Israel Jerusalem policy condemned

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: shrike ...there is no dispute that killing civilians intentionally in warfare is illegal.

I am happy to see you acknowledging this, shrike.

Do you condemn the actions of your nation's war heroes in 1948 who intentionally murdered thousands of Palestinian civilians in their program of ethnic cleansing?

[GHook93]

Quote by: PatrickHenry I am happy to see you acknowledging this, shrike. Do you condemn the actions of your nation's war heroes in 1948 who intentionally murdered thousands of Palestinian civilians in their program of ethnic cleansing?

What about your ancestors that stole the tropical paradise that you now live in. Why don't you come down from your high horse and stop bitching about occupation, when you contribute to the occupation of a foreign people. It is pretty hypocritical.

Don't counter with the obvious dishonest response that you would be happy to live under a sovereign Hawaiian government. Because a sovereign Hawaiian government would kick your white butt off the islands, except if you were going to be a tourist.

[Epistemologist]

Quote by: GHook93 Nice immature attack. And thanks for putting slanderous words in my mouth. I have known more Arabs and Muslims then most of you on this board. One of my best friends is an American-Iraqi serving on multiple tours in Iraq, so don't try to state that I am racist in anyway. I have never lumped all Arabs or Muslims together, but I have stated Arab extremist groups don't abided by the Geneva Convention. But let's stick to the Palestinians.

I realize it was kind of a mean attack and that's why I supplemented my post with further explanation, which you didn't seem to regard much. And for another topic of discussion, just knowing some people of Arab descent doesn't really show your true beliefs and racial view, but again, let's not discuss that here.

Quote by: GHook93 Hamas caught 2 Israeli soldiers who took a wrong turn. What they did was brutally (state-sanction) murdered these 2 men. Is this Geneva Convention material? They strap bombs on themselves and blow up innocent civilians (and specifically target these civilians). Not Geneva material! They randomly shoot missiles across the border with the intention of disrupting and killing civilians. Not Geneva material either.

Throughout the entire discussion, however, it seems that your strategy in justifying Israeli barbarism is by pointing to the other side and claiming that they're non-Geneva animals. But no one's denying that Palestinians are being brutal as well. I think the media reports are already saturated with enough news of the Palestinian this and the Palestinian that. So yeah, of course we acknowledge that.

But to shrug off Israeli actions as okay or as acceptable is wrong as well; to myopically and blindly accept Israeli's public image as a just, angelic, innocent, nation-state is wholly uncalled for because its covert (and sometimes not so covert) actions prove otherwise.

Since both sides would seem currently at fault, ff you're trying to figure out the entire conflict to point blame at the starter, let's not forget who invaded the region in the first place.

And my remarks on why both sides would break Geneva conventions is in a different arena altogether; instead of passing judgment on who's right or wrong in the conflict, I was just trying to explain why they're doing it, for respective national survival.

[pikatore]

Ghook, the whole 'look who's talking' argument doesn't work on everyone, and isn't a valid rebuttal.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: GHook93 What about your ancestors that stole the tropical paradise that you now live in. Why don't you come down from your high horse and stop bitching about occupation, when you contribute to the occupation of a foreign people. It is pretty hypocritical. Don't counter with the obvious dishonest response that you would be happy to live under a sovereign Hawaiian government. Because a sovereign Hawaiian government would kick your white butt off the islands, except if you were going to be a tourist.

GHook, aside from your continual off topic accusations against me personally, you are mistaken about what a sovereign Hawaii would do.

I was asking shrike about Israel's war heroes in British occupied Palestine in 1948. Why does this give a member license to make these rude, non-sequiturs about another topic entirely?

And I ask not about the current occupation of the entire region by the Zionist killers, but about specific crimes against humanity committed in 1948, based upon shrike's frank admission that intentionally killing civilians in warfare is wrong.

[Pooeypants]

Quote by: GHook93 What about your ancestors that stole the tropical paradise that you now live in. Why don't you come down from your high horse and stop bitching about occupation, when you contribute to the occupation of a foreign people. It is pretty hypocritical. Don't counter with the obvious dishonest response that you would be happy to live under a sovereign Hawaiian government. Because a sovereign Hawaiian government would kick your white butt off the islands, except if you were going to be a tourist.

This is not a debate on the mid Pacific islands, it is about the Middle East; specifically Israel. Please keep it that way.

[shrike]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Do you condemn the actions of your nation's war heroes in 1948 who intentionally murdered thousands of Palestinian civilians in their program of ethnic cleansing?

How can I condemn something that was never happened?

[shrike]

Quote by: Epis But to shrug off Israeli actions as okay or as acceptable is wrong as well; to myopically and blindly accept Israeli's public image as a just, angelic, innocent, nation-state is wholly uncalled for because its covert (and sometimes not so covert) actions prove otherwise.

Israel has full right to self defense and I think it doing in the right way. Of course there will be mistakes and wrong decisions in such long conflict. But there is never intent to do bad things on purpose.

[grandpa]

Quote by: GHook93 The majority of volconvo are adamantly against Israel, which by virtue is taking and support the Arab/Muslim argument, which is in effect supporting these countries. The surrounding Arab country are far worse and far more racist countries

I haven't supported any state argument by virtue. If one opposes one state it doesn't necessarily mean they support another.

Grandpa h.

[grandpa]

Quote by: shrike Israel has full right to self defense and I think it doing in the right way. Of course there will be mistakes and wrong decisions in such long conflict.

Your mantra is that Israeli terrorist actions are all mistakes. That's very, very naive.
The fact is Israel is actually putting its own population in danger by constantly imposing harsh conditions on the Palestinian population. Again, I'm not saying Palestinians never do things I disagree with very sharply, but that the various states involved are creating these conflicts.

Quote by: shrike But there is never intent to do bad things on purpose.

Of course you would say that. That's the only point of view you allow. Anything else must be anti-Semitic or un-American (or whatever). But it is certainly possible for soldiers to do bad things on purpose--in fact, that's what much of Israeli and US policy entails. States have to subjugate and terrify people if they are to have any kind of significance.

Grandpa h.

[The Decider]

Quote by: shrike No it does matter. There is a dispute about legality of Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria for example. But there is no dispute that killing civilians intentionally in warfare is illegal.

Only the Israeli government disputes the unanimous world consensus that Israel's occupation of the Occupied Territories is illegal. Even the US government, not known for its neutrality on Israel, opposes the Israeli argument. On the other hand, only Hamas and Hezbollah claim that their attacks on civilians are "self defense." They contest the definition of "civilian." Again, most nations in the world oppose that view. So you have two belligerents--the Israelis and their Arab guerrilla opponents-who unilaterally dismiss international law.

Sorry Shrike, your case for ignoring the GC is weak--and that's an understatement.

[Epistemologist]

Quote by: shrike Israel has full right to self defense

If you want to look at it that way, so do the Palestinians.

Quote by: shrike and I think it doing in the right way.

Of course.

Quote by: shrike Of course there will be mistakes and wrong decisions in such long conflict. But there is never intent to do bad things on purpose.

I assume the purpose is national defense. Both nations are intent on this purpose. It seems that some, however, are pushed more into a corner than others, and must resort to somewhat different means of achieving that goal.

[shrike]

Quote by: grandpa Your mantra is that Israeli terrorist actions are all mistakes. That's very, very naive..

Why it’s hard for you to accept that in such long conflict mistakes happen and civilians will die

The fact is Israel is actually putting its own population in danger by constantly imposing harsh conditions on the Palestinian population. Again, I'm not saying Palestinians never do things I disagree with very sharply, but that the various states involved are creating these conflicts.

You turning it upside down. Before Palestinians started the violence there was no "harsh conditions" .This nesccacry measures of self defense was imposed after Palestinians started they violent campaign to protect Israeli citizens.

But it is certainly possible for soldiers to do bad things on purpose--in fact, that's what much of Israeli and US policy entails. States have to subjugate and terrify people if they are to have any kind of significance

.
I never denied that soldiers did bad things but I what I say that this bad thing are against Israeli policy and Israeli law.

[shrike]

Quote by: The Decider Only the Israeli government disputes the unanimous world consensus that Israel's occupation of the Occupied Territories is illegal. Even the US government, not known for its neutrality on Israel, opposes the Israeli argument. On the other hand, only Hamas and Hezbollah claim that their attacks on civilians are "self defense." They contest the definition of "civilian." Again, most nations in the world oppose that view. So you have two belligerents--the Israelis and their Arab guerrilla opponents-who unilaterally dismiss international law. .

There is no unanimous consensus like you claim prominent law experts like Julius Stone and Eugene Rostow say that Israeli communities is legal under International law .I am not familiar with any experts that support Hamas POV on suicide bombing.
I say it again what various states says it pretty much irrelevant because it depends on political constellation.

[shrike]

Quote by: Epistemologist If you want to look at it that way, so do the Palestinians.

Against what? It was always the Palestinians who started the violence.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: shrike How can I condemn something that was never happened?

I am happy this isn't a myopia that infects the entire world, just a certain segment of Zionists.

It certainly is a fact that your nation's war heroes systematically murdered Palestinian civilians in 1948.

Robin Miller, a progressive freelance writer on issues of social justice

A third technique to induce Arab flight was military attack on a town's Arab population. These assaults often used Davidka mortars--horribly inaccurate, but useful for creating terror--and barrel bombs. The latter consisted of barrels, casks, and metal drums filled with a mixture of explosives and fuel oil. Rolled into the Arab section of a town, they created "an inferno of raging flames and endless explosions." Another destructive maneuver described by writer Arthur Koestler was the "ruthless dynamiting of block after block" of the Arab community.[10] Not uncommonly, the Jewish forces resorted to simple terrorism. Sometimes this took the form of bombs planted in vehicles or buildings: 30 killed in Jaffa on Jan. 4., 1948, with a truck bomb; 20 killed the next day when the Semiramis Hotel in Jerusalem was bombed; 17 killed by a bomb at the Jaffa Gate in Jerusalem two days later.[11] More often, a Jewish military force entered an Arab village and massacred civilians, either during a night raid or after the seizure of the village. The massacres started early: Major General R. Dare Wilson, who served with the British troops trying to keep peace in Palestine before the end of the British Mandate, reported that on Dec. 18, 1947, the Haganah murdered 10, mostly women and children, in the Arab village of al-Khisas with grenades and machine gun fire. Wilson also described how on Dec. 31 the Haganah slaughtered another 14, again mostly women and children, again using machine guns and throwing grenades into occupied homes, this time in Balad Esh-Sheikh.[12] Throughout 1948, the massacres continued: 60 at Sa'sa' on Feb. 15; 100 murdered in Acre after its May 18 seizure by the Haganah; several hundred at Lydda on July 12, including 80 machine-gunned inside the Dahmash Mosque; 100 at Dawayma on Oct. 29, with an Israeli eye-witness reporting that "the children were killed by smashing their skulls with clubs"; 13 young men mowed down by machine guns in open fields outside Eilabun on Oct. 30; another 70 young men blindfolded and shot to death, one after another, at Safsaf the same day; 12 killed at Majd al-Kurum, also on Oct. 30, with a Belgian U.N. observer writing that "there is no doubt about these murders"; an unknown number killed the next day at al-Bi'na and Deir al-Assad, described by a U.N. official as "wanton slaying without provocation"; 14 "liquidated," according to the Israeli military's report, at Khirbet al-Wa'ra as-Sauda on Nov. 2.[13] A particularly repugnant method of killing employed by the Jewish militias was the blowing up of houses with their occupants still inside, often at night. The militia would place explosive charges around the stone houses, drench the wooden window and door frames with gasoline, and then open fire, simultaneously dynamiting and burning the sleeping inhabitants to death.[14] The supreme act of terrorism by Jewish militias was the slaughter of nearly the entire village of Deir Yassin on April 9, 1948. According to Jacques de Reynier, a Swiss physician working for the Red Cross who arrived before the bloodletting had ended, 254 people were "deliberately massacred in cold blood." "All I could think of," he later said, "was the SS troops I had seen in Athens." According to Meir Pa'il, who served as a communications officer for the Haganah in Deir Yassin and was present during the assault, 25 male survivors were taken to Jerusalem and paraded through the streets in a perverse victory celebration, then shot in cold blood.[15] Menachem Begin, the leader of the Irgun, one of the militias involved in the horror at Deir Yassin, called the atrocity a "splendid act of conquest." In 1977, Begin was elected Prime Minister of Israel.[16] The massacre at Deir Yassin played a crucial role in undermining the morale of the Palestinian population. As de Reynier, the Swiss physician, wrote, "a general terror was built up among the Arabs, a terror astutely fostered by the Jews."[17]

[shrike]

I am happy this isn't a myopia that infects the entire world, just a certain segment of Zionists. It certainly is a fact that your nation's war heroes systematically murdered Palestinian civilians in 1948. Robin Miller, a progressive freelance writer on issues of social justice

Not anything that written by some anonymous "journalist" on internet is a truth or it is if it fits your worldview?
I wanted to check if he historian on his bio page but it was empty.

[pikatore]

shrike, the essay was FULL of sources.

[grandpa]

Quote by: shrike Why it’s hard for you to accept that in such long conflict mistakes happen and civilians will die.

Because that's an argument against state-sanctioned conflicts, not for them.
If conflict is inevitable with the existence of a given state it means that state should be seriously challenged. That's a very simple concept, and I repeat this for emphasis: Its applicable not only to Israel, but to all governing organizations.

Quote by: shrike You turning it upside down. Before Palestinians started the violence there was no "harsh conditions".

You have yet to provide evidence that the entire Palestinian population started this, or that the harsh conditions Israel is imposing is doing a single thing to foster peace anywhere.

Quote by: shrike This nesccacry measures of self defense was imposed after Palestinians started they violent campaign to protect Israeli citizens.

This 'self defense" means crippling virtually the entire Palestinian population, harassing everybody, ripping off Palestinian workers' paychecks, cutting off access to aid and dominating resources in general so as to put many on the brink of starvation and keep them there. Then there are the kangaroo court inquisitions. You would have to be a complete moron to not understand why this would be seen as problematic by the international community, or why this might contribute to the very anti-Semitism you so often talk about (when you aren't denying that Israel is intended to be mostly a Jewish state, of course).

Quote by: shrike I never denied that soldiers did bad things but I what I say that this bad thing are against Israeli policy and Israeli law.

The crucial point is that you've plainly denied any of this matters. Any abuse by Israelis will be portrayed as a mistake at worst, when you don't characterize them as unquestionably benign.

Israeli law hardly matters unless it harasses Palestinians.
Consider how, according to the BBC, "The Israeli parliament passed a law preventing
Palestinians married to Israelis from gaining
Israeli citizenship."

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Israeli law limits Arab citizenship

"Supporters of the bill fear the loss of Israel's Jewish character" (I wonder how you dare suggest Israel is not intended to be a predominately Jewish State).
The articles adds that "The...law, which applies only to Palestinians, will prevent the approval of any future or pending
applications." This is tyranny, pure and simple. States need to have an underclass of some kind to kick around, lest they lose a major rationale for their existence. The Israeli-Palestinian issue an excellent example of this proven fact (as was Israeli's support for South African Apartheid).

Grandpa h.

[grandpa]

Quote by: pikatore shrike, the essay was FULL of sources.

But they were sources that challenge the Israeli government, so we're not supposed to consider them as even potentially legitimate.

Grandpa h.