RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes

RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/9/2010 5:19:26 PM)
Perhaps my generalizations are a bit much, however your wonderful example of Iran (Which is not a member of the Arab League) has one of the largest populations of Jews (both citizen and non), being a total of 25,000 in 2004 and estimated as low as 15,000 currently. Down from over 100,000. Many Jewish schools have Muslim Principals and are forced to have Muslim curriculum. Jews have been executed or arrested as Israeli spies. (I believe in 2000 13 Jews were arrested in one given case). In Egypt Citizenship is denied as a rule, but has non citizen Jews living there and I believe a few citizens. Under the leaders of the Palestinian people, it is punishable by death to sell your land to a Jew. In Jordan it has never been legal for Jews to be citizens. Syria declared Jews enemies of the state in 1947 if I remember correctly. There remains a Jewish quarter in Damascus, with under 100 souls. Saudi Arabia forbid Jews from even entering its country until March 1, 2004. In 1947 the Arab League drafted laws to seize all bank accounts of Jews and would be forced to fight in Arab armies. Despite the 1947 planned second Holocaust, less than 30 years earlier in 1919 the Arabs and Jews agreed to a 2 state solution for the Palestinian territory under British rule. This territory is modern day Israel and Jordan combined.

tweakabelle -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 3:30:09 AM)
For one moment, Master NJ20, i was so happy to feel that we seemed to be edging towards some kind of consensus. We both agreed that compromise is necessary on both sides for peace to prevail (see posts #85 & 88). I had hoped that the chat would naturally progress towards what kind of compromises were necessary, what were the steps that needed to be taken to get from here to there .... It is sad to see that the chat has veered off in a less productive direction. So please let me repeat the invitation i offered you earlier: UN resolution 242, which offers Israel recognition and security guarantees accompanied by an Israeli withdrawal to its pre-1967 borders, and concurrent Israeli recognition of a Palestinian State seems to me the best route to a lasting solution. Is this your view? Do you see another basis for a solution that can satisfy the legitimate needs of both sides? Should the international community impose a settlement on both sides? One option is, like Anaxagoras to remain within the familiar tired space of charge and counter charge, where my side can do no wrong and your side can do no right and vice versa, where it's all blaming and always the other side's fault. And get precisely nowhere. Or we can begin to focus on solutions instead of problems. And if we can't do that, what right has either of us to expect the Palestinians and the Israelis talk solutions instead of problems? So I am feeling optimistic and looking forward to hearing your responses to the questions I posed above, and to responding to any questions you may have to raise .......... Love to all (and yes Anaxagoras, that includes you!)

MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 4:36:03 AM)
My last post was mostly a response to Israel being a racist state and merely pointing out the environment in which Israel exists. I feel the most honorable thing to do would be to honor the 1919 agreement. However, since the borders landed how they did I feel this situation has been going on so long and other Arab states have played off Palestinians as martyrs having them be absorbed into the 1919 agreement is a bit extreme. Personally I feel Jerusalem should be Israel's primarily with a UN organization to ensure foreign Arabs are allowed full rights within. I feel this is ebtter because last time Muslims controlled the city many Jewish building and artifacts were vandalized,d destroyed and lost. There are also some strategic point which allow ease of attack from Gaza and the West Bank into Israel. These points should be Israeli, and in my opinion, so should Hebron. Equal land area AND payment of money should be made by Israel for these areas and perhaps pull back and give more land area in general but no sites in specific. That is my opinion, and I do not think it is unreasonable. As far as I recollect the Palestinians originally denounced resolution 242.

truckinslave -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 4:38:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hertz quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave I'm saying that in my opinion people who want to kill Jews without a fair trial are anti-Semites. I think we would all agree on that. hertz: "I'm not sure that I would want to let questions about impartiality get in the way of a hanging". There we have it, then.

tweakabelle -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 5:41:11 AM)
i do agree that the 1919 Agreement is simply unenforceable today. Personally i see no reason why Jerusalem ought to belong 100% to anyone. On a more practical level, the status of Jerusalem, no matter how it is set out, is going to be difficult to resolve, Do you see the Palestinians ever accepting that? They are prepared to accept East Jerusalem, and until 1967 so was Israel. But i find it difficult to envisage them agreeing to anything that requires them to concede their claim to Jerusalem in toto in perpetuity. Nor quite frankly do i see why they should be asked to do so. I really don't see it as a tough issue to resolve the kinds of concerns you expressed (vandalism of Jewish buildings etc) within this framework. Rather it strikes me as the kind of thing that is easily resolved where there is a will on both sides, and in the context of an overall peace plan, the concerns you express seem to me to be relatively minor. It does seem to me that some kind of special status for the Wailing Wall, the Al-Asqa Mosque and all the major religious sites that would guarantee safe access and security to all wouldn't be too hard to work out. A little bit of something for everyone offers a way forward for all. All of nothing for any one side doesn't inspire any optimism in me. I have no idea why you feel Hebron deserves a special status. As a general principle, having isolated little pockets of Israel or Palestine totally surrounded by the other side should be avoided. Look at the existing problems with Gaza. It would be all too easy for extremists on either side to problemmatise the status or living conditions of "our people" surrounded by "them" and turn it into a causus belli. As regards the military issues you bring up .... demilitarized borders, an international presence enforcing the demilitarized zones until such time as both sides develop enough trust in each other ought to allay most of these concerns. It seems important to me that as much of the Middle East as possible becomes a nuclear free zone, if only to prevent external meddling. The best long term guarantee of peace and security is mutual economic dependence and prosperity - as i believe the example of the EU shows. So my emphasis would be towards ensuring mutual economic prosperity as the best security guarantee in the long term. Love to all

Anaxagoras -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 10:59:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle So please let me repeat the invitation i offered you earlier: UN resolution 242, which offers Israel recognition and security guarantees accompanied by an Israeli withdrawal to its pre-1967 borders, and concurrent Israeli recognition of a Palestinian State seems to me the best route to a lasting solution. Is this your view? Do you see another basis for a solution that can satisfy the legitimate needs of both sides? Should the international community impose a settlement on both sides? One option is, like Anaxagoras to remain within the familiar tired space of charge and counter charge, where my side can do no wrong and your side can do no right and vice versa, where it's all blaming and always the other side's fault. And get precisely nowhere. I personally believe the Palestinians are not ready to make peace. I understand that sounds harsh but I believe there will be warfare for many decades to come. In fact I would suggest we are only in the early chapters of the conflict. That does not mean I don't wish to see peace - I just don't think it is possible at this stage but on this issue I sincerely hope I am wrong! I never said Israel was a nation of saints - just not genocidists and thieves - and I want to see a two state solution. My reason for writing detailed posts was because I was primarily responding to attacks by others on this forum and general propaganda. I think before peace is possible there has to be sincere factual debate on this conflict - that is why I try to defend Israel against the very common extremist criticism. The Israeli's, Palestinians, any international bodies and governments involved with any peace process need engage with the entire conflict honestly to find a fair sustainable peace.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 11:07:13 AM)
Peace isn't possible until religion is taken out of the political equation. I.e. it will never happen.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 12:44:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterNJ20 Racist meaning, of course, being the only middle eastern state which allows both Jews and Arabs to be citizens and the only middle eastern state that allows both Jews and Arabs to purchase land? No - racist meaning, well, racist. quote: Can you name one case where the Palestinian leaders and militants have stopped shooting rockets, stopped sending suicide bombers, stopped calling for the death of Israel under an agreement for peace.....and then Israel attacks or is violent afterward? Yes, I can. Immediately prior to the most recent massacre visited upon Gaza by Israel. At that point, it was looking increasingly likely that the ceasefire, despite a slow start, was actually going to hold. Israel couldn't allow that to happen, so it launched an attack on the civilian population of Gaza.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 12:53:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: ORIGINAL: hertz quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave I'm saying that in my opinion people who want to kill Jews without a fair trial are anti-Semites. I think we would all agree on that. hertz: "I'm not sure that I would want to let questions about impartiality get in the way of a hanging". There we have it, then. There we have what, exactly?

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 12:57:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras I think before peace is possible there has to be sincere factual debate on this conflict You go first.

MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 1:42:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hertz quote: Can you name one case where the Palestinian leaders and militants have stopped shooting rockets, stopped sending suicide bombers, stopped calling for the death of Israel under an agreement for peace.....and then Israel attacks or is violent afterward? Yes, I can. Immediately prior to the most recent massacre visited upon Gaza by Israel. At that point, it was looking increasingly likely that the ceasefire, despite a slow start, was actually going to hold. Israel couldn't allow that to happen, so it launched an attack on the civilian population of Gaza. Are you referring to 2008? In 2008 1 week after a peace pledge rockets were fired from Gaza into Israel. That December, some months after these attacks started, Israel attacked.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 1:52:06 PM)
Actually, the ceasefire was first broken by an Israeli.

MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 1:52:44 PM)
I agree with demilitarizing borders. I think Israel controlled Jerusalem with UN present is a better option to the UN owning the city. Jerusalem is a big part of Israel and personally feel it belongs there. Maybe have an emergency plan where in times of conflict Jerusalem gets handed to peace keeping forces so neither side touches it during war, but I don't trust the Arabs to not try to take Jerusalem if a fight breaks out again. And I don't trust a Jerusalem in Arab hands to not be defaced. Muslim holy sites have not been destroyed and vandalized under Israeli rule the same way Jewish sites were destroyed under Arab rule, so special access routes should be made by the UN but it should still be within Israel's borders in my opinion. Hebron is one of the oldest cities that has had a strong Jewish community for a long time. It is illegal under Palestinian law to sell land to a Jew. I'd like to see this ancient community to continue to grow and prosper and once peace is made, if the Palestinians decide to turn their back on the agreement once borders are drawn and both sides say yes to the borders... then it will be hard to argue a new border change to take Hebron into Israel. And I do not think the Palestinians will accept resolution 242 if it is offered again because of Arab pressure. As long as the Israel issue is around Arabs outside of Palestine are happy because they have someone to vent anger towards. I feel this outside pressure is more to blame for stalemating the negotiations than Palestinian desires..because outside Arabs want Israel to suffer even if Palestinians want peace. Again there are also a few tactical assault points that if Arabs (even outside of Palestine) decide to attack, I'd rather have them on Israel's side of the border even if they are demilitarized borders. No offense to you, but if things go wrong the UN forces aren't going to help much, this has been shown time and again. Perhaps a combination of US, UK, and Egyptian forces should be stationed instead of UN forces. Although as hopeful as that sounds it seems just as doomed as UN forces.

MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 2:02:47 PM)
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/gaza-rockets-again-break-hamas-truce-pledge/80769/ The Israeli offensive was in December, this was in June 26. Jimmy Carter says this of the truce: "Palestinian leaders from Gaza were noncommittal on all issues, these leaders claimed that rockets were the only way to respond to their imprisonment and to dramatize their humanitarian plight. The top Hamas leaders in Damascus, however, agreed to consider a cease-fire in Gaza only, provided Israel would not attack Gaza and would permit normal humanitarian supplies to be delivered to Palestinian citizens." And Hamas arrest a handful of rocket firers but prosecuted none, and diverted funding from their healthcare system and staged worker strikes to dramatize the border closures.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 2:08:21 PM)
You are doing an excellent job of avoiding the point. The ceasefire was slow to start, but one only has to look at the numbers to see that progress had been made. Israel deliberately scuttled the ceasefire because it looked like it was going to work. They couldn't allow that, because if they did, then they would have had to keep to their side of the bargain. And there is no way Israel would be interested in doing that.

MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 2:16:43 PM)
"We recognize that until last week Hamas took efforts to halt rocket attacks by other groups as part of the 19 June ceasefire. However, throughout the ceasefire period other armed groups have continued to intermittently fire rockets from Gaza. As the governing authority in the Gaza Strip, it is your responsibility under international law to prevent such attacks, and to arrest and prosecute those who carry them out. We also urge you to take all necessary measures to curb such unlawful attacks whether or not the current ceasefire remains in place or is extended beyond its 19 December deadline. Security forces under your control in Gaza have also demonstrated an ability to curb rocket fire. On at least two occasions, Hamas security personnel arrested people accused of firing rockets. On 10 July at least three members of the Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades were detained for firing rockets. All were later released however, and no charges were brought against them" The Human Rights Watch wrote this to Hamas. As you can see Hamas made no effort to prosecute anyone, even if they didn't make any attacks themselves. dramatic increase in the extent of rocket fire and mortar shelling despite the six months long lull in the fighting: in 2008, the peak year of rocket fire and mortar shelling, a total of 3,278 rockets and mortar shells landed in Israeli territory (1,750 rockets and 1,528 mortar shells). That is a significant increase compared to 2007 (the number of landings in 2008 more than doubled) and compared to the previous years of the Palestinian terrorist campaign. With 125 Rockets fired during November after the 6 month lull.

hertz -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 2:32:21 PM)
My guess is you are deliberately avoiding the figures for July, August, September and October 2008, because those figures don't really support your thesis. In September, just one rocket was launched. In October, just one rocket was launched. I also suspect you are not that interested in the fact that the 125 rockets you claim for November were launched in retaliation after Israel launched an air-strike at Gaza. You're as biased and one-sided as Anaxagoras.

MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 4:34:14 PM)
On November 4th 2008, after 6 months of not prosecuting any militants who fired those rockets (all numbers cited by both you and me do not include mortars which about double to triple the number) despite its own self restraint Israel did not open with an air strike. Israeli forces moved into Gaza to destroy a tunnel into Israel, a tunnel which was in clear violation of the cease fire. 1 Palestinian militant was killed and several Israeli's injured. In the agreement Israel stated that any single rocket would violate the cease fire. So no, I am not avoiding the point. By not prosecuting the oneseys and twoseys being fired into Israel, the Palestinian militants put their cease-fire violating tunnel as a perfectly legitimate target. Following the tunnel raid Palestinians responded by firing mortars into Israel. Israel then performed an air strike on the mortar position which killed 5 militants. This set off the 125 rockets. By arresting and releasing the first of the rocket groups into total freedom the cease fire was violated. By building up weapon caches, the cease fire was violated. By constructing a tunnel across the border, the cease fire was violated. All three of these things were done before the November 4th attack. I am not missing the point. Israel drew first blood because they were smart enough to not be the only one listening to the cease fire.

Anaxagoras -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 5:27:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hertz quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras I think before peace is possible there has to be sincere factual debate on this conflict You go first. The cheap retorts from Hertz never cease. They are not honest replies that genuinely engage with opposing arguments as I proved on this thread such as in post 77 where he kept saying I was missing the point. Hertz's behaviour shows that what I said about many pro-Palestinians is true. Their cause is a destructive one harmful to peace by castigating one side alone. Of MasterNJ20 Hertz wrote: quote: ORIGINAL: hertz You're as biased and one-sided as Anaxagoras. This is comical from the one member of this entire forum who continually starts threads attacking and sneering at Israel, attempted to misrepresent the true character of the Holocaust, tried to reassert that the Israeli organ harvesting claim made in Sweden last year was true (the story itself resurrected old anti-Semitic blood-libel imagery), and spreads outright lies (not misrepresentations) about Israel such as in post 56: quote: ORIGINAL: hertz Israel tends to ignore the status of foreigners and just execute them wherever they are if they are a nuisance. The above is an utter fabrication. So called "Internationals" frequently go to Israel looking for any whif of scandal involving the IDF and the Israeli State. They are never harmed and they know it for otherwise they would never hassle armed soldiers as they do. There are a huge number of videos on Youtube which show their playacting which real human rights abusers would never tolerate. If this individual says anyone is biased it is only because they oppose his lying agenda.

MasterNJ20 -> RE: Israel's deputy PM threatened with arrest for war crimes (11/10/2010 6:58:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras Of MasterNJ20 Hertz wrote: quote: ORIGINAL: hertz You're as biased and one-sided as Anaxagoras. He may actually be right about that one.

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.054688E-02