|
|
Post by Victor Meldrew on Jan 13, 2009 20:13:18 GMT
Now my queston. How many children, women and non combatants have been hit by the IDF.
Many, by all the news reports I've seen. However, you could also say that the comparison between the number of children, women and non combatants hit by the IDF and vice versa is proportional to the levels to which the combatants of each side hide behind their own civilians.
they hoped that by not allowing reporters in might keep the event quiet.
Surely you aren't serious? Do you really believe that any Country, let alone one as experienced militarily as Israel could possibly have thought they could go to war and keep it secret from the outside world? That notion is just totally unbelieveable.
I do agree with the remainder of your post though. By not allowing the press into Gaza, what we now have are reports from Gaza residents showing the same footage at hospitals etc. I think Israel may have got a much better press if they'd allowed trained journalists into the region. For example, I haven't yet seen any of these 'home made news reports' follow a Hamas group as they prepare to fire a riocket into Israel. That bit has been totally ignored by the locals, so in terms of news coverage it just hasn't been seen. I bet a few pro journos would have got a slant on that story if they'd been allowed in.
|
|
waldo
New Member
Do not lose your head
Posts: 21 
|
Post by waldo on Jan 13, 2009 20:14:00 GMT
Besides, Israel is trying to NOT to hit non-combatants, those that are, while unfortunate, are not sufficient cause to call off the eradication of Hamas.
you are reading selectively again NY, read Avi's posting again
|
|
waldo
New Member
Do not lose your head
Posts: 21
|
Post by waldo on Jan 13, 2009 20:27:45 GMT
Now my queston. How many children, women and non combatants have been hit by the IDF.
Many, by all the news reports I've seen. However, you could also say that the comparison between the number of children, women and non combatants hit by the IDF and vice versa is proportional to the levels to which the combatants of each side hide behind their own civilians.
that is the point that I made. see if you agree with me?
Hamas is a terrorist organization
Israel is a democratic country who is currently invading the Gaza. They have a responsibility to protect the civililian population. Hamas is using hostages and Israel is killing the hostages.
|
|
waldo
New Member
Do not lose your head
Posts: 21
|
Post by waldo on Jan 13, 2009 20:34:06 GMT
That bit has been totally ignored by the locals,
which is the way of warfare and propaganda. what is Israel hiding?
If killing an unarmed man and his family while they pose no threat in times of truce is considered OK, what is permitted in times of war to the IDF.
|
|
waldo
New Member
Do not lose your head
Posts: 21
|
Post by waldo on Jan 13, 2009 20:37:42 GMT
Surely you aren't serious? Do you really believe that any Country, let alone one as experienced militarily as Israel could possibly have thought they could go to war and keep it secret from the outside world? That notion is just totally unbelieveable.
Not keep the war secret, they have kept their actions the subject of debate. The Israel propaganda machine now competes against the Hamas propaganda machine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Victor Meldrew on Jan 13, 2009 20:55:28 GMT
Hamas is a terrorist organization
Israel is a democratic country who is currently invading the Gaza. They have a responsibility to protect the civililian population.
You're not serious are you? So what you are saying is that a terrorist organisation cannot be touched by any state enemy if they hide behind their own civilian population while waging their campaign? Well, we might as well give the whole world over to global terrorist groups then.
I love your description of Hamas as a terrorist organisation. So they are just a ragbag bunch of terrorists when it suits certain arguments, but they are also the democratically elected government of Gaza when it suits other arguments. Anyway, your comments are completely the wrong way round. As the elected government, representing the people of Gaza it is THEY who have the duty of protecting their citizens. They could do this quite easily, simply and swiftly. By agreeing to stop firing any more missiles into Israel. Have they not yet realised that every time they fire one of their "primitive" (aka lethal) rockets they are only killing the people on one side, and it's not the Israelis.
|
|
|
|
Post by cobblers on Jan 13, 2009 21:07:50 GMT
There is a valid argument that a majority of Gazans voted for the course of conduct pursued by Hamas - it's no secret what they stood for.
"So what you are saying is that a terrorist organisation cannot be touched by any state enemy if they hide behind their own civilian population while waging their campaign? Well, we might as well give the whole world over to global terrorist groups then."
The above is spot on
|
|
avieder
New Member
never lie
Posts: 8,871
|
Post by avieder on Jan 13, 2009 22:03:04 GMT
Hi Waldo #6: ".....i would expect your support to bring those who have used their modern weapons of indiscriminate destruction to Justice also. "
Your major error is in calling our weapons "indiscriminate" - No need for me to eplain....
We have warned of an imeinent bombing of a Hamas Headqater, Communication center, rocket storage and launching site. Now those people made their choice
Yes, I am rejoicing for the bonus annihilaion of a top leader of Hamas. The fate of his family is beyond our responsibility.
If you find this "a crime" I have nothing more to say to you
|
|
waldo
New Member
Do not lose your head
Posts: 21
|
Post by waldo on Jan 13, 2009 22:20:50 GMT
The point that I am making, which is supported by our good friend Avi and has not been contested by anyone yet is that Israel is willing to kill children, women and non fighters.
Israel has locked out news from the war zone and so I have no reason to believe that the behavior of the IDF is any different in a war situation than the situation reported below.
Quote Avi Eder
From: avi_eder
Re #360
I heard, on the radio, how we killed Nizar Rayyan.
About a year ago Israel discovered that a certain residential building in Gaza was used as a headquater of Hamas, and as a workshop for rockets and as a rocket launching base against Shderot. So, Israel scattered leaflets around that building telling the people to evacuate it because of an immenant Israeli attack.
When the fighter jets came the pilots saw that the rooftop was full of women and children. So, they made an about turn and that building was not bombed.
This time, again leaflets were scattered around Rayyan's house with similar warnings.
Again instead of evacuating the area, Rayyan and his family went and stood on the roof. Only this time the pilots recognised him (modern optical technology, you know) and directed the missile right on its target......
One less terrorist leader like those of your 7/7 in London. He and his family.
unquote
|
|
waldo
New Member
Do not lose your head
Posts: 21
|
Post by waldo on Jan 13, 2009 22:36:21 GMT
You know something Avi, i very nearly took that Avator. Good one:
One less terrorist leader like those of your 7/7 in London. He and his family.
No similarity Avi, In London the people were given a fair trial and sent to Jail. Please do not make parallels between your society and the rest of the world.
Using your logic, warn then kill regardless, the Germans could say that the Jews were warned by Hitler in "Mein Kampf", 20 years later they were still there so the Germans are not guilty.
NOT my logic Avi.
|
|
skyways
New Member
Am I not cool?
Posts: 281
|
Post by skyways on Jan 13, 2009 23:12:50 GMT
  Israel were right to keep the press out, most of them have an agenda and the pratts think they can wander round a battlefield at whim! Yup, and then complain and blame anybody but themselves when one of 'em get's hisself offed
|
|
|
|
Post by cobblers on Jan 13, 2009 23:34:26 GMT
Waldo, I'd be interested to know what you would do - were you in power in Israel - about thousands of rockets fired at civilians in your country?
|
|
|
|
Post by cobblers on Jan 13, 2009 23:34:58 GMT
My avatar is beginning to annoy me now
|
|
|
|
Post by bertrus2 on Jan 13, 2009 23:58:41 GMT
The UN Council for Human Rights has called for an end to the attacks on Gaza which have resulted in the deaths of more than 900 as well as to rocket attacks which have killed 4 Israelis. Also for an end to the blockade of Gaza by Israel. Also for the end to the occupation of Palestinian territory seized by Israel in 1967. Also to an investigation of the targeting by Israel of UN facilities, including schools.
As a member of the UN, Israel has an obligation to accept UN standards. It seems it prefers to live by the sword.
|
|
|
|
Post by bertrus2 on Jan 14, 2009 0:07:42 GMT
what you would do - were you in power in Israel - about thousands of rockets fired at civilians in your country?
What the Israeli government has done is to commit atrocities to terrorise the Palestinians into submission. What they might have done is a) observe the truce b)when they broke it, at least try to agree on another ceasefire c) lift the blockade of Gaza which was a condition of continuing the ceasefire.
|
|
|
|
Post by cobblers on Jan 14, 2009 0:24:05 GMT
The UN Council for Human Rights has no credibility. Israel has been criticised specifically more than 15 times in less than two years while other countries, notably Sudan, North Korea, Myanmar, Cambodia and Sudan have escaped direct criticism.
"January 2008, Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen criticized the actions of the Human Rights Council actions against Israel. "At the United Nations, censuring Israel has become something of a habit, while Hamas's terror is referred to in coded language or not at all. The Netherlands believes the record should be set straight, both in New York and at the Human Rights Council in Geneva," Verhagen said"
"January 2008 decree
The Council released a statement calling on Israel to stop its military operations in the Gaza Strip and to open the Strip's borders to allow the entry of food, fuel and medicine. The Council adopted the resolution by a vote of 30 to 1. 15 states abstained.
"Unfortunately, neither this resolution nor the current session addressed the role of both parties. It was regretful that the current draft resolution did not condemn the rocket attacks on Israeli civilians," said Canada's representative Terry Cormier, the lone voter against"
"The United States and Israel boycotted the session. US ambassador Warren Tichenor said the Council's unbalanced approach had "squandered its credibility" by failing to address continued rocket attacks against Israel. "Today's actions do nothing to help the Palestinian people, in whose name the supporters of this session claim to act," he said in a statement. "Supporters of a Palestinian state must avoid the kind of inflammatory rhetoric and actions that this session represents, which only stoke tensions and erode the chances for peace," he added.[2] "We believe that this council should deplore the fact that innocent civilians on both sides are suffering," Slovenian Ambassador Andrej Logar said on behalf of the seven EU states on the council."
"The council voted on 30 June 2006 to make a review of possible human rights abuses by Israel a permanent feature of every council session. The Council’s special rapporteur on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is its only expert mandate with no year of expiry. The resolution, which was sponsored by Organization of the Islamic Conference, passed by a vote of 29 to 12 with five abstentions. Human Rights Watch urged it to look at international human rights and humanitarian law violations committed by Palestinian armed groups as well. Human Rights Watch called on the Council to avoid the selectivity that discredited its predecessor and urged it to hold special sessions on other urgent situations, such as that in Darfur.[24"
"[edit] Resolutions on defamation of religions
In 1999, Pakistan brought before the CHR a resolution entitled 'Defamation of Islam'. The purpose of the resolution was to have the Commission condemn what the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) said was a worldwide campaign to defame Islam.[35]
Some members of the CHR put forward amendments that called for the protection of all religions. Consequently, the Commission adopted a resolution entitled 'Defamation of Religions'. The resolution expressed "deep concern at negative stereotyping of religions" and concern with the way the communications-media "incite acts of violence, xenophobia or related intolerance and discrimination towards Islam and any other religion."[36] Each year between 1999 and 2006, the CHR approved similar resolutions about protecting religions in general and about protecting Islam in particular.[37]
In 2005, the CHR, through the ministration of Yemen, introduced a resolution entitled 'Combating Defamation of Religions' to the General Assembly.[38] The resolution stressed "the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions, Islam and Muslims in particular, especially in human rights forums." The resolution urged states "to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and their value systems and to complement legal systems with intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance." 101 states voted in favour of the resolution.
In 2006 and thereafter, the UNHRC approved similar resolutions."
Current UNCHR members include:
Saudi Arabia
Nigeria
Malaysia
Russian Federation
China
Human rights my arse.
|
|
|
|
Post by cobblers on Jan 14, 2009 0:25:00 GMT
No Bertrus, what would you do about the rocket attacks?
|
|
|
|
Post by newyorker on Jan 14, 2009 0:26:48 GMT
The UN, a bunch of cannibals, with a couple of normal people (Israel, America, you get the picture) trying to decide on what is for dinner.
|
|
|
|
Post by Victor Meldrew on Jan 14, 2009 0:37:16 GMT
Bertrus, just out of interest, do you only get all your news reports from Press TV?
|
|
|
|
Post by newyorker on Jan 14, 2009 0:47:15 GMT
Who let that a*shole in here anyway?
|
|
