AlexfromLA said:
lol @ Israeli's becoming neo nazis
The israeli government and military are all war criminals. I hope one day they are tried for their crimes. They used to be able to do whatever they wanted to the Palestinians without reproach but now the entire world can see what they are doing and is against them. There is really very little point in debating the issue. The entire world sees what is going on and they are disgusted by israels actions.
Listening to israeli apologists and their drivel is pointless. Their job isn't to debate, their job is to justify, rationalize and deny. But you simply can't justify or rationalize the murder of innocent civilians, racism, apartheid and illegally stealing and occupying land. It is time to stop talking and debating and simply condemn, sanction and lay siege ( read : embargo ) to israel just as they are doing to the Palestinians.
The Israeli regime is running out of time, friends and options, they have squandered all the good will that was given to them after wwII. Either make REAL lasting substantive peace and stop acting like nazis or the entire world will turn their backs on you and then all thats left is 7 million israelis in the desert with a bunch of nukes surrounded by half a billion Muslims ( who will probably have nukes as well ). I hope the israeli people choose a better option than the one their immoral leaders are giving them.
I hope that peace will one day find it's way to the Levant.
Thank you for yet another informative, fact filled contribution. It's obvious to see how commited you are to the search for truth and justice by virtue of your insightful, consciousness raising statments such as: a) "
lol @ Israeli's becoming neo nazis", and b)
"There is really very little point in debating the issue." and c
) It is time to stop talking and debating and simply condemn, sanction and lay siege ( read : embargo ) to israel..."
You apparently hail from the same school of intellectual curiousity as BBwolf who, after erroneously declaring the IDF gave no warning prior to boarding the Marmara, stated (see p.2): "
Even this absurd discussion shouldn't be taking place."
You condemn Israel as neo Nazis (absurd hyperbole which immediately undermines your credibility), but set forth absolutely no reasons for such strong language. Zero. Zilch. I am willing to be persuaded to your point of view, but only if you can explain the facts and reasoning to support it. Help me out. Explain the basis of your position, unless of course, you truly mean that there really is no point in discussing this.
Specifically, on what basis do you contend that the Israeli government and military are
all war criminals? Do you intend to include every member of the Knesset, even the Arab ones and those in minority parties strongly opposed to the Likud Party and Netanyahu's actions? Do you intend to include as a war criminal every member of the IDF without regard to rank? That's a very curious and unprecedented position. Exactly what are the acts of these people that constitute war crimes? Please be specific.
You claim that "
Listening to israeli apologists and their drivel is pointless. Their job isn't to debate, their job is to justify, rationalize and deny." Aside from the obvious inherent contradiction contained in this statement, did you by any chance take the time to read the mideast history set forth in the link cited in my previous post?
http://mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm
Do you think the content is drivel? Do you not concede a case can be made for the Israeli position based upon comprehension of the detailed facts compiled by this distinguished neutral group of peace activists? See
http://mideastweb.org/about.htm.
Why do you express such reluctance to debate with the Israeli apologists? If your version of the facts and law is so absolutely rock solid, why not shed some light on the conflict for the rest of us? Avoiding all debate on the grounds that it is pointless is really meanspirited and selfish. Come on, tell us why you think the way you do.
You go on to say that "
you simply can't justify or rationalize the murder of innocent civilians, racism, apartheid and illegally stealing and occupying land." I might argue that the term "murder" is generally not a term applied to casualties of war, even innocent civlians. Of course, placing bombs on public buses, in civilian airplanes, in cafes, and firing rockets indiscriminantly into civilian populations might constitute murder or war crimes. Who does those things?
Racism and apartheid? Even the Arab ass-kissing UN withdrew the 1975 resolution equating Zionism with apartheid (in 1991). Do Jews in Muslim countries enjoy the panopoly of civil rights available to Arabs in Israel? How many Jews serve in the government of Syria, Jordan, Iran or Saudi Arabia? Admittedly, there may be some de facto prejudice against Palestinians living in Israel, but there is no institutionalized (de jure) prejudice or racism. Moreover, Islam is not a race. Israelis and Arabs are both semitic people who probably share more genetic similarities than Iranians do with Syrians. The charge of racism makes little sense.
Stealing and occupying land? Is it stealing to retain land obtained after winning a defensive war? Did the Romans voluntarily relinquish captured territory? Did the Muslim Arabian rulers in the 8th -14th century as they spread north from the Arabian peninsula? Did the Crusaders? Did the Ottoman Turks? Did the US after the Mexican and Spanish wars? There is lots of precedent that land conquered in war, particularly defensive war, is retained by the winner.
Following WWII, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution providing for a sensible and relatively equal partition of the land that was formerly part of the British mandate. The plan provided for a Palestinian and a Jewish state based upon existing demographics. The Arab countires rejected that plan. Israel accepted it and subsequently declared independence based upon the UN mandated boundaries. Immediately thereafter a multitude of Arab countries declared war on Israel. There hasn't been peace since.
When the Palestinians, Egyptians and Syrians lost more land as a result of the 1967 war, they insisted that Israel give it all back! Where is the historical precedent for calling this captured land stolen? Palestine wasn't even an existing state in 1967. Nevertheless, Israel returned almost all of the Sinai to make peace with Egypt. In 1990 it offered to return 97% of the West Bank in return for an Arab acknowledgment of its right to exist. That seems eminently fair to me. The PLO rejected the offer.
Are my facts wrong?