be carried out, it was the Palestinians who were thrown out of their homes, stripped of all their land and all their human rights. That was over 50 yrs ago. What's happened has happened, and we are where we are. Since Israel was the original aggressor, then it wouldn't be asking too much (logically) for them to start a true and lasting peace. The arabs can't expect the Israelis to leave, and vice versa. What's done is done, and the way forward is for Israel to extend its hand in sincere friendship to the people it massacred to get to where it is today.

 Why is it that Israel is the one who has to defend itself from the Palestinians and Arabs, when they were the original aggressors? Why is it Israel that receives the largest chunk of US aid every year to continue to develop its massive arsenal of mass destruction? If Israel's cause was just and pure, it wouldn't need all this help. However, I have a feeling that they themselves know and realise the ugly truth of what they've done, and are paranoid about it.
are you painting to heavy a picture of the early israel ? were palistinians actually turfed out their homes and their land stolen ?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:46:56 PM
The Israeli response is all about Ehud Olmert trying to prove his tough guy right-wing credentials. Whereas for Sharon this was a given - so he had less to prove - Olmert still feels he has to convince the Israeli public he has the balls to "protect" them, to be honest I think he's gone too far in the eyes of a lot of the Israelis and might suffer a backlash from his own people if this all goes tits-up. His actions smack of a little-boy lost to me and I think he's got himself in over his head, but doesn't know what to do other than keep digging.

...

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/739042.html

Quote
Last update - 00:29 17/07/2006   
More than 500 protest in TA against IDF raids in Lebanon, Gaza   
By Tamara Traubman and Ruth Sinai-Heruti, Haaretz Correspondents   

More than 500 left-wing activists gathered in central Tel Aviv on Sunday to protest the escalating violence in Lebanon and the Israel Defense Forces' continued offensive in the Gaza Strip.

Police forces blocked the protesters when they arrived at the site of the demonstration, and detained three people for questioning.

The protesters called the IDF's operations an unnecessary war, and demanded that the government hold negotiations on a prisoner exchange.

"We have learned from history that military solutions don't bring anything other than death and destruction," said Abir Kobti, an activist in the Coalition of Women for Peace. "We are calling on the government to regain its composure, come down from the tree, and solve these problems with negotiations to save us from more deaths on both sides," she said.

Kobti said the media diminishes the attacks on Lebanese civilians as outcomes of a military offensive, thus "portraying it as a necessary war surrounded by full consensus."

A women's protest was also held Sunday next to the central Haifa train depot where a Hezbollah rocket landed early Sunday, killing eight people. The women said that in the coming days, they would be assembling a new group of Arab and Jewish women against the war.

Only 500, but it's something, and a start.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:49:10 PM
That is an interesting report Bluf.




Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:50:55 PM


 I believe that both of the above posts show a remarkable reading of the situation, and I am honestly glad that there are ppl who care enough about this world to think for themselves, and not merely pick up on whatever s**** they hear on cnn.

 I am not a political or military expert, but I am from the area, and have been through enough wartime to be able to talk about this. But for people so far away from the conflict zone, I applaud all on the forum who have the presence of mind to go in search of the truth.

 I;ve had enough of this torment for another day. My country burns and is in tatters tonight, but it's what we do best. Get back up on our feet, dust ourselves off, and start again.

 Power to the people.

 Can we sign a few strikers now ffs?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:57:45 PM
"Can we sign a few strikers now ffs?" bluelaugh.gif bluelaugh.gif

I blame the UN for our striker situation. bluebiggrin.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 08:59:14 PM
"Can we sign a few strikers now ffs?" bluelaugh.gif bluelaugh.gif

I blame the UN for our striker situation. bluebiggrin.gif

 Wrong forum tbh!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 09:03:00 PM
T4life. Be sure that the world is watching. Most sensible people want peace and peace will come, but it has a price.


Israel wants the world to deal with Iran, this is part of that agenda. Israel wants to draw the world (U.N.) into this.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 17 July 2006, 09:21:01 PM
T4life. Be sure that the world is watching. Most sensible people want peace and peace will come, but it has a price.


Israel wants the world to deal with Iran, this is part of that agenda. Israel wants to draw the world (U.N.) into this.

 Well it's high time the world punishes Israel for never once complying with any UN resolutions themselves. If they can;t comply with rulings given against them, they can;t go around crying to the UN when they have been cornered and need to be bailed out by a US veto or two.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 09:25:13 PM
Started a role of the U.N. thread. bluebiggrin.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: johnnypd on Monday 17 July 2006, 10:36:19 PM
probably not a popular opinion but i think israel should be disbanded. the "jewish state" dream has turned into the inevitable nightmare it was always going to become. the only way to peace is to get rid of the idea that palestinians and israelis should be separate. the palestinians want to go home and the israelis won't let them, the zionist nutcases want to live in the desert on the west bank and the palestinians dont want them there. we may call the gross and violent acts against lebanon paranoia, but the fact is, the only way israel can sustain itself as a "jewish state" is by lashing out at people to protect their demographic integrity.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 17 July 2006, 10:49:02 PM
"...probably not a popular opinion but i think israel should be disbanded. the "jewish state" dream has turned into the inevitable nightmare it was always going to become." jpd blueeek.gif


You don't mess about do you. bluewink.gif

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Tuesday 18 July 2006, 11:52:04 AM
 blueeek.gif blueeek.gif blueeek.gif blueeek.gif blueeek.gif blueeek.gif blueeek.gif

brave man there
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Tuesday 18 July 2006, 11:53:03 AM
Some fair points made though.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Ridzuan on Tuesday 18 July 2006, 11:54:07 AM
I think Israel is not the only danger to world peace.You still got the likes of North Korea as well.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 22 July 2006, 12:26:07 PM
Reports suggest Israel is perhaps a week away from THE GROUND INVASION of Lebannon.

Israeli army: 170,000 (regular front line troops) With reservists this goes upto 500,000
Tanks M60
Air force F16 etc

Hizbullah: Core fighters 1500 and reservists of say another 1000
No tanks
No airforce
Have 'Grail' S7 anti-aircraft missles a few hunderd. Numbers widely guessed at. (Although in the last conflict they fired 5000 of these things
bringing down 7 IAF planes.
Recent reports say they have 80's versions from Russia and Iran of the S70 with 20,000ft ceiling. Maybe 50 to 75 of these.


From beeb

"But the Hezbollah missile strikes on Israel's northern port city of Haifa demonstrate that it also has an unknown quantity of longer-range systems in its arsenal.

Most of these are Iranian-manufactured systems like the Fajr-3, with a 45-km range; the Fajr-5, with a range of some 75km; and the more potent Zelzal-2 with a range of up to 200km.
See the rockets' range
This would bring much of Tel Aviv - Israel's largest population centre - within range.

None of these are guided or accurate systems but if the target is an urban area, accuracy is not needed.

In addition, as the successful attack on an Israeli naval vessel demonstrates (an Egyptian freighter was also hit and abandoned by its crew), Hezbollah also has relatively sophisticated Iranian-supplied anti-shipping missiles at its disposal...."

Of particular concern is the transfer of technology, such as the French Milan and U.S. TOW anti-tank guided missiles, which are known to be in the Lebanese arsenal and may very well now be in Hezbollah hands in southern Lebanon.


Hizbollah will concentrate on classic hit and run guerilla tactics on tank groups and infantry detachments. Whereas Israel will try and manouvre Hizbollah elements into a 'kill zone' and hit them with everything from sky and armour. Where I live I've spotted 2 Lebanese flags hanging from windows. Israeli artillery will up the payload to 200 shells an hour if it needs to. It will be pretty much a masacre, although small groups of fighters and 'others' coming into the conflict zone will harry and attack the Israeli's for as long as they are there.

Syria and Iran have in their arsenal some of the latest anti-tank armour defeating missles and Iran for sure has the latest Chinese made 'Silkworm' anti-ship missle and transfer of these bits of kit into Southern Lebanon will be a serious headache for Israeli commanders as they are proven Western armour stoppers. Hizbullah will be looking to slow down Israeli tank groupings and if it transpires that Israel is losing 3 or 4 tanks a week it will be a clear indication that Hizbullah has the latest infantry versions of armour stopping missles.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Howaythelads on Saturday 22 July 2006, 01:24:21 PM
Reports suggest Israel is perhaps a week away from THE GROUND INVASION of Lebannon.
blah blah blah

Do you think you're the only one with access to the BBC?

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Sunday 23 July 2006, 10:14:56 AM
beleive it or not I have access as well..........................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 23 July 2006, 10:30:07 AM
Israeli Govt spokesman LYING as usual on CNN. Forget her name, she said they have opened a humanitarian aid corridor refrerring to the ships for civilians from Cyprus. Not mentioning the fact they are denying tons of aid getting through by refusing safe passage to the Red Cross, Red Cresecent and Swiss and other releif groups waiting on the border.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 23 July 2006, 11:16:38 AM
U.N. humanitarian spokesman Egeland on the ground in Lebannon condems Israel. He says Israel is breaking recognised humanitarian protocols and again asks for cessation of violence.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Dinho lad on Sunday 23 July 2006, 11:31:17 AM
U.N. humanitarian spokesman Egeland on the ground in Lebannon condems Israel. He says Israel is breaking recognised humanitarian protocols .

Nothing new there. Why isn't there anything being done about it?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 23 July 2006, 11:33:25 AM
.......because America is scared of Israel?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Dinho lad on Sunday 23 July 2006, 11:35:11 AM
.......because America is scared of Israel?

Sucks it's cock more like.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 23 July 2006, 11:36:19 AM
 :lol:


But you have to ask why?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Dinho lad on Sunday 23 July 2006, 11:39:21 AM
:lol:


But you have to ask why?

Hmmmm...perhaps their culture, believes etc are closer to Israel. I don't know exactly.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Howaythelads on Sunday 23 July 2006, 03:53:03 PM
beleive it or not I have access as well..........................

Aye, millions of people do, Rob.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 24 July 2006, 03:20:34 PM
But only I steal all their articles................. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 30 July 2006, 09:20:12 PM
Interesting short film (1 hr) on the shannanigans of the Israeli's in Palestine and how it plays out in the U.S. media.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-7828123714384920696&q=peace+propoganda+and+the+promised+land


The film should be called: 'How to ethnic cleanse on the quiet".

One interesting part is that the Jewish Peace movement that works with the Arabs, very very rarely gets into the U.S. media. As they just don't want to see images of Jews and Arabs working together!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 30 July 2006, 10:56:21 PM
Some Palestinian towns are subject to 200+ days of curfew a year. No going out, no buying food or water (if needed) no work, no visiting loved ones or friends. Dehumanising and Psychological warfare at its worst. All against the Geneva convention.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 31 July 2006, 07:31:04 AM
Some Palestinian towns are subject to 200+ days of curfew a year. No going out, no buying food or water (if needed) no work, no visiting loved ones or friends. Dehumanising and Psychological warfare at its worst. All against the Geneva convention.

The correct word here, parky, is

GHETTO
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 31 July 2006, 10:02:31 AM
Aye. bluesigh.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alpal78 on Wednesday 9 August 2006, 03:07:41 PM
Galloway going beserk on sky news  bluelaugh.gif

Made some good points though  :thup:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=249JaIaubVw
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Wednesday 9 August 2006, 03:17:00 PM
Some Palestinian towns are subject to 200+ days of curfew a year. No going out, no buying food or water (if needed) no work, no visiting loved ones or friends. Dehumanising and Psychological warfare at its worst. All against the Geneva convention.

The correct word here, parky, is

GHETTO
Remember the scene at the checkpoint in Israel when the Palestinian was forced to play his violin to prove he was a musician? The irony.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 9 August 2006, 03:21:07 PM
I love his use of the,.."No justice no peace line"..Georgie Boy.


It's a mash up alright....She went very pink in the face after the initial onslaught from Gorgeous George. bluelaugh.gif :lol: :thup:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Wednesday 9 August 2006, 03:32:42 PM
http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,25358.msg504994.html#msg504994

Old!  bluewink.gif But it was great.

She couldn't handle him, incidently I've always thought she was hilariously biased. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alpal78 on Wednesday 9 August 2006, 03:35:28 PM
http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,25358.msg504994.html#msg504994

Old!  bluewink.gif But it was great.

She couldn't handle him, incidently I've always thought she was hilariously biased. 

Yeah sorry I dont read every single post and thread. Blame it on the new changes that you guys have brought about  tongue.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlueStar on Wednesday 9 August 2006, 04:13:09 PM
Will there ever be whirled peas?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 9 August 2006, 06:05:30 PM
It will soon amount to a straight choice. World peace or Armageddon. I know which one I prefer.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 9 August 2006, 06:28:18 PM
well llllll 

some of my relatives work at Vickers soooo Amrmaggedon it is......................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 9 August 2006, 06:51:02 PM
Your relatives are going to bring about Armageddon! blueeek.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Thursday 10 August 2006, 07:24:56 AM
no - but they hope to profit from it.................


When Gulf War 1 was showing me uncle was all excited - "look! there!! on the box!!!!  WE built those tanks!!!"

My cousin pointed out that they were the Iraqi Army.......................   "aye!"
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 09:22:05 PM
Bump.


Here you go 2sheds.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 09:34:53 PM
Man is the greatest threat to world peace.
There will never be world peace.
Close thread, go to bed.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 09:48:56 PM
Quote
Here you go 2sheds.

Cheers Parky  :thumbsup:

The only problem is that this s*** looks likely to continue

Quote
US Election - Jewish Perspective:

Both U.S. parties agree: Democrats will win House but not Senate

Both major American political parties expect the Democrats to take control of the House of Representatives in tomorrow's midterm elections.

A National Journal survey demonstrated this aptly. It showed the Republicans predicting that the Democrats would win 21 seats in the House, seven more than they would need to win a majority, while the Democrats predicted that they would get 23 seats.

Both parties also have similar expectations for the Senate, according to the poll. The Republicans predicted a Democratic gain of four seats and the Democrats predicted five seats. In both cases, the result would be the same: The Republicans would continue to control the Senate, but by a majority of only one or two seats.

If there is a surprise in the midterm elections, it will be in the Senate, should the Democrats do a little better than expected and win an extra seat or two. They need six seats altogether to take control of the Senate.

The gap between the number of seats that each party ends up with will be the centre of attention in the next two days, since the smaller that gap, the greater the temptation will be - in both parties - to demand a recount. Such election chaos, of the kind that still reverberates from the Florida tally in the 2000 presidential race, is the big concern that overshadows Election Day.

There are many tight races, and each has the potential for the loser to appeal the results. Close Senate races are taking place in Missouri, Virginia and Montana, and in the House of Representatives, there are many tight races: two in Pennsylvania, two in Ohio, two in Indiana, two in Kentucky, one in Illinois, two in Florida - and the list goes on.

In Connecticut, three races are so close it is still tough to tell which way they will go. Some experts have said that Connecticut will demonstrate the extent of the Republican crisis: If all three races go to the Democrats, it will be a sign that the tide is turning, but if only one does, then the Democratic victory will be a relatively modest one.

In the most interesting race in Connecticut, the polls predict a certain victory for Senator Joe Lieberman, who decided to run as an independent after Ned Lamont beat him in the Democratic primary.

The number of Jews in the Senate will apparently rise, assuming that Lieberman stays and Ben Cardin wins in Maryland. The number of Jews in the House will definitely increase, due to expected new members from Florida, Arizona, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Wisconsin and other states.

Some legislators who are considered highly unsupportive of Israel are expected to be voted out. These include two Republicans, Congressman John Hostettler from Indiana and Senator Lincoln Chafee from Rhode Island. On the Democratic side of the aisle, Israel supporters breathed a sigh of relief when Cynthia McKinney of Georgia lost the primary, thereby preventing her from winning another term.

President George W. Bush, who has been campaigning hard recently, has the lowest approval rating ever for a president heading into midterm elections. Former president Harry Truman, who held the record until now, entered the 1950 midterms with a 40.5 percent approval rating, and lost 29 seats in the House and six in the Senate. Bush's approval rating is 37 percent, states a recent Gallup poll.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerBlog.jhtml?itemNo=784427&contrassID=25&subContrassID=0&sbSubContrassID=1&listSrc=Y&art=1
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 09:51:17 PM
sorry? who's the anti-semite?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 09:55:32 PM
Its from Ha'aretz - have you heard of them? :roll:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:00:12 PM
Its from Ha'aretz - have you heard of them? :roll:


no
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:03:07 PM
Try googling them and see where they are based and what is their target audience then
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:07:24 PM
Try googling them and see where they are based and what is their target audience then

why?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:14:26 PM
Haaretz (help·info) (Hebrew: הארץ, "The Land") is an Israeli newspaper, founded in 1919. It is published in Hebrew, with an abridged English edition published as an annex to the International Herald Tribune edition distributed in Israel. Hebrew and English editions also appear on the Internet.

In comparison to the other daily Hebrew newspapers, Maariv and Yedioth Ahronoth, Haaretz is relatively high brow, with longer articles, smaller print, fewer pictures and daily science and literature pages. It is attributed to the Labor Zionism and occasionally post-Zionism.

From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haaretz

Now, why would an 'anti-semite' post articles from Israel's equivalent of the Times?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:18:48 PM
Now, why would an 'anti-semite' post articles from Israel's equivalent of the Times?

to highlight the bits in bold to support his anti jewish agenda?

are you not aware of your own actions or something?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Toon Sarnie on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:19:52 PM
Just looked at this thread and saw
Is Israel the real danger to world peace?  « 1 2 ... 33 34 » Parky 666 7953 Today at 10:14:26 PM
by 2sheds

How spooky is that? :roll:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:20:25 PM
I  was thnking of locking it at that point. :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:24:12 PM
Now, why would an 'anti-semite' post articles from Israel's equivalent of the Times?

to highlight the bits in bold to support his anti jewish agenda?

are you not aware of your own actions or something?

The article is entitled 'US Election - Jewish Perspective:'
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:24:50 PM
Now, why would an 'anti-semite' post articles from Israel's equivalent of the Times?

to highlight the bits in bold to support his anti jewish agenda?

are you not aware of your own actions or something?

The article is entitled 'US Election - Jewish Perspective:'

and?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:31:57 PM
Now, why would an 'anti-semite' post articles from Israel's equivalent of the Times?

to highlight the bits in bold to support his anti jewish agenda?

are you not aware of your own actions or something?

The article is entitled 'US Election - Jewish Perspective:'

and?

And I highlighted the relevent parts pertaining to the point I was making.

So when an Israeli newspaper (that you have never heard of) prints an long article entitled ' US Election - Jewish Perspective:' and a small segment backs up my point I highlight it.


I hope I never get into a debate with you about 'War and Peace' - it would take me forever to cut and paste the entire book

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:33:29 PM
Now, why would an 'anti-semite' post articles from Israel's equivalent of the Times?

to highlight the bits in bold to support his anti jewish agenda?

are you not aware of your own actions or something?

The article is entitled 'US Election - Jewish Perspective:'

and?

And I highlighted the relevent parts pertaining to the point I was making.

So when an Israeli newspaper (that you have never heard of) prints an long article entitled ' US Election - Jewish Perspective:' and a small segment backs up my point I highlight it.


I hope I never get into a debate with you about 'War and Peace' - it would take me forever to cut and paste the entire book



right, now get to the point and explain how any of the above proves you were not making an anti-semitic statement?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:44:23 PM
I'm getting an intense feeling of deja vu here.

Everytime I start to criticise Israel for its latest attocity on any forum I get callled an 'anti-semite' - usually by a zionist bloodthirty apologist.

I tell you what invicta, have a read of this scholarly piece and tell me if this is 'anti-semetic'

I would highlight the relevent bits but I know you don't like that so have a good read and let me know your thoughts.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html

I'll catch your answer tomorrow at some point
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:45:55 PM
right, I have to do further reading to help you justify your view?

f off
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:57:49 PM
Good read that. One bit that stuck out.

"Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli. This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain."

What would be the reason for this I wonder???
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 10:59:50 PM
Good read that. One bit that stuck out.

"Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli. This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain."

What would be the reason for this I wonder???

they are friends Parky

totally wierd concept I know but....
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:00:54 PM
I think it's an ickle bit more complex than that Victoria.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:02:07 PM
how? why?

seems like a rock solid hypothesis to me
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:04:25 PM
ummm egypt receives almost as much as israel, and what the hell does egypt need the military support for?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:04:25 PM
"seems like a rock solid hypothesis to me..." Vic


It would suffice for you I guess. bluewink.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:07:50 PM
some of us need to use smoke and mirrors to cloud issues and create arguments where there is nothing but clear hard facts, fact with which they feel uncomfortable with, but facts none the less

 blueyes.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:08:52 PM
"ummm egypt receives almost as much as israel, and what the hell does egypt need the military support for?" hair gel


"Aid is central to Washington's relationship with Cairo. The US has provided Egypt with $1.3 billion a year in military aid since 1979, and an average of $815 million a year in economic assistance. All told, Egypt has received over $50 billion in US largesse since 1975.

The money is seen as bolstering Egypt's stability, support for US policies in the region, US access to the Suez Canal, and peace with Israel. But some critics question the aid's effectiveness in spurring economic and democratic development in the Arab world's most populous country - a higher US priority after Sept. 11, 2001."

It's basically money to keep them off Israel's back. :lol:

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:11:01 PM
"some of us need to use smoke and mirrors to cloud issues and create arguments where there is nothing but clear hard facts, fact with which they feel uncomfortable with, but facts none the less" Vic


Rubbish. It comes down to who is writing the 'facts'. Gosh I thought you were brighter. bluebigrazz.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:12:25 PM
"ummm egypt receives almost as much as israel, and what the hell does egypt need the military support for?" hair gel


"Aid is central to Washington's relationship with Cairo. The US has provided Egypt with $1.3 billion a year in military aid since 1979, and an average of $815 million a year in economic assistance. All told, Egypt has received over $50 billion in US largesse since 1975.

The money is seen as bolstering Egypt's stability, support for US policies in the region, US access to the Suez Canal, and peace with Israel. But some critics question the aid's effectiveness in spurring economic and democratic development in the Arab world's most populous country - a higher US priority after Sept. 11, 2001."

It's basically money to keep them off Israel's back. :lol:



you would side with a country that would blackmail the free world not to go to war?

for shame
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:13:14 PM
"some of us need to use smoke and mirrors to cloud issues and create arguments where there is nothing but clear hard facts, fact with which they feel uncomfortable with, but facts none the less" Vic


Rubbish. It comes down to who is writing the 'facts'. Gosh I thought you were brighter. bluebigrazz.gif


personal sleights

last refuge of the damned tbh.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:16:45 PM
"you would side with a country that would blackmail the free world not to go to war?

for shame"


That's naughty Vic. Where did I say I sided with them?? I must say you're showing your true colours tonight.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:17:48 PM
I think you missed this bit:


It comes down to who is writing the 'facts'.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Wednesday 8 November 2006, 11:18:50 PM
facts is facts is facts TBH

it's a philosophical axiom
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 9 November 2006, 11:36:06 AM
In war winners write the history dear. bluebigrazz.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Kitman on Thursday 9 November 2006, 12:06:58 PM
facts is facts is facts TBH

it's a philosophical axiom

I hope you realise that makes NE5 a serious philosopher?  You should show him more respect  bluebiggrin.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Thursday 9 November 2006, 12:41:23 PM
right, I have to do further reading to help you justify your view?

f off

Well you don't seem to mind reading my posts - whats wrong with reading an acedemically sound link?

Fine then I'll just start posting paragraphs from it that back up my case.

One way or another I'll get you to read it ;)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Thursday 9 November 2006, 12:48:07 PM
Good read that. One bit that stuck out.

"Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli. This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain."

What would be the reason for this I wonder???

they are friends Parky

totally wierd concept I know but....

A very wierd concept

From the piece you refuse to read invicta

Quote
A final reason to question Israel’s strategic value is that it does not behave like a loyal ally. Israeli officials frequently ignore US requests and renege on promises (including pledges to stop building settlements and to refrain from ‘targeted assassinations’ of Palestinian leaders). Israel has provided sensitive military technology to potential rivals like China, in what the State Department inspector-general called ‘a systematic and growing pattern of unauthorised transfers’. According to the General Accounting Office, Israel also ‘conducts the most aggressive espionage operations against the US of any ally’. In addition to the case of Jonathan Pollard, who gave Israel large quantities of classified material in the early 1980s (which it reportedly passed on to the Soviet Union in return for more exit visas for Soviet Jews), a new controversy erupted in 2004 when it was revealed that a key Pentagon official called Larry Franklin had passed classified information to an Israeli diplomat. Israel is hardly the only country that spies on the US, but its willingness to spy on its principal patron casts further doubt on its strategic value.

With friends like these who needs enemies?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 9 November 2006, 04:08:28 PM
I'm getting an intense feeling of deja vu here.

Everytime I start to criticise Israel for its latest attocity on any forum I get callled an 'anti-semite' - usually by a zionist bloodthirty apologist.

I tell you what invicta, have a read of this scholarly piece and tell me if this is 'anti-semetic'

I would highlight the relevent bits but I know you don't like that so have a good read and let me know your thoughts.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html

I'll catch your answer tomorrow at some point

i couldn't get the link to work, got an error: The requested URL could not be retrieved  anybody else have this problem?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 9 November 2006, 04:56:59 PM
No.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 9 November 2006, 05:28:54 PM
hmm...
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: bulivye on Thursday 9 November 2006, 05:32:50 PM
yes!  got it! 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: CaliMag on Thursday 9 November 2006, 05:59:47 PM
35 pages to answer a simple yes or no question....  :roll:

It's yes by the way.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Thursday 9 November 2006, 06:14:37 PM
 :thup:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 9 November 2006, 09:26:36 PM
No.

It's China btw fuckwits

catch up PLEASE  bluesigh.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Thursday 9 November 2006, 10:06:07 PM
Quote
No.

It's China btw fuckwits

From my answer you ignored on the previous page (I'll make it just 1 sentence as a whole paragraph might be too much - you appear to have an aversion to reading)

Quote
Israel has provided sensitive military technology to potential rivals like China, in what the State Department inspector-general called ‘a systematic and growing pattern of unauthorised transfers’

Now you know why




Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Thursday 9 November 2006, 10:13:30 PM
Quote
No.

It's China btw fuckwits

From my answer you ignored on the previous page (I'll make it just 1 sentence as a whole paragraph might be too much - you appear to have an aversion to reading)

Quote
Israel has provided sensitive military technology to potential rivals like China, in what the State Department inspector-general called ‘a systematic and growing pattern of unauthorised transfers’

Now you know why


yeah that's why  :roll:

any more foreign policy gems?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 10 November 2006, 10:45:07 AM
Vic if China dumped the $ American would collapse withing a week.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Friday 10 November 2006, 10:49:59 AM
of course they'd be buggered as its basically all their savings...................

on the other hand there is no doubt that a l ot of the appreciation of the pound is due to people taking a view on the US economy and the chances that they might get their assets frozen in the States
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Friday 10 November 2006, 10:53:17 AM
Yup and the Euro markets are far more dynamic and attractive atm. Everyone who is anyone is getting they're money out of the U.S. There is stats on this somewhere. I think already 4 of my clients here in Hamburg have said they won't bother to go to the States for a while. All this added security as created a lot of unseen overheads for business inc of course time and paper chasing.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Friday 10 November 2006, 07:32:03 PM
Is Israel the real danger to world peace?

Make your own mind up

Quote
PARIS, Nov 10 (Reuters) - France said on Friday it hoped the United States would put pressure on Israel to end military flights over Lebanon, after French peacekeepers nearly launched missiles at Israeli jets flying in an attack mode.

"This message must be sent by France and other countries, and also the U.N. ... We hope the Americans can send the same type of message to the Israelis," Foreign Ministry Spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei told reporters at a news briefing.

On Wednesday Defence Minister Michele Alliot-Marie said French troops participating in the UNIFIL peacekeeping force in Lebanon almost launched missiles at Israeli warplanes which had flown in an attack mode above their position on October 31.

Daniel Shek, the Israeli ambassador to France, on Thursday denied that Israeli jets had acted aggressively toward the French forces, calling Franco-Israeli relations 'very good'.

He described the flights over Lebanon as necessary reconnaissance missions designed to interdict resupply of Hezbollah fighters since a month of combat ended on Aug 14.

Earlier in the briefing, Mattei had said France was satisfied Israel would be able to explain the Oct. 31 fly-by.

"The ambassador took note yesterday of what the minister said, and I think he has made a commitment to provide us with a certain number of clarifications," he said.


http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L10810769.htm

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Friday 10 November 2006, 07:40:05 PM
Quote
Is Israel the real danger to world peace?

Make your own mind up

I don't know how to, question isn't phrased very well.

Does it presuppose the world is at peace, and asks if Israel has the potential to break it? or was the thread title typed incorrectly and in fact was "Israel is the real danger to world peace" and asked people to vote otherwise?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Friday 10 November 2006, 07:44:48 PM
Is Israel the real danger to world peace?

Make your own mind up

Quote
PARIS, Nov 10 (Reuters) - France said on Friday it hoped the United States would put pressure on Israel to end military flights over Lebanon, after French peacekeepers nearly launched missiles at Israeli jets flying in an attack mode.

"This message must be sent by France and other countries, and also the U.N. ... We hope the Americans can send the same type of message to the Israelis," Foreign Ministry Spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei told reporters at a news briefing.

On Wednesday Defence Minister Michele Alliot-Marie said French troops participating in the UNIFIL peacekeeping force in Lebanon almost launched missiles at Israeli warplanes which had flown in an attack mode above their position on October 31.

Daniel Shek, the Israeli ambassador to France, on Thursday denied that Israeli jets had acted aggressively toward the French forces, calling Franco-Israeli relations 'very good'.

He described the flights over Lebanon as necessary reconnaissance missions designed to interdict resupply of Hezbollah fighters since a month of combat ended on Aug 14.

Earlier in the briefing, Mattei had said France was satisfied Israel would be able to explain the Oct. 31 fly-by.

"The ambassador took note yesterday of what the minister said, and I think he has made a commitment to provide us with a certain number of clarifications," he said.


http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L10810769.htm




OMFG there could have been a nuclear war! ::august31::
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Saturday 11 November 2006, 06:56:01 PM
Hmmm the french v The Zionists - well I know that the french SSBN force can hit Israel but I don't think the  israelis can hit Paris ... yet
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 11 November 2006, 07:26:40 PM
Well of course recently there was an incident with a GERMAN patrol boat in the waters off Lebannon where the Israeli planes fired warning shots and missile defence flares. The Germans are the last people the Israeli's want to be antagonising.


 http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/25/061025190043.vjnw06sz.html


There was also the attack on the U.N. observation point iirc. The Israeli's recently seem to be going to the wire and testing the resolve of a lot of nations there on peace keeping or observation duties. Not clever at all.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Saturday 11 November 2006, 09:25:07 PM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:

Quote
The deputy defense minister suggested Friday that Israel might be forced to launch a military strike against Iran's disputed nuclear program — the clearest statement yet of such a possibility from a high-ranking official.

"I am not advocating an Israeli pre-emptive military action against Iran and I am aware of its possible repercussions," Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh, a former general, said in comments published Friday in The Jerusalem Post. "I consider it a last resort. But even the last resort is sometimes the only resort."

Sneh's comments did not necessarily reflect the view of Israel's government or of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said government spokeswoman Miri Eisin.

Olmert, who was arriving in Washington on Sunday, said he was confident in the U.S. handling of the international standoff over Iran's nuclear program. The Bush administration and other nations say is a cover for developing atomic weapons, but Tehran says the program is peaceful.

"I have enormous respect for President Bush. He is absolutely committed," Olmert said in an interview on NBC's "Today" show. "I know that America will not allow Iran to possess nuclear weapons because this is a danger to the whole Western world."

The United States and its European allies have proposed a raft of sanctions to try to curb the country's nuclear development.

Israel sees Iran as the greatest threat to its survival. Hard-line Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called for Israel's destruction, and Israelis do not believe his claims that Iran's nuclear program is meant to develop energy, not arms.

Israel crippled Iraq's atomic program 25 years ago with an airstrike on its unfinished nuclear reactor. Experts say Iran has learned from Iraq's mistakes, scattering its nuclear facilities and building some underground.

Sneh's tough talk is the boldest to date by a high-ranking Israeli official. Olmert and other Israeli leaders frequently discuss the Iranian threat in grave terms, but stop short of threatening military action.

Years of diplomacy have failed to persuade Iran to modify its nuclear program so it can't develop weapons.

From Yahoo News

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061110/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_iran_nuclear
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Saturday 11 November 2006, 10:15:35 PM
I fear they will try and strike while Bush is still in power. Insanity.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Saturday 11 November 2006, 10:37:51 PM

Quote
"I am not advocating an Israeli pre-emptive military action against Iran and I am aware of its possible repercussions," ... "I consider it a last resort. But even the last resort is sometimes the only resort."

The United States and its European allies have proposed a raft of sanctions to try to curb the country's nuclear development.

Years of diplomacy have failed to persuade Iran to modify its nuclear program so it can't develop weapons.


only you could turn the above statements into evidence that Isreal hates peace
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Sunday 12 November 2006, 12:35:47 AM

Quote
"I am not advocating an Israeli pre-emptive military action against Iran and I am aware of its possible repercussions," ... "I consider it a last resort. But even the last resort is sometimes the only resort."

The United States and its European allies have proposed a raft of sanctions to try to curb the country's nuclear development.

Years of diplomacy have failed to persuade Iran to modify its nuclear program so it can't develop weapons.


only you could turn the above statements into evidence that Isreal hates peace

 What a load of bull.

 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: kiwi on Sunday 12 November 2006, 08:59:54 AM
No. Troublesome as they are Israel still has a lot of sypathisers in positions of power. The reasons are historical, various and political. For most of the West the State of Israel is a niusance, a sore to be scratched, soothed and tolerated. However if Israel Nuked some other country  - poterntial problem.

The biggest single problem is the economic power of China. Japan has come and gone, Korea has come and gone, India was comming but is already showing the problems of capital and asset growth.

China's economy is increasing at 10% or so p.a. Numerous western companies are getting goods manufactured there at the expence of their own country, China is resisting revaluation of their currency, has an increasingly skilled labour force earning low to moderate wages, ignores ecological concerns, has a sufficiently large population to transit from peasant industry to high tech without disruption.

I suppose what I'm saying is the WW3 will be economic rather than by force of arms.

If you want to consider the alternative of actual nuclear conflict (conventional is not an option for WW3) the USA, France, UK and Russia are still the big 4. Anyone else is an irritant in nucllear terms.
Russia is desperately trying to become a player on the world scene again but is moving more toward energy as a lever. France and the UK will go with the EU if the crunch comes. So we are left with the USA.
During the Cuban Missile Crisis JFK was about to nuke Cuba when Kruschev withdrew. The world thought JFK had made the world safe but in fact Russia already had sufficient missiles in Cuba to obliterate every USA city. Kruschev was just checking.

Nostrodamus forecast that in this decade -"the yellow man will come out of the east".

I think that answers the question.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Sunday 12 November 2006, 09:24:11 AM
"Nostrodamus forecast that in this decade -"the yellow man will come out of the east"."

that has to stand with the Norwegian phrase"only thieves steal"

for a statement of the bloody obvious
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Sunday 12 November 2006, 09:28:05 AM
It should be pretty clear to one and all that continuing to supress teh palestinians has not led to peace

Why don't the Israelis try the othe option - withdraw to the 1966 borders, allow Jordanians and Palestinians to work freely in israel, invest in building up the economys of their neighbours and using Gaza as a source of outsourcing (like Singapore does with Battam Island in Indonesia)

The amount they'd save on arms would enable them to kick start the whole place

Of course, if they are only interested in occupying other people's land ........................ 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Ridzuan on Sunday 12 November 2006, 09:36:40 AM
Israel is another country which should join the axis of evil.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 80 on Sunday 12 November 2006, 10:38:35 AM
Israel is another country which should join the axis of evil.

Now this is an interesting one.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Sunday 12 November 2006, 11:23:07 AM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.


Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Sunday 12 November 2006, 11:25:14 AM
It should be pretty clear to one and all that continuing to supress teh palestinians has not led to peace

Why don't the Israelis try the othe option - withdraw to the 1966 borders, allow Jordanians and Palestinians to work freely in israel, invest in building up the economys of their neighbours and using Gaza as a source of outsourcing (like Singapore does with Battam Island in Indonesia)

The amount they'd save on arms would enable them to kick start the whole place

Of course, if they are only interested in occupying other people's land ........................ 


perhaps South Korea could start outsourcing to the North aswell  :roll:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Sunday 12 November 2006, 12:52:27 PM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.




In the past year Israel has attacked the Palestinians in Gaza, invaded Lebanon, threatened German and French UN troops and now it wants to 'consider' a pre-emptive attack on Iran, a country it could 'wipe off the map' (Shimon Peres)

Iran on the other hand has never attacked anyone.

Which one is the threat to peace again?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Sunday 12 November 2006, 01:24:32 PM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.


In the past year Israel has attacked the Palestinians in Gaza, invaded Lebanon, threatened German and French UN troops and now it wants to 'consider' a pre-emptive attack on Iran, a country it could 'wipe off the map' (Shimon Peres)

Iran on the other hand has never attacked anyone.

Which one is the threat to peace again?

First of all Iran has attacked via the terrorist groups it sponsors. But the main point is that the initiation from Iran was not of an attack but of the threat of an attack. That is why pre-emptive strikes are used, as a result of a threat of violence, they are a response, a retaliation.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Sunday 12 November 2006, 01:49:48 PM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.


In the past year Israel has attacked the Palestinians in Gaza, invaded Lebanon, threatened German and French UN troops and now it wants to 'consider' a pre-emptive attack on Iran, a country it could 'wipe off the map' (Shimon Peres)

Iran on the other hand has never attacked anyone.

Which one is the threat to peace again?

First of all Iran has attacked via the terrorist groups it sponsors. But the main point is that the initiation from Iran was not of an attack but of the threat of an attack. That is why pre-emptive strikes are used, as a result of a threat of violence, they are a response, a retaliation.

Iran could say exactly the same regarding Mr Peres' threat
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Sunday 12 November 2006, 01:59:37 PM
More war like rhetoric from Israel - this time trying to involve the US (again) to fight their battles for them.

Quote
The United States has until now not done enough to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, a senior Defense Ministry official has told The Jerusalem Post while expressing hope that Wednesday's referral of the Iranian issue to the United Nations Security Council would prove to be effective.

"America needs to get its act together," the official said. "Until now the US administration has just been talking tough but the time has come for the Americans to begin to take tough action."

Full story from the Jerusalem Post

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1139395573059


I tend to think those that bang on the drum of war are the biggest threat to peace.

how about you?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: BlufPurdi on Sunday 12 November 2006, 02:41:18 PM
Israel is another country which should join the axis of evil.

Now this is an interesting one.

Wasn't expecting that one. :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Sunday 12 November 2006, 10:16:45 PM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.




In the past year Israel has attacked the Palestinians in Gaza, invaded Lebanon, threatened German and French UN troops and now it wants to 'consider' a pre-emptive attack on Iran, a country it could 'wipe off the map' (Shimon Peres)

Iran on the other hand has never attacked anyone.

Which one is the threat to peace again?

2 sheds YOU ARE A f***ing IDIOT

Isreal has attacked Hezbollah who fired rockets into its sovereign territory

UN troops are flying in Isreali airspace, of course they will be engaged. If you think otherwise, you better stick with your stickle bricks and your world map set.

If you think Iran are an innocent bystander in the world nuclear play I hope you are the first to suffer their 'defensive action' using nuclear missiles

YOU f***ing PRICK
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Sunday 12 November 2006, 10:20:42 PM
BBC 1 Panorama - 'The Nuclear Wal-Mart'

read it and weap you f***ing w*****s
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Sunday 12 November 2006, 10:31:26 PM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.




In the past year Israel has attacked the Palestinians in Gaza, invaded Lebanon, threatened German and French UN troops and now it wants to 'consider' a pre-emptive attack on Iran, a country it could 'wipe off the map' (Shimon Peres)

Iran on the other hand has never attacked anyone.

Which one is the threat to peace again?

2 sheds YOU ARE A ****ING IDIOT

Isreal has attacked Hezbollah who fired rockets into its sovereign territory

UN troops are flying in Isreali airspace, of course they will be engaged. If you think otherwise, you better stick with your stickle bricks and your world map set.

If you think Iran are an innocent bystander in the world nuclear play I hope you are the first to suffer their 'defensive action' using nuclear missiles

YOU ****ING PRICK
israel has attacked hezbollah etc...werent the last couple of israeli retaliations seen to be attacks on civilians,a bit like the uk attacking ulsters catholics in retaliation for the IRA's attacks.


why do you have to call people "****ING PRICK" and "A ****ING IDIOT" just because you disagree.....grow up.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Sunday 12 November 2006, 10:36:50 PM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.




In the past year Israel has attacked the Palestinians in Gaza, invaded Lebanon, threatened German and French UN troops and now it wants to 'consider' a pre-emptive attack on Iran, a country it could 'wipe off the map' (Shimon Peres)

Iran on the other hand has never attacked anyone.

Which one is the threat to peace again?

2 sheds YOU ARE A ****ING IDIOT

Isreal has attacked Hezbollah who fired rockets into its sovereign territory

UN troops are flying in Isreali airspace, of course they will be engaged. If you think otherwise, you better stick with your stickle bricks and your world map set.

If you think Iran are an innocent bystander in the world nuclear play I hope you are the first to suffer their 'defensive action' using nuclear missiles

YOU ****ING PRICK
israel has attacked hezbollah etc...werent the last couple of israeli retaliations seen to be attacks on civilians,a bit like the uk attacking ulsters catholics in retaliation for the IRA's attacks.

you draw the line line between civilians and ?Hezbollah and then come back to me OK?



why do you have to call people "****ING PRICK" and "A ****ING IDIOT" just because you disagree.....grow up.

because I can't be arsed to debate semantics with idiots for 30 pages over clear and present facts. Excuse me all over the f***ing place if this is an outrageous presumption


Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Sunday 12 November 2006, 10:47:14 PM
invicta...i gave a valid example of attacking/not attacking citizens.


thats supposed to be what makes us "superior"(my quotes)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Sunday 12 November 2006, 10:51:07 PM
ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Sunday 12 November 2006, 10:55:23 PM
ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field
i dont refute it.do you refute that israel has deliberatly attacked purely civilian targets.


no doubt you'll say "so has hezbollah" to which i refere you to what i posted earlier about ulster/northern ireland
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Sunday 12 November 2006, 10:59:35 PM
ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field
i dont refute it.do you refute that israel has deliberatly attacked purely civilian targets.


no doubt you'll say "so has hezbollah" to which i refere you to what i posted earlier about ulster/northern ireland

I don't refute, and I don't give a s***

you give an example of any other country in the same situation

very easy for you to condemn miles away from the s***
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Sunday 12 November 2006, 11:03:39 PM
ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field
i dont refute it.do you refute that israel has deliberatly attacked purely civilian targets.


no doubt you'll say "so has hezbollah" to which i refere you to what i posted earlier about ulster/northern ireland

I don't refute, and I don't give a s***

you give an example of any other country in the same situation

very easy for you to condemn miles away from the s***
i have UK and the IRA
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Sunday 12 November 2006, 11:05:23 PM
ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field
i dont refute it.do you refute that israel has deliberatly attacked purely civilian targets.


no doubt you'll say "so has hezbollah" to which i refere you to what i posted earlier about ulster/northern ireland

I don't refute, and I don't give a s***

you give an example of any other country in the same situation

very easy for you to condemn miles away from the s***
i have UK and the IRA

do some research on the IRA and come back to me OK
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Sunday 12 November 2006, 11:09:14 PM
ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field
i dont refute it.do you refute that israel has deliberatly attacked purely civilian targets.


no doubt you'll say "so has hezbollah" to which i refere you to what i posted earlier about ulster/northern ireland

I don't refute, and I don't give a s***

you give an example of any other country in the same situation

very easy for you to condemn miles away from the s***
i have UK and the IRA

do some research on the IRA and come back to me OK
tell me something about the ira that changes the argument.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Sunday 12 November 2006, 11:19:48 PM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.


In the past year Israel has attacked the Palestinians in Gaza, invaded Lebanon, threatened German and French UN troops and now it wants to 'consider' a pre-emptive attack on Iran, a country it could 'wipe off the map' (Shimon Peres)

Iran on the other hand has never attacked anyone.

Which one is the threat to peace again?

First of all Iran has attacked via the terrorist groups it sponsors. But the main point is that the initiation from Iran was not of an attack but of the threat of an attack. That is why pre-emptive strikes are used, as a result of a threat of violence, they are a response, a retaliation.

 Yes you keep thinking that.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Sunday 12 November 2006, 11:22:10 PM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.




In the past year Israel has attacked the Palestinians in Gaza, invaded Lebanon, threatened German and French UN troops and now it wants to 'consider' a pre-emptive attack on Iran, a country it could 'wipe off the map' (Shimon Peres)

Iran on the other hand has never attacked anyone.

Which one is the threat to peace again?

2 sheds YOU ARE A ****ING IDIOT

Isreal has attacked Hezbollah who fired rockets into its sovereign territory

UN troops are flying in Isreali airspace, of course they will be engaged. If you think otherwise, you better stick with your stickle bricks and your world map set.

If you think Iran are an innocent bystander in the world nuclear play I hope you are the first to suffer their 'defensive action' using nuclear missiles

YOU ****ING PRICK

 What a f***ing hypocrite. Israel's soverign land was attacked? The UN flies in its airspace? You can cherry pick it anyway you want to, you will always be a numpty where Israel is involved.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Sunday 12 November 2006, 11:25:17 PM
ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field
i dont refute it.do you refute that israel has deliberatly attacked purely civilian targets.


no doubt you'll say "so has hezbollah" to which i refere you to what i posted earlier about ulster/northern ireland

I don't refute, and I don't give a s***

you give an example of any other country in the same situation

very easy for you to condemn miles away from the s***

 LOL what a f***ing hypocrite again!!! I've sat here in the past and told you about MY country, and you still insisted that you knew more than me about my own country. Now you chastise madras for being so far away from the s***? What a f***ing hypocrite.

 Oh, and soon as your point is made invalid by madras, you suddenly dont give a s*** eh? Blinded by Fox news i see
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 13 November 2006, 10:18:02 AM
"Israeli Airspace"??????? 

where the Jormans and the French are????????????????????????????????????????????//


I thought it belonged to the Lebanon - which is still a sovereign country the last  time I looked
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Monday 13 November 2006, 10:27:22 AM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.




In the past year Israel has attacked the Palestinians in Gaza, invaded Lebanon, threatened German and French UN troops and now it wants to 'consider' a pre-emptive attack on Iran, a country it could 'wipe off the map' (Shimon Peres)

Iran on the other hand has never attacked anyone.

Which one is the threat to peace again?

2 sheds YOU ARE A ****ING IDIOT

Isreal has attacked Hezbollah who fired rockets into its sovereign territory

UN troops are flying in Isreali airspace, of course they will be engaged. If you think otherwise, you better stick with your stickle bricks and your world map set.

If you think Iran are an innocent bystander in the world nuclear play I hope you are the first to suffer their 'defensive action' using nuclear missiles

YOU ****ING PRICK
israel has attacked hezbollah etc...werent the last couple of israeli retaliations seen to be attacks on civilians,a bit like the uk attacking ulsters catholics in retaliation for the IRA's attacks.


why do you have to call people "****ING PRICK" and "A ****ING IDIOT" just because you disagree.....grow up.

What are the last couple of Israeli retaliations you are referring to?

ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field
i dont refute it.do you refute that israel has deliberatly attacked purely civilian targets.


no doubt you'll say "so has hezbollah" to which i refere you to what i posted earlier about ulster/northern ireland

What are the purely civilian targets Israel has attacked?
What is a purely civilian target?
What is the proof that the intent was to attack purely civilian targets?

Does all this mean you think Israel has intended to kill civilians?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 13 November 2006, 10:48:54 AM
"What are the purely civilian targets Israel has attacked?"

even the IDF admit they killed 18 innocent people last week in Gaza FFS
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 13 November 2006, 11:40:50 AM
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Monday that "the president of Iran should remember that Iran can also be wiped off the map."

Full story here from the Jerusalem Post

www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1145961301962

Worth bearing in mind when you hear the latest news from this 'peace loving' nation:


When Iran threatens to attack (maybe you forgot?), you think Israel should not defend itself by a pre-emptive strike, if it does it doesn't love peace. To be a peace loving nation, let attackers attack, just sit in wonder and hope some day they will stop attacking.

Someone doesn't know the difference between the initiation of force and the retaliation of force and treats them both equally when obviously they aren't be.


You're better off just saying you hate Israel, then don't say any more.




In the past year Israel has attacked the Palestinians in Gaza, invaded Lebanon, threatened German and French UN troops and now it wants to 'consider' a pre-emptive attack on Iran, a country it could 'wipe off the map' (Shimon Peres)

Iran on the other hand has never attacked anyone.

Which one is the threat to peace again?

2 sheds YOU ARE A ****ING IDIOT

Isreal has attacked Hezbollah who fired rockets into its sovereign territory

UN troops are flying in Isreali airspace, of course they will be engaged. If you think otherwise, you better stick with your stickle bricks and your world map set.

If you think Iran are an innocent bystander in the world nuclear play I hope you are the first to suffer their 'defensive action' using nuclear missiles

YOU ****ING PRICK
israel has attacked hezbollah etc...werent the last couple of israeli retaliations seen to be attacks on civilians,a bit like the uk attacking ulsters catholics in retaliation for the IRA's attacks.


why do you have to call people "****ING PRICK" and "A ****ING IDIOT" just because you disagree.....grow up.

What are the last couple of Israeli retaliations you are referring to?

ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field
i dont refute it.do you refute that israel has deliberatly attacked purely civilian targets.


no doubt you'll say "so has hezbollah" to which i refere you to what i posted earlier about ulster/northern ireland

What are the purely civilian targets Israel has attacked?
What is a purely civilian target?
What is the proof that the intent was to attack purely civilian targets?

Does all this mean you think Israel has intended to kill civilians?

 The answer to that is a blatant big fat yes. Israel has always intended to kill civilians and always will. Just in their nature.
 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Monday 13 November 2006, 11:43:14 AM
"What are the purely civilian targets Israel has attacked?"

even the IDF admit they killed 18 innocent people last week in Gaza FFS

The IDF didn't admit that they targetted civilians, that they intended to kill civilians. I think they said it was a malfunction, definately an accident anyway.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 13 November 2006, 12:39:12 PM
Wow!!!

I thought that was an excuse at Nuremburg ...............................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Monday 13 November 2006, 03:16:05 PM
"What are the purely civilian targets Israel has attacked?"

even the IDF admit they killed 18 innocent people last week in Gaza FFS

The IDF didn't admit that they targetted civilians, that they intended to kill civilians. I think they said it was a malfunction, definately an accident anyway.

  :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Monday 13 November 2006, 03:50:49 PM
Toon4Life

Ok, that thorough thought provoking refutation has convinced me of your views. It surely is a pleasure to see such an excellent mind in action, you must have studied the art of persuasion at Harvard, I know that you won't admit it because of your humility.

Everyone ought to get off their chair, stand up and clap at his momentus intellectual achievements in this thread.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Monday 13 November 2006, 03:54:19 PM
well I thought your efforts at hairsplitting were worth a smilie TBH
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Monday 13 November 2006, 06:38:05 PM
Another well thought out reply from the clown we all know as Invicta

Quote
2 sheds YOU ARE A ****ING IDIOT

and you are a nazi turd who thinks palestinians should be shot 'because they are palestinians'  :roll:

Isreal has attacked Hezbollah who fired rockets into its sovereign territory

Wrong - the war was started over the alledged 'kidnapping' odf 2 IDF soldiers - nothing to do with rockets

UN troops are flying in Isreali airspace, of course they will be engaged. If you think otherwise, you better stick with your stickle bricks and your world map set.

UN troops were flying in Israeli airspace?  Where did you get that from?
The FACT is that Israeli jets carried out mock bombing runs over UN positions on Lebanese soil
I don't know why you pretend not to know that given that you replied to this exact point on page 36 where you replied 'OMG there could have been a nuclear war' www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,24231.700.html
Yet know you pretend they were flying in Israeli airspace?
Why do you lie?


If you think Iran are an innocent bystander in the world nuclear play I hope you are the first to suffer their 'defensive action' using nuclear missiles

Any missiles Iran could possibly produce would be far more likely to be aimed at Israel and not at Hebburn :roll:

YOU ****ING PRICK
Again you are a nazi turd

Invicta if you are going to attempt to add to this thread in a meaningful way try not to lie through your teeth so blatently

UN troops flying ffs  :roll:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Monday 13 November 2006, 06:40:39 PM
BBC 1 Panorama - 'The Nuclear Wal-Mart'

read it and weap you ****ing w*****s

Again another well thought out reply

Only last nights Panorama focussed on a Pakistani dealer.

Yet at the top of pg36 you claimed the real threat was china

So which is the biggest threat -China or Pakistan? (or does it not matter as long as it isn't Israel?)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Monday 13 November 2006, 06:54:25 PM
well I thought your efforts at hairsplitting were worth a smilie TBH

Is this in regard to the difference between accident and intent? if so, I hope you're not a police officer.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Monday 13 November 2006, 07:00:23 PM
well I thought your efforts at hairsplitting were worth a smilie TBH

Is this in regard to the difference between accident and intent? if so, I hope you're not a police officer.

The IDF seem to have a lot of "accidents", don't they. I thought they were supposed to be a highly trained and well disciplined army, if the number of "accidents" they have and "mistakes" they make is anything to go by, they seem like a bit of a crappy two-bit organisation to me.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Monday 13 November 2006, 08:16:06 PM
Gog and Magog. Judaism and Christianity. Islam is the red herring. bluecool.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Monday 13 November 2006, 10:49:41 PM
well I thought your efforts at hairsplitting were worth a smilie TBH

Is this in regard to the difference between accident and intent? if so, I hope you're not a police officer.

The IDF seem to have a lot of "accidents", don't they. I thought they were supposed to be a highly trained and well disciplined army, if the number of "accidents" they have and "mistakes" they make is anything to go by, they seem like a bit of a crappy two-bit organisation to me.

yes but consider how many operations a day they have and the fact that they arent fighting an identifiable army they are fighting armed civillians.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: indi on Monday 13 November 2006, 10:56:57 PM
well I thought your efforts at hairsplitting were worth a smilie TBH

Is this in regard to the difference between accident and intent? if so, I hope you're not a police officer.

The IDF seem to have a lot of "accidents", don't they. I thought they were supposed to be a highly trained and well disciplined army, if the number of "accidents" they have and "mistakes" they make is anything to go by, they seem like a bit of a crappy two-bit organisation to me.

yes but consider how many operations a day they have and the fact that they arent fighting an identifiable army they are fighting armed civillians.

And what does practice make?

Obviously a myth.


Seriously shem, do you think that they're really too fussed about civilian casualties?

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Pip on Monday 13 November 2006, 11:00:57 PM
well I thought your efforts at hairsplitting were worth a smilie TBH

Is this in regard to the difference between accident and intent? if so, I hope you're not a police officer.

The IDF seem to have a lot of "accidents", don't they. I thought they were supposed to be a highly trained and well disciplined army, if the number of "accidents" they have and "mistakes" they make is anything to go by, they seem like a bit of a crappy two-bit organisation to me.

Obviously run by Fat Fred then
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Tuesday 14 November 2006, 01:23:45 AM
well I thought your efforts at hairsplitting were worth a smilie TBH

Is this in regard to the difference between accident and intent? if so, I hope you're not a police officer.

The IDF seem to have a lot of "accidents", don't they. I thought they were supposed to be a highly trained and well disciplined army, if the number of "accidents" they have and "mistakes" they make is anything to go by, they seem like a bit of a crappy two-bit organisation to me.

yes but consider how many operations a day they have and the fact that they arent fighting an identifiable army they are fighting armed civillians.

And what does practice make?

Obviously a myth.


Seriously shem, do you think that they're really too fussed about civilian casualties?



how can you practice anticipating malfunctions? how can you tell who is a threatening civilian and whose not when everyone is carrying weapons? how can you tell whats a legit target and not when ambulances hide militias, when refugee camps are used to make bombs, when sweet little kids are strapped with explosive? it seems to me that every time the military figures the terrorists out they manage to find a new way to infiltrate and kill.

i dont suspect they shed a tear, but there are trials when army members are caught purposely targeting civillians. they are sentenced to jail, they are dishonorly discharged. and if you guys know so much about israel you know that a proper army service is necessary to get a decent job. so yes israeli soldiers and commandors do sometimes target civilian population but it is not the way the army operates and it is punished if discovered.

i kind of find it funny that the liberals always blame the conservatives for seeing the world as being good vs evil. the west being the good and the east being evil. however it seems that you guys do the exact same, america and israel are evil and hamas, hezbollah, iran are just innocent misunderstood victims. our world is quite grey, and noones perfect, yes israel is not the most tolerant state toward the palestinian/arab population but its not like the arab population been the best of neighbors and theres no logical reason why israel should behave as it does.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Moe-Ali on Tuesday 14 November 2006, 02:20:42 AM
ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field

Hezbollah are not terrorists. they are just an army of civillians who take the initiative, apply themselves, and look after the country.
Kinda like the white house ..
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 14 November 2006, 10:07:40 AM
Very interesting way of putting it Moe. :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: WhatTheFunk? on Tuesday 14 November 2006, 11:16:50 AM
Toon4Life

Ok, that thorough thought provoking refutation has convinced me of your views. It surely is a pleasure to see such an excellent mind in action, you must have studied the art of persuasion at Harvard, I know that you won't admit it because of your humility.

Everyone ought to get off their chair, stand up and clap at his momentus intellectual achievements in this thread.



 Thank you. Thank you. I'm glad you've finally come to your senses. I didn't really believe someone who appreciated the real Rehhagel could be such a blind sheep just towing the line. Welcome aboard son. Expect to learn a lot and to have a lot of fun on this side of reality.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 14 November 2006, 11:47:16 AM
 :lol:
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Tuesday 14 November 2006, 12:44:04 PM
Goashem sits in the chief apologists chair

Quote
how can you practice anticipating malfunctions?

Simple - you ensure previous 'errors' are not repeated - especially when it claims lives

 how can you tell who is a threatening civilian and whose not when everyone is carrying weapons?

Were all those women in the crowd the IDF opened fire on 'all carrying weapons'?

Do you see everyone in the footage from the West Bank 'carrying weapons?

Of course not so stop lying it does your case no good


how can you tell whats a legit target and not when ambulances hide militias,

Ambulances do not hide militias this is a lie perpetrated by Israel to justify shooting ambulances in direct violation of the Geneva convention

According to Protocol I, Article 85, Section 3 of the Geneva Conventions, "An indiscriminate attack affecting the civilian population or civilian objects and resulting in excessive loss of life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions."



 when refugee camps are used to make bombs,

Like Jenin?

Or is this all refugee camps therefore all refugees are legitimate targets?


when sweet little kids are strapped with explosive?

That is a disgusting tactic you won't hear me supporting that

Then again assuming all kids have bombs and pumping bulets into innocent schoolgirls carrying their books to school is also blatently wrong


it seems to me that every time the military figures the terrorists out they manage to find a new way to infiltrate and kill.

No every time the IDF takes an innocent life it feeds the recruitment of terrorists - or do you think suicide bombers materialise out of thin air?

i dont suspect they shed a tear,

Agreed

but there are trials when army members are caught purposely targeting civillians. they are sentenced to jail, they are dishonorly discharged.

Believe it or not German troops caught mis treating and in some cases killing Jews in Poland in 1939 were similarly treated by the German Army with some actually serving prison terms before being discharged

and if you guys know so much about israel you know that a proper army service is necessary to get a decent job. so yes israeli soldiers and commandors do sometimes target civilian population but it is not the way the army operates and it is punished if discovered.

Ever heard of a group called 'breaking the silence'?

YEHUDA SHAUL: I’m here in the United States, because, I would say, we in Breaking the Silence see the act of breaking the silence as an act of taking responsibility. As ex-Israeli soldiers, who’ve served as combat soldiers in the Occupied Territories and were there and committed all what we’re talking about, we're part of the occupation. After we were discharged and realized what we were doing and what was going on around us, there was only two options, as I see it. There’s or to lock ourselves in the room, cry and ask forgiveness, or to stand up and take responsibility and demand from others to take responsibility.


i kind of find it funny that the liberals always blame the conservatives for seeing the world as being good vs evil. the west being the good and the east being evil. however it seems that you guys do the exact same, america and israel are evil and hamas, hezbollah, iran are just innocent misunderstood victims. our world is quite grey, and noones perfect, yes israel is not the most tolerant state toward the palestinian/arab population but its not like the arab population been the best of neighbors and theres no logical reason why israel should behave as it does.


But as a 'tolerant' and 'civilised' state Israel should operate to the standards of the rest of the civilised world.

Saying the rest of the middle east is barbaric therefore we can act like total b******s to the Palestinians is a p*ss poor excuse

Goashem the following is a list of 11 rules of conduct the IDF is supposed to abide by in the 'Occupied Territories' (great term).

How many do you think they regularly hold to?

   1. Military action can only be taken against military targets.
   2. The use of force must be proportional.
   3. Soldiers may only use weaponry they were issued by the IDF.
   4. Anyone who surrenders cannot be attacked.
   5. Only those who are properly trained can interrogate prisoners.
   6. Soldiers must accord dignity and respect to the Palestinian population and those arrested.
   7. Soldiers must give appropriate medical care, when conditions allow, to oneself and one's enemy.
   8. Pillaging is absolutely and totally illegal.
   9. Soldiers must show proper respect for religious and cultural sites and artifacts.
  10. Soldiers must protect international aid workers, including their property and vehicles.
  11. Soldiers must report all violations of this code.

I would say points 3 and 8 are the only ones the IDF take seriously.

How about you?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Tuesday 14 November 2006, 04:58:58 PM
 :lol:
buddy why youre in such a battle mode? didnt get your breakfast?
1) Goashem sits in the chief apologists chair

- what is that suppose to mean?

2) Simple - you ensure previous 'errors' are not repeated - especially when it claims lives

- when youre talking about software/hardware malfunctions of otherwise working equipment its a little different dont you think?

3) Were all those women in the crowd the IDF opened fire on 'all carrying weapons'? Do you see everyone in the footage from the West Bank 'carrying weapons? Of course not so stop lying it does your case no good.

- wow, if you werent so p*ssed off at the fact that someone is defending israel you understand that im talking about the indiscrimination of whose carrying the weapons in the west bank, men/women/children/teenagers/old people.

4) Ambulances do not hide militias this is a lie perpetrated by Israel to justify shooting ambulances in direct violation of the Geneva convention
According to Protocol I, Article 85, Section 3 of the Geneva Conventions, "An indiscriminate attack affecting the civilian population or civilian objects and resulting in excessive loss of life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions."

- and that is a lie perpetrated by hamas and co.
btw under the Geneva Conventions any protected site that is used for anything other what it is intended for loses its protected status.
and ill just bunch the next two points together, when your enemy is using despicable acts, putting its own population the one they claim they defend in harms way its hard to tell the difference when that population allows it and welcomes it.

5) No every time the IDF takes an innocent life it feeds the recruitment of terrorists - or do you think suicide bombers materialise out of thin air?

- which obviously has nothing to do with the hatered sowed into these people from the early age? the glamorization of suicide bombers? and everytime suicide bombers prematurely explodes its easy to just blame israel to get a new recruit. and its just as easy to put your women and children in front of you in the line of fire, when they die thats at least 10 suicide bomber for each.  :roll:
i love how you guys are sure of it that one side is the total liar and the other is innocent and you always blame the other sides defenders of doing the same thing. hypocrites to be honest.

6) Believe it or not German troops caught mis treating and in some cases killing Jews in Poland in 1939 were similarly treated by the German Army with some actually serving prison terms before being discharged.

- Good. Too bad that stopped when they started exterminating them.

7) And? Yes commanders to command their troops to commit despicable acts, some are caught some are not. i never denied that.

8) But as a 'tolerant' and 'civilised' state Israel should operate to the standards of the rest of the civilised world.

- Haha, well id say compared to the rest of the 'civilized' world they perform above standards, considering Russia and Chechnya, USA and Japan, WW2 Germany, Britain and anything to be honest.

9) How about you?

- Id say 1 and 6 are the ones most frequently broken, the other ones id say are well upheld.


now, im not justifying the killing of innocents, im just showing that under the conditions the IDF faces when its hard to fully identify a target, mistakes are made.


Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Tuesday 14 November 2006, 07:45:15 PM
Quote
buddy why youre in such a battle mode? didnt get your breakfast?
1) Goashem sits in the chief apologists chair

- what is that suppose to mean?

It means having reduced invicta to blatent lying you now want to take his place.
Are you honest in your defence of Israel?
Read on and see




2) Simple - you ensure previous 'errors' are not repeated - especially when it claims lives

- when youre talking about software/hardware malfunctions of otherwise working equipment its a little different dont you think?
Firing a missile into an apartment complex at 5.30am to kill one terrorist that takes out another 15 is down to a malfunction is it?



3) Were all those women in the crowd the IDF opened fire on 'all carrying weapons'? Do you see everyone in the footage from the West Bank 'carrying weapons? Of course not so stop lying it does your case no good.

- wow, if you werent so p*ssed off at the fact that someone is defending israel you understand that im talking about the indiscrimination of whose carrying the weapons in the west bank, men/women/children/teenagers/old people.

What you actually said was 'how can you tell who is a threatening civilian and whose not when everyone is carrying weapons?' - but now its 'whose carrying the weapons in the west bank'

So is everyone armed or not?




4) Ambulances do not hide militias this is a lie perpetrated by Israel to justify shooting ambulances in direct violation of the Geneva convention
According to Protocol I, Article 85, Section 3 of the Geneva Conventions, "An indiscriminate attack affecting the civilian population or civilian objects and resulting in excessive loss of life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions."

- and that is a lie perpetrated by hamas and co.
btw under the Geneva Conventions any protected site that is used for anything other what it is intended for loses its protected status.

Really?
You'll have to post that for me because this from Amnesty does not mention that at all


Quote
According to Protocol I, Article 52 (1): "Civilian objects are all objects which are not military objectives." Article 52 (2) defines military objectives as ''those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.''

Objects that do not meet these criteria are civilian objects. In cases where it is unclear whether a target is used for military purposes, ''it shall be presumed not to be so used'' (Article 52(3)).

The authoritative Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 published by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC Commentary) interprets the expression "definite military advantage anticipated" by stating that "it is not legitimate to launch an attack which only offers potential or indeterminate advantages."

Overbroad interpretations of military advantage are often used to justify attacks aimed at harming the economic well-being of the state or demoralizing the civilian population in order to weaken the ability to fight. Such interpretations that distort the legal meaning of military advantage undermine civilian immunity and other fundamental principles of international humanitarian law, posing a severe threat to civilians. As the commentary on the German Military Manual explains: "If weakening the enemy population’s resolve to fight were considered a legitimate objective of armed forces, there would be no limit to war."

Israel has deliberately and extensively targeted public civilian infrastructure, including power plants, bridges, main roads, and Beirut’s airport. Such objects are presumed to be civilian. Even if it could be argued that some of these objects qualify as military objectives (because they serve a dual purpose), Israel is obligated to ensure that attacking these objects would not violate the principle of proportionality. For example, a road that can be used for military transport is still primarily civilian in nature. The military advantage anticipated from destroying the road, must be measured against the likely effect on civilians who are trying to flee the conflict.

The fact is that the destruction of infrastructure is having devastating consequences for the civilian population indicates that the bombing campaign is disproportionate. It also raises the strong possibility that Israel may have violated the prohibition against targeting objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population.

Israel has attacked the offices of Al-Manar, Hizbullah’s television station, and the transmitters of several other Lebanese television stations. This is another example of a dangerous distortion of the meaning of military advantage. The fact that Al-Manar television broadcasts propaganda in support of Hizbullah’s attacks against Israel does not render it a legitimate military objective. Only if the television station were being used to transmit orders to Hizbullah fighters or for other clearly military purposes could it be considered to be making "an effective contribution to military action". Even then, Israel would need to take required precautions in attacking it and choose the manner least harmful to civilians.

Intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects is a war crime (ICC Statute, Article 8 (2) (b) (ii)).


Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Tuesday 14 November 2006, 08:29:48 PM
Quote
and ill just bunch the next two points together, when your enemy is using despicable acts, putting its own population the one they claim they defend in harms way its hard to tell the difference when that population allows it and welcomes it.

Collective punishment and a callous disregard of human life are both totally wrong.



5) No every time the IDF takes an innocent life it feeds the recruitment of terrorists - or do you think suicide bombers materialise out of thin air?

- which obviously has nothing to do with the hatered sowed into these people from the early age? the glamorization of suicide bombers? and everytime suicide bombers prematurely explodes its easy to just blame israel to get a new recruit. and its just as easy to put your women and children in front of you in the line of fire, when they die thats at least 10 suicide bomber for each.  Rolling Eyes

I said it feeds the recruitment of terrorists - I did not say it was solely responsible


i love how you guys are sure of it that one side is the total liar and the other is innocent and you always blame the other sides defenders of doing the same thing. hypocrites to be honest.

To be honest you would know that one side is 'innocent' is contradictory to the despicable act of strapping bombs to kids that I've already mentioned.



6) Believe it or not German troops caught mis treating and in some cases killing Jews in Poland in 1939 were similarly treated by the German Army with some actually serving prison terms before being discharged.

- Good. Too bad that stopped when they started exterminating them.

The mentality of the ruling elites of Israel today and Germany in 1939 is very similar (PLEASE NOTE THE YEAR)




7) And? Yes commanders to command their troops to commit despicable acts, some are caught some are not. i never denied that.

Breaking the silence have a better take on the situation than you or I




Cool But as a 'tolerant' and 'civilised' state Israel should operate to the standards of the rest of the civilised world.

- Haha, well id say compared to the rest of the 'civilized' world they perform above standards, considering Russia and Chechnya, USA and Japan, WW2 Germany, Britain and anything to be hones

Are you claiming Israel operates to the same standards as the British did with the IRA?  :lol:

9) How about you?

- Id say 1 and 6 are the ones most frequently broken, the other ones id say are well upheld.

Lets go through the code

   1. Military action can only be taken against military targets.  Obviously false
   2. The use of force must be proportional.  Again total bollox
   3. Soldiers may only use weaponry they were issued by the IDF.  This is true
   4. Anyone who surrenders cannot be attacked. Utter cack
   5. Only those who are properly trained can interrogate prisoners.  Debatable
   6. Soldiers must accord dignity and respect to the Palestinian population and those arrested. Say no more
   7. Soldiers must give appropriate medical care, when conditions allow, to oneself and one's enemy. Firing at Ambulances does not exactly facilitate this
   8. Pillaging is absolutely and totally illegal. True
   9. Soldiers must show proper respect for religious and cultural sites and artifacts. Cack
  10. Soldiers must protect international aid workers, including their property and vehicles. Obviously cack
  11. Soldiers must report all violations of this code. See Breaking the Silence

now, im not justifying the killing of innocents, im just showing that under the conditions the IDF faces when its hard to fully identify a target, mistakes are made.


No you are acting as an apologist for an ongoing slaughter
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Tuesday 14 November 2006, 08:44:28 PM
"No you are acting as an apologist for an ongoing slaughter..." 2Sheds.


...and it is a disgusting and barbaric slaughter of a vastly superiour force against a tiny and generally poorly armed militia.


Peace and dialogue and common sense is the only way.

"The longer you prosecute a war without victory, the closer you come to defeat" parky 2006 tongue.gif
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rob W on Wednesday 15 November 2006, 05:13:37 PM
Not sure about that Parky - depends how much the populace can put up with

Of course as time goes on and the Zionists continue their mad arsed ways the other lot will build up their weapons - including a few buckets of instant sunshine no doubt - and it'll be all set for some serious revenge.....................................
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Saturday 18 November 2006, 05:13:19 PM
1) Firing a missile into an apartment complex at 5.30am to kill one terrorist that takes out another 15 is down to a malfunction is it?

- yes if you expected the building to be empty, no if the 15 killed were associates of the terrorist.

2) What you actually said was 'how can you tell who is a threatening civilian and whose not when everyone is carrying weapons?' - but now its 'whose carrying the weapons in the west bank'
So is everyone armed or not?

- its really simple, not everyone is carrying weapons, but not everyone of those who carry weapons considered a legitimite target either.

3) Really?
You'll have to post that for me because this from Amnesty does not mention that at all

- Art. 21. The protection to which fixed establishments and mobile medical units of the Medical Service are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy.
from genevaconventions.org

4) Collective punishment and a callous disregard of human life are both totally wrong.

- but when that human life is protecting/helping terrorists to get their goal its different.

2) I said it feeds the recruitment of terrorists - I did not say it was solely responsible

- you also said "or do you think suicide bombers materialise out of thin air", 1) suicide bombers seem to also appear under different circumstances than the ones in the israel palestine conflict. 2) other cultures who suffered great injustice (and far worse than the palestinians) dont seem to produce any suicide bombers. so to be honest i dont link israels actions on the creation of suicide bombers.
 
4) Are you claiming Israel operates to the same standards as the British did with the IRA?

- im claiming the operate at higher standards

 1. Military action can only be taken against military targets.  Obviously false
   2. The use of force must be proportional.  Again total bollox - how so?
   3. Soldiers may only use weaponry they were issued by the IDF.  This is true
   4. Anyone who surrenders cannot be attacked. Utter cack - how so?
   5. Only those who are properly trained can interrogate prisoners.  Debatable.
   6. Soldiers must accord dignity and respect to the Palestinian population and those arrested. Say no more
   7. Soldiers must give appropriate medical care, when conditions allow, to oneself and one's enemy. Firing at Ambulances does not exactly facilitate this. see geneva convention
   8. Pillaging is absolutely and totally illegal. True
   9. Soldiers must show proper respect for religious and cultural sites and artifacts. Cack - how so?
  10. Soldiers must protect international aid workers, including their property and vehicles. Obviously cack - how so?
  11. Soldiers must report all violations of this code. See Breaking the Silence

5) No you are acting as an apologist for an ongoing slaughter

- just as much as youre an apologist for an ongoing slaughter.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Saturday 18 November 2006, 08:43:04 PM
 Posted by: Goashem      Posted on: Today at 05:13:19 PM
Insert Quote
1) Firing a missile into an apartment complex at 5.30am to kill one terrorist that takes out another 15 is down to a malfunction is it?

- yes if you expected the building to be empty, no if the 15 killed were associates of the terrorist.

From 2002:
Quote
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) — In an attack criticized by President Bush as "heavy-handed," an Israeli warplane fired a missile that flattened a Gaza City apartment building early Tuesday, killing a Hamas leader at the top of Israel's most wanted list. Palestinians said at least 14 other people, including nine children, died in the airstrike. "This heavy-handed action does not contribute to peace," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Tuesday, pointing to "the loss of innocent life. This message will be conveyed to Israeli authorities, and the United States regrets the loss of life."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002-07-22-israel-strike2_x.htm

At least the 9 children didn't die of a 'malfunction'[/b]





2) What you actually said was 'how can you tell who is a threatening civilian and whose not when everyone is carrying weapons?' - but now its 'whose carrying the weapons in the west bank'
So is everyone armed or not?

- its really simple, not everyone is carrying weapons, but not everyone of those who carry weapons considered a legitimite target either.

You are contradicting yourself here.


3) Really?
You'll have to post that for me because this from Amnesty does not mention that at all

- Art. 21. The protection to which fixed establishments and mobile medical units of the Medical Service are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy.
from genevaconventions.org


It would make perfect sense for any enemy to fight a war from their ambulances and hospitals. :roll:

I defer to Amnesty's judgement.




4) Collective punishment and a callous disregard of human life are both totally wrong.

- but when that human life is protecting/helping terrorists to get their goal its different.

Ever heard of the Night of Broken Glass in Nazi Germany?
A jewish 'terrorist' walked into the embassy in Paris and shot dead a German official.
He wanted to protest at the treatment of some jews recently deported from Germany to Poland.
In response to this act of 'terrorism', the nazis launched a state sponsored pogrom against the jews in Germany costing some 300 lives and around a billion marks of damage - an act of collective punishment.

I think this was totally wrong.

How do you feel?






2) I said it feeds the recruitment of terrorists - I did not say it was solely responsible

- you also said "or do you think suicide bombers materialise out of thin air", 1) suicide bombers seem to also appear under different circumstances than the ones in the israel palestine conflict. 2) other cultures who suffered great injustice (and far worse than the palestinians) dont seem to produce any suicide bombers. so to be honest i dont link israels actions on the creation of suicide bombers.

I'm struggling to think of a more oppressed people today than the Palestinians to make an accurate comparison.
Historically I could point to the jews in the Warsaw Ghetto who fought on against overwhelming odds (some of whom even blew themselves up when surrounded by germans  (shock horror))
In the UK in 1940 the Government was telling the people 'you can always take one with you' when fighting against the threatened nazi invasion (shock horror)
I disagree entirely with the tactic of suicide bombing but it is bizarre that 'laying down your life for your country (/cause)' is seen as a noble act in some circumstances.
But to deny that Israels actions are nothing to do with the number  of suicide bombers is just silly



4) Are you claiming Israel operates to the same standards as the British did with the IRA?

- im claiming the operate at higher standards

Care to tell me when the British Army flattened the houses of IRA bombers with bulldozers as a punishment?
How about when the British Army fired missiles into a Sinn Fein members house killing them and their family?
What about when the British Army cut the power and water supplies to republican areas of Belfast?
Please give me examples of catholic women being forced to give birth at army checkpoints in Northern Ireland
And don't forget to tell me about the 12 year old schoolgirl the army pumped 17 bullets into to 'confirm the kill'




5) No you are acting as an apologist for an ongoing slaughter

- just as much as youre an apologist for an ongoing slaughter.

Not quite you are doing a far bigger job than I am

I'm prepared to criticize the side I am defending........................................ ...............................



Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Saturday 18 November 2006, 10:52:53 PM
Instead of having 100 different discussions at the same time, referring to events weeks ago, years ago and also decades ago, why not just have one? this way the thread won't go on for decades.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Parky on Sunday 19 November 2006, 12:30:33 AM
I'd say this is one of the best debated threads on this subject in a chatroom of this type on the whole goddam internet.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Sunday 19 November 2006, 05:31:14 PM
Instead of having 100 different discussions at the same time, referring to events weeks ago, years ago and also decades ago, why not just have one? this way the thread won't go on for decades.



All the more bizarre that you would start posting anti-hezbullah s*** into the greatest country thread to try to hijack that one.

At least this way all the relevant points are in the same thread (even if you and your zionist cohorts want to ignore the one you don't like)
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Sunday 19 November 2006, 06:46:09 PM
Genocidal zionist killers spare Hamas "militant" after several hundred human shields barricaded themselves in his house. World is baffled.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,20785379-663,00.html

As for hijacks, you will find that Toon4Life hijacked that thread with his anti-Israel crap...while everyone else didn't answer the question properly.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: 2sheds on Sunday 19 November 2006, 09:03:34 PM
Actually it was your fellow zionist in denial Stubbs
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Sunday 19 November 2006, 09:30:33 PM
What is a zionist and how am I one?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Monday 20 November 2006, 12:20:27 PM
ok, try and refute the fact that the entire south lebanon was controlled by Hexbollah, then we might have a level playing field

Hezbollah are not terrorists. they are just an army of civillians who take the initiative, apply themselves, and look after the country.
Kinda like the white house ..

how's that work then?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Monday 20 November 2006, 01:19:40 PM
How am I a zionist too? What is your definition of one? Is somone who supports a two-state solution a Zionist?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Monday 20 November 2006, 01:22:00 PM
How am I a zionist too? What is your definition of one? Is somone who supports a two-state solution a Zionist?
your two states being israel and israel reserves ?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Monday 20 November 2006, 01:22:50 PM
How am I a zionist too? What is your definition of one? Is somone who supports a two-state solution a Zionist?
your two states being israel and israel reserves ?

Israel and the only ever definition of Palestine as a sovereign country
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Monday 20 November 2006, 01:26:05 PM
How am I a zionist too? What is your definition of one? Is somone who supports a two-state solution a Zionist?
your two states being israel and israel reserves ?

Israel and the only ever definition of Palestine as a sovereign country
as if we couldn't re-define a modern palestine.......same way we did israel.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Monday 20 November 2006, 01:32:31 PM
How am I a zionist too? What is your definition of one? Is somone who supports a two-state solution a Zionist?
your two states being israel and israel reserves ?

You proceed from a false and arrogant presumption:

I support Israel and Palestine as two sovereign states.

I defend Israel from unfair and untrue libels and acusations, many of which are of the kind stated on this Board by people who are ill-informed. That does not mean I wish to deny the Palestinian's a state.

Alternatively, many of the posters on this Board who are pro-Palestine do not wish to see Israel exist as a country. This is also true for many in the wider Arab world. 
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Monday 20 November 2006, 06:25:25 PM
2sheds has gone strangely silent

surely he's not been banned?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Goashem on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 02:25:31 AM
1) At least the 9 children didn't die of a 'malfunction'

- thats tragic.

2) You are contradicting yourself here.

- nope, i think you still dont understand what im talking about.

3) It would make perfect sense for any enemy to fight a war from their ambulances and hospitals.  :roll:

-  :roll:

4) Ever heard of the Night of Broken Glass in Nazi Germany?
A jewish 'terrorist' walked into the embassy in Paris and shot dead a German official.
He wanted to protest at the treatment of some jews recently deported from Germany to Poland.
In response to this act of 'terrorism', the nazis launched a state sponsored pogrom against the jews in Germany costing some 300 lives and around a billion marks of damage - an act of collective punishment.

I think this was totally wrong.

How do you feel?

- i feel that you assume im jewish and this somehow matters to me on a personal level.
but again your analogy is quite faulty, the jews that were attacked there werent fostering terrorists organizations, they werent protecting terrorists. the germans randomly attacked jews that have nothing to do with the issue. when i feel collective punishments are harsh i dont make up reasons to support them (things like cutting off power to the gaza strip). 

5) I'm struggling to think of a more oppressed people today than the Palestinians to make an accurate comparison.

- native americans. they really had their land stolen from them. faced the most brutal extermination. stripped of their rights. thrown into reservers. still face heavy discrimination. no suicide bombers. or how about iraq, no israel, but we still have suicide bombers, how about the islamic terrorism in india?
blaming israel for suicide bombers is quite horseshit in my opinion. palestinians forced themselves into the situation they are now in. they ought to have some decency to work their way out of it with any opportunity they are given, but instead they choose to continue waging their war of terror.

6) Care to tell me when the British Army flattened the houses of IRA bombers with bulldozers as a punishment?

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_and_Tans
perhaps israel should start opening fire on football fans, burn the gaza strip, shoot some imams to live up to the high british standard :roll:

7) Not quite you are doing a far bigger job than I am

I'm prepared to criticize the side I am defending........................................ ...............................

- you make alot of assumptions about me, which are mostly inccorect. including the last one. what i was defending is the fact that mistakes do occur, and in this conflict more mistakes than usual are expected. you seem to assume that i think all israelis actions are mistakes. which i dont. and when they are done intentionally, i expect those who committed these acts to be held responsible and tried.

Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 10:43:59 AM
it's a recognised rule of war that you don't use red cross facilities as bases or weapons, to do so would eliminate any way of you medevac'ing your own men

that kind of thing has a nasty effect on morale

still, probably not a consideration for your average suicide bomber I guess
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:10:22 PM
How am I a zionist too? What is your definition of one? Is somone who supports a two-state solution a Zionist?
your two states being israel and israel reserves ?

You proceed from a false and arrogant presumption:

I support Israel and Palestine as two sovereign states.

I defend Israel from unfair and untrue libels and acusations, many of which are of the kind stated on this Board by people who are ill-informed. That does not mean I wish to deny the Palestinian's a state.

Alternatively, many of the posters on this Board who are pro-Palestine do not wish to see Israel exist as a country. This is also true for many in the wider Arab world. 
in future i'll proceed on the assumption that you can't tell when i make a joke.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:45:30 PM
.... and I'll proceed from the assumption that you will always claim statements you really meant were actually jokes in order to retract them.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:45:44 PM
it's a recognised rule of war that you don't use red cross facilities as bases or weapons, to do so would eliminate any way of you medevac'ing your own men

that kind of thing has a nasty effect on morale

still, probably not a consideration for your average suicide bomber I guess
Because Israel always follows the 'recognised rules of war', don't they?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:46:30 PM
How am I a zionist too? What is your definition of one? Is somone who supports a two-state solution a Zionist?
your two states being israel and israel reserves ?

You proceed from a false and arrogant presumption:

I support Israel and Palestine as two sovereign states.

I defend Israel from unfair and untrue libels and acusations, many of which are of the kind stated on this Board by people who are ill-informed. That does not mean I wish to deny the Palestinian's a state.

Alternatively, many of the posters on this Board who are pro-Palestine do not wish to see Israel exist as a country. This is also true for many in the wider Arab world.
in future i'll proceed on the assumption that you can't tell when i make a joke.

I support Palestine's existence as a country. Do you support Israel's existence?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:49:00 PM
it's a recognised rule of war that you don't use red cross facilities as bases or weapons, to do so would eliminate any way of you medevac'ing your own men

that kind of thing has a nasty effect on morale

still, probably not a consideration for your average suicide bomber I guess
Because Israel always follows the 'recognised rules of war', don't they?

... As the Palestinian's do when they send martyrs in to blow school buses and hospitals up?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:50:47 PM
it's a recognised rule of war that you don't use red cross facilities as bases or weapons, to do so would eliminate any way of you medevac'ing your own men

that kind of thing has a nasty effect on morale

still, probably not a consideration for your average suicide bomber I guess
Because Israel always follows the 'recognised rules of war', don't they?

... As the Palestinian's do when they send martyrs in to blow school buses and hospitals up?
That's kind of the point I was making. Neither side plays by the rules. One side has an overwhelming military advantage though.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:51:47 PM
I'm struggling to think of a more oppressed people today than the Palestinians to make an accurate comparison.

The Tibetans under Chinese occupation.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:53:14 PM
I'm struggling to think of a more oppressed people today than the Palestinians to make an accurate comparison.

The Tibetans under Chinese occupation.
Well done, you've found a people who may be even more oppressed than the Palestinians. Israel off the hook then, eh?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Gemmill on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:54:05 PM
Free Tibet!
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Stubbs on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:54:43 PM
it's a recognised rule of war that you don't use red cross facilities as bases or weapons, to do so would eliminate any way of you medevac'ing your own men

that kind of thing has a nasty effect on morale

still, probably not a consideration for your average suicide bomber I guess
Because Israel always follows the 'recognised rules of war', don't they?

... As the Palestinian's do when they send martyrs in to blow school buses and hospitals up?
That's kind of the point I was making. Neither side plays by the rules. One side has an overwhelming military advantage though.

Does it now? I'd say an ability to carry destruction and death into civilian areas via bombs that are strapped to an an ordinary-looking person's belt who blends in with the rest of the public and is therefore difficult to spot and defend against is an "overwhelming military advantage". It is also something that has forced the kind of measures that Israel employes, such as the checkpoints.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Rehhagel on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:55:19 PM
How am I a zionist too? What is your definition of one? Is somone who supports a two-state solution a Zionist?
your two states being israel and israel reserves ?

You proceed from a false and arrogant presumption:

I support Israel and Palestine as two sovereign states.

I defend Israel from unfair and untrue libels and acusations, many of which are of the kind stated on this Board by people who are ill-informed. That does not mean I wish to deny the Palestinian's a state.

Alternatively, many of the posters on this Board who are pro-Palestine do not wish to see Israel exist as a country. This is also true for many in the wider Arab world.
in future i'll proceed on the assumption that you can't tell when i make a joke.

I support Palestine's existence as a country. Do you support Israel's existence?

You mean you would support a country called Palestine if it came about? any kind of country? if so why, if not what kind of country and why? when? under what conditions if any?
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: madras on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:56:36 PM
How am I a zionist too? What is your definition of one? Is somone who supports a two-state solution a Zionist?
your two states being israel and israel reserves ?

You proceed from a false and arrogant presumption:

I support Israel and Palestine as two sovereign states.

I defend Israel from unfair and untrue libels and acusations, many of which are of the kind stated on this Board by people who are ill-informed. That does not mean I wish to deny the Palestinian's a state.

Alternatively, many of the posters on this Board who are pro-Palestine do not wish to see Israel exist as a country. This is also true for many in the wider Arab world.
in future i'll proceed on the assumption that you can't tell when i make a joke.

I support Palestine's existence as a country. Do you support Israel's existence?
yes i do,but now i'm in favour of a 3state solution,israel,palestine and israel reserves.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:57:44 PM
I'm struggling to think of a more oppressed people today than the Palestinians to make an accurate comparison.

The Tibetans under Chinese occupation.
Well done, you've found a people who may be even more oppressed than the Palestinians. Israel off the hook then, eh?

In regards that you don't see many Tibetans becoming suicide bombers, launching rocket attacks on Chinese villages or taking up sniper positions in temples
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 12:59:50 PM
it's a recognised rule of war that you don't use red cross facilities as bases or weapons, to do so would eliminate any way of you medevac'ing your own men

that kind of thing has a nasty effect on morale

still, probably not a consideration for your average suicide bomber I guess
Because Israel always follows the 'recognised rules of war', don't they?

the point was in response the invisible 2sheds assertion that 'why don't Isreal just use ambulances as weapons?'

which in fact is why the Palestinians wouldn't think twice about doing the same

quite ludicrous claiming Israel don't respect the Geneva conventions in this respect
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 01:00:01 PM
it's a recognised rule of war that you don't use red cross facilities as bases or weapons, to do so would eliminate any way of you medevac'ing your own men

that kind of thing has a nasty effect on morale

still, probably not a consideration for your average suicide bomber I guess
Because Israel always follows the 'recognised rules of war', don't they?

... As the Palestinian's do when they send martyrs in to blow school buses and hospitals up?
That's kind of the point I was making. Neither side plays by the rules. One side has an overwhelming military advantage though.

Does it now? I'd say an ability to carry destruction and death into civilian areas via bombs that are strapped to an an ordinary-looking person's belt who blends in with the rest of the public and is therefore difficult to spot and defend against is an "overwhelming military advantage". It is also something that has forced the kind of measures that Israel employes, such as the checkpoints.
To argue anything other than Israel has an overwhelming military advantage is absolutely unbelievable and completely ridiculous imo. I don't think it's a case of one side being all bad and the other being all good by any means and I don't advocate suicide bombings btw. I think they are pretty inevitable though given Israel's actions and (yes, you guessed it) overwhelming military superiority.
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: Invicta_Toon on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 01:02:00 PM
it's a recognised rule of war that you don't use red cross facilities as bases or weapons, to do so would eliminate any way of you medevac'ing your own men

that kind of thing has a nasty effect on morale

still, probably not a consideration for your average suicide bomber I guess
Because Israel always follows the 'recognised rules of war', don't they?

... As the Palestinian's do when they send martyrs in to blow school buses and hospitals up?
That's kind of the point I was making. Neither side plays by the rules. One side has an overwhelming military advantage though.

Does it now? I'd say an ability to carry destruction and death into civilian areas via bombs that are strapped to an an ordinary-looking person's belt who blends in with the rest of the public and is therefore difficult to spot and defend against is an "overwhelming military advantage". It is also something that has forced the kind of measures that Israel employes, such as the checkpoints.
To argue anything other than Israel has an overwhelming military advantage is absolutely unbelievable and completely ridiculous imo. I don't think it's a case of one side being all bad and the other being all good by any means and I don't advocate suicide bombings btw. I think they are pretty inevitable though given Israel's actions and (yes, you guessed it) overwhelming military superiority.

impersonation of civilians is one of the biggest no no's regarding the Geneva conventions
Title: Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
Post by: alex on Tuesday 21 November 2006, 01:04:39 PM