|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 3:02 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
[
If someone is considered a trespasser and they refuse to leave your land than legally you can shoot them. . |
Link to the relevant Israeli law? |
I wasn't talking about Israeli law, I was making an analogy. Israeli law doesn't count for much in the settlements and in the Palestinian territories. |
You were the one who claimed that this was legal. So if we are not talking about Israeli law how is this relevant to the topic under discussion. |
Do you understand analogies? There is legal precedent that you can shoot trespassers, that was what I was referring too. I never claimed it was legal, legality doesn't play into this sort of thing. |
This is exactly why it is so hard to read your posts. First you claim that legally you can shoot trespassers, then you claim there is legal precedent, then you say "legality doesn't play into this sort of thing."
Seriously this makes no sense. Either it's legal and therefore legality plays into it, or it is not legal and legality doesn't. There can't be both legal precedent for it and legality having no role at all.
Now let read your quote above. You said "If someone is considered a trespasser and they refuse to leave your land than legally you can shoot them" So yes you did claim it was legal.
If there is LEGAL precedent then show that.
And you are the one who should be asking about understanding analogies. When one talks about legal matters he is discussing things as they are by law. Analogies are a completely different kettle of fish. And what analogy are you attempting to make? |
You are a very literal minded person. My analogy was that in many countries you can take actions against trespassers and that in a way the Palestinians were taking actions against the settlers is similar to people taking actions against trespassers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| If someone is considered a trespasser and they refuse to leave your land than legally you can shoot them. |
I'm not exactly sure of the specifics of the pertinent laws, but regardless, I don't support that. There have historically been plenty of completely unjust laws. Something being legal doesn't make it right; shooting someone for merely being on your property -- even if they refuse to leave -- is horrific. As such, said laws are understandably uncompelling to me as a reference.
| Leon wrote: |
| Also most civilians do not have stockpiles of military grade weaponry, but most settlers do. |
I don't care how many weapons they have. I do admittedly care what they do with them; if they start shooting at Palestinians, then Palestinians fighting back in self-defense is legitimate. If not, then the fact that they have those weapons doesn't make them a more legitimate target in my eyes.
| Leon wrote: |
| Actually as a strategy asymmetrical warfare can be very strong. Neither side wants to destroy the other, at least realistically, as far as goals go. |
Asymmetrical warfare can be very strong in certain situations, but this isn't one of them. The Israeli army is an immediate presence, very effective at what it does, and which has the entire area in question virtually (edit - excessive adjective usage) locked down. The opportunities Hamas has had to cause harm have come not because of genuinely clever tactics or military viability, but because Israel has repeatedly shown forbearance. A genuinely determined military effort by Israel could bring the situation to resolution quite quickly. International opinion is what is primarily preventing such an effort.
There is no chance of Hamas destroying Israel through asymmetrical warfare. There is no chance of Hamas causing the Israeli people to tire of their current behavior through asymmetrical warfare. Indeed, such activities only serve to enrage Israelis and make Israeli actions seem more legitimate to outsiders. |
You are right in some ways, but wrong in others. Israel can not destroy Hamas or bring it to a resolution quickly. There are too many Palestinians to make that logistically feasible without resorting to some sort of death camp scenario. Hamas doesn't want to destroy Israel, except perhaps in its dreams. Many in Hamas have spoke of a willingness to work with Israel, and their ceasefire worked until another militant group started shooting rockets out of Gaza. International opinion is not considered highly by Israel, only the opinion of America. Ultimately Israels actions end up looking illegitimate in the court of international opinion anyways.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Both sides want to be in positions of relative strength when the eventual deal goes down. |
And nothing the Palestinians themselves can do can put them in a position of relative strength. Only the unmeritted grace of international opinion can possibly lend strength to their cause, and killing Israeli civilians isn't conducive to that. |
They won't ever be stronger than Israel, but they can be strong enough to make demands. Every military action cost Israel in several ways such as economically, morally, and in the court of opinion. Palestine has less to lose.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| It's not Israeli forbearance, but rather American and International pressure that keeps Palestine intact. |
Rather, international pressure is, in large part, the cause of Israeli forbearance. |
Israel doesn't care about UN resolutions, only keeping Americas special relationship.
| Leon wrote: |
| Israel isn't very concerned about International opinion. |
| Fox wrote: |
If Israel didn't care about international opinion, Leon, this situation would have resolved itself quite some time ago. Clearly, Israel cares about international opinion. As you yourself pointed out just above, it's international opinion that causes Israel's military forbearance. How you can assert that, then assert that Israel doesn't care is beyond me. Not caring about occasional speeches of condemnation and not caring about international opinion are two very different things.
| Leon wrote: |
| The only country that it will change its actions for is America, and that is only to a point. Relying on International pressure, especially from the UN, would be a foolish strategy. |
Regardless of whether you think it's foolish, it's the only remotely viable option Palestine has. For all you're talk of "asymmetrical warfare", we aren't going to be seeing a Palestinian military victory over Israel. It's just not going to happen; even thinking it might is silly and pointless. Perhaps an Arabic coalition could, hypothetically, win out if the rest of the world abstained and the United States cut Israel off, but then we are once again ultimately working in terms of international opinion, since it's the only thing that could push the rest of the world into abstaining. |
Asymmetrical warfare isn't about winning, it's about giving the other side unacceptable loses.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Israel kills just as many civilians. |
Now imagine if, instead, you could phrase that as, "Only Israel kills civilians." Suddenly those muddy ethical waters become a whole lot clearer. |
would be beautiful, even better if no one kills civilians, but we have to make do with what we have. Unfortunately morality doesn't seem to factor into decision making on either side.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| How much do you know about the PLO? |
When the PLO gets some final results that I, as a hypothetical Palestinian, would be happy with, I'll be willing to engage in discussion about the merits of the organization and its strategy. Until then, I'm not inclined to cheerlead for them. |
[/quote]
Definitely not cheer-leading the PLO. The PLO has several huge problems, merely commenting on their evolution and what its consequences are. Chances are when you ask some one which Palestinian government is more legitimate they will say Fatah, even though the PLO was more militant in its past then Hamas ever has been. Its past is what gave it the option of its more peaceful future and it got that when it was in a position of relative strength. I am saying that I hope that Hamas will undergo a similar transformation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoholDiver
Joined: 03 Oct 2009
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 3:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pretty much.
At least Palestinians don't pretend to be civilized human beings. I don't remember Palestinias claiming to be any kind of chosen people either.
| bacasper wrote: |
An Israeli or Israelis behave horribly inhumanely, brutally, and fatally against and inhumanely against a Palestinian or Palestinians, and they get away with it.
Isn't that kinda like reporting that the sun rose this morning? surprising this stuff even makes the papers anymore. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| Israel can not destroy Hamas or bring it to a resolution quickly. |
If unfettered by the restriction of retaliation from the international community, they most certainly could. You're just being unrealistic here. Perhaps a few Hamas members would remain here or there with the potential to engage in singular, ultimately trivial terrorist strikes, but with regards to any reasonable measure Israel could handle the situation with ease.
| Leon wrote: |
There are too many Palestinians to make that logistically
feasible without resorting to some sort of death camp scenario. |
Who says they wouldn't resort to "some sort of death camp scenario?" There's a limited amount of Palestinian hostility the Israeli government would be willing to accept before just doing what it took to end the threat to its people. That's just the reality of the situation, and it's nothing unique to Israel. Plenty of nations have engaged in genocide over far less than what has happened in the Israeli-Palestinian region of the world. I'm not saying I want Israel to do that, but I am saying that if international pressure wasn't a factor, that's probably what they (or any nation in their position) would eventually do; no nation is going to accept unlimited provocation and constant threat to the security of their people if they can avoid it. Hell, our own nation used to pay citizens to exterminate certain native tribes who made too much of a nuisance of themselves. Do you really think Israel would show unlimited patience of their own accord? Of course not.
| Leon wrote: |
| International opinion is not considered highly by Israel, only the opinion of America. Ultimately Israels actions end up looking illegitimate in the court of international opinion anyways. |
You can say this until you're blue in the face, and I'm just going to shrug and disagree. International commentary might not have much impact on Israeli politics, but if opinion in Western, developed nations started swinging to the point where those nations might actually take action, you can be sure Israel would take that into account.
| Leon wrote: |
| They won't ever be stronger than Israel, but they can be strong enough to make demands. |
Nope. Other Arabic nations might be strong enough to gain some leverage on behalf of Palestine, but again that comes back to the international community.
| Leon wrote: |
| Every military action cost Israel in several ways such as economically, morally, and in the court of opinion. Palestine has less to lose. |
You just said the court of opinion meant nothing to Israel. Now you're contradicting that. Again.
| Leon wrote: |
| Israel doesn't care about UN resolutions, only keeping Americas special relationship. |
International opinion and UN resolutions are two very different things. I agree, Israel doesn't care about UN resolutions, and really, neither does anyone else.
| Leon wrote: |
| Asymmetrical warfare isn't about winning, it's about giving the other side unacceptable loses. |
The only unacceptable loses Palestine can deal to Israel are PR loses, which again comes back to my point. Sure, a Palestinian willing to die can probably take a few Israelis with him, but most aren't willing to die. Further, regardless of how you feel about Israel being a "remnant of imperialism," Israelis don't feel the same way; to them, Israel is their rightful home, and bloodshed isn't going to encourage them to abandon the region, but rather will encourage them to persist in their present course. There is no "unacceptable loss" that the Palestinians could themselves deliver upon Israel that would somehow allow them to reach victory conditions.
This is just the reality of the situation. You can try to nuance and quibble your way around it, but you won't get anywhere.
| Leon wrote: |
| would be beautiful, even better if no one kills civilians, but we have to make do with what we have. Unfortunately morality doesn't seem to factor into decision making on either side. |
I agree it would be better if no one kills civilians, but that's not my point. My point was that Palestinians forbearing from killing civilians would change them from "part of the hostilities" to "the indisputable victims of unwarranted aggression." If they hope to get international opinion on your side -- and regardless of what you think, it's their best bet of getting what they want -- being able to portray themselves as the indisputable victims is a benefit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 4:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Israel can not destroy Hamas or bring it to a resolution quickly. |
If unfettered by the restriction of retaliation from the international community, they most certainly could. You're just being unrealistic here. Perhaps a few Hamas members would remain here or there with the potential to engage in singular, ultimately trivial terrorist strikes, but with regards to any reasonable measure Israel could handle the situation with ease. |
This is the course of action that Israel took against the PLO. Israel was much more aggressive, even going into other sovereign nations like Lebanon to peruse the PLO and it did not end the PLO, and it most certainly was not easy.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
There are too many Palestinians to make that logistically
feasible without resorting to some sort of death camp scenario. |
Who says they wouldn't resort to "some sort of death camp scenario?" There's a limited amount of Palestinian hostility the Israeli government would be willing to accept before just doing what it took to end the threat to its people. That's just the reality of the situation, and it's nothing unique to Israel. Plenty of nations have engaged in genocide over far less than what has happened in the Israeli-Palestinian region of the world. I'm not saying I want Israel to do that, but I am saying that if international pressure wasn't a factor, that's probably what they (or any nation in their position) would eventually do; no nation is going to accept unlimited provocation and constant threat to the security of their people if they can avoid it. Hell, our own nation used to pay citizens to exterminate certain native tribes who made too much of a nuisance of themselves. Do you really think Israel would show unlimited patience of their own accord? Of course not. |
They are working in the framework of what is acceptable. The amount of damage they take affects there strategy towards the Palestinians, but death camps are not acceptable to Americans, other Arab states, and many Israelis.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| International opinion is not considered highly by Israel, only the opinion of America. Ultimately Israels actions end up looking illegitimate in the court of international opinion anyways. |
You can say this until you're blue in the face, and I'm just going to shrug and disagree. International commentary might not have much impact on Israeli politics, but if opinion in Western, developed nations started swinging to the point where those nations might actually take action, you can be sure Israel would take that into account. |
No western nation will ever take military action against Israel, and Israel knows it. They don't have to worry about that.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| They won't ever be stronger than Israel, but they can be strong enough to make demands. |
Nope. Other Arabic nations might be strong enough to gain some leverage on behalf of Palestine, but again that comes back to the international community. |
Palestinians are capable of inflicting unacceptable losses to Israel.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Every military action cost Israel in several ways such as economically, morally, and in the court of opinion. Palestine has less to lose. |
You just said the court of opinion meant nothing to Israel. Now you're contradicting that. Again. |
American opinion, liberal Israeli opinion, and possibly Arab opinion are important. International opinion is most definitely not.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Israel doesn't care about UN resolutions, only keeping Americas special relationship. |
International opinion and UN resolutions are two very different things. I agree, Israel doesn't care about UN resolutions, and really, neither does anyone else.
| Leon wrote: |
| Asymmetrical warfare isn't about winning, it's about giving the other side unacceptable loses. |
The only unacceptable loses Palestine can deal to Israel are PR loses, which again comes back to my point. Sure, a Palestinian willing to die can probably take a few Israelis with him, but most aren't willing to die. Further, regardless of how you feel about Israel being a "remnant of imperialism," Israelis don't feel the same way; to them, Israel is their rightful home, and bloodshed isn't going to encourage them to abandon the region, but rather will encourage them to persist in their present course. There is no "unacceptable loss" that the Palestinians could themselves deliver upon Israel that would somehow allow them to reach victory conditions. |
Its not even really about them abandoning the region as much as it is them stopping settlements and allowing Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. If you look at victory conditions as a total defeat of either side than you are looking at the situation wrong.
| Fox wrote: |
| This is just the reality of the situation. You can try to nuance and quibble your way around it, but you won't get anywhere. |
This is a very complex situation where nuance is essential to understanding it, rather than black and white.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| would be beautiful, even better if no one kills civilians, but we have to make do with what we have. Unfortunately morality doesn't seem to factor into decision making on either side. |
I agree it would be better if no one kills civilians, but that's not my point. My point was that Palestinians forbearing from killing civilians would change them from "part of the hostilities" to "the indisputable victims of unwarranted aggression." If they hope to get international opinion on your side -- and regardless of what you think, it's their best bet of getting what they want -- being able to portray themselves as the indisputable victims is a benefit. |
Who the hell wants to be the victim all the time? Again I say that the only reason that the PLO is in a position to make peace is because the Palestinians and Israelis know their past, and what can happen if peace isn't made. What incentives do Israel have to make compromises with a peaceful Palestine? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
American opinion, liberal Israeli opinion, and possibly Arab opinion are important. International opinion is most definitely not. |
Two of the three parts of your list consist of members of the very international community you have repeatedly claim Israel doesn't care about. Come on, Leon, this is getting ridiculous.
| Leon wrote: |
| Its not even really about them abandoning the region as much as it is them stopping settlements and allowing Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. |
Nothing Palestine in its own right can do can achieve that.
| Leon wrote: |
| This is a very complex situation where nuance is essential to understanding it, rather than black and white. |
Save it. We both know you're trying to shove this situation into the preconceived box your anti-Israeli politics demand rather than simply understand it.
| Leon wrote: |
| Who the hell wants to be the victim all the time? |
Who the Hell wants to be in Palestine's position at all?
| Leon wrote: |
| Again I say that the only reason that the PLO is in a position to make peace is because the Palestinians and Israelis know their past, and what can happen if peace isn't made. What incentives do Israel have to make compromises with a peaceful Palestine? |
Again, when there's actual peace, and Israel has actually made concessions to the PLO as a result of the "strength of it's position," totally independent of any incentives offered by the international community, I'll be willing to talk about the PLO's successes on that front.
As much as it's charming watching you contradict yourself and struggle to in some sense defend the murder of Israeli civilians, I think this conversation has reached its natural end point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
American opinion, liberal Israeli opinion, and possibly Arab opinion are important. International opinion is most definitely not. |
Two of the three parts of your list consist of members of the very international community you have repeatedly claim Israel doesn't care about. Come on, Leon, this is getting ridiculous. |
OK, I think we have differnt notions of what an international community consists of. I'm saying that America and a small handful of Arab states doesn't make an international community, but you are right that those are international actors.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Its not even really about them abandoning the region as much as it is them stopping settlements and allowing Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. |
Nothing Palestine in its own right can do can achieve that. |
If it is achieved then Palestinian violence will have played a part.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| This is a very complex situation where nuance is essential to understanding it, rather than black and white. |
Save it. We both know you're trying to shove this situation into the preconceived box your anti-Israeli politics demand rather than simply understand it. |
The things I want for Israel are the things that are ultimately best for Israel. I understand the situation, four people died who shouldn't have. Being morally indignant every time an innocent died never brought anyone back to life. That is the easy part. The nuanced parts are the whys and what can be done to make sure it doesn't keep happening.
| Fox wrote: |
| Leon wrote: |
| Who the hell wants to be the victim all the time? |
Who the Hell wants to be in Palestine's position at all?
| Leon wrote: |
| Again I say that the only reason that the PLO is in a position to make peace is because the Palestinians and Israelis know their past, and what can happen if peace isn't made. What incentives do Israel have to make compromises with a peaceful Palestine? |
Again, when there's actual peace, and Israel has actually made concessions to the PLO as a result of the "strength of it's position," totally independent of any incentives offered by the international community, I'll be willing to talk about the PLO's successes on that front.
As much as it's charming watching you contradict yourself and struggle to in some sense defend the murder of Israeli civilians, I think this conversation has reached its natural end point. |
The fact that there are even peace talks is a sign of progress. Any contradictions you see are in your head, or because of miscommunication between us I suppose. I agree, I am growing tired of this conversation. I respect your opinions, but think we are looking at this through different frames and on different levels and in a way talking past each other. I'm not sure what to make of the fact that so many threads on this forum are about Israel, there are many other more interesting topics that haven't been discussed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Another American reporter described the following incident in Gaza in June 2001: "It is still. The camp waits, as if holding its breath. And then, out of the dry furnace air, a disembodied voice crackles over a loudspeaker. 'Come on, dogs,' the voice booms in Arabic. 'Where are all the dogs of Khan Younis? Come! Come!' I stand up. I walk outside the hut. The invective continues to spew: 'Son of a bitch!' 'Son of a *beep*!' 'Your mother's cunt!' The boys dart in small packs up the sloping dunes to the electric fence that separates the camp from the Jewish settlement. They lob rocks toward two armored jeeps parked on top of the dune and mounted with loudspeakers. A percussion grenade explodes. The boys, most no more than ten or eleven years old, scatter, running clumsily across the heavy sand. There are no sounds of gunfire. The soldiers shoot with silencers. The bullets from the M-16 rifles tumble end over end through the children's slight bodies. Later, in the hospital, I will see the destruction: the stomachs ripped out, the gaping holes in limbs and torsos. Yesterday at this spot the Israelis shot eight young men, six of whom were under the age of eighteen. One was twelve. This afternoon they kill an eleven-year-old boy, Ali Murad, and seriously wound four more, three of whom are under eighteen. Children have been shot in other conflicts I have covered--death squads gunned them down in El Salvador and Guatemala, mothers with infants were lined up and massacred in Algeria, and Serb snipers put children in their sights and watched them crumple onto the pavement in Sarajevo--but I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport." ["A Gaza Diary: Scenes from the Palestinian Uprising," by Chris Hedges, Harper's magazine, October 2001 |
Jesus. What do they think is going to be the outcome of this. This kind of behavior is suicidal. There are more than 350 million Arabs. |
Good thing it probably didn't happen then.
http://honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/Eyeless_in_Gaza_-_Part_2.asp
As the link points out Hedges fails to provide any evidence that he actually was there and saw these things..."no photos no videos no outside verification"
A professional reporter failing to provide a single shred of proof? Then again for the anti-Israeli crowd proof is just an inconvenience. |
Hedges is credible. I believe him.
HonestReporting Canada is just one of the many zionist attack sites that aggressively fights for Israel via enforcing media homogeneity.
James Petras describes such organizations:
http://www.lahaine.org/petras/b2-img/petras_thest.pdf
| Quote: |
The State and Local Bases of Zionist Power in America
Local Zionist functionaries form rapid response committees to visit and threaten any local publisher and editorial staff publishing editorials or articles questioning the Israeli party line. Local leaders police (�monitor�) all local meetings, speaker invitations, as well as the speeches of public commentators, religious leaders and academics to detect any �anti-Zionist overtones� (which they label �covert anti-Semitism�). |
Honestreporting is one of these organizations. It will find a story about the brutal actions of the Israeli state and her employees and quickly move to weaken the story with disinformation, character assassination and accusations of inappropriate motives and/or dishonesty:
| Quote: |
| But we suspect Hedges wasn't there, either. His account is rife with factual errors and fails to stand up to scrutiny. |
Right. "We suspect". How smooth. Hedges is a liar OR the IDF was playing target practice. I trust Hedges. Honestreporting is not credible. It is just one of the circled wagons. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 8:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
Good thing it probably didn't happen then.
http://honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/Eyeless_in_Gaza_-_Part_2.asp
As the link points out Hedges fails to provide any evidence that he actually was there and saw these things..."no photos no videos no outside verification"
A professional reporter failing to provide a single shred of proof? Then again for the anti-Israeli crowd proof is just an inconvenience. |
Hedges is credible. I believe him.
HonestReporting Canada is just one of the many zionist attack sites that aggressively fights for Israel via enforcing media homogeneity.
James Petras describes such organizations:
http://www.lahaine.org/petras/b2-img/petras_thest.pdf
| Quote: |
The State and Local Bases of Zionist Power in America
Local Zionist functionaries form rapid response committees to visit and threaten any local publisher and editorial staff publishing editorials or articles questioning the Israeli party line. Local leaders police (�monitor�) all local meetings, speaker invitations, as well as the speeches of public commentators, religious leaders and academics to detect any �anti-Zionist overtones� (which they label �covert anti-Semitism�). |
Honestreporting is one of these organizations. It will find a story about the brutal actions of the Israeli state and her employees and quickly move to weaken the story with disinformation, character assassination and accusations of inappropriate motives and/or dishonesty:
| Quote: |
| But we suspect Hedges wasn't there, either. His account is rife with factual errors and fails to stand up to scrutiny. |
Right. "We suspect". How smooth. Hedges is a liar OR the IDF was playing target practice. I trust Hedges. Honestreporting is not credible. It is just one of the circled wagons. |
"Honestreporting" is, I am sure, about as honest as "pjhonestrecruiting."
Enough said. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asylum seeker
Joined: 22 Jul 2007
Location: On your computer screen.
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 9:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| asylum seeker wrote: |
[
Israel and every other state in the world should try to hold itself to higher standards than terrorist organisations, in my opinion.
What's your conclusion about it? |
And Israel does. An investigation was called into the possible misconduct of this captain. That alone shows higher standards than Hamas. |
Not if the trials were whitewashes. It seems like they only did the retrial because the other soldiers in the unit complained.
I'm sure testifying against a superior officer is a serious thing to do and I highly doubt the other soldiers on the unit would have made this decision lightly. They must have felt there was a pretty serious miscarriage of justice to take that step. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Another American reporter described the following incident in Gaza in June 2001: "It is still. The camp waits, as if holding its breath. And then, out of the dry furnace air, a disembodied voice crackles over a loudspeaker. 'Come on, dogs,' the voice booms in Arabic. 'Where are all the dogs of Khan Younis? Come! Come!' I stand up. I walk outside the hut. The invective continues to spew: 'Son of a bitch!' 'Son of a *beep*!' 'Your mother's cunt!' The boys dart in small packs up the sloping dunes to the electric fence that separates the camp from the Jewish settlement. They lob rocks toward two armored jeeps parked on top of the dune and mounted with loudspeakers. A percussion grenade explodes. The boys, most no more than ten or eleven years old, scatter, running clumsily across the heavy sand. There are no sounds of gunfire. The soldiers shoot with silencers. The bullets from the M-16 rifles tumble end over end through the children's slight bodies. Later, in the hospital, I will see the destruction: the stomachs ripped out, the gaping holes in limbs and torsos. Yesterday at this spot the Israelis shot eight young men, six of whom were under the age of eighteen. One was twelve. This afternoon they kill an eleven-year-old boy, Ali Murad, and seriously wound four more, three of whom are under eighteen. Children have been shot in other conflicts I have covered--death squads gunned them down in El Salvador and Guatemala, mothers with infants were lined up and massacred in Algeria, and Serb snipers put children in their sights and watched them crumple onto the pavement in Sarajevo--but I have never before watched soldiers entice children like mice into a trap and murder them for sport." ["A Gaza Diary: Scenes from the Palestinian Uprising," by Chris Hedges, Harper's magazine, October 2001 |
Jesus. What do they think is going to be the outcome of this. This kind of behavior is suicidal. There are more than 350 million Arabs. |
Good thing it probably didn't happen then.
http://honestreporting.com/articles/critiques/Eyeless_in_Gaza_-_Part_2.asp
As the link points out Hedges fails to provide any evidence that he actually was there and saw these things..."no photos no videos no outside verification"
A professional reporter failing to provide a single shred of proof? Then again for the anti-Israeli crowd proof is just an inconvenience. |
Hedges is credible. I believe him.
. |
Well just because you believe him doesn't make it so. When he is able to provide proof I will believe him. If he was there he should have been able to take some pictures...but so far we haven't seen even one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 05, 2010 7:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Well just because you believe him doesn't make it so. When he is able to provide proof I will believe him. If he was there he should have been able to take some pictures...but so far we haven't seen even one. |
Yeah, I'd have to agree. Given that most of that excerpt was obvious hyperbole, it's kind of hard to take any of it seriously without some proof. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 08, 2010 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah but I am sure it paid well.
Maybe I should become a journalist - I like writing fiction.
(post eddited due to a spelling mistake) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
