The U.N. Still Refuses to Condemn Terrorism

[walford]

http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=45977
By JOSHUA MURAVCHIK

THIS MONTH, the U.N. Security Council voted to condemn terrorism. The resolution was introduced by Russia, still grieving over the terrorist attack on a school in Beslan, and perhaps the unanimous vote will give it a measure of solace.

But the convoluted text and the dealings behind the scenes that were necessary to secure agreement on it offer cold comfort to anyone who cares about winning the war against terrorism. For what they reveal is that even after Beslan and after the train bombings in Spain and after 9/11, the United Nations still cannot bring itself to oppose terrorism unequivocally.

The reason for this failure is that the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which comprises 56 of the United Nations’ 191 members, defends terrorism as a right.

After the Security Council vote, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John C. Danforth tried to put the best face on the resolution. He said it “states very simply that the deliberate massacre of innocents is never justifiable in any cause. Never.”

But in fact it does not state this. Nor has any U.N. resolution ever stated it. The U.S. delegation tried to get such language into the resolution, but it was rebuffed by Algeria and Pakistan, the two OIC members currently sitting on the Security Council. (They have no veto, but the resolution’s sponsors were willing to water down the text in return for a unanimous vote.)

True, the final resolution condemns “all acts of terrorism irrespective of their motivation.” This sounds clear, but in the Alice-in-Wonderland lexicon of the United Nations, the term “acts of terrorism” does not mean what it seems.

For eight years now, a U.N. committee has labored to draft a “comprehensive convention on international terrorism.” It has been stalled since Day 1 on the issue of “defining” terrorism. But what is the mystery? At bottom everyone understands what terrorism is: the deliberate targeting of civilians. The Islamic Conference, however, has insisted that terrorism must be defined not by the nature of the act but by its purpose. In this view, any act done in the cause of “national liberation,” no matter how bestial or how random or defenseless the victims, cannot be considered terrorism.

This boils down to saying that terrorism on behalf of bad causes is bad, but terrorism on behalf of good causes is good. Obviously, anyone who takes such a position is not against terrorism at all — but only against bad causes.

The United States is not alone in failing to get the Islamic states to reconsider their pro-terrorism stance. After the 9/11 attacks on the United States, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan pushed to break the deadlock on the terrorism convention. He endorsed compromise language proscribing terrorism unambiguously while reaffirming the right of self-determination. But the Islamic Conference would not budge.

Far from giving ground on terrorism, the Islamic states have often gotten their way on the issue, with others giving in to them. As early as 1970, for instance, the U.N. General Assembly adopted a resolution “reaffirm(ing) ... the legitimacy of the struggle of the colonial peoples and peoples under alien domination to exercise their right to self-determination and independence by all the necessary means at their disposal.”

Everyone understood that this final phrase was code for terrorism. Similar formulas have been adopted repeatedly in the years since. Originally, the Western European states joined the United States in voting against such motions. But in each of the past few years the U.N. Commission on Human Rights has adopted such a resolution with regard to the Palestinian struggle against Israel, with almost all the European members voting in favor.

Danforth may feel that the U.S. position was vindicated in the new Security Council resolution, but that is not what OIC representatives think. As Pakistan’s envoy to the United Nations, Munir Akram, put it: “We ought not, in our desire to confront terrorism, erode the principle of the legitimacy of national resistance that we have upheld for 50 years.” Accordingly, he expressed satisfaction with the resolution: “It doesn’t open any new doors.”

Who is right? Hours of parsing the resolution won’t resolve that question. But in the end it does not matter. As long as the Islamic states resist any blanket condemnation of terrorism, we will remain a long way from ridding the Earth of its scourge. And the United Nations will be helpless to bring us any closer.

Joshua Muravchik is a resident scholar at American Enterprise Institute.

[username]

The reason i believe they rejected the resolution was because calling the incidents in question act's of terrorism is purley an opinion. In actual fact and incident being labeled a terrorist act is totally and utterly an opinion.

Lets take 9/11 as an example, For most US residents the incident was an act of terrorism, But for Al Qaeda it was an act of self defence. In no way can this be succesfully argued. Any reader who claims that 9/11 was an act of terrorism is allowed to. It's their opinion and they are entitled to it, this is allowed because you are free and able to voice your opinion on the incident. As you are allowed to do this the people on the other side of the situation are allowed to say it was an act of self defence this is thier opinion. You may not agree with them but it is their opinion.

The only thing you cannot disagree on is 2 planes flew into the WTC buildings and a number of people died because of that. Weather it was the worst day in the history or man, the best day in the history of man or anything in between is a matter of opinion. An opinion and nothing else.

[S'13]

.

Lets take 9/11 as an example, For most US residents the incident was an act of terrorism, But for Al Qaeda it was an act of self defence. In no way can this be succesfully argued. Any reader who claims that 9/11 was an act of terrorism is allowed to. It's their opinion and they are entitled to it, this is allowed because you are free and able to voice your opinion on the incident. As you are allowed to do this the people on the other side of the situation are allowed to say it was an act of self defence this is thier opinion. You may not agree with them but it is their opinion.


Terrorism is terrorism wheather you are the one applying it or wheather your the one affected by it.

Fact: Terrorism is the the calculated use of violence against civilians.

Fact: The attack on the WTC was deliberate while the WTC was a civilian target.


Put the two together...

[cut]

do you feel the same way about the terrorists that assasinated count Bernadotte?

[futurepilot2004]

.

Lets take 9/11 as an example, For most US residents the incident was an act of terrorism, But for Al Qaeda it was an act of self defence. In no way can this be succesfully argued. Any reader who claims that 9/11 was an act of terrorism is allowed to. It's their opinion and they are entitled to it, this is allowed because you are free and able to voice your opinion on the incident. As you are allowed to do this the people on the other side of the situation are allowed to say it was an act of self defence this is thier opinion. You may not agree with them but it is their opinion.


Terrorism is terrorism wheather you are the one applying it or wheather your the one affected by it.

Fact: Terrorism is the the calculated use of violence against civilians.

Fact: The attack on the WTC was deliberate while the WTC was a civilian target.


Put the two together...


So would you consider individuals firing ak47s at the Israeli army in Gaza are terrorists? If he was only firing at a soldier that would make him a freedom fighter right?
Its impossible to condemn all terrorism because it depends on what your views are.

[S'13]

do you feel the same way about the terrorists that assasinated count Bernadotte?

Yeah actually, the LEHI (known better as the Stern Gang) were terrorists and were desliked by most Jews living in the Land of Israel at the time, in fact when Stern was hanged, most Jews felt that a criminal was brought to justice.

P.S

Just to correct myself, Stern wasn't hanged but shot dead.

[cut]

do you feel the same way about the terrorists that assasinated count Bernadotte?

Yeah actually, the Lehi (known better as the Stern Gang) were terrorists and were desliked by most Jews living in the Land of Israel at the time, in fact when Stern was hanged, most Jews felt that a criminal was brought to justice.

good to know

although not all israelis share that opinion it seems

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/9c/120px-Stern-stamp.jpg

[machupichu]

username is absolutely correct. that kind of wise & impartial pov is totally absent from us policy. look at the forum users from the us: one could think those are all nationalistic warmongers without any bit sense of justice left. (well what would you expect from a military forum?!)

[S'13]

.

Lets take 9/11 as an example, For most US residents the incident was an act of terrorism, But for Al Qaeda it was an act of self defence. In no way can this be succesfully argued. Any reader who claims that 9/11 was an act of terrorism is allowed to. It's their opinion and they are entitled to it, this is allowed because you are free and able to voice your opinion on the incident. As you are allowed to do this the people on the other side of the situation are allowed to say it was an act of self defence this is thier opinion. You may not agree with them but it is their opinion.


Terrorism is terrorism wheather you are the one applying it or wheather your the one affected by it.

Fact: Terrorism is the the calculated use of violence against civilians.

Fact: The attack on the WTC was deliberate while the WTC was a civilian target.


Put the two together...


So would you consider individuals firing ak47s at the Israeli army in Gaza are terrorists?

I would consider that guerilla warfare.


If he was only firing at a soldier that would make him a freedom fighter right?

If he is a freedom fighter is a matter of opinion but if he only targets soldiers/military targets he would be considerd by me to be using guerilla warfare and wouldn't be a terrorist, the problem is that Palestinians mostly target civilians and so they are terrorists.


Its impossible to condemn all terrorism because it depends on what your views are.

It is not impossible because no matter what your views are, the murder of innocent civilians is always terrorism...

[S'13]

do you feel the same way about the terrorists that assasinated count Bernadotte?

Yeah actually, the Lehi (known better as the Stern Gang) were terrorists and were desliked by most Jews living in the Land of Israel at the time, in fact when Stern was hanged, most Jews felt that a criminal was brought to justice.

good to know

although not all israelis share that opinion it seems

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/9c/120px-Stern-stamp.jpg

True...

LEHI didn't always carry out terror attacks, it was also involved in fighting against Arab militant groups so to some degree the group did defend the Jews in the Land of Israel, however its part in carrying out terrorist attacks didn't do us any good and was a criminal act.

Some in Israel see in Stern a hero and some see him as a criminal, I see him as both.

[cut]

so you can understand why palestinians would think the same of hamas?

[futurepilot2004]

edit

[S'13]

so you see a terrorist as a hero. theres your ambiguity when it comes to condemning terrorists.



Stern's group fought armed Arab groups that targeted Jewish civilians, that is the Stern who I see as a hero.

The Stern who carried out terrorist attacks is a criminal in my eyes and the fact that he was stopped was good thing.

That is all I meant...

[cut]

double post

[cut]

Stern made an attempt to ally with the nazis, how can anyone in Israel call him a hero after that?

[S'13]

so you can understand why palestinians would think the same of hamas?

The Palestinians have a choice, they can use guerilla warfare if they like but they chose to attack civilians.

Hamas terrorists are not seen as heros by the Palestinians because they fight IDF soldiers but because they send people to blow themselves up in coffe shops and buses.

In the West Bank you will find hundreds, even thousends of posters glorifying people who murderd women and children by blowing themselves up, looking into the eyes of their victims before pulling the switch. I can't understand that... It's simpley sick.

[S'13]

Stern made an attempt to ally with the nazis, how can anyone in Israel call him a hero after that?

True that's is another reason why many disliked and still dislike him. I don't believe Stern was really aware of what the Nazis were planning but he did know as everyone knew, that Nazi Germany was a racist country that embitterd the lives of all Jews living under its rule.

[cut]

so you can understand why palestinians would think the same of hamas?

The Palestinians have a choice, they can use guerilla warfare if they like but they chose to attack civilians.

Hamas terrorists are not seen as heros by the Palestinians because they fight IDF soldiers but because they send people to blow themselves up in coffe shops and buses.


I'm not convinced that is true, but you are right about the glorifying of matyrs that is ****ed up, everyone knows that.

[Knutsen]

S'13 killing civilians the way palestinian terrorists do is a sick thing. But try tu put in their place, they are desperate and for many families their only chance of survival is the money they'll get when one of them becomes a suicide bomber.

Btw, would you consider the recent israeli operation in Yabila an act of terrorism?

[S'13]

so you can understand why palestinians would think the same of hamas?

The Palestinians have a choice, they can use guerilla warfare if they like but they chose to attack civilians.

Hamas terrorists are not seen as heros by the Palestinians because they fight IDF soldiers but because they send people to blow themselves up in coffe shops and buses.


I'm not convinced that is true, but you are right about the glorifying of matyrs that is f*** up, everyone knows that.

Lets agree that Palestinian groups prefer to target civilian than to actually engage in guerilla warfare. In the time of the mandate all Jewish undrground groups were engaged in guerilla warfare. Even the most fanatic gorup, the LEHI though it used terrorism was mostly engaged in guerilla warfare, something which I can't say about the Palestinians.

[S'13]

But try tu put in their place, they are desperate and for many families their only chance of survival is the money they'll get when one of them becomes a suicide bomber

There are plenty of poor and starving people in this world, do you see them blowing themselves on buses and in coffe shops?

They don't do it for the money, they do it for the glory.



Btw, would you consider the recent israeli operation in Yabila an act of terrorism?

No, since it was aimed at targeting terrorists.

[machupichu]

so you can understand why palestinians would think the same of hamas?
The Palestinians have a choice, they can use guerilla warfare if they like but they chose to attack civilians.
guerilla warfare means hit&run, right? do you think tha terrain is suited for that?

[Knutsen]

I know it was aimed at terrorists but such a loss of innocent lives i would consider it to be terrorism. I mean , you can't engage such a risk to kill a few terrorists. With actions like that the IDF is putting the lives of innocents on a secondary role and in my opinion that is terrorism.

For example in Spain ETA sometimes bombs military barracks (for them is a military objective) without caring about civilian casualties. In my opinion both ETA bombings and the operation of YAbila are the same thing.

[cut]

so you can understand why palestinians would think the same of hamas?

The Palestinians have a choice, they can use guerilla warfare if they like but they chose to attack civilians.

Hamas terrorists are not seen as heros by the Palestinians because they fight IDF soldiers but because they send people to blow themselves up in coffe shops and buses.


I'm not convinced that is true, but you are right about the glorifying of matyrs that is f*** up, everyone knows that.

Lets agree that Palestinian groups prefer to target civilian than to actually engage in guerilla warfare. In the time of the mandate all Jewish undrground groups were engaged in guerilla warfare. Even the most fanatic gorup, the LEHI though it used terrorism was mostly engaged in guerilla warfare, something which I can't say about the Palestinians.

palestinian terrorist groups would much rather target the IDF if it actually had an effect, if it weren't for WW2 the british government would probably have retained it's mandate, I'm sure Lehi would have become more radical and desperate like palestinian groups by now. The thing is palestinians are messed up and it's much easier to classify terrorist groups elsewhere.

The problem with the UN is that it's inclusive not exclusive, which means that it has to be seen as fair as possible, even if it means dealing with despotic regimes. The way the UN looks at it is, that it is doing for the people that are usually not as messed up as the regime. Palestine though is visibly messed up on both counts, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be given a chance. Both Israel and Palestine say that the UN is agaisnt them, so at least claims of favouritism can be dismissed. :P

[Knutsen]

I agree with cut, the UN is a multinational organisation, that means they cannot take a clear side since it represents every country on earth.
But they do take part, for example on the Madrid bombings. There was a resolution approved by all members to condemn the bombings.
If the UN always said what the US and Israel think is right then it wouldn't be the UN anymore.

[Phil642]

Wich was the Jewish terrorist organisation that bombed the UK embassy in Jerusalem in the 40ties (100 deads mostly civilians)?

[Geezah]

Wich was the Jewish terrorist organisation that bombed the UK embassy in Jerusalem in the 40ties (100 deads mostly civilians)?

Do you mean the King David hotel?

[IDFM203]

Both Israel and Palestine say that the UN is agaisnt them, so at least claims of favouritism can be dismissed. :Pahh? Every one claims all sorts of things, however a real case (as I have made to you in the past) can be made to PROVE that in Israels case indeed the UN has a clear disproportionate and unfair negativity towards it, however I cant see any such case to back up any supposed Pali claims.

BTW when have the Plais cliamed that the UN was against them? I know they say the U.S. but I don’t believe they have said the UN (and again even if they had, I don’t think they have a case and certainly not like Israel legitimately has)

In fact if anything, the Palis and those that support them have almost "hijacked" the UN for thier own cause which conincides with most of the Arab cause against the very existence of Israel etc...at a detriment to a whole host of other conflicts and needs of other nations and regions around the world that gets negelgted or doesnt get nowhere near enough attention as is needed simply due to the disproportionate amount of time the UN spends on the Pali's and Arabs behalf against Israel :roll:


Shalom :D

[Knutsen]

IDF, i hope you don't expect the UN to say nothing about Israel breaking international laws and agreements.
Great piece of victimist propaganda. Good work!

[IDFM203]

IDF, i hope you don't expect the UN to say nothing about Israel breaking international laws and agreements.
Great piece of victimist propaganda. Good work!Before I even attempt to get into it here with you, let me ask you two questions....who do you think was the author of most of those UN resolutions against Israel?

How many resolutions have been passed or written solely against any Arab state or terrorists organization in the context of the Israeli/Arab conflict?

I think if you start to research that you will have a better understanding of where I am coming from as well as having a REAL understanding of what my post before this one meant ;)

P.S. I never cired victom here, I am simply stating a fact with my last post and it has nothing to do with any supposed "victimist Propaganda" :roll:

Shalom :D

[walford]

Warfare: a forcible means to change another government's policy [such as continuing to live in freedom or dominate the world].

Guerilla: a neutral term for someone who operates in small bands attacking troops, police, and government officials. They also attack infrastructure [rather than the civilians themselves] such as bridges, power plants, fuel storage, factories, etc. in order to distrupt civilian life. Guerillas may be trying to remove an occupying force or they may instead be trying to remove a democracy in order to install a dictatorship.

Groups that use guerilla tactics can concievably be negotiated with and allowed a voice in a future government.

Terrorist: deliberately targets civilians in order to demoralize them to the point that whatever policy that the terrorists oppose [such as the continued survival as the state of Israel] is seen as 'not worth it.' The more savage the manner of killing the civilians, the better. Targeting women and children is especially desirable. Freedom is never an objective for terrorists. Their aim is always to install a totalitarian society.

Terrorists cannot be negotiated with because for them it is a zero-sum game. Either they totally win or totally lose. They do not wish to become part of a civilized society. There is no living in peace with terrorists.
Here is my offering on how to deal with the terrorist problem in Israel:
http://utopia-unmasked.us/ArabIsraeli.htm

[S'13]

guerilla warfare means hit&run, right? do you think tha terrain is suited for that?

Guerilla warfare means many things:

Attacking military targets (bases, positions, convoys, patrols and so on), sabotage of enemy infrastructure. All the things that a small militia is capable of doing while not attacking civilians.

This sort of warfare was conducted against the British by Jewish militias very often in the Land of Israel.

[S'13]

palestinian terrorist groups would much rather target the IDF if it actually had an effect

How do you know? Palestinian groups never really made an effort to use guerilla warfare...


if it weren't for WW2 the british government would probably have retained it's mandate, I'm sure Lehi would have become more radical and desperate like palestinian groups by now.

Actually all of the Jewish militias (apart from the LEHI) decided to not attack British forces in Palestine at the time of WW2 (many men from the Haganah even joined the British army). It was only after the end of WW2 that the groups began to step up attacks against British military targets.

[S'13]

Wich was the Jewish terrorist organisation that bombed the UK embassy in Jerusalem in the 40ties (100 deads mostly civilians)?

That wasn't an attack on an embassy, get your facts straight.
The building was base for the the military command and a branch of the Criminal Investigation Division (a clear military target), the Irgun was the group which carried out the attack.

[GrimReaper]

Wich was the Jewish terrorist organisation that bombed the UK embassy in Jerusalem in the 40ties (100 deads mostly civilians)?

That wasn't an attack on an embassy, get your facts straight.
The building was base for the the military command and a branch of the Criminal Investigation Division (a clear military target), the Irgun was the group which carried out the attack.
Not only that, it should be mentioned that they warned everyone to leave half an hour before the blast, but the warning was disregarded.

[S'13]

I know it was aimed at terrorists but such a loss of innocent lives i would consider it to be terrorism.


Can you even give me the ratio of civilian and terrorist casualties? You do know that terrorists don't wear uniforms, right? So it's not that hard to add them to the body count of "innocent civilians" who died in IDF operations.
You have to understand that in war there are civilians who will be killed by mistake, but that isn't terrorism, that is war. And this war is forced upon us by the Palestinian terrorists.


With actions like that the IDF is putting the lives of innocents on a secondary role and in my opinion that is terrorism.

And without operations like this the IDF is putting the lives of Israeli civilians on a secondary role, and the IDF is there to protect Israeli civilians. Carrying out these operations is self defense not terrorism. If this is your view of what terrorism is then you don't know what's the defenition of terrorism.


For example in Spain ETA sometimes bombs military barracks (for them is a military objective) without caring about civilian casualties.

Well when a militia destroyes a military target and civilians get hurt that is to me the same as when an army bombs a military target and there are civilians who also get hurt. Civilian casualties are inavoidable in war.

[Knutsen]

And without operations like this the IDF is putting the lives of Israeli civilians on a secondary role, and the IDF is there to protect Israeli civilians

I don't think Yabaila was such an important thing to do to protect israeli civilians. And we see the results, at least 35 children killed (and they can't be mistaken for terrorists).


And this war is forced upon us by the Palestinian terrorists.

Palestinian: And this war is forced upon us by the IDF.
This is a never ending story. A vicious circle , 'if you **** me, i'll **** you harder', which turns into a 'i'll **** you even harder'.
Blaming palestinians for the situation is as stupid as blaming israelis.

[S'13]

I don't think Yabaila was such an important thing to do to protect israeli civilians.


You don't think that it was such an importent thing? Tell that to the people who are been hit by rockets fired from Jabalia on a daily basis.


And we see the results, at least 35 children killed (and they can't be mistaken for terrorists).

Is the defenition of a chiled by the source which provided the numbers someone who is under 18?

If so then I can tell you that there are plenty of of 16 year olds (and younger) who take part in terrorist activity...


Palestinian: And this war is forced upon us by the IDF.

No actually... If you ask the people from Hamas they will tell that their war is all about destroying Israel.

Have a nice day.

[Knutsen]

All palestinians are not Hamas. So according to you palestinians don't want to live in peace, only want to destroy Israel......
This poor granny whose house has been destroyed by the wall of shame doesn't weant to live in peace, only destroy israel....


29 September 2004

Abed Al Fatah Madi, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a missile by Israeli forces during a raid.

30 September 2004

Mohammad Al Shalhah, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by Israeli forces during a raid.

Mohammed Khaled Raihan, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Ziad 'Alaa' Shams, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Mohammed Ra'fat al-Reef, 17,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Mo'taz 'Abdul Malek al-Bakri, 17,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Nidal Sa'id al-Beeshawi, 16,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Sultan Sa'id al-Beeshawi, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Ahmed 'Adnan al-Bora'ei, 16,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Diaa' al-Din Ahmed al-Kahlout, 17,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Yahia Akram Hammad, 16,
of Jabalia,
killed by Israeli forces during a raid.

Tamer 'Abdul 'Aziz Abu Eshkayan, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by Israeli forces during a raid.

Sa'ed Mohammed Hiddu Abu al-'Eish, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a bullet to the chest by Israeli forces during a raid.

Ahmed Ibrahim 'Abdul Fattah Madi, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed when an electricity tower fell on a number of children during a demolishing by Israeli forces bulldozers.

Hani Sa'id Mushtaha, 17,
of Jabalia,
died of bullet injuries to the head sustained the night before by Israeli forces during a raid.

3 October 2004

Islam Nader Dweidar, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by Israeli forces while baking bread in her garden.

Mohammed D'iab al-Najjar, 13,
of Jabalia,
died of bullet injuries to the head sustained two nights prior by Israeli forces during a raid.

Saber Ibrahim 'Asaliya, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by Israeli forces by a bullet to the back while trying to escape during a raid.

Nidal Muhsen al-Madhoun, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a bullet to the heart by Israeli forces during a raid.





I guess the 14 year old boy baking bread is a real threat for the security of Israel. I guess these teenagers were a real danger for israeli merkavas....

[Knutsen]

If you ask an ultra orthodox jew he will tell you to destroy all Palestinians.

[S'13]

All palestinians are not Hamas.

True however a lot of the Palestinian public supports Hamas and it is the strongest orginization there...


So according to you palestinians don't want to live in peace, only want to destroy Israel......

Not all of them, the problem is that most of them support groups which do.


This poor granny whose house has been destroyed by the wall of shame doesn't weant to live in peace, only destroy israel....

Maybe, what's for sure is that she is a victim of those who do want to destroy Israel since we wouldn't need to build the barier if it wasn't for them.


guess the 14 year old boy baking bread is a real threat for the security of Israel. I guess these teenagers were a real danger for israeli merkavas....

Heard of Hussam Abdu?
http://backspin.typepad.com/backspin/2004/03/14year_old_terr.html

Yeah, he's a teenager so he must be harmless... :roll:

[S'13]

If you ask an ultra orthodox jew he will tell you to destroy all Palestinians.

Actually there are Ultra Orthodox Jews who don't believe Israel should exist... rofl

[Phil642]

Wich was the Jewish terrorist organisation that bombed the UK embassy in Jerusalem in the 40ties (100 deads mostly civilians)?

That wasn't an attack on an embassy, get your facts straight.
The building was base for the the military command and a branch of the Criminal Investigation Division (a clear military target), the Irgun was the group which carried out the attack.
Not only that, it should be mentioned that they warned everyone to leave half an hour before the blast, but the warning was disregarded.

I was looking for the terrorist organisation Irgun, thanks, so i could find the story on the web: Bombing of The King David Hotel (http://www.etzel.org.il/english/ac10.htm)

[Knutsen]

Maybe, what's for sure is that she is a victim of those who do want to destroy Israel since we wouldn't need to build the barier if it wasn't for them.

:cantbeli: Blaming palestinians for the actions you commit´.... good strategy


Not all of them, the problem is that most of them support groups which do.
It's their last hope for their survival. I can assure you if i were in their situation i would support Hamas.

[Geezah]

All palestinians are not Hamas. So according to you palestinians don't want to live in peace, only want to destroy Israel......
This poor granny whose house has been destroyed by the wall of shame doesn't weant to live in peace, only destroy israel....


29 September 2004

Abed Al Fatah Madi, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a missile by Israeli forces during a raid.

30 September 2004

Mohammad Al Shalhah, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by Israeli forces during a raid.

Mohammed Khaled Raihan, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Ziad 'Alaa' Shams, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Mohammed Ra'fat al-Reef, 17,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Mo'taz 'Abdul Malek al-Bakri, 17,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Nidal Sa'id al-Beeshawi, 16,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Sultan Sa'id al-Beeshawi, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Ahmed 'Adnan al-Bora'ei, 16,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Diaa' al-Din Ahmed al-Kahlout, 17,
of Jabalia,
killed by a shell fired by an Israeli tank near an UNRWA school.

Yahia Akram Hammad, 16,
of Jabalia,
killed by Israeli forces during a raid.

Tamer 'Abdul 'Aziz Abu Eshkayan, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by Israeli forces during a raid.

Sa'ed Mohammed Hiddu Abu al-'Eish, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a bullet to the chest by Israeli forces during a raid.

Ahmed Ibrahim 'Abdul Fattah Madi, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed when an electricity tower fell on a number of children during a demolishing by Israeli forces bulldozers.

Hani Sa'id Mushtaha, 17,
of Jabalia,
died of bullet injuries to the head sustained the night before by Israeli forces during a raid.

3 October 2004

Islam Nader Dweidar, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by Israeli forces while baking bread in her garden.

Mohammed D'iab al-Najjar, 13,
of Jabalia,
died of bullet injuries to the head sustained two nights prior by Israeli forces during a raid.

Saber Ibrahim 'Asaliya, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by Israeli forces by a bullet to the back while trying to escape during a raid.

Nidal Muhsen al-Madhoun, 14,
of Jabalia,
killed by a bullet to the heart by Israeli forces during a raid.





I guess the 14 year old boy baking bread is a real threat for the security of Israel. I guess these teenagers were a real danger for israeli merkavas....

Any chance you could list the Israeli civilian deaths at the hands of the Palestinians?
While the Israeli's have an army and are prepared to fight soldier to soldier, the Palestinians choose not to conduct warfare this way, instead they see it as ok to attack soft targets!
I think it's all very good to list off the innocent Palestinians that have been killed during this conflict but please don't make it seem so one sided!

[GrimReaper]

Knutsen, may I ask what country are you from/live in?

[machupichu]

guerilla warfare means hit&run, right? do you think tha terrain is suited for that?
Guerilla warfare means many things:
Attacking military targets (bases, positions, convoys, patrols and so on), sabotage of enemy infrastructure. All the things that a small militia is capable of doing while not attacking civilians.
This sort of warfare was conducted against the British by Jewish militias very often in the Land of Israel.
WAKE UP PLEASE!
israel has not such classic infrastructure and terrain to work with (classic) guerilla tactics. GIVE ME ONE example where that textbook guerilla works in a modern society. todays armies capabilities have made those tactics piece of history. its simply put unpracticable. dont be so lame and ask for the totally outdated hit&run tactics in the case of pal. vs israel. thats a sanctimonious attempt for pushing the wrong vs right, good vs evil cliche. its not THAT easy!!

[IDFM203]

Palestinian: And this war is forced upon us by the IDF.
This is a never ending story. A vicious circle , 'if you f*** me, i'll f*** you harder', which turns into a 'i'll f*** you even harder'.
Since you didn’t bother to answer my other two questions, how about you answer the following one ;)


So you say its a vicious circle, ahh? So what if today Israel stopped all firing completely, not a single shot in self-defense or defensively in a offensive manner, thus ending completely our part of the "circle" of violence, would the Palis do the same? Would they stop suicide bombings? Shootings at Israelis towns and cities? Etc….

You see I totally dispute this notion of a “circle” (or a cycle) of violence but like before, I have decided not to even get into it in detail but merely to ask a few questions so well these conversations can be a bit shorter then the last ones I had on this a while ago (not with you but with others like you ;)


Shalom :D

[Kilgor]

terrorism is the deliberate targeting of civilians for a politican goal. Just like the world trade centre.

The targeting of the pentagon, whilst terrible is probably not in the same catagory as you could classify it as a military target.

There is NO excuse for the deliberate targeting of civilians. Blowing yourself up in a cafe or train carrage is just pure terrorism and the result is only produce fear and political change.

[machupichu]

terrorism is the deliberate targeting of civilians for a politican goal. Just like the world trade centre.

The targeting of the pentagon, whilst terrible is probably not in the same catagory as you could classify it as a military target.

There is NO excuse for the deliberate targeting of civilians. Blowing yourself up in a cafe or train carrage is just pure terrorism and the result is only produce fear and political change.
then hiroshima was an act of terrorism too?

[Kilgor]

what about berlin or london ?

the rules were a bit different in ww2.

[machupichu]

what about berlin or london ?
the rules were a bit different in ww2.
you DO know the difference between so called "carpet bombing", that had it military sense, and the immediate destruction of two big cities, dont you?

[Kilgor]

when you have fleets of over 1000 bombers pounding a city, there isnt much different between that and one real big bomb.

take a look at dresden for example. Or the firebombing of tokyo.

Both the cities hit by the A-bomb were considered to be military cities, and japan was offered surrender before the blasts.

But these arguements go around in circles
:roll:

[machupichu]

when you have fleets of over 1000 bombers pounding a city, there isnt much different between that and one real big bomb.

take a look at dresden for example. Or the firebombing of tokyo.

Both the cities hit by the A-bomb were considered to be military cities, and japan was offered surrender before the blasts.
you must be american

[Dennis G]

An Islamic Conference? :bash: Imagine the hubbub if a group of countries established a Christian Conference within the UN... Either you are with us or against us. I guess we know which side the UN is on, (AND IT AIN'T OURS!)

[Raistlin]

I know it was aimed at terrorists but such a loss of innocent lives i would consider it to be terrorism. I mean , you can't engage such a risk to kill a few terrorists. With actions like that the IDF is putting the lives of innocents on a secondary role and in my opinion that is terrorism.
Don't forget that fighting terrorism IS synonimous to saving lifes. In bigger view, you prevent the death of innocent people (at least 1) by killing murderers and other innocent people (at least 1). Is it worth it? Oh, it's a subject to a big philosphical debate which is related to Utilitarianism, Nationalism and such.

The thing is, terrorism doesn't have such a debate. They kill innocent people for purely political purpose, not to save other innocent people.


palestinian terrorist groups would much rather target the IDF if it actually had an effect,
So? I would rather prefer not to rob a bank if I was born smarter and therefore could make a lot of money by myself...


I'm sure Lehi would have become more radical and desperate like palestinian groups by now.
I'm glad you're so sure. :roll:


It's their last hope for their survival.
Yeah, right, because it's the official policy of Israeli government to kill all Palestinians :roll:

[Tikvah]

The thing is, terrorism doesn't have such a debate. They kill innocent people for purely political purpose, not to save other innocent people.

You give them too much credit, Raistlin. If this were about politics, the violence would have ended long ago, but it isn't and it hasn't. The arab terrorists' sole purpose and goal is to wipe Israel and its' people off the face of this earth. If this were only about getting back land, it would have ended when Israel offered it to them. Even when Ehud Barak (I believe it was him) offered the Arab's almost all of the territories in exchange for peace, they refused it.

[Raistlin]

The arab terrorists' sole purpose and goal is to wipe Israel and its' people off the face of this earth.
My point was made about terrorism in general since the debate is about an universal definition of terrorism.

[Tikvah]

The arab terrorists' sole purpose and goal is to wipe Israel and its' people off the face of this earth.
My point was made about terrorism in general since the debate is about an universal definition of terrorism.

Ah, ok. My point still stands ;) , but I had thought you were referring to those groups of terrorists since it was a post about the IDF and Arab terrorism that you were responding to. And I only half agree with you on that general statement ;) .

[Raistlin]

And the other half...?

[walford]

when you have fleets of over 1000 bombers pounding a city, there isnt much different between that and one real big bomb.
take a look at dresden for example. Or the firebombing of tokyo.
Both the cities hit by the A-bomb were considered to be military cities, and japan was offered surrender before the blasts.
The firebomings of Dresden and Tokyo occurred over 2 generations ago. Countries with limited government would not indulge in such tactics again.

If we want to go over brutal methods of warfare from the past that will not be used anymore, we could argue about how terrible the sacking of Carthage was.

The main reason that total war tactics such as bombing entire cities will not be used anymore is that THEY DON'T WORK. It is well known that German factory production was not significantly affected even by 'strategic bombing.' What really put a bite in German warfighting ability was the effective cut-off of fuel.

Furthermore, Goebbels was able to point to the heavy bombing raids as proof that the Allies were trying to destroy the entire German people -- rather than just the NAZI regime. That's why they kept fighting long after there was any chance of them winning the war.

There is simply no moral equivalence between the methods used by HAMAS and the IDF responses. A suicide bombing occurs in a disco or pizzeria. Young men and women are killed. Then a diorama with fake body parts is set up so Palestinian mothers can bring their children to celebrate the results.

Afterward the people who sent the suicide bombers are hiding amongst their own women and children, using the decency of their enemies as a shield when they have none. They are HOPING that Palestinian civilians are killed if the IDF strikes at them. Then they can count on people from the West leaking milk from their nipples while they lament the terrible loss of life because of Israeli 'aggression.'

I blame the people in the West who make excuses for the terrorists MORE than the terrorists themselves. The apologists are the ones who are giving the terrorists the idea that their tactics and their cause is legitimate.

[machupichu]

walford you are crazy. do you really believe that israel is all right and the arabs are all wrong? the difference is that internationally israel is backed up WITHOUT any good reason, just for beeing a jewish state. the arabs dont have any important supporter, they feel discriminated (they are!). if not for the EU to stand up from time to time, nobody seems to care about the justice. its all about israel. the EU is the only one who tries to have a objective POV.

[walford]

What a devastating refutation. All of the assertions that I made have been masterfully analyzed and picked apart to the bone. I will now cry myself to sleep, knowing that such a superior intellect exists.

[machupichu]

What a devastating refutation. All of the assertions that I made have been masterfully analyzed and picked apart to the bone. I will now cry myself to sleep, knowing that such a superior intellect exists.
your biased statements deserve no better treatment. make them more objective and well-grounded and you will recieve constructive replies.

[walford]

Whereas your responses are so much more objective and rational:

strange that only the us&brits had those TOP SECRET infos. no other country in this world thought that saddam was a threat to the usa. dont you think its strange? and dont forget to tell us about what kerry said about "giving away sec....". i suggest you apologize for beeing so goddamn stupid.

youre a native english speaker and understood so little of that debate? my guess is you didnt even watch it, you just snapped that fragment out of some newspaper ala SUN of guardian (canadian counterparts).
YOURE DISQUALIFIED. SIT AND QUIT!

the impression i got is that (mostly american) people see bush as soldier and kerry as wussy. cant those people see that kerry already proved who the REAL soldier is? is beeing incautious and overhasty nowadays an adornment in leadership? THIS IS NO VIDEOGAME MORONS!

yeah its probably not really exact, but the plainness speaks for itself - i guess theres no doubt that the rest of the world hates mr bush and prefers a president XY.

you are stupid.
was clinton liked? he was not loved, but he was liked because, as i said before, he seemed to respect international laws AND (most important) opinions. bush acts and sounds like a nationalistic egomaniac who would break every law there is in order to have profit for his country. that is NOT how it works in a global world. one has to obey the rules, even the superpowers. isolate america from world trade and it would become a dump of sh** in no time.

how could YOU know? do those 3 military friends of yours like bush too?
lets face it: bush is hated all over the world because he is (and ACTS!) like a nationalist. clinton for example made the impression of beeing interested in international policy without the urge of dominating it.
another thing is, bush looks like an unconvincable cowboy idiot to most of those voters in other countries. "america first", all that crap wont get him any friends in the world. the us people seem to love such an sycophant attitude, but in will harm americas global position in the long run. (already did)

username is absolutely correct. that kind of wise & impartial pov is totally absent from us policy. look at the forum users from the us: one could think those are all nationalistic warmongers without any bit sense of justice left. (well what would you expect from a military forum?!)

saragossa? meriva? generalmotors? strike? anyone? seems like youre not very interested in economics nor politics.

loco you are nothing but a clown. Can't Believe It
your little anecdotes are absolutely not unique, everyone in europe knows it. its called globalization. like it or hate it. (read about current GM and Opel affair)
but your attitude ("spain would be strong all by itself") is overly optimistic and far from reality in an extent that is already insulting to the people of europe (net payers) who pumped HUNDRET OF BILLIONS of cash over the years into your country. you should for f**** gods sake acknowledge the facts and stop fantasizing in that idiotic dream world of yours. its HAS pos. effects for all, thats understood, BUT the balance IS HIGHLY lopsided) atm (who knows what the future brings?).
noone hates spain, its very popular by everyone in europe and the spaniards are liked as well, but what you are spreading here is so complete nonsense and born out of ignorance, misinterpretation and patriotism.

then you call economic sanctions an act of eggression too? thats some undifferentiated dumb logic.

spain was not a 3rd rate country if you compare it to african countries, thats sure. BUT it was hardly a so called "newly industrializing country", so you can name it a 2.5
its not like japan&germany, who developed all by themselfes - espania needed the foreign money VERY badly. if not you maybe would work on a arid corn field today, so calm your horses and be thankful for what the 1st rates gave you.

hehe foxtrot you are so smart ROFL

did you know that "the only thing before WW2 standing between" Spain "becoming a little odessa was" france?????
hahaha omg, those history guessing is complete nonsense.

fact is: there has NEVER BEEN a plan of anyone going to war with germany (western europe) after ww2. all the rest is just dumb guessing. and thats what you do. Can't Believe It

another fact is: germany nowadays has EXCELLENT relationship to russia. those didnt come over night, even if you think so - how can russia like germany after ww2 you ask. how little you know of the world little spanish boy.

and PLEASE TELL ME about your great economic skills, id LOVE seeing your specialised knowledge in the matter.
http://www.angelfire.com/space/usenet/

[machupichu]

rofl rofl rofl

[walford]

http://www.carlasceramics.com/ceramic-images/Twilly-Troll.jpg

[machupichu]

i knew you still play with toys

[walford]

http://www.saunalahti.fi/sakarit/kerro-lisaa/troll.jpg

[machupichu]

whats your age walford?

[Kilgor]

machupichu wrote:


strange that only the us&brits had those TOP SECRET infos. no other country in this world thought that saddam was a threat to the usa. dont you think its strange? and dont forget to tell us about what kerry said about "giving away sec....". i suggest you apologize for beeing so goddamn stupid.


I thought the french and german's had some of the most damming intelligence when it came to saddams WMD programs ...

It was just the US and Uk, you really gotta check your facts before ranting.

[Sayeret]

Knutson wrote:
I know it was aimed at terrorists but such a loss of innocent lives i would consider it to be terrorism. I mean , you can't engage such a risk to kill a few terrorists. With actions like that the IDF is putting the lives of innocents on a secondary role and in my opinion that is terrorism.

How is carrying out an operation to defend your country an act of terrorism if civilians are accidently killed. Do you think Israel would waste money on tear gas and rubber bullets if they didn't care about preserving civilian life. You know that the Palestinian civilians live in the same areas as the Palestinian terrorists and its not like the Palestinian terrorists live in their own little area of the city by themselves away from all the other civilians?


For example in Spain ETA sometimes bombs military barracks (for them is a military objective) without caring about civilian casualties. In my opinion both ETA bombings and the operation of YAbila are the same thing.

With this view you could consider the US, Spain, England, China, Japan, and about any other country that's been to war as a terrorist state. Sometimes civilians are killed in war, its not like civilians live far away from the terrorists who run around in uniforms in their terrorist bases. Theres a difference between purposely blowing up a civilians and accidently killing them.


IDF, i hope you don't expect the UN to say nothing about Israel breaking international laws and agreements.
Great piece of victimist propaganda. Good work!

Yeah, I know killing terrorist leaders is so much worse than blowing up civilians with suicide bombers. :cantbeli: :cantbeli:


I don't think Yabaila was such an important thing to do to protect israeli civilians. And we see the results, at least 35 children killed (and they can't be mistaken for terrorists).

Maybe it's not important to you but it is to Israelis being killed and wounded by Palestinian terrorists it is. Someone could say the same thing about the Al Qaeda attacking Spain but that doesn't make it true.


Palestinian: And this war is forced upon us by the IDF.
This is a never ending story. A vicious circle , 'if you f*** me, i'll f*** you harder', which turns into a 'i'll f*** you even harder'.
Blaming palestinians for the situation is as stupid as blaming israelis.

I can't find the exact details but I remember that there were about three suicide bombings prior to the one in Netanya during Passover which killed 30 people which Israel didn't retaliate to. The Palestinian terrorists kept carrying out attacks but Israel didn't retaliate and eventually did but that was only after a large amount of attacks. It's not a cycle of violence because the Palestinians are trying to attack Israel regardless of the operations they carry out. Everyday the Palestinians try to sneak suicide bombers into Israel but they fail in part because the military and police guarding the border, the military operations being carried out against Hamas, and intelligence. Arresting terrorists in Spain is much different from Gaza or the West Bank. If you have some kind of secret solution to reducing civilian casalties to zero then share but right now it sounds like your just critisizing Israel because you can.


I guess the 14 year old boy baking bread is a real threat for the security of Israel. I guess these teenagers were a real danger for israeli merkavas....

Are you going to call NATO a terrorist group because it has accidently killed civilians?


NATO has repeatedly denied that it deliberately attacks non-military buildings and insists that all possible precautions are taken to avoid civilian casualties. Serb officials put the death toll from the following incidents, most of which but not all NATO acknowledges as errors, at more than 460. Overall, they say, some 2,000 civilians have been killed since the start of the air campaign on March 24.

April 5 -- A 550-pound NATO bomb aimed at Yugoslav army barracks in Aleksinac in southern Serbia misses its target and lands in a residential area. Serbs put death toll at 17.
April 9 -- NATO hits homes near a telephone exchange in the Kosovo capital, Pristina. NATO said civilian casualties were possible but neither side provided a death toll.
April 12 -- A NATO pilot fires two missiles into a train crossing a bridge at Grdelicka Klisura in southern Serbia, killing 55 people, according to Belgrade. NATO insists the bridge, a key supply line for Yugoslav forces in Kosovo, was the target and that the pilot saw the train too late.
April 14 -- NATO bombs refugee convoys in the Djakovica region of south-east Kosovo, leaving 75 dead, according to Belgrade. NATO, without confirming the civilian toll, said it was targeting military vehicles but admitted hitting two convoys.
April 28 -- NATO, aiming for an army barracks in the Serb village of Surdulica (250 kms/150 miles south of Belgrade), bombs a residential area, leaving at least 20 civilians dead.
May 1 -- NATO bombs a bridge at Luzane near Pristina, killing 47 people aboard a bus which was travelling along it. NATO, without confirming the figure, admitted the following day having targetted the bridge without the intention of causing civilian casualties.
May 7 -- A NATO air raid hits central Nis in southeast Serbia, leaving at least 15 dead and 70 injured. NATO said its planes were aiming for a landing strip and a radio transmitter but that a cluster bomb had missed its mark.
May 8 -- NATO mistakenly attacks the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, killing three journalists. The United States and NATO said the intended target was a Yugoslav building with military use, but US maps used in the planning of the operation were old and marked the embassy at a previous address.
May 13 -- NATO bombs the village of Korisa, leaving 87 civilians dead according to the Serbs. The allies claim that the civilians were being used as "human shields" and that Korisa was a legitimate military target.
May 20 -- A Belgrade hospital is hit by a missile at around 1 -- 00 a.m., killing three patients. NATO attributes the accident to a missile which went astray during an attack on a nearby military barracks.
May 21 -- NATO bombs Istok prison in north-west Kosovo. Alliance officials insist the prison was being used as an assembly point for Serb forces in the province. Serbs say at least 100 inmates and a prison officer were killed.
May 22 -- NATO admits bombing by mistake positions of the Kosovo Liberation Army at Kosare, near the border with Albania. Sources close to the KLA say seven guerillas were killed and 15 injured.
May 30 -- NATO bombs a highway bridge at Varvarin in a daytime raid in central Serbia. The Serbs claim 11 people died while attempting to cross the bridge in their cars. NATO has not confirmed whether there were cars on the bridge and insists the bridge was a legitimate military garget.
May 31 -- Missiles strike a sanatorium at Surdulica, southern Serbia, killing at least 20 people, according to the Serb authorities. NATO says it successfully attacked a military barracks in the town but refuses to confirm, or categorically deny, hitting the hospital.
May 31 -- A NATO bomb aimed at a military compound strikes a four-storey apartment block in the town of Novi Pazar. NATO confirms one of its bombs went astray and landed in a residential area. Serb authorities report 23 dead.
1 June -- A NATO bomb landed in a residential neighbourhood in the Serbian town of Novi Pazar.

Is the Gulf war in 1991 now another unnecesarry operation done by a terrorist nations since in one incident 600-1,000 Iraqi civilians were killed when a bomb shelter they were in was accidently bombed?


If you ask an ultra orthodox jew he will tell you to destroy all Palestinians.

So how many Ultra Orthodox Jews do you know?


It's their last hope for their survival. I can assure you if i were in their situation i would support Hamas.

This is their last hope of surivival? Since when has Israel been carrying out genocide against the Palestinians? Apparently this violence being done by Hamas has hurt the Palestinians much more than it's helped.


Sixty leading Palestinian intellectuals and officials yesterday signed a prominent advertisement implicitly urging Palestinians not to escalate the cycle of violence by maintaining the strategy of suicide bombings

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0326-11.htm


Seventy prominent Palestinian politicians and intellectuals have warned their fellow nationals that violent retaliation against Israelis for the assassination of Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin will play into Ariel Sharon's hands and damage the independence struggle.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/03/26/1079939847301.html?from=storyrhs&oneclick=true

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1178260,00.html

[machupichu]

I thought the french and german's had some of the most damming intelligence when it came to saddams WMD programs ...
It was just the US and Uk, you really gotta check your facts before ranting.
thats exactly how far you can come with only undetailed information. anyway im surprised you heard of that european security informations at all. the truth is, the main informant of all the us "argumentation" came from the german BND, he was a political refugee from iraq. BUT the german bnd classified his data as HIGHLY unreliable and his motifs as dodgy. all that was in his record which was shared with the brits. of course it was a nice surprise when they realized that Bush&Co made those fishy infos the main arguments in their war.

so, who should check his facts now smartass?
:-*$

[Knutsen]

I'm tired of all this,Sayeret so i'l lonly answer to your survival post. Survival is not only a matter of genocide , survival lays on everyday actions, like when Israel gets access to most of the water, the wall destroys palestinian homes, the wall prevents terrorists to enter israel , we agree on that, but also prevents normal people to go to their jobs or go to school , and those actions sink palestinian economy and sink the only future these people could expect. That is a struggle for survival.

About the ultra orthodox jews, i know a few, and i can assure you most of those ultra orthodox jews are the most racist and genocidal wannabes i've ever met.


Yeah, I know killing terrorist leaders is so much worse than blowing up civilians with suicide bombers.
Only terrorist leaders die..............


And Geezah, when you say i reveal my side , i wouldn't doubt to post the deaths of israeli civilians but in this particular discussion we were talking about Jabaila. I posted that list cause S'13 was denying the killing of civilians. Next time someone denies palestinians kill civilians i'll be the first to post the list of dead israelis.

Btw, for those who think i'm a supporter of AlQaeda and the like. I'm not defending the palestinians , i'm denouncing the actions in my opinion the IDF does wrong.

[S'13]

:cantbeli: Blaming palestinians for the actions you commit´.... good strategy


Let me help you out since it is a bit hard for you to grasp what I'm telling you.

Terrorists from the West Bank enter the Green Line and murder Israeli civilians, I hope you understand this fact.

In order to stop terrorists from entering the Green Line we are building a barier, also with this barier we won't need to have as much IDF operations as we have today.

We wouldn't need to build a barier or operate inside the West Bank if there was no terrorism against our civilians.
It's very simple...


It's their last hope for their survival.

Strange since the reason they are suffering is their support for Hamas and other terrorist groups. If they want to survive and have a state they must stop using terrorism.

[S'13]

WAKE UP PLEASE!
israel has not such classic infrastructure and terrain to work with (classic) guerilla tactics. GIVE ME ONE example where that textbook guerilla works in a modern society. todays armies capabilities have made those tactics piece of history. its simply put unpracticable. dont be so lame and ask for the totally outdated hit&run tactics in the case of pal. vs israel. thats a sanctimonious attempt for pushing the wrong vs right, good vs evil cliche. its not THAT easy!!

Read about Hezballah tactics in S.Lebanon when fighting IDF forces, that was all guerilla warfare, the exception is the fact that they fired rockets at civilian towns.

The only ones who should wake up here are the people who think that a someone can gain anything by murdering inoccent women and childern.

[S'13]

About the ultra orthodox jews, i know a few, and i can assure you most of those ultra orthodox jews are the most racist and genocidal wannabes i've ever met.


True, there are fanatic Jews (big "surprise" :cantbeli: ) but can you give me more than one example of Jewish militais targeting Palestinian civilians in the last 5 years, and can you assure me that these kinds fanatics get the same support as Palestinian fanatics get? I as a Jew who actually lives in Israel can tell that the fanatics among us get very little support and that the state cracks down on almost all their activities...


I posted that list cause S'13 was denying the killing of civilians. Next time someone denies palestinians kill civilians i'll be the first to post the list of dead israelis.

You should really improve your reading comprehension :roll:

I never denied the fact that innocent civilians die in anti-terrorists operations.
However to be sure that every dead person that is displayed as a killed civilian is without a doubt a killed civilian is very naive.
Also to be sure that every teenager who dies in these operations is innocent simpley because of his age isn't just naive but idiotic (especialy since this isn't a war with another army but a war against terrorist groups which use children).

You also must understand that no matter what, in wars civilians die, the fact is however that combatants are the targets. The fact that in an operation aimed at killing combatants/terrorists isn't a terrorist act since the targets are not the civilians but the terrorists.

[Knutsen]

and can you assure me that these kinds fanatics get the same support as Palestinian fanatics get?
I never said those fanatics get support


However to be sure that every dead person that is displayed as a killed civilian is without a doubt a killed civilian is very naive.
Also to be sure that every teenager who dies in these operations is innocent simpley because of his age isn't just naive but idiotic (especialy since this isn't a war with another army but a war against terrorist groups which use children).
The same can be said about terrorists. There are teenager terrorists, we agree but there are innocents dying too. I'm not against Israel defending themselves, i just say that some operations are not very proportionate, like Jenin a year or so ago.


You also must understand that no matter what, in wars civilians die, the fact is however that combatants are the targets. The fact that in an operation aimed at killing combatants/terrorists isn't a terrorist act since the targets are not the civilians but the terrorists.

Agree on that.

[Geezah]

And Geezah, when you say i reveal my side , i wouldn't doubt to post the deaths of israeli civilians but in this particular discussion we were talking about Jabaila. I posted that list cause S'13 was denying the killing of civilians. Next time someone denies palestinians kill civilians i'll be the first to post the list of dead israelis.

Btw, for those who think i'm a supporter of AlQaeda and the like. I'm not defending the palestinians , i'm denouncing the actions in my opinion the IDF does wrong.

Then don't try and justify what you're saying by making it look as though only Palestinian civilians are dieing, compared to what Israel could do I would say they've retrained themsleves quite well, don't you think?

The Palestininas choose to conduct warfare differently to the way Israel would prefer to conduct theirs, the terrorists make sure they blend in with innocent civilians because they know that more often than not the Israeli troops will not fire indiscriminately into crowds of people!

[S'13]

Double post

[S'13]

I never said those fanatics get support


So we can both agree that we can't compare Jewish fanatics to the Palestinian fanatics.
I pointed out that most Palestinians support fanatics that want Israel destroyed, then you brought up the fact that we have fanatics too, something which is true however unlike Palestinian fanatics they don't get support on a wide sacle.


The same can be said about terrorists.

What can be said?


There are teenager terrorists, we agree but there are innocents dying too.

The IDF as any other western army tries to reduse the number of civilian casualties as much as possible however that is a very hard task, especially in the type of war we are fighting in.


i just say that some operations are not very proportionate, like Jenin a year or so ago.

What is proportionate then? Do you know better than the soldiers on the ground how the war should be waged?
Many military experts (Israeli and non-Israeli) were stunned that the IDF didn't use its airforce/artillery in order to destroy resistance in Jenin, the IDF didn't do this in order to reduce civilian casualties and paid with blood of its soldiers for this... Think about that before you mention Jenin.

[Sayeret]

Btw, for those who think i'm a supporter of AlQaeda and the like. I'm not defending the palestinians , i'm denouncing the actions in my opinion the IDF does wrong.

Why don't you condemn NATO, the Europeans, and the US for accidently killing civilians too?


NATO has repeatedly denied that it deliberately attacks non-military buildings and insists that all possible precautions are taken to avoid civilian casualties. Serb officials put the death toll from the following incidents, most of which but not all NATO acknowledges as errors, at more than 460. Overall, they say, some 2,000 civilians have been killed since the start of the air campaign on March 24.

April 5 -- A 550-pound NATO bomb aimed at Yugoslav army barracks in Aleksinac in southern Serbia misses its target and lands in a residential area. Serbs put death toll at 17.
April 9 -- NATO hits homes near a telephone exchange in the Kosovo capital, Pristina. NATO said civilian casualties were possible but neither side provided a death toll.
April 12 -- A NATO pilot fires two missiles into a train crossing a bridge at Grdelicka Klisura in southern Serbia, killing 55 people, according to Belgrade. NATO insists the bridge, a key supply line for Yugoslav forces in Kosovo, was the target and that the pilot saw the train too late.
April 14 -- NATO bombs refugee convoys in the Djakovica region of south-east Kosovo, leaving 75 dead, according to Belgrade. NATO, without confirming the civilian toll, said it was targeting military vehicles but admitted hitting two convoys.
April 28 -- NATO, aiming for an army barracks in the Serb village of Surdulica (250 kms/150 miles south of Belgrade), bombs a residential area, leaving at least 20 civilians dead.
May 1 -- NATO bombs a bridge at Luzane near Pristina, killing 47 people aboard a bus which was travelling along it. NATO, without confirming the figure, admitted the following day having targetted the bridge without the intention of causing civilian casualties.
May 7 -- A NATO air raid hits central Nis in southeast Serbia, leaving at least 15 dead and 70 injured. NATO said its planes were aiming for a landing strip and a radio transmitter but that a cluster bomb had missed its mark.
May 8 -- NATO mistakenly attacks the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, killing three journalists. The United States and NATO said the intended target was a Yugoslav building with military use, but US maps used in the planning of the operation were old and marked the embassy at a previous address.
May 13 -- NATO bombs the village of Korisa, leaving 87 civilians dead according to the Serbs. The allies claim that the civilians were being used as "human shields" and that Korisa was a legitimate military target.
May 20 -- A Belgrade hospital is hit by a missile at around 1 -- 00 a.m., killing three patients. NATO attributes the accident to a missile which went astray during an attack on a nearby military barracks.
May 21 -- NATO bombs Istok prison in north-west Kosovo. Alliance officials insist the prison was being used as an assembly point for Serb forces in the province. Serbs say at least 100 inmates and a prison officer were killed.
May 22 -- NATO admits bombing by mistake positions of the Kosovo Liberation Army at Kosare, near the border with Albania. Sources close to the KLA say seven guerillas were killed and 15 injured.
May 30 -- NATO bombs a highway bridge at Varvarin in a daytime raid in central Serbia. The Serbs claim 11 people died while attempting to cross the bridge in their cars. NATO has not confirmed whether there were cars on the bridge and insists the bridge was a legitimate military garget.
May 31 -- Missiles strike a sanatorium at Surdulica, southern Serbia, killing at least 20 people, according to the Serb authorities. NATO says it successfully attacked a military barracks in the town but refuses to confirm, or categorically deny, hitting the hospital.
May 31 -- A NATO bomb aimed at a military compound strikes a four-storey apartment block in the town of Novi Pazar. NATO confirms one of its bombs went astray and landed in a residential area. Serb authorities report 23 dead.
1 June -- A NATO bomb landed in a residential neighbourhood in the Serbian town of Novi Pazar.

Also even if you know a lot of Ultra Orthodox Jews that believe that genocide should be carried out against the Palestinians you should meet more because not are like that.

[Raistlin]

your biased statements deserve no better treatment.
He is biased just because you don't agree with his ideas. Rrrright. How old are YOU machupichu?


I'm tired of all this,Sayeret so i'l lonly answer to your survival post.
It would be nice to hear your counter-arguments to our other arguments...


like when Israel gets access to most of the water
AFAIK no palestinians are dying of thirst. So no question of survival here.


and those actions sink palestinian economy and sink the only future these people could expect. That is a struggle for survival.
You DO realise it's putting you in jail for a crime and then you justify your violence against the guards by the fact that you're struggling for your survival and gaining freedom? Rediculous.


I posted that list cause S'13 was denying the killing of civilians. Next time someone denies palestinians kill civilians i'll be the first to post the list of dead israelis.
OK. I'll claim the dutch (or wherever you're from) police kills innocent people and we'll make it a draw.

[Tikvah]

And the other half...?

I believe that just as there are terrorists who murder and destroy for political purposes, there are just as many if not more who do the same simply in the name of hate with no goal other than to cause fear and death. So I just didn't agree you should make that one universal statement. But I agree with pretty much everything else you have said so far ;) .

[walford]

NATO has repeatedly denied that it deliberately attacks non-military buildings and insists that all possible precautions are taken to avoid civilian casualties.
April 5 -- misses its target
April 12 -- the pilot saw the train too late.
April 14 -- targeting military vehicles but admitted hitting two convoys.
April 28 -- aiming for an army barracks...bombs a residential area
May 1 -- targetted the bridge without the intention of causing civilian casualties.
May 7 -- aiming for a landing strip and a radio transmitter but that a cluster bomb had missed its mark.
May 8 -- NATO mistakenly attacks... the intended target
May 13 -- civilians were being used as "human shields"
May 20 -- accident to a missile which went astray
May 22 -- bombing by mistake
May 31 -- one of its bombs went astray
I am not a big fan of NATO, because it is feckless and is of no use to the United States. However, these were all accidents.

Our enemies on the other hand, deliberately target civilians -- this means they kill ON PURPOSE. They gleefully claim responsibility after the fact and even construct dioramas suicide bombing aftermaths, complete with the fake body parts of men and women killed while in a restaurant, market or dance club.

There still has been no case made that there is a moral equivalency here.

Do you notice that there is no one on their side apologizing/making excuses for us?

[Tikvah]

NATO has repeatedly denied that it deliberately attacks non-military buildings and insists that all possible precautions are taken to avoid civilian casualties.
April 5 -- misses its target
April 12 -- the pilot saw the train too late.
April 14 -- targeting military vehicles but admitted hitting two convoys.
April 28 -- aiming for an army barracks...bombs a residential area
May 1 -- targetted the bridge without the intention of causing civilian casualties.
May 7 -- aiming for a landing strip and a radio transmitter but that a cluster bomb had missed its mark.
May 8 -- NATO mistakenly attacks... the intended target
May 13 -- civilians were being used as "human shields"
May 20 -- accident to a missile which went astray
May 22 -- bombing by mistake
May 31 -- one of its bombs went astray
I am not a big fan of NATO, because it is feckless and is of no use to the United States. However, these were all accidents.

Our enemies on the other hand, deliberately target civilians -- this means they kill ON PURPOSE. They gleefully claim responsibility after the fact and even construct dioramas suicide bombing aftermaths, complete with the fake body parts of men and women killed while in a restaurant, market or dance club.

There still has been no case made that there is a moral equivalency here.

Do you notice that there is no one on their side apologizing/making excuses for us?

The only, ONLY times they have ever apologized was when they accidentally mistook fellow Arabs for jews or Israelis and killed them. THEN they issue apologies and martyr them. :|

[Sayeret]

I am not a big fan of NATO, because it is feckless and is of no use to the United States. However, these were all accidents.

Our enemies on the other hand, deliberately target civilians -- this means they kill ON PURPOSE. They gleefully claim responsibility after the fact and even construct dioramas suicide bombing aftermaths, complete with the fake body parts of men and women killed while in a restaurant, market or dance club.

There still has been no case made that there is a moral equivalency here.

Do you notice that there is no one on their side apologizing/making excuses for us?

walford

I like NATO and I agree with what they do. The point of the post wasn't to show that NATO is an evil organization but rather that even an organization like NATO sometimes kill civilians. I know they don't kill civilians purposely and neither does Israel and I was trying to show that.

[walford]

even an organization like NATO sometimes kill civilians. I know they don't kill civilians purposely and neither does Israel and I was trying to show that.
Most of the time, our side commits these 'collateral damage' accidents because the terrorists hide behind their own civilians, HOPING that women and children will die as a consequence.

The likes of Al Qaeda and HAMAS are fully aware that if that happens, many in the West will not condemn the terrorists for killing OUR civilians, then hiding behind THEIRS -- which is the RULE, not the exception. These are evil organizations; they are evil in their intentions and in their methods. If they succeed in attaining their ultimate goal [the installation of a brutal dictatorship], their own people will suffer the most.

Could you imaging the IDF hiding behind Jewish women and children? That would make the target all the more juicy, would it not?

The terrorists use these tactics because they are counting on our decency to sheild them while they have none. Like I said, there is no moral equivalency here.

[Raistlin]

walford, Sayeret is our guy, he completely agrees with you :)

[walford]

walford, Sayeret is our guy, he completely agrees with you
Could he talk to my wife? She certainly does not.

[Tikvah]

walford, Sayeret is our guy, he completely agrees with you
Could he talk to my wife? She certainly does not.

LOL

:petting: