or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Prisoners Revolt In Gaza.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Prisoners Revolt In Gaza. - Page 3

post #81 of 157

When official Government military actions, presumed against military targets, have a 2 out of 3 civilian death rate and a 10, 20, 50x civilian death rate compared to the enemy, it takes a real lack of morals for someone not to see that that is not an ethical thing to do.

 

Whether it's called "terrorism" or not, people die. This can be stopped. This should be stopped.

 

If Israel really wants to gain favour enough to end this conflict, Israel must take the moral high ground. The moral high ground is not their birthright. And it disappears when they start killing children playing soccer. NO MATTER WHAT THE PALESTINIANS DO.

 

An eye for an eye? Soon the world is blind. Ten Palestinians for each Israeli? Genocide. Sharon and Nethanyahu should be held responsible.

post #82 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

Don't be intellectually dishonest.  You know full well that those who accuse Israel of "terrorism" are not referring to fringe groups of settlers.  They are referring to official government policy and military actions.  

There are members of the administration that sanctioned and indeed took part in acts of terrorism that in one incident alone killed up to 90 civilians. do you really believe that the fact that they are now "legitamate" has shifted their moral compass? Let's not forget that the British weren't even their "enemy" they were there in an administrative role but were seen as an obstacle to the Zionists goal.

post #83 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Don't be intellectually dishonest.  You know full well that those who accuse Israel of "terrorism" are not referring to fringe groups of settlers.  They are referring to official government policy and military actions.  

Terrorism is a sub-element of a guerillia-tactic, that is being usually used by groups that are weaker and much less ressourced/equipped than the opponent. Israel's army is well-equipped and ressourced and has therefore no need to resort to terrorism or other guerillia-tactics.

Terrorism is a tactic to use fear to try to achieve a political goal, for which the group/people doesn't have the military power to achieve in a conventional manner. Israel on the other hand as a state with a full equipped army/secret service has the means to achieve its political and economical goals without terrorism, it simply uses its military force and occupational system to do what its leaders decide, like for example the huge dispossession of palestinian land and ressources it did in the last few decades to create israeli settlements in the Westbank.

Terrorism is ugly and against human morale and ethic codes, but even uglier and more immoral is a state using its political and military power to dispossess and oppress people and it's hard to condemn people for choosing immorale means to fight against a much bigger oppressor.

You can't just ask of these people to give up their means of fighting. In order to really get away from terrorism the people need hope, protection and a longterm political perspective. A powerful actor needs to back the palestinians and help them to restore their political and national rights. The US could do that, as an ally of Israel and having huge political and economical power, it could declare the occupation by Israel as illegal and force Israel to retreat (including dismantling israeli setllements in the Westbank) from the occupied areas and help to create a palestinian state within internationally recognized borders with East-Jerusalem as capital.

A sort of Marshall-plan would need to follow to help the palestinian state to become an economically viable state. Then the palestinians would naturally reduce their support for terrorism and militant groups, as the palestinians would build up a normal regulated and trained army, and work within the new economy, and any remaining militant groups would become just as fringe as the current jewish militant groups.

But instead of doing the right thing, US-leaders are always thinking about winning or not losing elections and so they play it safe which means the status-quo is being untouched.
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #84 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

Don't be intellectually dishonest.  You know full well that those who accuse Israel of "terrorism" are not referring to fringe groups of settlers.  They are referring to official government policy and military actions.  

 

The general consensus among many, but not all, of the US members here is that the Palestinians are terrorists, that they resort to violence to pursue their goals. Fair enough...

 

How then do they feel about the Tibetans? They have engaged in violent uprisings against the Chinese over the years. Indeed the CIA even funded and trained Tibetan insurgents. The Tibetans are terrorists, the Chinese sovereign government says so, so it must be true. But hang on... the CIA funded a terrorist organisation... does it then follow that the USA is a state sponsor of terrorism? If so they should put themselves on the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency list (ICE), where they can join Israel as a "specially designated country" that "have shown a tendency to promote, produce or protect terrorist organizations or their members."  The inclusion of Israel is at least consistent with claims that they have been sponsoring the Islamic terrorist group MEK.

 

Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) is currently on the official US list of terrorist organisations yet there are many politicians, that have previously be prone to spouting anti-islamic rhetoric and shown to favour Israel, that want MEK removed from the list. This baffled many people until NBC covered the story. The suggestion is that MEK is being funded by Israel, acting as agents in the killing of Iranian nuclear scientists, a policy that seems to curry favour in the USA.

 

As a Brit should I be allowed to demand that the drunken mock-Irish dickheads that funded the IRA through NORAID should be sent to Guantanamo Bay?

 

Ultimately labeling someone that, lacks a structured army yet, resorts to organised violence as being a terrorist state is one hell of an oversimplification. Pot/kettle?

post #85 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

When official Government military actions, presumed against military targets, have a 2 out of 3 civilian death rate and a 10, 20, 50x civilian death rate compared to the enemy, it takes a real lack of morals for someone not to see that that is not an ethical thing to do.

 

I have morals, and I think it is indeed ethical.  It's necessary.  

 

 

 

 

Quote:
Whether it's called "terrorism" or not, people die. This can be stopped. This should be stopped.

 

Yes.  It can be stopped by Hamas.  

 

 

 

Quote:
If Israel really wants to gain favour enough to end this conflict, Israel must take the moral high ground. The moral high ground is not their birthright. And it disappears when they start killing children playing soccer. NO MATTER WHAT THE PALESTINIANS DO.

 

Total crap.  The Palestinians are the ones putting missile sites next to soccer fields.  It's not "no matter what the Palestinians do."  That is an absolute falsehood.  Israel is responding to terror.  

 

 

 

Quote:
An eye for an eye? Soon the world is blind. Ten Palestinians for each Israeli? Genocide. Sharon and Nethanyahu should be held responsible.

 

And who is to be held responsible for Palestinian terror?  Who is to be held responsible for the DELIBERATE targeting of known innocent civilians?  Oh, right...no one.  Because in your view, their terror is justified.  Just admit it.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #86 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcrawler View Post


Terrorism is a sub-element of a guerillia-tactic, that is being usually used by groups that are weaker and much less ressourced/equipped than the opponent. Israel's army is well-equipped and ressourced and has therefore no need to resort to terrorism or other guerillia-tactics.
Terrorism is a tactic to use fear to try to achieve a political goal, for which the group/people doesn't have the military power to achieve in a conventional manner. Israel on the other hand as a state with a full equipped army/secret service has the means to achieve its political and economical goals without terrorism, it simply uses its military force and occupational system to do what its leaders decide, like for example the huge dispossession of palestinian land and ressources it did in the last few decades to create israeli settlements in the Westbank.

 

OK.  

 

 



Terrorism is ugly and against human morale and ethic codes, but even uglier and more immoral is a state using its political and military power to dispossess and oppress people and it's hard to condemn people for choosing immorale means to fight against a much bigger oppressor.

 

We disagree.  Terrorism is far worse than using military and political power.  It's not even a question.  And I reject your label of "oppressor."  

 

 

 


 

Quote:
You can't just ask of these people to give up their means of fighting

 

Yes, I can.  And so should you.  

 

.

 

Quote:
In order to really get away from terrorism the people need hope, protection and a longterm political perspective. A powerful actor needs to back the palestinians and help them to restore their political and national rights.

 

Is that what they want?  I know you'd like to think so, but they've been offered a full state multiple times in the last 30 years.  It's been rejected.  

 

 

Quote:
 The US could do that, as an ally of Israel and having huge political and economical power, it could declare the occupation by Israel as illegal and force Israel to retreat (including dismantling israeli setllements in the Westbank) from the occupied areas and help to create a palestinian state within internationally recognized borders with East-Jerusalem as capital.

 

The US could not do that.  Every time we have tried to intervene and referee the conflict, it gets worse.  You're dreaming about declaring the "occupation" illegal.  

 

 

Quote:
A sort of Marshall-plan would need to follow to help the palestinian state to become an economically viable state. Then the palestinians would naturally reduce their support for terrorism and militant groups, as the palestinians would build up a normal regulated and trained army, and work within the new economy, and any remaining militant groups would become just as fringe as the current jewish militant groups.
But instead of doing the right thing, US-leaders are always thinking about winning or not losing elections and so they play it safe which means the status-quo is being untouched.

 

The Palestinians have been offered all of that.  They must first reject terrorism.  On the contrary, they've embraced it.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hungover View Post

 

The general consensus among many, but not all, of the US members here is that the Palestinians are terrorists, that they resort to violence to pursue their goals. Fair enough...

 

How then do they feel about the Tibetans? They have engaged in violent uprisings against the Chinese over the years. Indeed the CIA even funded and trained Tibetan insurgents. The Tibetans are terrorists, the Chinese sovereign government says so, so it must be true. But hang on... the CIA funded a terrorist organisation... does it then follow that the USA is a state sponsor of terrorism? If so they should put themselves on the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency list (ICE), where they can join Israel as a "specially designated country" that "have shown a tendency to promote, produce or protect terrorist organizations or their members."  The inclusion of Israel is at least consistent with claims that they have been sponsoring the Islamic terrorist group MEK.

 

Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) is currently on the official US list of terrorist organisations yet there are many politicians, that have previously be prone to spouting anti-islamic rhetoric and shown to favour Israel, that want MEK removed from the list. This baffled many people until NBC covered the story. The suggestion is that MEK is being funded by Israel, acting as agents in the killing of Iranian nuclear scientists, a policy that seems to curry favour in the USA.

 

As a Brit should I be allowed to demand that the drunken mock-Irish dickheads that funded the IRA through NORAID should be sent to Guantanamo Bay?

 

Ultimately labeling someone that, lacks a structured army yet, resorts to organised violence as being a terrorist state is one hell of an oversimplification. Pot/kettle?

 

 

I'm not sure what your point is.  If you want to discuss other terrorist groups, then let's do so.  We're focused on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict now.  Trying to broaden the debate by labeling the US as hypocritical just cheapens the discourse.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #87 of 157

It doesn't cheapen the discourse.  It hurts your argument.  It's no wonder you don't want to discuss Tibet.  You care more about winning than collaborating to find a better solution.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #88 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

It doesn't cheapen the discourse.  It hurts your argument.  It's no wonder you don't want to discuss Tibet.  You care more about winning than collaborating to find a better solution.

 

Winning what?  I simply think that trying to label the US as inconsistent or hypocritical doesn't add to the discussion of this topic.  It may be a valid topic, but it's a different one.   

 

The problem here is that we can't even discuss the issue honestly.  You, tonton, Nightcrawler, hungover and others won't admit that your true position is that you think Palestinian terror is completely justified, and that you view Israel as an evil oppressor.   Until you do, there isn't much point in going further.  

 

In fact, intellectual dishonesty is the problem we see right now in the U.S. with regard to the "fiscal cliff" negotiations.  Democrats won't admit that they know raising taxes on the wealthy won't fix our problems, and will likely slow the economy.  They won't admit the real reason they want to raise taxes is that they simply think upper income people should be taxed more for reasons of "fairness" and "fixing" wealth inequality.   If we would just start with what people actually believe, we might be able to get something accomplished.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #89 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

The Israelis do not engage in terrorism.  

 

 

 

Oh really, SDW200?. Well, take that up with the United States Government.

 

Typical bullshit and ignorance from SDW2001: Here's some statistics from 1948-1989: 

 

 

Event or Class

Date

Numbers Killed

Fraction or Multiple of PLO Killings (Row 1)

PLO Killings

1. Total Israelis killed by PLO

1968-81

282

1

Israeli Killings

2. Deir Yassin

April 10, 1948

254 (100+ women/children)

0.9

3. Doueimah

Oct. 28, 1948

350-1,000

1.2-3.5

4. Qibya

Oct. 14-15, 1953

66-70 (¾ women/children)

0.2

5. El-Bureig

Aug. 31, 1953

50

0.2

6. Kafr Kassim

Oct. 29, 1956

49 (29 women/children)

0.2

7. Khan Yunis

Nov. 3-4, 1956

275

1.0

8. Rafah

Nov. 12, 1956

111

0.4

9. Abu Zaabal

Feb. 12, 1970

70-80

0.2-0.3

10. Bahr al-Baqr

April 8, 1970

40-47 (all children)

0.1-0.2

11. Syria (9 air raids)

Sept. 9, 1972

200-500

0.7-1.8

12. Refugee Camp

May 1974

200+

0.7+

13. Refugee Camps

Dec. 2, 1975

57

0.2

14. Lebanon

Nov. 9, 1977

70-100

0.2-0.4

15. Beirut

July 17-18, 1981

300+

1.1+

16. Refugee Camps

June 3-4, 1982

190+

0.8+

17. Sabra-Shatila

Sept. 16-18, 1982

1,800-3,500 (large % women/children)

6.4-12.4

18. Beqaa Valley

Jan. 1984

100 (many children)

0.4

19. Majdal Anjar

Aug. 28, 1984

100

0.4

20. Tunis

Oct. 1, 1985

75

0.3

21. 1987-89 uprising

May 1989

438

1.6

22. Aggregate of rows 2-21

 

4,795-7,496

17.0-26.6

 

Link

Link

Link

Link

Link

LInk

Link

 

 

Israel is not only guilty of international terrorism since its creation in 1948, but also they are guilt of war crimes. In this BBC report (conservative mainsteam Government run UK broadcast network), the vast majority of Israel's targets in Lebanon during the 2009 war were civilian infrastructure - NOT military facilities. Targeting the civilian infrastructure of a nation is deemed a war crime under international law. But as we all know, there is one law for Israel and the US, and another law for the rest of the world's nations.

 

 

KEY INFRASTRUCTURE DAMAGED IN ISRAELI BOMBING
Map: Lebanon
Airports
Beirut International
Qaleiat domestic
Rayak military
Ports
Beirut
Tripoli
Jounieh
Other transport
Lighthouse, Beirut
Bridges: 62
Fuel stations: 22
Overpasses: 72
Dams: 3
Roads: 600km
Military
Radar installations: 4
Army barracks: 1
Civilian
Private homes: 5,000
Commercial
Tissue paper factory, Bekaa
Bottle factory, Bekaa
Other businesses: 150
Communications
Hezbollah's al-Manar TV station, Haret Hreik, Beirut
MTC mobile phone antenna, Dahr al-Baidar
Utilities
Jiyeh power plant
Sibline power station
Sewage plant, Dair al-Zahrani

 

 

And considering that the huge majority of the US population gets its news out of the Middle East via the corporate weasel-media as filtered by MEMRI, designed to sanitize Israel, and demonize its enemies....you will not hear of reality.

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #90 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

The problem here is that we can't even discuss the issue honestly.  You, tonton, Nightcrawler, hungover and others won't admit that your true position is that you think Palestinian terror is completely justified, and that you view Israel as an evil oppressor.   Until you do, there isn't much point in going further.  

 

Talk about caricatures.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #91 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Talk about caricatures.

 

Not at all...simply what I think your position really is.  If I'm wrong, please say so.  And please be specific as to what your position is.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #92 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

 

Oh really, SDW200?. Well, take that up with the United States Government.

 

Typical bullshit and ignorance from SDW2001: Here's some statistics from 1948-1989: 

 

 

 

You can post all the statistics you want.  The fact is that the Israelis do not deliberately target innocent civilians.  There is no way around that for you, no matter how much of a problem you have with Israeli military and political actions.  

 

Really, I'd love to hear what some of you folks (you know who you are) think Israel should do.   You're excellent at ripping them for military actions in response to terrorism.  But rarely do I hear (read) and what you'd like them to do.   What you fail to acknowledge is that the Palestinian cause is not about establishing a state.  It's not about better living conditions or opposing an "occupation."  It's about retaking the land they believe is theirs by God's own will.  They view Israel as an illegitimate state, regardless of the actions it pursues.      

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #93 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

You can post all the statistics you want.  The fact is that the Israelis do not deliberately target innocent civilians.  There is no way around that for you, no matter how much of a problem you have with Israeli military and political actions.  

 

 

Really, I'd love to hear what some of you folks (you know who you are) think Israel should do.   You're excellent at ripping them for military actions in response to terrorism.  But rarely do I hear (read) and what you'd like them to do.   What you fail to acknowledge is that the Palestinian cause is not about establishing a state.  It's not about better living conditions or opposing an "occupation."  It's about retaking the land they believe is theirs by God's own will.  They view Israel as an illegitimate state, regardless of the actions it pursues.      

 

So, in your mind, all the facts, statistics and hard evidence of terrorism, the deliberate targeting of civilians, and committing war crimes on the part of the Israeli military, are not relevant - and only your opinion counts?

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #94 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

Not at all...simply what I think your position really is.  If I'm wrong, please say so.  And please be specific as to what your position is.  

Palestinian insurgents and the Israeli government are both acting like complete dicks hurting their respective nations.  I think that Israel's response has been vastly disproportionate--the statistics absolutely support that notion.  A disproportionate response does not, however, give license to the Palestinians to fire rockets at civilians.  Having rockets fired at civilians doesn't give license to Israel to kill ten or a hundredfold more Palestinian civilians.  

 

Israel has the missile defense system to protect them, but it won't solve their terrible PR problem--they just flat out look like bullies with the kill ratio so drastically in their favor.  They should stop the encroaching settlements, stop killing civilians, and stop giving the Palestinian extremists excuses to recruit and retaliate.  

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #95 of 157

OK then, Definitions of terrorism:

 

Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. US Department of Defense 2005.

 

Quote:
The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.

 

No mention of civilians there at all.. What you do have is the use of violence to create fear in order to achieve an ideological goal. So, bombing Gaza in the knowledge that civilians WOULD definitely be killed is unlawful and intended to coerce and therefore fits the bill so far as the US DoD definition of terrorism.

 

So! What should Israel do? Remove the blockade on Gaza, stop illegal settlements, negotiate on the creation of the Palestinian state, engage in dialogue with Iran and stop acting like the bully of the Middle East. For a start.

post #96 of 157

Was the Boston Tea Party a terrorist act?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #97 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Was the Boston Tea Party a terrorist act?


I don't know enough about it to definitively answer, but in my opinion, I would call it more civil disobedience - more like Occupy, Greenpeace, or Sea Shepherd....

post #98 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Was the Boston Tea Party a terrorist act?

Good example. Yes, it was. If i recall my history correctly, the rebels stormed the ships, killed the men on board and destroyed the cargo. The act was meant as a threat to the British that if they did not stop the oppression of the settlers (taxation without representation), then more violence would follow.

Sounds like a terrorist act to me.

Would you condemn the Boston Tea Party?

If not, then why?

Is it because you find such oppression unbearable?

Now... Does anyone thing the Palestinians are not being oppressed?
post #99 of 157
Well, I have reviewed the history, and by all firsthand accounts, there were no deaths in Boston harbor on that night. In that case, I do not consider this particular rebellion an act of terrorism.

I'd like to ask anyone here whether they consider a Muslim rebel force blowing up an unmanned American oil well an act of terrorism.
post #100 of 157
I'm curious, MJ, as to whether you think any of the Tea Partiers' collectively agreed upon actions (to distinguish them from individual actions or mistakes) were unjust or unjustified.
post #101 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

 

I'm not sure what your point is.  If you want to discuss other terrorist groups, then let's do so.  We're focused on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict now.  Trying to broaden the debate by labeling the US as hypocritical just cheapens the discourse.  

In what way does it cheapen my argument? You denied that Israel engages in terrorist activities I showed you evidence to suggest otherwise. You choose to ignore it because it doesn't fit in with your arguement. Even the largest supporter of Israel, the USA, accepts that Israel engages in terrorist activities.

 

Let us assume that the UN does grant Palestine recognition as a state later today. Does this mean that you will drop the terrorist label whenever the Palestinians fire their crude motars? 

post #102 of 157

One of Israel's ace cards is the sympathy card. Criticize Israel, and you're automatically a "Jew Hater" or an "Anti-Semite" or even  "Holocaust Denier". They play this card at every opportunity, and for many people (especially in politics), the notion of being lumped alongside Hitler and the Nazis is not only unwelcome, but a political suicide/career ender.

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #103 of 157

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/29/world/meast/palestinian-united-nations/?hpt=hp_t1

 

Palestine is now an observer state at the UN.  Same status as the Vatican.

 

 

 

The US and Israel of course objected.

 

The "leader of the free world" and its puppy don't want freedom for all people, just select ones.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #104 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/29/world/meast/palestinian-united-nations/?hpt=hp_t1

 

Palestine is now an observer state at the UN.  Same status as the Vatican.

 

 

 

The US and Israel of course objected.

 

The "leader of the free world" and its puppy don't want freedom for all people, just select ones.

Unfortunately the first Israeli response is likely to result in power cuts in the Occupied Terratories. Perhaps the Palestinians could pay some Iranian nuclear scientists to build a nuclear power station for them... opps, I forgot... the Israeli government paid terrorists to murder them all....

post #105 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by hungover View Post

Unfortunately the first Israeli response is likely to result in power cuts in the Occupied Terratories. Perhaps the Palestinians could pay some Iranian nuclear scientists to build a nuclear power station for them... opps, I forgot... the Israeli government paid terrorists to murder them all....

 

That would be the MEK and Jundallah terrorist groups, the latter funded and abetted by both US and UK governments. Jundullah has been responsible for an ongoing spate of terrorist attacks - bombings and shootings in Iran, resulting in hundreds of murders and injuries since 2003. 

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #106 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Was the Boston Tea Party a terrorist act?

For the benefit of those outside of the USA I suspect that this question is in response to the recent news reports of children in Texan schools being asked to consider if the Tea Party was an act of terrorism http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2239169/The-Boston-Tea-Party-act-terrorism-Fury-mock-news-report-taught-schools.html?ito=feeds-newsxmlquestion

 

The children were presented with a mock news account of the story which reported it as an act of terrorism. The intention being to teach the children to question what they read and to understand that through propagander you can spin pretty much anything. The irony here however is that the mainstream press in the USA have largely ommited to mention the mock element and have portrayed the education authority as being anti-patriotic.

post #107 of 157

The Boston Tea party act is imho definitely not terrorism, it was imho an act of rebellion.

 

That the rebels masquaraded as indians is though psychologically interesting. Maybe they saw indians as a symbol for uncompromised freedom or being disobedient and rebellious made them psychologically uneasy and the masquerading helped them overcome these inhibitions.

I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #108 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcrawler View Post

The Boston Tea party act is imho definitely not terrorism, it was imho an act of rebellion.

 

That the rebels masquaraded as indians is though psychologically interesting. Maybe they saw indians as a symbol for uncompromised freedom or being disobedient and rebellious made them psychologically uneasy and the masquerading helped them overcome these inhibitions.

Or perhaps they though that if things went pear shaped they could blame it on the "indians" ;)

post #109 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by hungover View Post

Unfortunately the first Israeli response is likely to result in power cuts in the Occupied Terratories. Perhaps the Palestinians could pay some Iranian nuclear scientists to build a nuclear power station for them... opps, I forgot... the Israeli government paid terrorists to murder them all....

 

It's important to be precise. The murder of iranian scientists is not terrorism, it's ordinary assassination.

 

The difference is that terrorism isn't specific regarding its victims, the sole purpose is to cause an effect of fear for the purpose of achieving a political change.

 

Killing the iranian scientists is a very specific assassination-campaign with the purpose of slowing down the development of the iranian nuclear program.

 

Like already said, Israel as a government doesn't need to resort terrorism, a tool used by militarily weak groups, it can use normal warfare or assassinations to achieve its goals.

 

Even the massacres in Lebanon were not terrorism, they were normal massacres for the purpose of killing as much of the civilian supportbase of the PLO in Lebanon as possible... and Israel's army didn't commit the massacre itself, it let a christian militia commit it.

 

The breaking bones-policy in the occupied terrorities during the first intifada or the arbitrary emprisonments without court-decisions (for the purpose of creating a net of collaborateurs through pressure) or the destruction of homes of the families of family-members of suicide-bombers or the blockade of Gaza or the stealing of land and ressources, ... all that and more don't qualify for being terrorism, they are occupational policy, oppression, maybe warcrimes but certainly not terrorism.

 

The use of disproportionate force in residential areas with the calculated acceptance of huge collateral damage could qualify as terrorism if the goal is to force the palestinian population to develop fear and reduce their support for the palestinian militant groups, but to prove that that is the main-motivation is difficult and maybe it's only a sidemotivation.


Edited by Nightcrawler - 11/30/12 at 5:43am
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #110 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

 

So, in your mind, all the facts, statistics and hard evidence of terrorism, the deliberate targeting of civilians, and committing war crimes on the part of the Israeli military, are not relevant - and only your opinion counts?

 

Go ahead.  Show me evidence that Israeli military deliberately targets innocent civilians.  Show me the evidence of "war crimes."   Can't wait.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Palestinian insurgents and the Israeli government are both acting like complete dicks hurting their respective nations.  I think that Israel's response has been vastly disproportionate--the statistics absolutely support that notion.

 

So?  The entire idea of proportionate military responses is stupid.  

 

 

 

Quote:
  A disproportionate response does not, however, give license to the Palestinians to fire rockets at civilians.

 

Agreed.  

 

 

Quote:
  Having rockets fired at civilians doesn't give license to Israel to kill ten or a hundredfold more Palestinian civilians

 

You're drawing a false equivalence there.  Israel does not deliberately target known innocent civilians.  They are going after military targets and terrorist leaders.  Unlike the Palestinians, they are not launching strikes on busses and pizza shops.  

.  

 

Quote:
Israel has the missile defense system to protect them, but it won't solve their terrible PR problem--they just flat out look like bullies with the kill ratio so drastically in their favor.  They should stop the encroaching settlements, stop killing civilians, and stop giving the Palestinian extremists excuses to recruit and retaliate.  

 

I actually agree with that.  My complaint with Israel has always been that they sometimes seem ready to poke the bear.  Right or wrong, they should stop the expansion of settlements in areas that they know will be provocative.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by groakes View Post

OK then, Definitions of terrorism:

 

Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. US Department of Defense 2005.

 

 

No mention of civilians there at all.. What you do have is the use of violence to create fear in order to achieve an ideological goal. So, bombing Gaza in the knowledge that civilians WOULD definitely be killed is unlawful and intended to coerce and therefore fits the bill so far as the US DoD definition of terrorism.

 

 

 

 

Yes, I'm quite aware of how the left twists itself into a pretzel trying to justify Palestinian actions while condemning Israeli actions.  Every intellectually honest person knows that Israel does not engage in terrorism.  Terrorism is the deliberate targeting of civilians in pursuit of a political goal, no matter what your little dictionary says.  

 

 

 

Quote:
So! What should Israel do? Remove the blockade on Gaza,

 

Why, so more weapons can flow?  

 

Quote:
 stop illegal settlements,

 

Tell me how they are "illegal" in their own country.  

 

Quote:
 negotiate on the creation of the Palestinian state

 

They've tried that for at least 20 years.  In 1995, Arafat was offered 95% of what he wanted, and rejected it.  The Palestinians, on the whole, do not want a peaceful two state solution.  


 

Quote:
engage in dialogue with Iran

 

To what end?  Iran is incredibly hostile and has called for Israel's destruction time and time again.  They are led by religious zealots who are exceptionally anti-semitic.  Please.  

 

Quote:
 and stop acting like the bully of the Middle East. For a start

 

Ummm...does Israel launch rockets over borders for no reason?  Does Israel blow up busses and movie theaters and outdoor markets?  

.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/29/world/meast/palestinian-united-nations/?hpt=hp_t1

 

Palestine is now an observer state at the UN.  Same status as the Vatican.

 

 

 

The US and Israel of course objected.

 

The "leader of the free world" and its puppy don't want freedom for all people, just select ones.

 

Yes, Berg...because our objection means we don't want people to be free.  <slaps forehead>

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hungover View Post

In what way does it cheapen my argument? You denied that Israel engages in terrorist activities I showed you evidence to suggest otherwise. You choose to ignore it because it doesn't fit in with your arguement. Even the largest supporter of Israel, the USA, accepts that Israel engages in terrorist activities.

 

Let us assume that the UN does grant Palestine recognition as a state later today. Does this mean that you will drop the terrorist label whenever the Palestinians fire their crude motars? 

 

1.  Israel does not engage in terrorism.  Period.  

 

2.  The United States does not "accept" that Israel engages in terrorist activities.  

 

3.  Of course I won't, not if they are deliberately targeted at civilians.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #111 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

Go ahead.  Show me evidence that Israeli military deliberately targets innocent civilians.  Show me the evidence of "war crimes."   Can't wait.  

 

 

 

You have already said the following:

 

 

 

Quote: SDW2001
You can post all the statistics you want.

 

You have admitted that your mind is made up and your opinion set in stone, regardless of facts, statistics, evidence etc. I could post more

 

 

 

 

Quote:

Saydem said that losses in Gaza have reached $1.9 billion.

The death toll is reported at 1,342 and 5,500 were injured.

Other numbers are coming in.

As many as 58 mosques and churches were destroyed, 83 hospitals and were razed, 25 schools were levelled and all of Gaza is now communicating through one fibre optic cable with the world.

An estimated 80 percent of its communications infrastructure has been wiped out.

 

 

but according to your track record, the only media worth reading is material that has been sanitized (by the hardline Likudist leaning Middle East Media Research Institute MEMRI), which has a track record of bias and propaganda-mongering, and is the translation/ filter organ through which most of the US public receives its "news" from the Middle East.

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #112 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

 

You have already said the following:

 

 

 

 

You have admitted that your mind is made up and your opinion set in stone, regardless of facts, statistics, evidence etc. I could post more

 

 

 

 

 

 

but according to your track record, the only media worth reading is material that has been sanitized (by the hardline Likudist leaning Middle East Media Research Institute MEMRI), which has a track record of bias and propaganda-mongering, and is the translation/ filter organ through which most of the US public receives its "news" from the Middle East.

 

You are not understanding my point.  I am saying that you have shown no evidence that the Israelis deliberately target innocent civilians.  No amount of statistics, data points or other "evidence" is going to change the fact that Palestinians target innocent men, women and children, and the Israelis don't.  

 

Edit:  By the way, aren't you the one who claimed the U.S. had killed 100-200,000 civilians in Iraq?  Yeah, I think you were.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #113 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

By the way, aren't you the one who claimed the U.S. had killed 100-200,000 civilians in Iraq?  Yeah, I think you were.  

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iraq#Effects_on_the_Iraqi_people_during_sanctions

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #114 of 157
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #115 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

Oh boy.  

 

Is that to say the claims and estimates are untrue?

 

Or is this just argumentum de incredulity?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #116 of 157

If Israel wanted to target innocent civilians they could use all their weaponry and kill all palestinians, it's technically possible for Israel to commit a genocide. They don't do it because doing so would destroy Israel from within as the israelis themselves couldn't live with doing such a heinous crime.

 

Like already said using terrorism is not necessary for Israel, using normal warfare and occupational oppression they have enough means to achieve their military and political goals.

 

But what is historically interesting is that Israel supported Hamas to grow roots inside Gaza as a mean to split the palestinian political will. During the 80's of last century the secular PLO made steps to recognize Israel and enter a 2-state-solution-compromise. This was the most dangerous development for Israel as it meant having to retreat from the Westbank and to dismantle the settlements there.

 

So in order to disrupt that development Israel supported the muslim brotherhood in establishing itself in Gaza so that the palestinian people would lose their unity and the PLO lose its legitimacy of representing the palestinian people, and additionally adding a religious slant to the conflict so that the palestinians wouldn't be able to enter a secular compromise (divide and conquer).

 

The prospect of peace and therefore having to fulfill the UN-resolutions that declare the occupation of Gaza, Westbank, East-Jerusalem.. as illegal is what Israel's governments have feared the most (I'm not sure if there is a difference between Likud and Kadima on that question), not the predictable and manageable terrorism of militant palestinians.

I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #117 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

Is that to say the claims and estimates are untrue?

 

Or is this just argumentum de incredulity?

 

It's an expression of disbelief...that someone actually thinks the United States is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths as a result of sanctions placed upon Iraq.  It's not a question of estimated casualties.  It's a question of assigning blame, and making statements like sammi has in the past ("The Iraq war caused the deaths of 100,000 civilians.")  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #118 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

It's an expression of disbelief...that someone actually thinks the United States is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths as a result of sanctions placed upon Iraq.  It's not a question of estimated casualties.  It's a question of assigning blame, and making statements like sammi has in the past ("The Iraq war caused the deaths of 100,000 civilians.")  

 

What's even more unbelievable is that you seem to see no connection between the US-drive sanctions and the civilian deaths and suffering.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #119 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

It's an expression of disbelief...that someone actually thinks the United States is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths as a result of sanctions placed upon Iraq.  It's not a question of estimated casualties.  It's a question of assigning blame, and making statements like sammi has in the past ("The Iraq war caused the deaths of 100,000 civilians.")  

 

Who is to blame for the deaths resulting from the U.S.-led sanctions, then?

 

Who is to blame for the deaths resulting from the U.S.-led invasion, then?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #120 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcrawler View Post

 

It's important to be precise. The murder of iranian scientists is not terrorism, it's ordinary assassination.

 

The difference is that terrorism isn't specific regarding its victims, the sole purpose is to cause an effect of fear for the purpose of achieving a political change.

 

Killing the iranian scientists is a very specific assassination-campaign with the purpose of slowing down the development of the iranian nuclear program.

 

Like already said, Israel as a government doesn't need to resort terrorism, a tool used by militarily weak groups, it can use normal warfare or assassinations to achieve its goals.

 

Even the massacres in Lebanon were not terrorism, they were normal massacres for the purpose of killing as much of the civilian supportbase of the PLO in Lebanon as possible... and Israel's army didn't commit the massacre itself, it let a christian militia commit it.

 

The breaking bones-policy in the occupied terrorities during the first intifada or the arbitrary emprisonments without court-decisions (for the purpose of creating a net of collaborateurs through pressure) or the destruction of homes of the families of family-members of suicide-bombers or the blockade of Gaza or the stealing of land and ressources, ... all that and more don't qualify for being terrorism, they are occupational policy, oppression, maybe warcrimes but certainly not terrorism.

 

The use of disproportionate force in residential areas with the calculated acceptance of huge collateral damage could qualify as terrorism if the goal is to force the palestinian population to develop fear and reduce their support for the palestinian militant groups, but to prove that that is the main-motivation is difficult and maybe it's only a sidemotivation.

Sorry but I have to disagree with you. Throughout this thread we have witnessed the ease with which words can be manipulated to either condemn or justify unlawful killings.


IMO both sides are (ultimately) as bad as each other. Neither has the right to kill innocent civilians for personal or political gain. That said, I do take umbrage with what seems to be a rehashing of the US media's take on the situation, namely the de-legitimisation of one side through terms such as terrorism. The implied intention being to portray one side as innocents that need to defend themselves from these "crazy idealists". Your insistence on using the term "political assassination" being one such euphemism- it just sounds much "nicer" than "state sponsored murder by terrorist organisations" (which is what it was). I appreciate that might not have been your aim but it is a sad fact that the Nintendofication of violence has filtered down through to the press and in turn the public.


In the last 2 years a number of Iranian "nuclear scientists" have been killed (with up to at least 24 other people) . Given that the pool of scientists is very small their murders will have the effect of acting as a disincentive to joining any such Iranian state jobs. In other words, potential scientists have been "terrorised". You might counter that the primary aim of the killings is to thwart the Iranians, whilst I agree, don't you concede that the killings were conducted in a dramatic manner. More often than not the paymasters want the killings to be as inconspicuous as possible, not in this case, terror is an intended aim.


Both the USA and Israel have laws that prohibit the premeditated killing of civilians without due process. None of the "scientists" had committed any crimes, none were tried. At worst they were guilty of taking a wage from a government that the US/Israeli governments do not like. Additionally they were unfortunate to have been born in region of the world that certain governments would rather remain in a state of political infighting


As soon as wealthy states revel in such duplicity and hypocrisy it undermines their authority (and by association most of the other "western states") it feeds the propaganda machines of those that want to manipulate people into committing acts of violence against those wealthy states. Statements by republican politians such as "On occasion, scientists working on the nuclear programme in Iran turn up dead, I think that's a wonderful thing" (Rick Santorum in October) do little to calm a volatile region. But hey, why should he care? X hundreds of tanned people on the other side of the world kill each other, proves that they are crazy, we need to protect ourselves from them... and so on.


In the main I appreciate your definition of terrorism but perhaps if the Palestinians were on an equal "armoury" footing with the Israelis then they would not resort to such crude and atrocious measures as bombing buses. With proper funding an true UN recognition they could fire the very same missiles that the Israelis currently use, at such as stage would this be acceptable? They would after all be a country legitimately trying to reclaim land stolen by a neighbouring state. And no I am not advocating such as situation. IMO both sides have proved that they should not be allowed to have arms.
 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Prisoners Revolt In Gaza.