Page 61 of 81 FirstFirst ...
11
51
59
60
61
62
63
71
... LastLast
  1. #1201
    Quote Originally Posted by Kasierith View Post
    Its not only different on a few details here and there, its different in just about every way. For example, when the women and children tried to flee, they were shot down, not by the police, but by Koresh and his main supporters. What's more, the fire was either caused by the accidental ignition of tear gas or purposefully set by those aside, ie the fire was not the main line of attack. Stop trying to establish strawmen.
    Not going to argue the details with you, if you've looked into the situation at all you'd know that what happened inside the compound is still not at all clear. The bottom line is that the ATF/FBI task force sent tanks with tear gas and automatic weapons support into a civilian area to force the issue instead of slowly and peacefully resolving the situation - which is what President Clinton initially wanted to do until the Attorney General convinced him otherwise. You asked if people would freak out if the US killed 50 people to take out one man. Sorry if you don't like the answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kasierith View Post
    Hamas runs on the "liberty or death" concept. They point to Israel as oppressors of the people and of freedom. Its a twisted mentality that Hamas took advantage of in order to strengthen its position. The people don't believe their lives are cheap so much, they merely believe that its worthwhile to sacrifice their lives for their beliefs and for their families. Wasn't the US built on the concept of a marginalized group of people fighting for their freedom against a superior military force?
    I laughed when I read this. Hamas doesn't run on the "liberty or death" concept. Hamas is a terrorist organization who for years killed Israeli civilians indiscriminately and gained legitimacy when the Palestinians decided that they were the best way to fight Israel. How's that working out for them, by the way?

    As to the American Revolution, one of the major differences is that the colonies actually had a chance of winning because Britain wasn't willing to commit enough of their forces to subdue their fellow Englishmen. Also I admit that my history classes were a bit biased, but I'm fairly sure that the colonies never sent saboteurs into Britain with the purpose of blowing up Parliament, or targets with even less strategic value. But yeah, other than that I guess Hamas and the 13 colonies operated exactly along the same lines.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kasierith View Post
    You really, really haven't been paying attention to the world, have you?
    Oh, is that why a multinational coalition was formed to stop Russia from absolutely kicking the shit out of Chechnya? Or when China crushed Tibet? I must have missed all of that. Unless it's in Europe's backyard(Serbia) or a complete wreck of a nation(Rwanda), or someone decides to royally piss off the US(Iraq, Afghanistan), the UN usually doesn't get involved beyond a slap on the wrist and a sternly worded letter(Iraq again). By all means provide actual examples if you disagree.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kasierith View Post
    The greater part (again, stop doing selective reading as I never said all in an absolute sense) of responsibility lays on Israel, because first of all they started the conflict, and second of all because they are in a greater position of power. Hamas did not come out of a void, but was brought about because of Israel's actions against the Palestinians, as anyone capable of reading a timeline can figure out.
    You're right, you didn't specifically say that Israel deserves all the blame for the situation. You just have heavily implied it in every single post you've made in this thread, with no real critique of Hamas to balance it out. My bad for saying clearly what you were saying obliquely, I guess?

  2. #1202
    Quote Originally Posted by Beavis View Post
    People need to stop repeating this myth. Hate Israel all you want, but hate them for the right reasons. Gaza and the West Bank are both independent, non-state political entities, governed by Hamas and the Palestinian National Authority, respectively. The people there are subject to the laws of their respective governments and therefore not under any sort of Apartheid.

    Israel itself is a completely integrated society where Arab citizens enjoy all the rights accorded to any other Israeli.
    South Africa Apartheid did have the same type of concept, they did call it "Homlands" it was independent, non-state political entities, governed by blacks, but was constant overruled and controlled by the central (white) government.

    Israeli citizens of arabic origin are not oppressed and enjoy the rights and privilege as appropriate to a citizen of a democratic state, BUT the problem is all the people who is denied citizenship (no law of return for them) and the government of Israel is using all the trick in the book to force them into a limbo.

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-20 at 07:55 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Liara View Post
    Palmer report. For the full report, see here.
    Specifically,
    No weapons that can I understand, but all the rest of the goods what is blockade? did UN clear that to?
    Last edited by a77; 2012-11-20 at 06:57 PM.

  3. #1203
    Quote Originally Posted by Liara View Post
    The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law
    That's hilarious! Israel has blockaded in recent years such "weapons" as: pasta, tomato paste, juice, shaving cream, potato chips, cookies, candy, A4 paper, crayons, soccer balls, musical instruments, toilet paper, candles and wheelchairs.

    Does that sounds like a list designed to "prevent weapons from entering Gaza"? Because to me that sounds awfully lot like collective punishment and a deliberate attempt to stop a nation from developing itself into a modern society.

  4. #1204
    Quote Originally Posted by Martoshi View Post
    That's hilarious! Israel has blockaded in recent years such "weapons" as: pasta, tomato paste, juice, shaving cream, potato chips, cookies, candy, A4 paper, crayons, soccer balls, musical instruments, toilet paper, candles and wheelchairs.

    Does that sounds like a list designed to "prevent weapons from entering Gaza"? Because to me that sounds awfully lot like collective punishment and a deliberate attempt to stop a nation from developing itself into a modern society.
    And yet, the international report made by a UN appointed committee completely disagrees with you.
    Mostly because humanitarian goods don't enter by sea.

    Also, have you got a source for your claim?

  5. #1205
    Quote Originally Posted by Liara View Post
    And yet, the international report made by a UN appointed committee completely disagrees with you.
    That says a lot more about the "UN appointed committee" than anything else.

    Mostly because humanitarian goods don't enter by sea.
    Yeah, they don't enter by sea because Israel is blockading the sea. When people try to import humanitarian goods by sea, IDF stops them and shoots them. Do you even think before writing?

    Also, have you got a source for your claim?
    Certainly you must be aware of such well known facts since you're so passionately debating the topic?


  6. #1206
    Bloodsail Admiral soulcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    A Black Land of Sorcery and Nameless Horror
    Posts
    1,125
    tell it to the people that were killed or injured in international waters by IDF pirates. turkey your ally was less than impressed if i remember.

  7. #1207
    Quote Originally Posted by soulcrusher View Post
    tell it to the people that were killed or injured in international waters by IDF pirates. turkey your ally was less than impressed if i remember.
    You know, when about 10 people start attacking you with metal pipes, knives etc. and try to throw you overboard, you react.
    And if they had nothing to hide, why did they object to being inspected like any other ship? Why did they attack IDF soldiers as soon as they boarded?

  8. #1208
    Quote Originally Posted by Liara View Post
    Also, have you got a source for your claim?
    Of course he doesnt.
    People think they know everything because they are effected by Hamas's propaganda, but that for sure makes it all true!

    Truth remains - Israel supply food, water, medical supply and electircity to Gaza strip while Hamas fires rockets.

  9. #1209
    Bloodsail Admiral soulcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    A Black Land of Sorcery and Nameless Horror
    Posts
    1,125
    people defending themslves in international waters Liara. you had no right being there, but hey israel doesnt care does it. you bully who you like and just dont care.

  10. #1210
    Fluffy Kitten Kasierith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    St Petersburg
    Posts
    9,876
    Quote Originally Posted by tjanson View Post
    Not going to argue the details with you, if you've looked into the situation at all you'd know that what happened inside the compound is still not at all clear. The bottom line is that the ATF/FBI task force sent tanks with tear gas and automatic weapons support into a civilian area to force the issue instead of slowly and peacefully resolving the situation - which is what President Clinton initially wanted to do until the Attorney General convinced him otherwise. You asked if people would freak out if the US killed 50 people to take out one man. Sorry if you don't like the answer
    .

    Slowly and peacefully? Since when is a 51 day operation rushed? And yes, the cause is uncertain which is exactly why I gave the two main theories behind it, neither of which in any way connect it to what is happening in Palestine. You have disputed nothing, but instead presented a flimsy strawman to attempt to defend your point.

    I laughed when I read this. Hamas doesn't run on the "liberty or death" concept. Hamas is a terrorist organization who for years killed Israeli civilians indiscriminately and gained legitimacy when the Palestinians decided that they were the best way to fight Israel. How's that working out for them, by the way?
    About as well as it was before Hamas. As for Hamas not running on that concept...

    "The Hamas Charter (or Covenant), issued in 1988, outlined the organization's position on many issues at the time, identifies Hamas as the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine and declares its members to be Muslims who "fear God and raise the banner of Jihad in the face of the oppressors." The charter states "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories,[36] and the obliteration or dissolution of Israel.[71][72]"

    Hamas was formed due to Israeli actions against Palestine.

    As to the American Revolution, one of the major differences is that the colonies actually had a chance of winning because Britain wasn't willing to commit enough of their forces to subdue their fellow Englishmen. Also I admit that my history classes were a bit biased, but I'm fairly sure that the colonies never sent saboteurs into Britain with the purpose of blowing up Parliament, or targets with even less strategic value. But yeah, other than that I guess Hamas and the 13 colonies operated exactly along the same lines.
    The colonists tarred and feathered tax collectors to show the British a lesson. Epitome of humanitarianism there. And what about John the Painter? Boston Tea Party? Treatment of British prisoners? Use of guerrilla warfare and attacking behind the lines at the beginning stages of the war, before the militia was formed/armed enough to fight more openly on a larger scale? You seem to be subjectively denying any relationship because the existence of said relationship would distress you.

    Oh, is that why a multinational coalition was formed to stop Russia from absolutely kicking the shit out of Chechnya? Or when China crushed Tibet? I must have missed all of that. Unless it's in Europe's backyard(Serbia) or a complete wreck of a nation(Rwanda), or someone decides to royally piss off the US(Iraq, Afghanistan), the UN usually doesn't get involved beyond a slap on the wrist and a sternly worded letter(Iraq again). By all means provide actual examples if you disagree.
    Yes, because superpowers like China and Russia equal Israel, and its not like there were a few decades of two nuclear superpowers glaring at each other and showing just how fruitful such interventions would be. Its too bad we don't have more relative examples of international intervention like... oh.... Libya, for example. Or Rwanda. I find it hard to believe you don't realize such interventions occurred, and so I must wonder why you are subjectively denying these specific instances. It bespeaks of a lack of understanding about the inner mechanics of how the Security Council works.

    You're right, you didn't specifically say that Israel deserves all the blame for the situation. You just have heavily implied it in every single post you've made in this thread, with no real critique of Hamas to balance it out. My bad for saying clearly what you were saying obliquely, I guess?
    Hamas' crimes are that it resorts to acts of terrorism as its only means of combating Israel, which while understandable is in no way excusable. The illegitimacy of their actions is not up for discussion, because it is self evident. Why would I waste time discussing something that we probably both agree on to begin with? That said, their actions are still a direct response to Israel's aggressive tactics, and in terms of what can actually be done to resolve the conflict focus should be put on Israel, for the reasons I have already stated.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liara View Post
    The blockade was deemed legal under international law by an international UN inquiry committee.

    What started this round of escalation was a group of Popular Resistance Committee members who opened fire on an Israeli patrol.

    And how exactly did Israel start the conflict? By being attacked by 5 different Arab countries along with the local Arab population on the day of its founding?
    http://news.antiwar.com/2011/09/13/i...says-un-panel/ you were saying?

    Again. Read a timeline. Its really, really not that hard. I'm speaking specifically of this round of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If you want to mix stages of history together, than I guess the US should invade Britain for burning down the White House.

  11. #1211
    Quote Originally Posted by Lyrie View Post
    Of course he doesnt.
    Yeah, except I listed the sources.

    People think they know everything because they are effected by Hamas's propaganda, but that for sure makes it all true!
    And some people are blinded by Israeli propaganda and will defend any and all Israeli action without any critical thought passing their brain.

  12. #1212
    Quote Originally Posted by soulcrusher View Post
    people defending themslves in international waters Liara. you had no right being there, but hey israel doesnt care does it. you bully who you like and just dont care.
    Defending themselves from an inspection? By viciously attacking soldiers who are performing the inspection? Interesting.

  13. #1213
    Quote Originally Posted by Liara View Post
    Defending themselves from an inspection? By viciously attacking soldiers who are performing the inspection? Interesting.
    There was no justification for executing those people on the boat, it was not an imminent danger to anyone and it was the IDF's own choice to board.

  14. #1214
    Quote Originally Posted by Kasierith View Post
    .
    http://news.antiwar.com/2011/09/13/i...says-un-panel/ you were saying?

    Again. Read a timeline. Its really, really not that hard. I'm speaking specifically of this round of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If you want to mix stages of history together, than I guess the US should invade Britain for burning down the White House.
    Who's to say which report is the correct one? Of course it's not something that will be clear cut.

    Also, why do you feel the need to write in a condescending way? Because I don't agree with you?

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-20 at 09:39 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Martoshi View Post
    There was no justification for executing those people on the boat, it was not an imminent danger to anyone and it was the IDF's own choice to board.
    First of all, it was not an execution. It was self defense, because when you're basically being lynched by tens of people, you start fearing for your life, and you damn well should.

  15. #1215
    Quote Originally Posted by Liara View Post
    Who's to say which report is the correct one? Of course it's not something that will be clear cut.
    What's clear cut is that the blockade is not only aimed at stopping weapons because at various times Israel has blockaded many items that have no military purpose at all.

  16. #1216
    Quote Originally Posted by Martoshi View Post
    And some people are blinded by Israeli propaganda and will defend any and all Israeli action without any critical thought passing their brain.
    Thats the thing. Im not effected by any propaganda. Unlike you I try to look at things objectively and I cast aside my own opinions.
    Its a sad world to live in when you see the strong and only democracy in the Middle East being accused for crimes against humanity while a brutal terror organization gets your sympathy.

  17. #1217
    Fluffy Kitten Kasierith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    St Petersburg
    Posts
    9,876
    Quote Originally Posted by Liara View Post
    Who's to say which report is the correct one? Of course it's not something that will be clear cut.

    Also, why do you feel the need to write in a condescending way? Because I don't agree with you?
    Because it is a point that I have made repeatedly, and can be analyzed simply by looking at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timelin...inian_conflict

    As for your article saying that the blockade is fine by international law.... read deeper into the report you're supporting.

    http://news.antiwar.com/2011/09/01/u...-mavi-marmara/

    In addition, an except from said report vindicating the blockade, which I went and read through.


    The blockade was intended as a form of economic and political warfare. It was not restricted to items that could be used against Israel, but also included ordinary consumer items with no security purpose. As such, it has a disproportionate and punitive impact on the civilian population and has aggravated the humanitarian crisis in Gaza."

  18. #1218
    Quote Originally Posted by Liara View Post
    First of all, it was not an execution. It was self defense, because when you're basically being lynched by tens of people, you start fearing for your life, and you damn well should.
    Looks like a clear cut execution to me, military unit against a mob of guys wielding plastic chairs and pieces of pipes or whatever. It just shows the incredible incompetence of IDF to put soldiers into that situation and then start shooting. The ship was not a danger to anyone, it could've been stopped without this braindamaged boarding attempt.

  19. #1219
    Fluffy Kitten Kasierith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    St Petersburg
    Posts
    9,876
    Quote Originally Posted by Martoshi View Post
    There was no justification for executing those people on the boat, it was not an imminent danger to anyone and it was the IDF's own choice to board.
    That situation is an example where there was clearly blame on either side. It is by no means a clear cut "Israel was the bad guy" scenario. Neither side's hands are clean in this mess.

  20. #1220
    Quote Originally Posted by Martoshi View Post
    What's clear cut is that the blockade is not only aimed at stopping weapons because at various times Israel has blockaded many items that have no military purpose at all.
    Tell me this, please - why doesn't Egypt allow any goods to enter Gaza via the Rafah crossing, which they fully control since Israel withdrew from Gaza?

    As for Israel, it doesn't allow very specific items (about 30 right now) that are either completely military such as weapons, or have a dual use such as reinforced concrete (and those can enter when approved by the PA and supervised by the international community).


    Also, people are now resorting to much to personal attacks or simply being rude.
    Just because we don't agree with each other doesn't mean we can't respect each other, sheesh.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •