RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this?

RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

IronBear -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/23/2006 8:50:38 PM)
Something I used to see on more thn a few combat jackets a long time ago.. It will offend some and probably doesen't even apply but readig the posts here it came to mind and mey even ring a few bells with one or three old farts like me.... *"Kill em all and let God sort em out"*

meatcleaver -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 12:52:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterKalif I apologize for not reading this entire thread due to time issue, but on this issue I feel very strongly....I am very much against the Israeli invasion of a sovereign country in this case Lebanon and the tremendous casualties it is inflicting on an innocent population....Lebanon was barely recovering from its 1970's disastrous civil war (in which it is convinient to remember the role of the Israeli defense forces in meddling with the overthrow of president Gemayel of the Falangist party) and the government sadly has no control over southern Lebanon (it has a weak state and army but well disposed)...and Israel has used the kidnapping of two soldiers as an excuse to attack in a cowardly fashion a less powerful neighbor. While it is deplorable what happened to the Israeli soldiers, they are afterall soldiers and know that they can be targeted for attacks and that does not justify bringing war to an entire nation. While Hizbullah is ultimately responsable for this pathetic and sad chain of events, they are the ones who will benefit mostly from the Israeli reaction....as an example we see daily the massive unfair destruction of cities and deaths of civilians who have nowhere to go. The Bush administration's response has been compliant and very lenient with that country, so he should not be surprised that the US holds no moral ground nor support as a "neutral" power in the Arab world whatsoever. In fact the US has become the main backer of Israel in this invasion as much as Israel's non compliance with several UN resolutions, which it has chosen to ignore. I fully support Spain's Zapatero's government in denouncing this cowardly attack on a defenseless nation. If every country in the world chose Israel's path when its soldiers were compromised, the world would be a total chaos, with war everywhere. Well said. The USA is the only power with influence over Israel but with it allowing Israel to do what it wants, it has long since compromised itself in the eyes of the Arab world. The Arab leaders daren't meet Condeleesa Rice in their own country because of domestic political opinion so they have to meet her in Rome. Even those Arabs states that want peace (and there are some despite all the anti-Arab rants) and a honest settlement to this festering sore, they can't be seen to kow tow to the Americans in the eyes of their public. If Bush demanded immediately that it was realised Israel's retaliation was way over the top that civilised values had to prevail, he would have had some credibility. A side effect of this is, his being seen to be the dog that is wagged by its Israeli tail is only compromising US troops in Iraq where his lack of intervention is stoking anti-American feeling on the streets. For the same reason, I think Blair having backed Bush's stance to the hilt, should be kicked out of office for compromising the credibility of British troops on the streets of Iraq. Not that either party had much credibility in the first place but both have even less now. For those that say these conflicts aren't linked, think about it, they are in the eyes of the Arab public.

meatcleaver -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 1:07:39 AM)
If this isn't criminal negligence, what is? http://www.guardian.co.uk/syria/story/0,,1827422,00.html

EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 2:51:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Estring Many people don't want Israel to exist. Including you it seems. This is called anti-semitism. It is funny how Israel is the only country in the world that is criticised for wanting to defend themselves. And using Hitler and Goebbels to justify your viewpoint basically proves my point. Estring. Seriously. Stop and think before you post. Disagreeing with the state of Israel is not called "anti-Semitism", if it were, you would have to call thousands of Jews anti-Semitic. You didn't ask me where I got the information regarding the use of Hitler and Goebbels. I got it from this website. It's written by Jews, not Nazis. Remind them how "anti-Semitic" you think they are while you're there. www.JewsAgainstZionism.com

EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 3:06:41 AM)
It's someone much higher up than me saying Israel shouldn't exist. Quote: "We were given the Holy Land by G-d in order to be able to study and practice the Torah without disturbance and to attain levels of holiness difficult to attain outside of the Holy Land. We abused the privilege and we were expelled. That is exactly what all Jews say in their prayers on every Jewish festival, "Umipnay chatoenu golinu mayartsaynu" - "Because of our sins we were expelled from our land". We have been forsworn by G-d "not to enter the Holy Land as a body before the predestined time". To violate the oaths would result in "your flesh will be made prey as the deer and the antelope in the forest," and the redemption will be delayed." *Rabbi Gedalya Liebermann*

philosophy -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 3:29:49 AM)
...i assume that all those saying that Israel is justified in bombing civilian populations in response to terrorist attack would have supported the British armed forces in carpet bombing Dublin during the IRA bombing campaign, and perhaps they'd also have agreed with wiping out the community where Timothy McVeigh lived too. After all they failed to prevent him so must be considered legitimate targets.

WayWardSoul -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 2:36:44 PM)
quote: perhaps they'd also have agreed with wiping out the community where Timothy McVeigh lived too. After all they failed to prevent him so must be considered legitimate targets. When did the government that controled the country he did this in fail to go after him and just sit on there hands so he could keep doing it? That has to be the worst example I have ever heard to back up any reason someone is for or against something.

meatcleaver -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 2:55:06 PM)
The Israelis know they set up their country illegally and then robbed the Palestinians of their homes and lands whilst expelling 750,000 of them. The way they justify what they did to themselves, appears to have been to dehumanize and demonize the Palestinians in their mind. The Israeli treatment of the Palestinians is what created terrorism. If Palestinians were terrorists in the first place they wouldn't have been so easy to expell. It is quite noticable that the forces of civilisation aka USA & Britain, while they talk about international law in regard to Iraq, never mention international law in regard to this conflict for the simple reason, Israel breaks international law regularly. International law is quite categoric. Refugees should be allowed back to their homes with full restitution. We all know that is not going to happen but the Palestinians deserve some restitution. If the USA & Britain who are the chief Israeli cheer leaders really believed in international law, they would at least acknowledge that the Palestinians have had a great wrong done against them, there might then be a beginning of a meaningful process. Just remember the forces of civilisation, aka the USA & Britain, are in Iraq and Afghanistan preaching about the rule of law. Is it any wonder that Arabs don't believe they are sincere and see them as hypocrites who are in the region as neo-colonialists?

philosophy -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 2:58:03 PM)
"When did the government that controled the country he did this in fail to go after him and just sit on there hands so he could keep doing it?" quite a few conspiracy theorists argue just this..........you can find evidence to justify any act of barbarism if you try hard enough, for the barbarians it doesn't have to be particulary good evidence.

meatcleaver -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 3:11:26 PM)
If you are talking about the expulsions that is widely recorded in many credited history books. I don't think there is that much disagreement about what happened. There are still many witnesses alive. International law is quite clearly written so there is no argument about what it says.

swtnsparkling -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 3:36:37 PM)
quote: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? Yes

meatcleaver -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 3:54:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ...i assume that all those saying that Israel is justified in bombing civilian populations in response to terrorist attack would have supported the British armed forces in carpet bombing Dublin during the IRA bombing campaign, and perhaps they'd also have agreed with wiping out the community where Timothy McVeigh lived too. After all they failed to prevent him so must be considered legitimate targets. Well such people are always happy until it comes round to themselves being bombed. Then I bet they are the first to shout for protection under international law. Such utterances just show a limited imagination.

ddm -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 4:04:45 PM)
First thing to understand: Who are the Palestinians? The majority of them arrived after Jews had been driven out after the conflict with the Romans. The emperor Hadrian crushed Jewish rebels and created a Roman province called Palaestina. Jews were displaced and the people known as the Palestinians settled in the region. They originated from Turkey, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Rome, Italy and various countries. They adopted a religion known as Islam later on and began to speak Arabic, derived from Aramaic. Here is a crucial point. Prior to the formation of the Roman province of Palaestina, Jews had been practising Judaism in the region for centuries. We have excavations from around 800 B.C. In Israel and Jews had an Empire as far back as 1000 B.C. That's centuries before Christians appeared in Jerusalem and even more centuries before Islam became a world religion. The only religion that's older than Judaism is the poytheistic belief system of the Canaanites and such people were a semitic race closely related to the Jewish peoples. Jews did not displace Palestinians or rob land from Palestinians. Jews themselves were ethnically cleansed by the Babylonians, the Assyrians and later the Romans. Jews did retake their homeland by force in the sixties which is another matter entirely. The word is "retake" not "steal".

ddm -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 4:16:37 PM)
The objective of organizations such as Hamas is to drive all Jews from what they believe is an Islamic land. They seek to create a completely Islamic order throughout the Middle East. Basically, Iran, Hamas and other extremists refuse to recognise Israel or that Israel ever had a history in the region. If you study a map of the Middle East you will discover Israel is, in fact, a tiny state. Arabs, on the other hand, occupy vast territories, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, e.t.c. Arab land is incredibly rich and wealthy in oil. However, what bothers extremists in the Islamic world is the fact Israel exists in the confines of what they believe to be Moslem land. This is stated in the Hamas charter which is mind-boggling to read. Here is just a tiny sample. Hamas states it doesn't believe in negotiations, a 2 state solution e.t.c. "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." "The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. " "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."

meatcleaver -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 4:21:07 PM)
If you are going to go back to biblical times perhaps we should start reading the bible and pointing out where god orders Moses to commit genocide. 15: "Have you allowed all the women to live?" he asked them. 16: "They were the ones who followed Balaam's advice and were the means of turning the Israelites away from the LORD in what happened at Peor, so that a plague struck the LORD's people. 17: Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18: but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. So if you want to go back thousands of years one could say the orginal land was stolen. The fact is that people are still alive that lived through the 1948 expulsions.

EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 6:04:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ddm This is stated in the Hamas charter which is mind-boggling to read. Here is just a tiny sample. Hamas states it doesn't believe in negotiations, a 2 state solution e.t.c. "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." "The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. " "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." One could apply similar quotes to the Israelis and produce the same results " If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?" - David Ben-Gurion

EnglishDomNW -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 6:06:34 PM)
This was posted on another message board, I don't know if the humour will translate across the Atlantic I like to annoy my Israeli flatmate by handing him all the mail I get which is addressed to 'The Occupier'

ddm -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 6:16:38 PM)
There are verses in the Old Testament where Yahweh apparently urges the Hebrews to slay their Canaanite neighbours so they don't fall into their evil ways, so to speak - i.e. the temple prostitutes, orgies and shannanigans. This is a different topic, though, I think. I don't seek to argue Jews are entitled to inhabit Israel on account of any specific religious directive from Yahweh. What I am saying is Jews have lived in Israel for thousands of years which means they have a cultural history in the region. I think the important point that people who march with "Free Palestine" flags don't understand is that it's religion which drives Hamas in its desire to drive Jews out of Israel. Hamas would like the world to think Jerusalem is an Islamic sphere of influence, not Christian or Judaic. We have a politician over here in the U.K. who once referred to Jerusalem as the "daughter of Islam". Well, since when has Jerusalem been Islamic so far as the ancient world is concerned? The thing is Islam didn't appear as a world religion till some centuries after the fall of the Roman Empire. Julius Caesar would have known all about Judaism but Islam would have been alien to him. Islam is an old religion but it's not an ancient religion so I don't specifically see why Hamas or the clerics in Iran proclaim to the world Jeruslam must somehow be an Islamic State as part of their birthright. What about Judaism or Christianity? One more point about religion and Israel: If you read the book of Jonah you'll find a different Yahweh to the authoritarian one that's revealed through Moses. I mean, Jonah teaches that all nations are the same and all peoples deserve compassion. At any rate, after World War 2 and the Hollocaust Jews had 2 options. Either they remain as a displaced people in Europe and Russia, hoping they don't get persecuted again by another nutty dictator, or they forcefully retake their ancient homeland. I think the U.S. backed the latter choice and decided that, yes, Jewish people should have their own state and borders, going on the history of the region. The problem is that radical Moslems don't want Jews in Israel but now the situation has changed. Despite all the doom and gloom and accusations of war-crimes against the IDF, we now see a Jewish State defending itself with a powerful army. No longer do we see images of a helpless people entering the death camps and not having the tanks and missiles that would have saved them from WW2. This time Israel is hitting back against the likes of the radical Iranian clerics who have been arming Hizbolah and Hamas. Israel is now showing the Arab World that the IDF is able to defend the borders of Israel if their citizens are attacked by rockets and suicide bombings. Let's remember the President of Iran called the hollocaust a myth and expressed the desire to wipe Israel off the map.

ddm -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/24/2006 6:32:42 PM)
Hmmm, this guy's speaking from a religious perspective and maybe doesn't understand his own history so well. I know many Jews do believe they are following God's laws by inhabiting the promised land but this isn't what motivates my argument. I simply think all people want to live where they have their roots. Again, this whole concept of the Palestinians having their land stolen needs to be delved into. Just who are the Palestinians? Well, I agree these people do have rights and do deserve a state of their own. Even so, many of the people who make up the Palestinian people came to live in that disputed land after Jews were ethnically cleansed. Look at it this way: We now see thousands of Lebanese moving out of Lebanon due to the conflict with Israel. Now suppose these people don't come back to Lebanon and other ethnic groups more friendly to Israel move into their land (Lebanon) in their stead. Suppose that many years later, the children and offspring of the displaced Lebanese take up arms, fight their way back into Lebanon and restore their original State, is that morally wrong? Actually, in my view it would be justified for the Lebanese people due to mitigating circumstances - displacement after conflict. That's how history unfolds. There are worse case scenarios that the Jews fighting for and winning their State back. The Brits have taken Argentina yet how far can they trace their ancestry in the Falkland Islands? 3000 years? What about the Aboriginees and American Indians? If Hamas can forward a cause and gain sympathy via terrorism, should the Aboriginees do the same? That is the snag.

meatcleaver -> RE: Does Israel have the RIGHT to deploy over this? (7/25/2006 12:47:21 AM)
The problem is not that a Jewish state but that Israel was set up prior to agreement, much of it on stolen land and with the expulsion of 750,000 Arabs. It was accepted in the Balfour agreement and later agreed by the UN that the land in the area should be divided between the two peoples with Jerursalem being under international administration so neither people could lay claim to it because Jerusalem was recognized as a potential flash point. Getting agreement was a problem and was always going to be a problem but it was the actions of the Zionists that have caused the terrorism, not radical Islam. Radical Islam is something that has developed later over the last half century, much of it because of western support for Arab dictators that oppress ordinary Arabs and western exploitation of Arab resoucres ie. oil. The stolen lands of Palestine has become used as a focal point of western neo-colonialsism because of the USA's bankrolling Israel and the Arab popultion's realisation, rightly or wrongly, the USA needs Israel in the area for its neo-colonial activities because Israel is its only dependable allie in the area. The Palestinians took up terrorism because they thought and probably rightly, that if they didn't do something themselves about their plight, they would be left to rot in refugee camps with the world happy to ignore them. The west has continued to ignore international law in regard to this conflict while pressuring Arab states to comply with international law so we have another area where western hypocrisy is exposed. The new Iraqi prime minister was not backward in telling Blair yesterday that the west being happy to see innocent Arabs being killed in Beirut will have repercussions on the streets of Iraq because once again it will be seen that the west doesn't care about innocent Arab lives. If international agreements and laws were adhered to from the beginning, we probably wouldn't be discussing this current conflict the past conflicts and wouldn't be expecting another conflict in the future. That being said, one just has to look at this conflict and see how stupid human beings are. The effort, life and money this conflict has cost, if it was all directed into building something positive, we wouldn't have 6,000,000 Palestinian refugees wanting to see the destruction of Israel. But humans are stupid and so much money has been wasted on planes and tanks because it suits the profits of certain interest groups.

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125