|
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 |
R. S. Refugee
Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Location: Shangra La, ROK
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:59 am Post subject: Palestinian teenager(s) kidnapped, beaten, tortured, by IDF |
 |
|
Look who's been kidnapped!
Hundreds of Palestinian 'suspects' have been kidnapped from their homes and will never stand trial
Arik Diamant
Arik Diamant is an IDF reservist and the head of the Courage to Refuse organization
It's the wee hours of the morning, still dark outside. A guerilla force comes out of nowhere to kidnap a soldier. After hours of careful movement, the force reaches its target, and the ambush is on! In seconds, the soldier finds himself looking down the barrel of a rifle.
A smash in the face with the butt of the gun and the soldier falls to the ground, bleeding. The kidnappers pick him up, quickly tie his hands and blindfold him, and disappear into the night.
This might be the end of the kidnapping, but the nightmare has just begun. The soldier's mother collapses, his father prays. His commanding officers promise to do everything they can to get him back, his comrades swear revenge. An entire nation is up-in-arms, writing in pain and worry.
Nobody knows how the soldier is: Is he hurt? Do his captors give him even a minimum of human decency, or are they torturing him to death by trampling his honor? The worst sort of suffering is not knowing. Will he come home? And if so, when? And in what condition? Can anyone remain apathetic in the light of such drama?
Israeli terror
This description, you'll be surprised to know, has nothing to do with the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit. It is the story of an arrest I carried out as an IDF soldier, in the Nablus casbah, about 10 years ago. The "soldier" was a 17-year-old boy, and we kidnapped him because he knew "someone" who had done "something."
We brought him tied up, with a burlap sac over his head, to a Shin Bet interrogation center known as "Scream Hill" (at the time we thought it was funny). There, the prisoner was beaten, violently shaken and sleep deprived for weeks or months. Who knows.
No one wrote about it in the paper. European diplomats were not called to help him. After all, there was nothing out of the ordinary about the kidnapping of this Palestinian kid. Over the 40 years of occupation we have kidnapped thousands of people, exactly like Gilad Shalit was captured: Threatened by a gun, beaten mercilessly, with no judge or jury, or witnesses, and without providing the family with any information about the captive.
When the Palestinians do this, we call it "terror." When we do it, we work overtime to whitewash the atrocity.
Suspects?
Some people will say: The IDF doesn't "just" kidnap. These people are "suspects." There is no more perverse lie than this. In all the years I served, I reached one simple conclusion: What makes a "suspect"? Who, exactly suspects him, and of what?
Who has the right to sentence a 17-year-old to kidnapping, torture and possible death? A 26-year-old Shin Bet interrogator? A 46-year-old one? Do these people have any higher education, apart from the ability to interrogate? What are his considerations? I all these "suspects" are so guilty, why not bring them to trial?
Anyone who believes that despite the lack of transparency, the IDF and Shin Bet to their best to minimize violations of human rights is na�ve, if not brainwashed. One need only read the testimonies of soldiers who have carried out administrative detentions to be convinced of the depth of the immorality of our actions in the territories.
To this very day, there are hundreds of prisoners rotting in Shin Bet prisons and dungeons, people who have never been �and never will be � tried. And Israelis are silently resolved to this phenomenon.
Israeli responsibility
The day Gilad Shalit was kidnapped I rode in a taxi. The driver told me we must go into Gaza, start shooting people one-by-one, until someone breaks and returns the hostage. It isn't clear that such an operation would bring Gilad back alive.
Instead of getting dragged into terrorist responses, as Palestinian society has done, we should release some of the soldiers and civilians we have kidnapped. This is appropriate, right, and could bring about an air of reconciliation in the territories.
Hell, if this is what will bring Gilad home safe-and-sound, we have a responsibility to him to do it.
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3271505,00.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know all the details of the prisioner situation but if the Palestinian side had accepted Bill Clintons' peace plan there would be no war.
Israel got out of Gaza and yet they were still attacked by missiles.
If the other side gave up their war there would be no war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deadman
Joined: 27 May 2006
Location: Suwon
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
I don't know all the details of the prisioner situation but if the Palestinian side had accepted Bill Clintons' peace plan there would be no war.
Israel got out of Gaza and yet they were still attacked by missiles.
If the other side gave up their war there would be no war. |
Now what did the article say again? Thats right,
| Quote: |
| we work overtime to whitewash the atrocity |
Hmm. They're not the only ones.
| Quote: |
| but if the Palestinian side had accepted Bill Clintons' peace plan there would be no war |
That's right. And if Iraq had bent over and given their country to the US there'd be no war. If Iran bends over and surrenders its soverignty to us there'll be no war. In fact, if everyone just does what we say and gives us whatever we want, there'll be no war.
Good one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R. S. Refugee
Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Location: Shangra La, ROK
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| deadman wrote: |
... if everyone just does what we say and gives us whatever we want, there'll be no war. ...
|
\
By Jove (sorry, Christian fundies), I think you've got it. You've actually come up with the solution of how to obtain world peace. I think you deserve a "Freedom" Medal and kisses on both cheeks by Dubya for that one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sadly Not dead enoughman wrote
| Quote: |
Now what did the article say again? Thats right, |
??
Sadly Not dead enoughman wrote
| Quote: |
| we work overtime to whitewash the atrocity |
| Quote: |
Sadly Not dead enoughman wrote
Hmm. They're not the only ones. |
??
| Quote: |
| but if the Palestinian side had accepted Bill Clintons' peace plan there would be no war |
Sadly Not dead enoughman wrote
Except that Bill Clintons offer was a good offer. What else could have Israel given up and still survived?
What do you know about the offer?
Sad to say not dead enough man wrote
| Quote: |
| And if Iraq had bent over and given their country to the US there'd be no war. |
That is not true., IF Saddam had given up trying to conquer the gulf and the mid east and his revolutionary agenda their would have been no war.
You don't know what you talking about
Sad to say not Dead enough man wrote
| Quote: |
| If Iran bends over and surrenders its soverignty to us there'll be no war. In fact, if everyone just does what we say and gives us whatever we want, there'll be no war |
That is false if Iran just stops trying to export their revolution and support terror and their plans to dominate the guld and the mideast there would be no problem.
HERE IS IRAN PROTECTING THEIR SOVERIGHTY
Shipment of high explosives intercepted in Iraq
Most sophisticated of roadside bombs reportedly coming from Iran
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8829929/
| Quote: |
9/11 Commission Finds Ties Between al-Qaeda and Iran
Senior U.S. officials have told TIME that the 9/11 Commission's report will cite evidence suggesting that the 9/11 hijackers had previously passed through Iran |
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,664967,00.html
| Quote: |
| On June 25, 1996, Iran again attacked America at Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, exploding a huge truck bomb that devastated Khobar Towers and murdered 19 U.S. airmen as they rested in their dormitory. These young heroes spent every day risking their lives enforcing the no-fly zone over southern Iraq; that is, protecting Iraqi Shiites from their own murderous tyrant. When I visited this horrific scene soon after the attack, I watched dozens of dedicated FBI agents combing through the wreckage in 120-degree heat, reverently handling the human remains of our brave young men. More than 400 of our Air Force men and women were wounded in this well-planned attack, and I was humbled by their courage and spirit. I later met with the families of our lost Khobar heroes and promised that we would do whatever was necessary to bring these terrorists to American justice. The courage and dignity these wonderful families have consistently exemplified has been one of the most powerful experiences of my 26 years of public service. |
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003518
Iran responsible for 1983 Marine barracks bombing, judge rules
Friday, May 30, 2003 Posted: 11:14 PM EDT (0314 GMT)
Marines search through the rubble for their missing comrades after the 1983 barracks bombing in Beirut, Lebanon.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iran is responsible for the 1983 suicide bombing of a U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 American servicemen, a U.S. District Court judge ruled Friday.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/iran.barracks.bombing/
Amir Taheri: Khomeinists hammering new strategy to oust 'Great Satan'
| Quote: |
But at almost exactly the same time, militants from some 40 countries spread across the globe were trekking to Tehran for a 10-day "revolutionary jamboree" in which "a new strategy to confront the American Great Satan" will be hammered out. The event is scheduled to start on February 1 to mark the 25th anniversary of the return to Iran from exile of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the "Islamic Revolution".
It is not clear how many militants will attend, but the official media promise a massive turnout to underline the Islamic Republic's position as the "throbbing heart of world resistance to American arrogance."
The guest list reads like a who-is-who of global terror.
In fact, most of the organisations attending the event, labelled "Ten-Days of Dawn", are branded by the US and some European Union members as terrorist outfits. For more than two decades, Tehran has been a magnet for militant groups from many different national and ideological backgrounds.
The Islamic Republic's hospitality cuts across even religious divides. Militant Sunni organisations, including two linked to Al Qaida, Ansar al-Islam (Companions of Islam) and Hizb Islami (The Islamic Party), enjoy Iranian hospitality.
They are joined by Latin American guerrilla outfits, clandestine Irish organisations, Basque and Corsican separatists, and a variety of leftist groups from Spartacists to Trotskyites and Guevarists. Tehran is the only capital where all the Palestinian militant movements have offices and, in some cases, training and financial facilities. |
http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/04/01/28/109235.html
Yes Iran was just protecting their soverignty when they did these things 
Q: How about when the kill translators of the Satantic Versus in countires as far away as Japan?
Was Saddam Hussein protecting his soverignty when he massed troops for another invasion of Kuwait in 1995? Was Saddam protecting Iraqs '
soverignty when he gassed the Kurds? How about when he supported suicide bombers?
Care to answer or are you gonna run away?
Deadman are you dishonest or just ignorant?
By the way Khaddafy gave up his war for the most part and Libya is doing pretty good.
And look the US isn't bother him are they?
Explain that wise one ( huk)
yours wasn't you don't know what you are talking about or maybe you do and you are just going around giving misinformaiton.
Deadman you are an apologist for the Bathists and Khomeni lovers and that is not the only one you are an apologist for. One thing though you are not anti war just anti US.
Now go back to the conspriacy stuff. I hope someone kills David Icky and those who support him.
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:30 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| R. S. Refugee wrote: |
| deadman wrote: |
... if everyone just does what we say and gives us whatever we want, there'll be no war. ...
|
\
By Jove (sorry, Christian fundies), I think you've got it. You've actually come up with the solution of how to obtain world peace. I think you deserve a "Freedom" Medal and kisses on both cheeks by Dubya for that one. |
You mean Iran war is legitmate?
HERE IS IRAN PROTECTING THEIR SOVERIGHTY
Shipment of high explosives intercepted in Iraq
Most sophisticated of roadside bombs reportedly coming from Iran
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8829929/
| Quote: |
9/11 Commission Finds Ties Between al-Qaeda and Iran
Senior U.S. officials have told TIME that the 9/11 Commission's report will cite evidence suggesting that the 9/11 hijackers had previously passed through Iran |
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,664967,00.html
| Quote: |
| On June 25, 1996, Iran again attacked America at Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, exploding a huge truck bomb that devastated Khobar Towers and murdered 19 U.S. airmen as they rested in their dormitory. These young heroes spent every day risking their lives enforcing the no-fly zone over southern Iraq; that is, protecting Iraqi Shiites from their own murderous tyrant. When I visited this horrific scene soon after the attack, I watched dozens of dedicated FBI agents combing through the wreckage in 120-degree heat, reverently handling the human remains of our brave young men. More than 400 of our Air Force men and women were wounded in this well-planned attack, and I was humbled by their courage and spirit. I later met with the families of our lost Khobar heroes and promised that we would do whatever was necessary to bring these terrorists to American justice. The courage and dignity these wonderful families have consistently exemplified has been one of the most powerful experiences of my 26 years of public service. |
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003518
Iran responsible for 1983 Marine barracks bombing, judge rules
Friday, May 30, 2003 Posted: 11:14 PM EDT (0314 GMT)
Marines search through the rubble for their missing comrades after the 1983 barracks bombing in Beirut, Lebanon.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iran is responsible for the 1983 suicide bombing of a U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 American servicemen, a U.S. District Court judge ruled Friday.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/iran.barracks.bombing/
Amir Taheri: Khomeinists hammering new strategy to oust 'Great Satan'
| Quote: |
But at almost exactly the same time, militants from some 40 countries spread across the globe were trekking to Tehran for a 10-day "revolutionary jamboree" in which "a new strategy to confront the American Great Satan" will be hammered out. The event is scheduled to start on February 1 to mark the 25th anniversary of the return to Iran from exile of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the "Islamic Revolution".
It is not clear how many militants will attend, but the official media promise a massive turnout to underline the Islamic Republic's position as the "throbbing heart of world resistance to American arrogance."
The guest list reads like a who-is-who of global terror.
In fact, most of the organisations attending the event, labelled "Ten-Days of Dawn", are branded by the US and some European Union members as terrorist outfits. For more than two decades, Tehran has been a magnet for militant groups from many different national and ideological backgrounds.
The Islamic Republic's hospitality cuts across even religious divides. Militant Sunni organisations, including two linked to Al Qaida, Ansar al-Islam (Companions of Islam) and Hizb Islami (The Islamic Party), enjoy Iranian hospitality.
They are joined by Latin American guerrilla outfits, clandestine Irish organisations, Basque and Corsican separatists, and a variety of leftist groups from Spartacists to Trotskyites and Guevarists. Tehran is the only capital where all the Palestinian militant movements have offices and, in some cases, training and financial facilities. |
http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/04/01/28/109235.html
Yes Iran was just protecting their soverignty when they did these things .
How about when the kill translators of the Satantic Versus?
You are another one who doesn't know what he is talking about- at best. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deadman
Joined: 27 May 2006
Location: Suwon
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| What do you know about the offer? |
I know that despite all their grandstanding and hoo ha the Israelis never make any meaningful compromise. Here's a quite from Henry Kissenger:
| Quote: |
I ask Rabin to make concessions, and he says he can't because Israel is too weak. So I give him arms, and he says he doesn't need to make concessions because Israel is strong"
-- Henry Kissinger (quoted in Findley's Deliberate Deceptions p.199, quoting from Sheehan's The Arabs, Israelis and Kissinger) |
I don't blame them, though. They obviously feel they are in a very morally precarious situation, the land they are on having been taken by ethic cleansing using bombs and terror against a civilian population (how much do YOU know about that, Joo), and that world opinion might suddenly turn. That may account for the aggressive and relentless propaganda the rest of the world recieves.
I do know the Clinton plan was turned down because Arafat wanted right of return for the displaced population, a condition the Israelis would never accept. Why not I wonder?
Here's more on the right of return:
| Quote: |
ttp://www.latimes.com/news/comment/20000810/t000074944.html
Palestinian Refugees Must Be Allowed to Choose
Middle East: Israel's rejection of the right of return goes against international law.
By ELIA ZUREIK, LA Times, 08/10/2000
In 1948, 800,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled out of fear from their homes in what is now Israel, and they never have been allowed to return. Today, these refugees and their descendants number more than 4 million. More than any other factor, the dispossession and suffering of the Palestinian refugees have fueled the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. And more than any other factor, their fate is the key to its resolution.
At the Camp David summit, Palestinian and Israeli negotiators overcame an important barrier by discussing the Palestinian refugees seriously for the first time, but they remain sharply divided on the issue. As before, Israeli officials maintain that the creation of the Palestinian refugee problem had nothing to do with Israeli policies and practices. They claim instead that the Palestinian exodus was prompted by calls from Arab leaders for Palestinians to flee--or simply by the tragedy of war--even though substantial evidence from recently declassified official Israeli sources reveals premeditated plans to expel and transfer indigenous Palestinians across the borders into other Arab states.
Even were we to assume that the Palestinian exodus was caused by the unintended consequences of war, it is still hard to see how this justifies Israel's continued prevention of the refugees' return. There are numerous examples of peoples who were displaced during war but permitted to return to their homes once peace was established, most recently in the Balkan wars. That is what refugee law prescribes, and that is the solution initially proposed by the United Nations in 1948 and reaffirmed more than 100 times since.
Israel's rejection of the right of return simply has no basis in international law or practice. The refusal to allow the return of the refugees has a deeper ideological basis: Israel wants to preserve a Jewish majority. Allowing Palestinian refugees to return might disturb Israel's "fragile demographic balance" or "change the character" of the state, to use the euphemisms of the day. Accordingly, what is--under any standard--a form of ethnic cleansing is defended by Israelis as a means of national self-preservation.
Notwithstanding the international trend toward increased mobility and pluralism and the increasing diversity in Israeli society itself--in part a result of the influx of many immigrants from the former Soviet Union--Israel continues to conceive of itself as a state for only the Jewish people.
But what of the Palestinian refugees? They are no less attached to the land of their forbears than their Jewish neighbors. United Nations data show that among the former Palestinian residents of West Jerusalem who became refugees in 1948, two-thirds still live nearby, either in East Jerusalem or in adjacent towns. Many of them can see their old neighborhoods in the distance; a few lucky ones granted permits to enter Israel can even pass by their old homes. But they are barred from returning and reclaiming their property.
Refugees farther away in Lebanon, Syria and other countries must rely only on their memories--or, for the younger generations raised in filthy, overcrowded refugee camps, their imagination. I recently read an interview with an elderly Palestinian woman living in the Ein el Hilwa camp in Lebanon. Tightly gripping the rusted key to her family's farm near Jaffa, she asked her interviewer how she should explain to her grandchildren, who had known only the stench of the camp's open sewers, what it was like to wake up to the scent of fresh lemons.
These refugees must have felt especially embittered to watch Israel admit 6,000 Lebanese affiliated with the South Lebanese Army as a reward for their collaboration during Israel's occupation of Southern Lebanon, while Israel has declined to allow the Palestinians to return to their homes.
The Palestinian refugees did not choose their past; it was forced on them. If there is to be peace, however, they must choose their future. This simple idea is the essence of the Palestinian position on refugees in the ongoing negotiations with Israel.
For the right of return to have any meaning, each Palestinian refugee must be given a free choice about where to live. A sizable number probably will choose not to return to their homes in Israel, particularly if they are given the opportunity to settle elsewhere or to improve their quality of life.
Many are established in other countries and would prefer to remain in them. But the choice must be theirs and theirs alone.
Elia Zureik, a Professor of Sociology at Queen's University, Kingston, Canada, Advises the Palestine Liberation Organization on Refugee Issues |
Taken from http://www.radioislam.org/historia/zionism/zureik_refug_latimes.html
Here's a peace plan for you: give up your racist dream of a Jews only Chosen Race wonderland, and allow the former occupants to return if they wish. Accept them as your brothers instead of clinging to your passive aggressive they'll-persecute-us-if-we-don't-persecute-them-first attitude. Don't like that offer? Now you know how the Palestinians feel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deadman
Joined: 27 May 2006
Location: Suwon
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fuuuurthermore...
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee (paraphrased) wrote: |
| Iran blah blah this and Iran blah blah that. Yes Iran was just protecting their soverignty when they did these things |
Nice history lesson. Let's talk about now, though.
1. Iran is breaking no international law in pursuing nuclear capability. If Israel can have nuclear weapons without a peep from the west, why not Iran? It knows if it ever used them, it would bring massive retaliation that would wipe it from the face of the earth. If it posessed them, it would give them increased security from foreign aggression and give them more power to boot. I'm all for non proliferation, but lets ask Israel to give up it's nukes as a show of good faith. They have recently shown an inclination to hot headed military action. Is it really a good thing for them to have nukes?
2. "Iran wants war" is media propaganda. Iran wants nuclear power/capability. Lets not forget who's threatening who.
Here's a good article for your consideration, from the Sydney Morning Herald (Australian newspaper). It's well argued, balanced, and correctly spelled, more than can be said for anything you've provided, Joo.
| Quote: |
Israel and the US fall into another trap of their own making
Amin Saikal
July 17, 2006
Israel's disproportionate military response to the abduction of one of its soldiers and the killing of two more by Palestinian militants nearly three weeks ago and to similar action by the Lebanese Hezbollah last week has generated a regional crisis.
The Bush Administration's public backing of such a response can only increase resentment of both Israel and the US in the Arab and Muslim worlds, further undermining Washington's efforts in the war on terrorism.
In part, Israel's overreaction may reflect the inexperience of its new Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, and Minister for Defence, Amir Peretz.
Yet Israel's operations appear to be designed to go well beyond punishing Palestinian militants and Hezbollah.
What started as two minor skirmishes on Israel's borders with Gaza (which despite Israel's formal withdrawal from the strip a year ago has, for all practical purposes, remained under its control) and Lebanon, have been blown out of all proportion. The Palestinian and Hezbollah kidnappings are nothing new in the region. Israel has kidnapped, jailed and killed Palestinians and Lebanese in the hundreds over the years in the name of self-defence and combating terrorism, as defined by Israel.
Why has Israel overreacted? It is using the abductions to achieve a wider goal. In the case of the Palestinians, it has been deeply troubled by the rise to power of the radical Islamist group Hamas through a democratic election early this year. Although Israel initially backed the formation of Hamas in the late 1980s as a counter to the secularist Palestine Liberation Organisation, which it then rejected as a terrorist organisation, it has increasingly found it expedient to do everything possible to prevent Hamas from governing and strengthening the forces of political Islam in the region.
Israel's ultimate objective seems to be to cause the demise of the Hamas Government, and a civil war between the PLO and Hamas supporters as a way out of negotiating a possible end to its occupation. In this, it has had the support of Bush, who has been unhappy with the outcome of the Palestinian process of democratisation.
Similarly, Israel has been increasingly uncomfortable with the growth of Hezbollah and the speed of Lebanon's recovery following its civil war and democratisation, especially since Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon after 20 years of costly occupation.
Since its foundation in 1948 Israel's policy in historical Palestine has been to do whatever it takes to ensure that its Arab neighbours remain weak and divided. On this basis, while it has neutralised the Egyptian and Jordanian regimes through peace treaties and American influence, and the US has paralysed Iraq as a threat to the Jewish state, Israeli leadership has been keen to ensure favourable regime change in Syria and its regional ally, Iran, along with the destruction of the Syrian- and Iranian-backed Hezbollah.
Israel is seeking to destroy not only Hezbollah, but also Lebanon. Its wider objective is to set back Lebanon's reconstruction by years so that it could never rival Israel politically and economically, as well as to undermine the chances of any US-Iran agreement over Iran's nuclear program.
Israel has embarked on a dangerous game. Syria and Iran will not leave Hezbollah in the lurch.
The situation that Israel has generated by its overreaction will leave both Israel and the US vulnerable to wider accusations of a Jewish-Christian conspiracy against Islam, and an upsurge in secular and religious radicalism among Arabs and Muslims.
This can only assist al-Qaeda and its supporters, and may well illustrate once again the immaturity of the Israeli leadership, and the naivety of the US in handling the Middle East conflict.
Amin Saikal is professor of political science and the director of the Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies (the Middle East and Central Asia) at the ANU. |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| One thing though you are not anti war just anti US. |
Well, I know war will never go away, I'm just against it's gratituous use and the propaganda bullshit that is currently accompanying it, so yes, I'm anti-war. I'm anti racist, and hence, anti Zionist too. I like the US, just not the current govt which is up to its ears in war and Zionists.
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Now go back to the conspriacy stuff. I hope someone kills David Icky and those who support him. |
I hope someone else kills eeevryone else in the whole wooorld |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
sad to say he is not a deadman wrote:
| Quote: |
| 1. Iran is breaking no international law in pursuing nuclear capability. |
They signed the NPT didn't they. I guess North Korea is doing / did nothing wrong when the persued nuclear capabliity.
I guess it was ok when Stalin got nukes and would have been ok if Hitler got them. Oh I forget don't you have a soft spot for Hitler?
| Quote: |
| If Israel can have nuclear weapons without a peep from the west, why not Iran? |
The same reason why it is not a very bad thing if India has nuclear weapons but it is not good if North Korea has them.
Israel is not out to destroy Iran but Iran is out to destroy Israel.
Israel even had good relations with Iran before Khomeni came to power.
| Quote: |
| It knows if it ever used them, it would bring massive retaliation that would wipe it from the face of the earth |
.
Iran might be crazy or very brave they might think they could first strike Israel and destroy the nation once and for all.
| Quote: |
| If it posessed them, it would give them increased security from foreign aggression and give them more power to boot |
.
the only aggression against Iran is cause Iran won't give up its war.
| Quote: |
| I'm all for non proliferation, but lets ask Israel to give up it's nukes as a show of good faith |
.
Sure when Iran and the others give up their war.
They have even threatened Israel w/ nuclear weapons.
| Quote: |
RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL
TEHRAN 14 Dec. (IPS) One of Iran�s most influential ruling cleric called Friday on the Muslim states to use nuclear weapon against Israel, assuring them that while such an attack would annihilate Israel, it would cost them "damages only".
"If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world", Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani told the crowd at the traditional Friday prayers in Tehran.
Analysts said not only Mr. Hashemi-Rafsanjani�s speech was the strongest against Israel, but also this is the first time that a prominent leader of the Islamic Republic openly suggests the use of nuclear weapon against the Jewish State. |
http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm
Iran also wants nuclear weapons so they can threaten other nations and sponser terror.
It is not a good thing.
| Quote: |
| They have recently shown an inclination to hot headed military action. Is it really a good thing for them to have nukes? |
Really do you have any evidence that Israel behaves worse than its enemies during war time? Indeed do you have any evidence that Israel behaves particularly bad during war time. Does Israel act worse than others at war?
Do you have any evidence of that? Just curious. I bet you don't.
Indeed Israel never used nuclear weapons even though it has been attacked many times.
| Quote: |
| 2. "Iran wants war" is media propaganda. |
From a guy who believes Rense.
It is media propaganda? Why cause you say so?
If Iran didn't want war why have they attacked US forces? Why do they kill the translators of the Satanic Versus? Answer . Can you?
I know Deadman when you don't like the news it is shock - a conspiracy.
Jeff Rense ought to die.
| Quote: |
| Iran wants nuclear power/capability. |
and wants to dominate the gulf , the mideast and destroy Israel. and kill the translators of the Satanic Versus. and perhaps wipe out Jews overseas.
| Quote: |
Lets not forget who's threatening who. |
Iran has attacked the US and sponsered terror.
At any rate there would be no problem with Iran if they gave up their war.
Indeed the US would not object to much to Iran getting nukes if Iran gave up their war.
See Pakistan.
| Quote: |
Nice history lesson. Let's talk about now, though. |
why if Iran has attacked the US why is that not relevant? Indeed they have probably been behind the deaths of US forces in Iraq. That seems like now to me.
| Quote: |
| Here's a good article for your consideration, from the Sydney Morning Herald (Australian newspaper). It's well argued, balanced, and correctly spelled, more than can be said for anything you've provided, Joo |
.
Well I provided info that Iran has infact engaged in hostile acts. As for the spelling well you are not worth the time to proofread.
it is a good article. But if Hezzbollah is hurt it would weaken Iran. so it can go either way
| Quote: |
| Well, I know war will never go away, I'm just against it's gratituous use and the propaganda *beep* that is currently accompanying it, so yes, I'm anti-war. I'm anti racist, and hence, anti Zionist too. I like the US, just not the current govt which is up to its ears in war and Zionists. |
you are not anti war. You are not anti Saddam's war and you are not anti war by Iran. you are a fake and phoney.
And Israel's enemies ought to give up their war.
Khomenism is an evil ideology and its agenda is evil. It is nothing but terror and racism. Iran wants to dominate the mideast and conquer the gulf maybe even more.
all Israel wants is too survive. No comparison.
So is what Bin Laden taught so is what Saddam taught.
| Quote: |
| hope someone else kills eeevryone else in the whole wooorld |
I hope they kill David Icky and his supporters , every breath they take is a loss of O2.You are not anti war. You support Irans war, and you supported the agenda of Hizzbollah. and anyone else who hates the US.
That is what you are about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
DM
[quote]I know that despite all their grandstanding and hoo ha the Israelis never make any meaningful compromise. Here's a quite from Henry Kissenger:
| Quote: |
I ask Rabin to make concessions, and he says he can't because Israel is too weak. So I give him arms, and he says he doesn't need to make concessions because Israel is strong"
-- Henry Kissinger (quoted in Findley's Deliberate Deceptions p.199, quoting from Sheehan's The Arabs, Israelis and Kissinger) |
fine but when Kissenger was in charge Rabin was not. You are taking about something that was said before Rabin was prime minister. So really your quote is meaningless. right?
| Quote: |
| I don't blame them, though. They obviously feel they are in a very morally precarious situation, the land they are on having been taken by ethic cleansing using bombs and terror against a civilian population (how much do YOU know about that, Joo), and that world opinion might suddenly turn. That may account for the aggressive and relentless propaganda the rest of the world recieves. |
the Palestinian side / arab side lost land in war where they intended to mass kill and or ethnically cleanse the Jews from the area. Yes or no?
Furthermore Israel's enemies have engaged in ethnic cleansing of Arab Jews and they persecuted their minority groups. Yes or No?
What propagandaare you talking about? Oh the media is part of the conspiracy. Lets believe Jeff Rense . According tou he is a good source
DM
| Quote: |
| I do know the Clinton plan was turned down because Arafat wanted right of return for the displaced population, a condition the Israelis would never accept. Why not I wonder? |
cause they would have their country voted out of existance.
Here's more on the right of return:
[quote]ttp://www.latimes.com/news/comment/20000810/t000074944.html
Palestinian Refugees Must Be Allowed to Choose
| Quote: |
Middle East: Israel's rejection of the right of return goes against international law.
By ELIA ZUREIK, LA Times, 08/10/2000
In 1948, 800,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled out of fear from their homes in what is now Israel, and they never have been allowed to return. Today, these refugees and their descendants number more than 4 million. More than any other factor, the dispossession and suffering of the Palestinian refugees have fueled the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. And more than any other factor, their fate is the key to its resolution. |
so those who have never been to Israel are entiled to right of return. Besides the 800,000 number is too high more like 600,000.
| Quote: |
| At the Camp David summit, Palestinian and Israeli negotiators overcame an important barrier by discussing the Palestinian refugees seriously for the first time, but they remain sharply divided on the issue. As before, Israeli officials maintain that the creation of the Palestinian refugee problem had nothing to do with Israeli policies and practices. They claim instead that the Palestinian exodus was prompted by calls from Arab leaders for Palestinians to flee--or simply by the tragedy of war--even though substantial evidence from recently declassified official Israeli sources reveals premeditated plans to expel and transfer indigenous Palestinians across the borders into other Arab states. |
Perhaps and the Palestinian side had something similar planned for Israels. and of course Israel's enemies did similar stuff to their own Jews. Sort of interesting that such does does not bother you in the least. but I know why.
| Quote: |
| Even were we to assume that the Palestinian exodus was caused by the unintended consequences of war, it is still hard to see how this justifies Israel's continued prevention of the refugees' return. There are numerous examples of peoples who were displaced during war but permitted to return to their homes once peace was established, most recently in the Balkan wars. That is what refugee law prescribes, and that is the solution initially proposed by the United Nations in 1948 and reaffirmed more than 100 times since. |
Where is the UN laws that support what he says? besides UN resolution 242 over rules because it speaks of something other than right of return.
| Quote: |
| Israel's rejection of the right of return simply has no basis in international law or practice. The refusal to allow the return of the refugees has a deeper ideological basis: Israel wants to preserve a Jewish majority. Allowing Palestinian refugees to return might disturb Israel's "fragile demographic balance" or "change the character" of the state, to use the euphemisms of the day. Accordingly, what is--under any standard--a form of ethnic cleansing is defended by Israelis as a means of national self-preservation. |
well cause the arab nations did a job on their jews so one could understand why Israel would be a little fearful don't you agree?
DM
| Quote: |
| Notwithstanding the international trend toward increased mobility and pluralism and the increasing diversity in Israeli society itself--in part a result of the influx of many immigrants from the former Soviet Union--Israel continues to conceive of itself as a state for only the Jewish people |
.
and about 50% of Israels population is from Arab Lands.
DM
| Quote: |
| But what of the Palestinian refugees? They are no less attached to the land of their forbears than their Jewish neighbors. United Nations data show that among the former Palestinian residents of West Jerusalem who became refugees in 1948, two-thirds still live nearby, either in East Jerusalem or in adjacent towns. Many of them can see their old neighborhoods in the distance; a few lucky ones granted permits to enter Israel can even pass by their old homes. But they are barred from returning and reclaiming their property. |
they ought to be compensated for the land they lost and they will be under any peace agreement.
DM
| Quote: |
| Refugees farther away in Lebanon, Syria and other countries must rely only on their memories--or, for the younger generations raised in filthy, overcrowded refugee camps, their imagination. I recently read an interview with an elderly Palestinian woman living in the Ein el Hilwa camp in Lebanon. Tightly gripping the rusted key to her family's farm near Jaffa, she asked her interviewer how she should explain to her grandchildren, who had known only the stench of the camp's open sewers, what it was like to wake up to the scent of fresh lemons. |
give her some money.
DM
| Quote: |
| These refugees must have felt especially embittered to watch Israel admit 6,000 Lebanese affiliated with the South Lebanese Army as a reward for their collaboration during Israel's occupation of Southern Lebanon, while Israel has declined to allow the Palestinians to return to their homes. |
They have offered to pay them. What have Israels enemies offered to the Arab Jews they persecuted?
DM
| Quote: |
| The Palestinian refugees did not choose their past; it was forced on them. If there is to be peace, however, they must choose their future. This simple idea is the essence of the Palestinian position on refugees in the ongoing negotiations with Israel. |
They ought to be paid. and compensated.
DM
| Quote: |
| For the right of return to have any meaning, each Palestinian refugee must be given a free choice about where to live. A sizable number probably will choose not to return to their homes in Israel, particularly if they are given the opportunity to settle elsewhere or to improve their quality of life. |
they ought to take the money.
DM
| Quote: |
| Many are established in other countries and would prefer to remain in them. But the choice must be theirs and theirs alone. |
They ought to have right of return to the Palestinian state in west bank and Gaza.
| Quote: |
| Elia Zureik, a Professor of Sociology at Queen's University, Kingston, Canada, Advises the Palestine Liberation Organization on Refugee Issues[ |
actually a limited right of return was offered to bring together families.
compensation money in lieu of the Right of return for the rest.
and a full right of return to a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank
DM
| Quote: |
| Here's a peace plan for you: give up your racist dream of a Jews only Chosen Race wonderland, and allow the former occupants to return if they wish |
.
Let them return to Palestinian state and compensation for the rest.
Besides although zionism was not a good idea what is done is done and now
Jews need protection from Bathism , Khomenism and Bin Ladenism and the similar stuff . They are all fascist evil ideas.
Those who believe in Bathism , Khomenism and Bin Ladenism and the similar stuff can't be trusted to protect their minorites or govern.
If you want to talk about racism start with Bathism ,Khomenism and Bin Ladenism. They are just about the most vile racists and bigots on the planet.
Tell us how they treat and have treated their minorites. Are they gonna do to the Jews what Saddam did to the Kurds? Or like what Iran does to the Bahis?
What is with the selective criticism?
DM
| Quote: |
| Accept them as your brothers instead of clinging to your passive aggressive they'll-persecute-us-if-we-don't-persecute-them-first attitude. Don't like that offer? Now you know how the Palestinians feel. |
You ought to give up your selective criticism and apolgizing for Bathists and Khomeni followers.
How could anyone accept rule by those with agenda to commit mass killing and the most vile racism anywhere?
Stop apologizing for those hate mongering ideologies. And why is your criticism so selective? I mean Israels enemies are far more rascist and have done far worse than Israel yet you care not. I have a good idea why. You pretend to post out of moral concern but that is not why you post at all. You won't not admit the real reason you post will you.
At anyrate I did say zionism was a mistake not an evil idea but a mistake.
nevertheless what is done is done.
and now Israels need protection from Bathists, Khomeni lovers and Bin Laden followers and all the similar types.Cause we know what Bathists, Khomeni lovers and Bin Laden followers do to their minorities.
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Tue Jul 18, 2006 4:37 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joo,
People would listen to you, if you didn't cling to your anti Iranian party line so fervently. Also spout off so often about "kill", "nuke", " blow up"......whoever.
The point overall that Deadman is making, I agree with. That is, too many just see violence/war as easy and gratuitous. As he wrote and I support,
| Quote: |
| Well, I know war will never go away, I'm just against it's gratituous use and the propaganda *beep* that is currently accompanying it, so yes, I'm anti-war. I'm anti racist, and hence, anti Zionist too. I like the US, just not the current govt which is up to its ears in war and Zionists. |
I also agree with the writer of the posted article and it is has been said again and again and again , the last 5 years. U.S. policy has contributed greatly to the increase of terror in this world, some now but probably terribly so in the future. It is not a policy that is constructive or protective and as such should be rejected by Americans. The author writes,
| Quote: |
The situation that Israel has generated by its overreaction will leave both Israel and the US vulnerable to wider accusations of a Jewish-Christian conspiracy against Islam, and an upsurge in secular and religious radicalism among Arabs and Muslims.
This can only assist al-Qaeda and its supporters, and may well illustrate once again the immaturity of the Israeli leadership, and the naivety of the US in handling the Middle East conflict. |
But let's not get caught up in all this geopolitical grappling. We all can come up with many cases to support each side. All parties have commited terrible atrocities, all are in the mud. The only things I support are those which envision, enact dialogue, understanding, a vision of living together...........
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="ddeubel"]Joo,
| Quote: |
People would listen to you, if you didn't cling to your anti Iranian party line so fervently. Also spout off so often about "kill", "nuke", " blow up"......whoever. |
well Iran has engaged in a war against the US. Their agenda is quite sinister and the persecuted their minorities.
If Iran gave up their war then there would be no problem
| Quote: |
The point overall that Deadman is making, I agree with. That is, too many just see violence/war as easy and gratuitous. As he wrote and I support, |
well then just have Iran give up thier war.
| Quote: |
| I also agree with the writer of the posted article and it is has been said again and again and again , the last 5 years. U.S. policy has contributed greatly to the increase of terror in this world, some now but probably terribly so in the future. It is not a policy that is constructive or protective and as such should be rejected by Americans. The author writes, |
The biggest reason for terror is that mideast regimes and elties teach hate and incite violence.
| Quote: |
| But let's not get caught up in all this geopolitical grappling. We all can come up with many cases to support each side. All parties have commited terrible atrocities, all are in the mud. The only things I support are those which envision, enact dialogue, understanding, a vision of living together........... |
nice idea however that requires that one side in the conflict give up their war. One side is willing to already. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cerulean808
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joo Rip
| Quote: |
| well Iran has engaged in a war against the US. |
Really? When was this war declared? Has the US declared itself at war with Iran? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
On the OP: So, R.S., do two wrongs make a right in this case, then? Are you trying to validate the morality of Hezbollah's abduction of the Isreali soldiers?
I agree that Israel has not acted properly at all times -- particularly in Gaza and South Lebanon. But why do you think your friends chose to abduct the Isreali soldiers now, at this particular time?
And Cerulean808: yes, whether declared or not -- in the conventional sense, that is -- Iran has more or less been at war with Israel and the United States, and basically the entire West since, 1979.
It is not surprising but indeed confirmation that OP, Ddeubel, and their correligionist Cerulean808 are here making Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran's case against Israel and the United States, as that is clearly where their sympathies are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R. S. Refugee
Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Location: Shangra La, ROK
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| On the OP: So, R.S., do two wrongs make a right in this case, then? Are you trying to validate the morality of Hezbollah's abduction of the Isreali soldiers? |
No, I don't believe that two wrongs make a right. But I do believe that as long as a superpower is occupying Iraq that war crimes like the ones we've all heard about recently will be common and that there will always be a resistance until the occupier leaves.
Likewise, with Israel, until they come up with an acceptable ("just" is a difficult word to use in this situation) solution that most likely includes a peace settlement with a return to their pre-1967 borders in exchange for peace and recognition of Israel, the resistance is likely to continue.
To quote one of the more humanistic posters on this board....
"All parties have commited terrible atrocities, all are in the mud. The only things I support are those which envision, enact dialogue, understanding, a vision of living together...........
DD"
Does DD sound like he's saying two wrongs make a right? Neither am I. |
|
| 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
