Page 12 of 15 FirstFirst ... 289101112131415 LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 212

Thread: Gaza complicates Barack Obama's policy in Mideast

  1. #166
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    I say we move the middle east to the moon. Build a big dome and let them hash it out there.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  2. #167
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Back of Beyond
    Posts
    11,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sputnik View Post
    exactly.
    the palestinian authority has become an expert on playing victim for the press and the arab world in general totally uses this conflict for their own interests. especially in multilateral fora like the UN. mention anything, like darfur or iran or anything else that is going on in the muslim world, and they turn into the kings of denial and start going on about state sovereignty and not interfering in the internal affairs of states and bla, bla, bla and how it's all the west's manipulation. and the only thing that exists and is important is ending israeli occupation and the evil zionists. i'm not saying the middle east isn't important but it's also not the only problem in the world and i only wish they were as concerned with the human rights of people in darfur, iran, somalia, libya, etc... as they are with palestinians'.

    the US' blind, unilateral, unwavering support of israel and their denial about the atrocities commited by israel don't help, of course, but the fact is, the arab world is just as stubborn and in denial as the palestinians and blinded by their hatred of the US and israel.

    oh, and someone in israel has to finally stand up to those fucking idiotic fundie settlers and smack some sense into them. or sterilise the over-breeding idiots and end the crazy expansionist zionist madness once and for all. all the israelis i know hate these morons and are fucking sick and tired of risking their lives during their military service defending these idiots.


    ok, i admit i'm too tired to read this whole thread but i would like to say something about the UN resolutions. i used to think the same way as you until i actually started working in the field and participating in israel-palestine resolutions in the human rights council. fact is, because there are so many muslim countries and they get the support of all the NAM countries - i.e. the vast majority of voting countries in the council, they have an easy majority and don't even have to listen to anyone else's arguments. those texts are never the result of a negotiation. instead, these countries stong-arm the council and get these totally one-sided texts passed and if you even try to suggest they maybe put something in there about palestinian terrorist attacks or, say, the way palestinian authorities sometimes manipulate and use their own people as cannon fodder by placing strategic things like weapon reserves right next to schools and hopsitals so that when they are attacked, there will be heavy civilian casuaties and they can then play the victims for the world's medias, you get shot down.
    so in a way, you can't really blame israel for then defying these texts because they are totally biased and unilateral but since these things are passed by votes, you always end up with everyone voting in favor of the texts and only Canada votes against, the EU either abstains or votes against and then a handful of other more moderate countries that refuse to vote on a one-sided, unbalanced text, abstain as well.

    don't get me wrong, i think the HR council has done a lot of good in other areas but fact is, the middle eastern conflict is way too politicised to ever be resolved by votes among states who have other things at stake and aren't voting solely based on their concern for human rights.
    So let me get this straight: because Muslim countries participate in the wording of UN resolutions Israel has the right to defy them? And in case you haven't noticed the US has vetoed every recent UN effort to santion Israel.

    Also. In this most recent conflict alone: Israel has bombed a police station, a UN charter school, a University..where do you want Palestinians to put such institutions if not amongst civilians? Heaven forbid they should have police stations in their neighborhoods..

    Where do you live? In the US media Israel is portrayed without fail and without irony as the victims of this "conflict" and Palestinians are portrayed as totally at fault, the aggressors. Pictures of maimed and slaughtered Palestinian children do not exist in the US media world, while use of phosphorus weapons by Israel is routinely debunked depsite clear evidence to the contrary. The coverage is so lopsided I can't believe anyone could see it otherwise.

  3. #168
    Elite Member Rica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,308

    Default

    The war that is going on at the moment has existed for a long time, I wonder if anyone knows who or what started it.
    The Hamas have been firing rockets from Gaza into Israel since 2000, if someone was firing rockets into your country you would do everything in your power to stop them.
    The USA media is biased, however the Palestinians are not innocent in all this either. Many of the opinions expressed in this thread are that Israel is evil and Palestinians are innocent. That is simply not true.
    What kind of idiotic organisation fires rockets into a country that can easily crush them?
    What Israel is doing is not good, I'm not defending their actions, but I can understand why they are doing what they are doing. As I said, if someone was firing rockets into your country for years, putting your family and friends and countrymen in harms way, you'd do anything and everything in your power to stop those rockets.

    I also want to say thanks Marie and please continue to post in this thread, it's interesting and informative to hear your opinion.

  4. #169
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    As I said, if someone was firing rockets into your country for years, putting your family and friends and countrymen in harms way, you'd do anything and everything in your power to stop those rockets.
    Probably wouldn't be happening if you didn't steal their country and throw them out.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  5. #170
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Both parties cheerlead still more loudly for Israel's war

    As the body count in Gaza piles up, the U.S. Congress acts overwhelmingly to insinuate itself into the war with blind support for Israel.

    Glenn Greenwald

    Jan. 08, 2009 |

    (updated below)


    World concern over, and opposition to, the Israeli war in Gaza is rapidly mounting:
    International pressure intensified sharply on Israel on Thursday, the 13th day of its Gaza assault, after the United Nations suspended food aid deliveries, the International Committee of the Red Cross accused the Israelis of knowingly blocking assistance to the injured, and a top Vatican official defended comments in which he compared Gaza to a concentration camp.
    The Israelis have deliberately made it impossible to know the full extent of the carnage and humanitarian disasters because they continue to prevent journalists from entering Gaza even in the face of a now week-old Israeli Supreme Court order compelling them to do so. According to Palestinian sources, there are now 700 dead Palestinians -- at least 200 of them children -- and well over 1,000 wounded. Those numbers are not seriously doubted by anyone. By comparison, a total of 10 Israelis have died -- 10 -- almost all of them by "friendly fire." The unusually worded Red Cross condemnation of Israel was prompted by its discovery, after finally being allowed into Gaza, of starving Palestinian children laying next to corpses, with ambulances blocked for days by the IDF. Even with the relative "restraint" Israel is excercising (the damage it could cause is obviously much greater), this is not so much of a war as it is a completely one-sided massacre.

    As a result, much of the world is urging an end to the war and acting to forge a cease-fire -- except the United States. Here, blind and unequivocal support for the Israeli attack is actually increasing almost as fast as the Palestinian body count piles up. Apparently, it isn't enough that we supply the very bombs being dropped on the Palestinians and use our U.N. veto power to prevent any U.N. action to stop the war or even to urge its cessation. The U.S. Congress wants to involve the U.S. further still in Israel's war.

    This afternoon, the Democratic-led U.S. Senate did just that by enacting -- via a cowardly voice vote -- a completely one-sided, non-binding resolution that expresses unequivocal support for the Israeli war, and heaps all the blame for the conflict on Hamas and none of it on Israel. Harry Reid -- who jointly sponsored the Resolution with GOP Leader Mitch McConnell -- proudly proclaimed: "When we pass this resolution, the United States Senate will strengthen our historic bond with the state of Israel." On its website, AIPAC is already patting the U.S. Senate on its head for "for conveying America's unequivocal and steadfast support for Israel's right to self-defense."

    The Senate resolution is here (.pdf). The very similar House version that was circulated earlier today was drafted by Israel-centric House Foreign Affairs Chairman Howard Berman (D-Calif.). It is here (.pdf), and is expected to pass early next week -- undoubtedly with overwhelming bipartisan support. ThinkProgess noted yesterday that Democrats took the lead in drafting the Resolution because they did not want to be "out-hawked by the Republicans," though it's hardly unusual for Democrats to march in lockstep with Republicans on Israel more than any other issue.

    It's hard to overstate how one-sided this resolution is. It "expresses vigorous support and unwavering commitment to the welfare, security, and survival of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state with secure borders." Why should the U.S. maintain an "unwavering commitment to the welfare" of a foreign country? It "lays blame both for the breaking of the 'calm' and for subsequent civilian casualties in Gaza precisely where blame belongs, that is, on Hamas." It repeatedly mentions the various sins of Hamas -- from rockets to suicide attacks -- but does not mention a single syllable of criticism for Israel. In the world of the U.S. Congress, neither the 4-decade occupation of Palestinian land nor the devastating blockade of Gaza nor the ongoing expansion of Israeli settlements even exist. That may not be mentioned.

    The Resolution demands that Hamas take multiple steps towards peaceful resolution but demands that Israel do absolutely nothing. It purports to call for a cease-fire in which the Palestinians make all the concessions and Israel makes none. Worst of all -- in light of the Red Cross condemnation, yesterday's slaughter at the U.N. school, and other similar incidents -- the Resolution disgustingly praises Israel's conduct of the war, claiming that "Israel has facilitated humanitarian aid to Gaza with hundreds of trucks carrying humanitarian assistance and numerous ambulances entering the Gaza Strip since the current round of fighting began on December 27, 2008."

    This one-sided, ostensibly "pro-Israel" bipartisan inflaming of tensions by the U.S. is nothing new. Long-time Middle East negotiator Aaron David Miller, in Newsweek, earlier this week made one of the most startling revelations in some time -- that in all the time the U.S. has supposedly been attempting to forge a Middle East peace agreement over the past 25 years, it never once, in any meaningful way, raised with Israeli leaders the damage that comes from Israeli settlements. Specifically, said Miller: "I can't recall one meeting where we had a serious discussion with an Israeli prime minister about the damage that settlement activity — including land confiscation, bypass roads and housing demolitions — does to the peacemaking process."

    Miller emphasized that by being so blindly supportive even of misguided Israeli actions, "the United States has allowed that special bond to become exclusive in ways that undermine America's, and Israel's, national interests." The only way the U.S. can play a constructive role in the Middle East, he argues, is if it is even-handed and, most importantly, willing to criticize Israeli actions when they harm American interests (and their own) and pressure them to stop. Matt Yglesias, in a new piece up at The American Prospect, makes much the same point.

    Yet here we have, yet again, exactly the opposite behavior -- equally from both parties. At exactly the time that worldwide horror over this war is at its peak, the Democratic-led Congress steps up to announce to the world: "this is our war, too; we support whatever Israel does absolutely and without reservations." We thus make Israel's wars our wars; its enemies our enemies; its intractable disputes our disputes; and the hostility and anger it generates our own. And we embolden Israel to continue further.

    Given that we endlessly hear from our political establishment that the first and most important obligation of our leaders is to "keep us safe" -- that's the justification for everything from torture to presidential lawbreaking -- what possible legitimate rationale is there for the U.S. Congress to act in unison to involve itself in Israel's war so emphatically, and to thereby re-direct the anger over Israeli actions even further towards the U.S. and American citizens? How are U.S. interests even remotely advanced by insinuating ourselves this way? As Juan Cole recounted this week:
    In 1996, Israeli jets bombed a UN building where civilians had taken refuge at Cana/ Qana in south Lebanon, killing 102 persons; in the place where Jesus is said to have made water into wine, Israeli bombs wrought a different sort of transformation. In the distant, picturesque port of Hamburg, a young graduate student studying traditional architecture of Aleppo saw footage like this on the news [graphic]. He was consumed with anguish and the desire for revenge. As soon as operation Grapes of Wrath had begun the week before, he had written out a martyrdom will, indicating his willingness to die avenging the victims, killed in that operation--with airplanes and bombs that were a free gift from the United States. His name was Muhammad Atta. Five years later he piloted American Airlines 11 into the World Trade Center. . . .

    On Tuesday, the Israeli military shelled a United Nations school to which terrified Gazans had fled for refuge, killing at least 42 persons and wounding 55, virtually all of them civilians, and many of them children. The Palestinian death toll rose to 660.

    You wonder if someone somewhere is writing out a will today.
    The U.S. does enough on its own to make itself the target of worldwide anger. Why must it take on Israel's battles as well?

    The fact that this is a non-binding resolution makes it worse, not better. It achieves nothing other than rubbing in the world's face -- including the Muslim world -- that this is not just an Israeli attack on Palestinians but an American attack as well. As BooMan put it in explaining that virtually no mainstream U.S. politician would dare oppose this Resolution: "This, then, creates the false impression that there is near unanimity of support for whatever it is that Israel wants to do. And let me frank about this . . . sending such a message does more to put Americans at risk than it does it protect Israelis."

    TPM's Elana Schor today wrote: "We're looking into whether any senator was bold enough to decline to co-sponsor the measure." It will be a surprise if there were any. Many members of Congress -- with some noble exceptions -- still remain pitifully afraid that the likes of David "Axis of Evil" Frum will accuse them of being anti-Semitic if they dare oppose Israeli actions, even in the name of U.S. interests, while others continue to be supportive of any war or proposed war waged on Muslims or Arabs -- regardless of the rationale for the war or its severity.

    Whatever the motives, for America to blindly support Israel's self-destructive and unjustified behavior does not serve Israeli interests and -- most importantly -- does not serve America's. Blind support isn't "friendship," nor is enabling someone else's destructive behavior. It's subservience. And few things are as harmful or as unjust as the cowardly, lockstep behavior of both major American political parties when it comes to Israel.

    UPDATE: Since the Israeli attack on Gaza began, the advocacy of J Street -- the new Jewish-American organization designed to break AIPAC's monopoly on speaking for American Jews -- has been superb. They have gone much further than any Jewish group that is taken seriously by the establishment, continuously expressing opposition to the Israeli offensive and infuriating those who want to maintain a neoconservative stranglehold over speaking for American Jews. Earlier today, I asked them for their position on the Senate Resolution and, just now, this is what they sent me:
    Since the first days of the crisis in Gaza, J Street has consistently called for strong American leadership to reach a ceasefire that ends all military operations, stops the rockets aimed at Israel, institutes an effective mechanism to prevent weapons smuggling into Gaza, and lifts the blockade of Gaza. Since J Street's founding, we have consistently advocated for active American diplomacy to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

    We support Congressional action that endorses these aims.
    That statement -- by design, I would guess -- is unclear in the extreme. It seems intended to imply -- without actually stating -- support for the Congressional Resolutions. They say they "support Congressional action that endorses these aims," but -- conspicuously -- they don't actually say whether the Resolution passed by the Senate and to be passed by the House does so. It's hard to see how either of the two Resolutions could be deemed to do so, given that neither even mentions, for instance, a lifting of the blockade of Gaza. But that's the statement J Street issued.

    On a related note, MediaBloodHound has the details on the very interesting story of how AP caused to vanish into thin air the tough questioning by its reporter of the U.S. State Department regarding Gaza.

    Recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza and reaffirming the United States’ strong support for Israel.

    111th CONGRESS

    1st Session

    H. RES.XXX

    Recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza and reaffirming the United States’ strong support for Israel.

    January XX, 2009

    Mr./Ms. XX (for him/herself, Mr./Ms.……) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

    RESOLUTION

    Recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza and reaffirming the United States’ strong support for Israel.

    Whereas Hamas was founded with the stated goal of destroying the State of Israel;

    Whereas Hamas has been designated by the United States as a Foreign Terrorist Organization;

    Whereas Hamas has refused to comply with the Quartet’s (the United States, the European Union, Russia, and the United Nations) requirements that Hamas recognize Israel’s right to exist, renounce violence, and agree to accept previous agreements between Israel and the Palestinians;

    Whereas in June 2006, Hamas illegally crossed into Israel, attacked Israeli forces, and kidnapped Corporal Gilad Shalit, whom they continue to hold today;

    Whereas Hamas has launched thousands of rockets and mortars against Israeli population centers since 2001, and has launched more than 6,000 thousand such rockets and mortars since Israel withdrew its civilian population and its military from Gaza in 2005;

    Whereas Hamas has increased the range and payload of its rockets, reportedly with support from Iran and others, putting hundreds of thousands of Israelis in danger of rocket attacks from Gaza;

    Whereas Hamas locates elements of its terrorist infrastructure in civilian population centers, thus using innocent civilians as human shields;

    Whereas Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in a statement on December 27, 2008, that “We strongly condemn the repeated rocket and mortar attacks against Israel and hold Hamas responsible for breaking the ceasefire and for the renewal of violence there;”

    Whereas on December 27, 2008, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said, “For approximately seven years, hundreds of thousands of Israeli citizens in the south have been suffering from missiles being fired at them … In such a situation we had no alternative but to respond. We do not rejoice in battle but neither will we be deterred from it. …The operation in the Gaza Strip is designed, first and foremost, to bring about an improvement in the security reality for the residents of the south of the country.”

    Whereas the humanitarian situation in Gaza, including shortages of food, water, electricity, and adequate medical care, is becoming more acute;

    Whereas Israel has facilitated humanitarian aid to Gaza with hundreds of trucks carrying humanitarian assistance and numerous ambulances entering the Gaza Strip since the current round of fighting began on December 27, 2008;

    Whereas on January 6, 2009, before the United Nations Security Council, Secretary Rice stated that: "The situation before the current events in Gaza was clearly not sustainable. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis lived under the daily threat of rocket attack, and frankly, no country, none of our countries, would have been willing to tolerate such a circumstance. Moreover, the people of Gaza watched as insecurity and lawlessness increased and as their living conditions grew more dire because of Hamas's actions which began with the illegal coup against the Palestinian Authority in Gaza…A ceasefire that returns to those circumstances is unacceptable and it will not last”; and

    Whereas, the ultimate goal of the United States is a sustainable resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that will ensure the welfare, security, and survival of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state with secure borders, and a democratic Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with the State of Israel.

    Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

    (1) Expresses vigorous support and unwavering commitment to the welfare, security, and survival of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state with secure borders, and recognizes its right to act in self-defense to protect its citizens against Hamas’s unceasing aggression, as enshrined in the UN Charter;

    (2) Reiterates that Hamas must end the rocket and mortar attacks against Israel, recognize Israel’s right to exist, renounce violence, agree to accept previous agreements between Israel and the Palestinians, and verifiably dismantle its terrorist infrastructure;

    (3) Encourages the Administration to work actively to support a durable and sustainable cease-fire in Gaza , as soon as possible, that prevents Hamas from retaining or rebuilding its terrorist infrastructure, including the capability to launch rockets and mortars against Israel, and thereby allowing for the long-term improvement of daily living conditions for the ordinary people of Gaza;

    (4) Believes strongly that the lives of innocent civilians must be protected to the maximum extent possible, expresses condolences to innocent Palestinian and Israeli victims and their families, and reiterates that humanitarian needs in Gaza should be addressed promptly and responsibly;

    (5) Calls on all nations

    (A) to condemn Hamas for deliberately embedding its fighters, leaders, and weapons in private homes, schools, mosques, hospitals, and otherwise using Palestinian civilians as human shields, while simultaneously targeting Israeli civilians; and

    (B) to lay blame both for the breaking of the “calm” and for subsequent civilian casualties in Gaza precisely where blame belongs, that is, on Hamas;

    (6) Supports and encourages efforts to diminish the appeal and influence of extremists in the Palestinian territories, and strengthen moderate Palestinians who are committed to a secure and lasting peace with Israel;

    (7) Calls on Egypt to intensify its efforts to halt smuggling between Gaza and Egypt and affirms the willingness of the United States to continue to assist Egypt in these efforts;

    (8) Calls for the immediate release of the kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who has been illegally held in Gaza since June 2006;

    (9) Reiterates its strong support for a just and sustainable resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict achieved through negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in order to ensure the welfare, security, and survival of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state with secure borders, and a viable, independent and democratic Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with the State of Israel.

  6. #171
    Elite Member Rica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    Probably wouldn't be happening if you didn't steal their country and throw them out.
    so that makes it ok for them to fire rockets daily into a populated area? where children play? they have bomb shelters next to play ground equptiment and also in schools...its saddening to see that and if it ever happened where I live, I'd do everything I could to stop the rockets

  7. #172
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Rica, if someone walked into wherever the hell you live, uprooted you and your people by force and then took over your country, relegating you to squalid hellhole refugee camps and tiny strips of land where you were piled on top of each other in poverty.. wouldn't you be just the slightest bit pissed off? Wouldn't you fight for what was taken from you?

    Get real.

    Yes, other powers in the region use this conflict as a proxy for their own stupidity, that doesn't negate the fact that an entire people had their world stolen from them by western powers to create a new nation, by force, for another group of people that was almost wiped out.

    It's insane.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  8. #173
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rica View Post
    so that makes it ok for them to fire rockets daily into a populated area? where children play? they have bomb shelters next to play ground equptiment and also in schools...its saddening to see that and if it ever happened where I live, I'd do everything I could to stop the rockets
    Your statement reminds me of the opening of an article published this week:
    As Israel continues its Gaza assault, which has now resulted in more than 500 dead and 2,300 wounded Palestinians, with five Israelis killed, the following thought experiment is worth performing.

    America's founding sin, its dispossession of its native inhabitants, has not taken place in the 19th century, but continuously during the last 60 years. America has not completed its ethnic cleansing, has walled off millions of exiles and must contend with an armed resistance movement. Washington, despite international demands and U.N. insistence that it do so, refuses to resolve the issue by returning a portion of the land it had taken. Approximately 1.5 million of those native Americans, most of them refugees from their ancestral homes who have never been allowed to return, are imprisoned in a tiny, squalid area whose exits, water, heat, fuel, medicine and food are controlled by Washington. In their despair and their disillusionment with their corrupt leadership, those people elect a radical, rejectionist movement (which Washington had helped to foster, to undercut the native's original leadership) that denies America's right to exist and has a history of viciously striking at U.S. citizens using any means it can, including suicide bombers and crude homemade rockets that have killed two dozen Americans in seven years.

    To punish these people for choosing a government it considers a terrorist organization, Washington imposes a harsh blockade, with a top American official joking that the U.S. is going to put the natives "on a diet." The rejectionist government agrees to a cease-fire with the expectation that the blockade will be lifted. When the blockade is not lifted, and following a U.S. raid into their territory, the rejectionists begin firing the rockets again. Washington then launches a carefully planned aerial assault on the tiny, largely defenseless area, raining bombs down on one of the most densely populated places on earth, killing militants and civilians alike and bombing houses filled with women and children. It then launches a ground invasion of the area. Throughout, America paints itself as an innocent victim, which has been forced with a heavy heart to take surgical, conscientious military actions against terrorist fanatics who threaten its very existence.

    This comparison to the current Gaza invasion is not, of course, exact. Israel is a tiny state, a fraction the size of the U.S. The Indians never posed a serious threat to American settlers, nor did they have neighboring allies who launched an all-out war on the U.S. in 1776. Nor were large tracts of American territory acquired by legally purchasing them from absentee native landlords. But the larger parallels remain. If such a scenario had taken place, how would the world and America react? At a minimum, there would be massive protests. Large numbers of American citizens would take to the streets, denouncing the slaughter and insisting that their government reach a political settlement with the natives.

    Much of the rest of the world is outraged by Israel's assault on Gaza. But the United States -- the beacon of democracy, the champion of freedom, a nation founded on revolutionary anti-colonialism -- is applauding it.
    Gaza Israel Palestine | Salon

  9. #174
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    51,891

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasha View Post
    So let me get this straight: because Muslim countries participate in the wording of UN resolutions Israel has the right to defy them? And in case you haven't noticed the US has vetoed every recent UN effort to santion Israel.
    uh, show me where i said that. maybe i wasn't as clear as i would have liked but i really don't see how you can extrapolate that much from what i wrote and interpret it as that. you complain of manipulative US media but you're basically doing the same thing to my post.

    i said that, because they know they will get the majority, they write resolutions that are havily politicised, one-sided and biased. and that's hardly conducive to a negotiated peace, now is it? so in a way, muslim countries are shooting themselves in the foot and guaranteeing that israel will defy the resolutions, which then gives them the perfect excuse to say, see, israel is acting in defiance of international law, it's all their fault. (never mind hamas and palestinian terrorists, they're just martyrs fighting for a cause).
    what i said was, muslim countries are not blameless in perpetuating the conflict, but apparently you seem to have issues with the concept of nuances and the fact that the world isn't black and white.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasha View Post
    Also. In this most recent conflict alone: Israel has bombed a police station, a UN charter school, a University..where do you want Palestinians to put such institutions if not amongst civilians? Heaven forbid they should have police stations in their neighborhoods..

    Where do you live? In the US media Israel is portrayed without fail and without irony as the victims of this "conflict" and Palestinians are portrayed as totally at fault, the aggressors. Pictures of maimed and slaughtered Palestinian children do not exist in the US media world, while use of phosphorus weapons by Israel is routinely debunked depsite clear evidence to the contrary. The coverage is so lopsided I can't believe anyone could see it otherwise.
    i never said israel was the victim. again, show me in my post where i said that. really, i'm curious.

    i never defended israel's actions. i think it's pretty much a given that they often overreact and act like an aggressive occupying power. i was merely pointing out that just because that is the case, doesn't mean the other side is innocent either. and that there are a lot of interests in the muslim world that actually benefit from keeping the conflict alive.

    also, i don't live in the US. i've been living in europe for the better part of the past 18 years except for 4 years in canada, and i just recently moved to south america. i get my news from a variety of sources. oh, and i saw first hand during four years how texts gets written and negotiated at the UN. and sometimes it's a transparent and objective process in good faith, other times it's just manipulation and poitical maneuvering mascarading as concern for human rights.
    the same countries that go on and on about the poor palestinians, are then capable of turning around and opposing a resolution calling for an end to female genital mutilation because they think it's insulting to their culture and religious values, and defending iran's heinous crimes against its own people (stoning of women, marrying off child brides, beating up political opponents, etc) because they take issue with what they perceive as finger-pointing from the west.

    and by the way, i think israel should go back to the 1967 borders and suck it up and give back all that land, and that the only way to end the conflict is a two-state solution.
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  10. #175
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Back of Beyond
    Posts
    11,082

    Default

    Sputnik, you explicitly said you do not blame Israel for defying UN resolutions. I can't find any other reason, in what you wrote, for saying that other than Muslim countries were allowed to participate.

    you can't really blame israel for then defying these texts
    i never said israel was the victim

    Where did I accuse you of saying Israel is a victim? I challenged you for saying:

    the palestinian authority has become an expert on playing victim for the press
    Which is patently false. If they are such experts, then they would be portrayed as victims in the press and they are NOT.

    Quote Originally Posted by Glenn Greenwald
    this is not so much of a war as it is a completely one-sided massacre.


    Right on Glenn, right on.

  11. #176
    Elite Member Sweetie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Den of the roving cunty bitches
    Posts
    24,533

    Default

    This shit has been going on over there for thousands of years.

  12. #177
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    the 'holy land' should be blasted into a crater. It's such a festering boil or shit, always has been.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  13. #178
    Elite Member Aella's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    8,899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasha View Post

    Which is patently false. If they are such experts, then they would be portrayed as victims in the press and they are NOT.
    Now that's a bit America-centric, isn't it? From what I gather from this thread, the US media is pro-Israel (what a surprise-NOT), but don't assume it's the same everywhere in the world.
    "Remember to always be yourself. Unless you suck." - Joss Whedon

    "The only thing more expensive than education is ignorance." -Benjamin Franklin

  14. #179
    Elite Member sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    fellow traveller
    Posts
    51,891

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasha View Post
    Sputnik, you explicitly said you do not blame Israel for defying UN resolutions. I can't find any other reason, in what you wrote, for saying that other than Muslim countries were allowed to participate.
    once again, did you read the part about how resolutions are one-sided and only condemn israel and say nothing about palestinian terrorism? i'm bolding it this time to be sure you'll see it.
    have you ever been at a negotiation where people try to get something included condemning both sides and especially terrorist acts against israeli civiians only to be shot down and ignored because they know they have the votes to pass the text as is? or at most they'll make a token gesture and put in like half a line. like i said, i never said israel was the victim, but if these resolutions actually respected the UN Charter in the first place, they wouldn't be so biased, politicised and one-sided.
    do your research, becky.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sasha View Post
    Which is patently false. If they are such experts, then they would be portrayed as victims in the press and they are NOT.
    last time i checked, the US is not the whole world.
    check out the media in the rest of the world and you'll see there are more of them that do portray them as victims and don't tell both sides.
    last time i checked, self-determination does not mean the right to commit terrorism.

    also, the PLO are the masters of double-speak. they would say one thing to western media, and another to muslim media. to the west, they would play the game and claim they wanted a peaceful, two-state solution. to the muslim world, they would go on about the obliteration of the zionist state. arafat was especially good at this.
    and while i think palestine was better off when he was still around, i also can't deny that he was an expert at double-speak.
    I'm open to everything. When you start to criticise the times you live in, your time is over. - Karl Lagerfeld

  15. #180
    Elite Member ana-mish-ana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    3,200

    Default

    Its because of the holy land crap thats associated with it thats the main cause. Another thing to consider is that many commentators have commented that there will be a demographic change in Israel with Arabs becoming a larger minority and I cant not help think that will be a factor in future conflict.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Barack Obama's energy policy: listening when we disagree
    By Fluffy in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: November 14th, 2008, 03:15 PM
  2. Replies: 31
    Last Post: October 15th, 2008, 11:37 AM
  3. Grim proving ground for Barack Obama's housing policy
    By witchcurlgirl in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 27th, 2008, 01:07 PM
  4. Barack Obama and John McCain argue over policy towards Cuba
    By Grimmlok in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: May 21st, 2008, 10:38 AM
  5. Barack Obama aides attack Hillary Clinton on foreign policy
    By kingcap72 in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: March 7th, 2008, 02:45 PM

Posting Permissions

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