Israelis have big b*lls
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: A PC!
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Skylark:
Because Danny is usually first to back the IDF to the hilt, regardless of what they have done.
Why Moggie? Is he an Israeli or a Palestinian or an international Lawyer?
Or you could say that Danny usually responds when he thinks that people have over-stepped the mark and have said something that is fundamentally unfair to Israel, the IDF/AF or Zionists. The fact that he hasn't done may even mean that this debate has been conducted in a more civilised and balanced manner than usual! Or perhaps he hasn't noticed? Or perhaps he's bored by the PLO apologists.....
You might also explain his understandable sensitivities regarding this issue by adding that he is a former reservist member of the IDF, and that he therefore has an entirely understandable pride in, and an admirable loyalty to, this force.
Anyone from Danny's background is naturally going to regard Palestinian terrrorism as ample justification for what the IDF have done, and while some Jews do oppose Zionism, security concerns (rather than dogma) mean that very few regard the 1967 borders as being sensible, and many do think that the Arabs already have their own states in Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, etc. and therefore see nothing wrong with expropriating the whole Biblical land of Israel. Don't get me wrong, I personally think that anything less than a return to those borders is too much to ask the Palestinians to swallow, I'm just trying to calmly explain the opposing pov.
The surprise is that Bubette hasn't contributed.
You might also explain his understandable sensitivities regarding this issue by adding that he is a former reservist member of the IDF, and that he therefore has an entirely understandable pride in, and an admirable loyalty to, this force.
Anyone from Danny's background is naturally going to regard Palestinian terrrorism as ample justification for what the IDF have done, and while some Jews do oppose Zionism, security concerns (rather than dogma) mean that very few regard the 1967 borders as being sensible, and many do think that the Arabs already have their own states in Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, etc. and therefore see nothing wrong with expropriating the whole Biblical land of Israel. Don't get me wrong, I personally think that anything less than a return to those borders is too much to ask the Palestinians to swallow, I'm just trying to calmly explain the opposing pov.
The surprise is that Bubette hasn't contributed.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: London & Edinburgh
Age: 38
Posts: 646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must fully commend the pilots on their actions and the courage of their convictions for doing so ... lesser men wouldn't have.
I hope life gets better for them.
Jordan
I hope life gets better for them.
Jordan
Swounger
Join Date: May 1999
Location: New York, NY USA
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it says a lot that they felt free to do this. However, it is disgusting that they presented it, on the net, as some sort of official IAF position. I think 7 of them were in active reservists, and those on active duty are going to be disciplined.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought thrown into the ring for comment.
This world now seems to be taking the concept of "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" more seriously than it has in the past. Why else would the USA so vehemently deny the concept of a world court to hear these types of offences in respect of its own citizens but encourage it for others.
Perhaps this has something to do with the actions of these Israeli officers.
As I said, just a thought.
This world now seems to be taking the concept of "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" more seriously than it has in the past. Why else would the USA so vehemently deny the concept of a world court to hear these types of offences in respect of its own citizens but encourage it for others.
Perhaps this has something to do with the actions of these Israeli officers.
As I said, just a thought.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: London & Edinburgh
Age: 38
Posts: 646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just thought I should add a footnote to that ... The USA has such a strong position against the International Court of Justice in the Hague, that the Senate has (or at least at one point) approved "The Hague Invasion Act", saying that if any American was sentenced there, the 'Administration' could without further feedback to the Senate invade the Hague.
Says something, doesn't it?
Jordan
Says something, doesn't it?
Jordan
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Not a huge sand box but very nice winters anymore
Age: 57
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The Republicans fear that American soldiers serving their country abroad will unjustly be hauled before the ICC in The Hague. Their "American Service Members' Protection Act" – that's the official name – would authorise the president to use force to free US military personnel held by the court."
"Critics sarcastically call it the "Hague Invasion Act". They are referring to legislation pushed by rightwing Republican members of Congress aimed at blocking the International Criminal Court. "
Jordon- more research required before making bogus and slanted posts please!
Pardon my last post--make it "19" more reasons why what these men are doing is wrong!
"Critics sarcastically call it the "Hague Invasion Act". They are referring to legislation pushed by rightwing Republican members of Congress aimed at blocking the International Criminal Court. "
Jordon- more research required before making bogus and slanted posts please!
Pardon my last post--make it "19" more reasons why what these men are doing is wrong!
Swounger
Join Date: May 1999
Location: New York, NY USA
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely---the same way America is attacking Afghanistan, and Yemen, and I hope your country would do the same if another country were training and bombing terrorists killing your children.
Afghanistan and Yemen aren't attacking the USA, but the Syria isn't attacking Israel either. The pretext is that the countries being attacked are supporting and funding terrorist organisations and harbouring terrorists.
If that's acceptable why didn't we bomb Dublin and New York, both of which funded terrorist organisations and harboured known IRA and INLA terrorists. Would that have been OK, Bubs?
If that's acceptable why didn't we bomb Dublin and New York, both of which funded terrorist organisations and harboured known IRA and INLA terrorists. Would that have been OK, Bubs?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: City of Culture
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dont engage guys.
Americans cannot rationalise that terrorism cannot be stopped by Tommahawk cruise missles and delta force commando's. To many Arnie films and a 'can do' culture is to blame IMO.
Americans cannot rationalise that terrorism cannot be stopped by Tommahawk cruise missles and delta force commando's. To many Arnie films and a 'can do' culture is to blame IMO.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middle East
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmm....still a little miffed that by all accounts its cool that the US can detain, interogate and ultimately convict citizens of other nations of "crimes against humanity" but Boo bluddy hoo! it is completely unacceptable that they may be held accounatble for similar!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: City of Culture
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its the 'Can Do' culture dude 'Can Do' 
Then of course their government starts to go round invading independent states all under a pre-text and they begin to wonder why the world hates them because a few years back they all loved them. I guessed they never realised that certain counties may not like the idea that the USA can do this after all they were overthrown in the past by another 'Can do' US government.
And very quickly a 'Can do' culture becomes a 'Why does everyone hate us' culture
<<< Against the war poster FAnyonesI.
Then of course their government starts to go round invading independent states all under a pre-text and they begin to wonder why the world hates them because a few years back they all loved them. I guessed they never realised that certain counties may not like the idea that the USA can do this after all they were overthrown in the past by another 'Can do' US government.
And very quickly a 'Can do' culture becomes a 'Why does everyone hate us' culture
<<< Against the war poster FAnyonesI.
Last edited by A Civilian; 6th Oct 2003 at 08:56.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Not a huge sand box but very nice winters anymore
Age: 57
Posts: 548
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting to note that while so many feel free to critisize what has been done, no one has offered up a better alternative.
Come on then Civi & Jacko, what are your solutions to stopping terrorist attacks?
Come on then Civi & Jacko, what are your solutions to stopping terrorist attacks?
Terrorism is almost inevitably a complex problem, requiring complex solutions which will vary widely from case to case.
Over-generalisations are thus of little usefulness.
But, having said that, here's a general guide! It seemed to prove successful in those few anti-terrorist campaigns which did prove successful (Malaysia, NI, etc.)
1) Demonstrate to the enemy the high cost and futility of continuing an armed struggle.
2) Compromise enough to isolate the terrorists (Mao's famous little fishes) from widespread support in their community (both inside the country and in neighbouring countries). Recognise legitimate grievances and demands and address and meet them.
3) Reward compromise. Go the extra mile. Resist provocation, especially when it comes from minority groups who oppose a peaceful solution, if the majority are still 'talking'.
4) Deal with the real leaders of the opposing side, and do so openly and fully once they renounce violence.
5) Be prepared to give ground in return for similar concessions from the other side.
6) Remain within international law when conducting military operations.
7) Keep your international allies on side.
Israel is VERY good at 1) and passes 7) by keeping its most important ally on side, though it's obviously becoming less good at that.
The way Israel is dealing with the problem will not solve it. It will store up generations of wannabe martyrs, and Israel will isolate itself internationally. Those who should sympathise with Israel's position will end up not caring, and thinking that the nation has brought its troubles upon itself. The fact that even a Republican US Government is now prepared to be gently but openly critical ought to provide Israel with a wake up call.
At the end of the day you have to reach a compromise or completely destroy the enemy (you have to kill or imprison all of them) and completely remove their communities, putting them beyond your borders. The only successful campaign based on this sort of ethnic cleansing and removal would seem to be America's successful disposession of the Native American tribes. For Israel to undertake such a final solution to its Arab problem does not seem practical, on all sorts of levels.
Achieving peace is neither easy nor painless, as we have discovered in Ulster. There is not, however, an acceptable alternative.
Bombing your neighbours is not a viable alternative to anything, S PC-9.
Over-generalisations are thus of little usefulness.
But, having said that, here's a general guide! It seemed to prove successful in those few anti-terrorist campaigns which did prove successful (Malaysia, NI, etc.)
1) Demonstrate to the enemy the high cost and futility of continuing an armed struggle.
2) Compromise enough to isolate the terrorists (Mao's famous little fishes) from widespread support in their community (both inside the country and in neighbouring countries). Recognise legitimate grievances and demands and address and meet them.
3) Reward compromise. Go the extra mile. Resist provocation, especially when it comes from minority groups who oppose a peaceful solution, if the majority are still 'talking'.
4) Deal with the real leaders of the opposing side, and do so openly and fully once they renounce violence.
5) Be prepared to give ground in return for similar concessions from the other side.
6) Remain within international law when conducting military operations.
7) Keep your international allies on side.
Israel is VERY good at 1) and passes 7) by keeping its most important ally on side, though it's obviously becoming less good at that.
The way Israel is dealing with the problem will not solve it. It will store up generations of wannabe martyrs, and Israel will isolate itself internationally. Those who should sympathise with Israel's position will end up not caring, and thinking that the nation has brought its troubles upon itself. The fact that even a Republican US Government is now prepared to be gently but openly critical ought to provide Israel with a wake up call.
At the end of the day you have to reach a compromise or completely destroy the enemy (you have to kill or imprison all of them) and completely remove their communities, putting them beyond your borders. The only successful campaign based on this sort of ethnic cleansing and removal would seem to be America's successful disposession of the Native American tribes. For Israel to undertake such a final solution to its Arab problem does not seem practical, on all sorts of levels.
Achieving peace is neither easy nor painless, as we have discovered in Ulster. There is not, however, an acceptable alternative.
Bombing your neighbours is not a viable alternative to anything, S PC-9.
Swounger
Join Date: May 1999
Location: New York, NY USA
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prop, I was 100% serious--do you believe in appeasing terrorists as an effective force against terrorism? Cutting off their funds, arms caches, and training would be a better method.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middle East
Posts: 1,183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bubbette,
Agree, what would have been a more respected solution to this would have been to sit back and think OK, where, how and why?! Yes, this process was basically done, but probably not to the extent it should have been.
By simply picking up the big stick and going around clubbing anything that ryhmes with terrorist is not going to solve anything.
Do not misconstrue from this or any of my other posts that I don't support a response and direct resolve to the acts of terrorism that have occurred, I just believe it is not being done properly and if we were fishing it would be great because we now have a huge can of worms!
Agree, what would have been a more respected solution to this would have been to sit back and think OK, where, how and why?! Yes, this process was basically done, but probably not to the extent it should have been.
By simply picking up the big stick and going around clubbing anything that ryhmes with terrorist is not going to solve anything.
Do not misconstrue from this or any of my other posts that I don't support a response and direct resolve to the acts of terrorism that have occurred, I just believe it is not being done properly and if we were fishing it would be great because we now have a huge can of worms!
Swounger
Join Date: May 1999
Location: New York, NY USA
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the diplomatic efforts have failed (re the Palestinians) because they don't want peace; unfortunately, they have a dictator for a leader. Getting rid of him seems to be the only way. But Israel listens to world pressure. . .esp the US'.