US plan to undermine Hamas, arm Fatah

[Peet]

and Palestine, as Occupied Territory, is subject to the protection of the Geneva Conventions.

That means its people too, for the benefit of shysters.

Do terrorists count as protected persons in the Geneva convention?

If so I see no reason to uphold it on grounds of moral bankruptcy.

 

[nino_savatte]

Your point being?

You said this

Well given that they don't technically have a military, all attacks on palestinians are attacks on civilians.

The IDF are a military force, are they not? So you admit that the IDF targets civilians?

 

[Peet]

Yes I do admit it. But civilians who are combattant. I certainly won't lose any sleep over it.

 

[nino_savatte]

Yes I do admit it. But civilians who are combattant. I certainly won't lose any sleep over it.

Oh really? Are all those killed by the IDF combatants? No.

 

[Peet]

Probably not. But civilian casualties are a natural consequence of war.

I would buy all this targetting civilians crap if Israel marched into a village and massacred every last resident to teach them a lesson but I know of no incidents that qualify.

As I said, If Israel wanted to target civilians in the manner in which you impy there would be significantly more bodies on the streets of Gaza.

 

[moono]

You must have been a spittoon in a past life peet.

 

[nino_savatte]

Probably not. But civilian casualties are a natural consequence of war.

I would buy all this targetting civilians crap if Israel marched into a village and massacred every last resident to teach them a lesson but I know of no incidents that qualify.

As I said, If Israel wanted to target civilians in the manner in which you impy there would be significantly more bodies on the streets of Gaza.

Ah, the "collateral damage" canard.

 

[Peet]

So unless Israeli military action can gurantee none of the sweet as pie civilians are hurt it's alright but otherwise it's collective punishment. Gotcha.

Sorry, but you're holding Israel to an impossible standard.

Geneva convention is more a humanist aspiration that a code of war. It just doesn't work like that.

 

[nino_savatte]

More Zionist propaganda?

Cheers Golem, you're a real brick.

 

[Luther Blissett]

My problem with that assessment is that there weas no country to speak of. What was given to the Jews was mostly desert and uncultivated scrub. There were very few farms and next to no economic activity. The arabs who occupied the mandate of palestine were largely economic migrants because of the increased economic activity caused by a mass influx of jews.

Made the desersts bloom¿ Yes, there are small experimental desertification reclamation projects, mainly academic-based, and vastly underfunded, but what you're repeating here is a myth - and in that 'desert', big industry has polluted acre upon acre, esp. in the Ramat Hovav region (http://1breathtime.com/negev/index-eng.htm)

Ramat-Hovav contains most of Israel's chemical factories which pollute the area, historical unmanaged dumping areas, more than 2,500 acres of evaporation ponds piped from the factories, a national toxic waste site which includes incineration, and more.

The air, soil and groundwater pollution emitted by these factories cause severe illnesses among the Negev population.

Arab violence kicked off because Arabs have always opposed the idea of a Jewish national home. There was no appropriation of Arab land until the arab uprising of 1938 (IIRC)

That's why Jews and Arabs fought together in the Palestinian Regiment prior to '47, isn't it, because the 'Arabs'* had always opposed the idea of a Jewish national home (But check your history books and you'll find many of the early pre-zionist and later, zionist non-nationalist mid aliyah settlers or Jewish-organised Police, also opposed the idea of nationalism and an exclusive Jewish only national home) You can't be bothered to differentiate between the struggle in Palestinine itself by Palestinians, and the wider Arab neighbours disputes with Israel. You can't be bothered to note that both Jordan and Syria, who were against Israel as a state, also behaved abominably towards the Palestinians - your laziness at making the distinction, and calling all those involved in that region 'Arabs' as though they were some homogenous mass with a single mind is highly offensive, and incorrect historically. Did you even bother to read any Middle East History before coming to these forums?

Because I'm really not all that interested in who's land it was, more who developed it and what it has become. Australia wasn't a nation. It may have had inhabitants but, as with Israel, there was enough space for settlers and developers. What was built endures as a liberal and free society. You can argue that American settlers and Australian settlers were brutal to the indigenous populations. They were. But arabs worked for jews building Israel until the arabs kicked off. And as I said, the idea that the arabs were native to the mandate of palestine is a falsehood. Most of them were nomads. You can't say they were thrown off their farms because up until Israeli irrigation, there weren't any in the land allocated to them.

The man is clearly confused as to who or what an 'arab' is. Somebody bring out the DNA proof again, please, since it's clear he hasn't seen it. He says 'Most of them were nomads', but of course, doesn't say which nomads he's talking about - the Bedouin of the Negev are a nomadic people, but the Palestinians who lived in their villages were not nomads, they had been settled there and could trace their routes back to the various tribes inhabiting that Canaanite region, even before Abraham Avinu passed through the region with his flock for the first time sometime around 2000BCE. DNA evidence has proved this link too, so there is no disputing that the majority of Palestinians are indiginous to the region.

The arabs were given 85% of the mandate of palestine. Why the arabs would want what was given to the israelis is beyond me. I'm curious to know if the arabs would be so keen to return if the Israelis returned it as they found it. I very much doubt it.

You're doing it again - trying to treat 'The Arabs' as a homgenous entity - when they were regional differences throughout the Arab world, and different ethnicities and customs depending on which region one hailed from. Thus, an 'Arab' in the Bek'aa valley had very different dress and customs from an 'Arab' in Bethlehem. There's no equivalence between 'Arabs' and 'Jews', although your interpretation sounds dangerously similar to interpretations of 'history' we see parrotted by the Christian-coalition, the Jerusalem Summit, the Betar-Tagar, tending to the more vicious Kahanist at times - just what tripe are you reading to make this damaging case for continued conflict between Israeli and Palestinian, Peet?

 

[Luther Blissett]

More Zionist propaganda?

Cheers Golem, you're a real brick.

Yes, a real brick from the Pastor Hagee/Jerusalem Summit school of clay-man casting - you know, the ones who accuse Islam of what they daren't accuse Judaism of - veiled antisemites, modernised and updated for today's discerning anti-Arabist

 

[Peet]

just what tripe are you reading to make this damaging case for continued conflict between Israeli and Palestinian, Peet?

Wicks, Pryce-Jones, Bowen, Lewis, Hanson, Phillips, Rubin, Glick, Dershowitz, Britanica. Usual drivel you expect from zionists.

 

[ViolentPanda]

If you've read Dershowitz, you've also read Joan Peters.

Not only did he plagiarise her, he also copied across all the historical errors she made too.

What a fucking loser, you'd have thought the daft cunt would at least have checked the facts he was ripping off, and him a lawyer too!

 

[ZAMB]

If you've read Dershowitz, you've also read Joan Peters.

Not only did he plagiarise her, he also copied across all the historical errors she made too.

What a fucking loser, you'd have thought the daft cunt would at least have checked the facts he was ripping off, and him a lawyer too!

I KNEW he was relying on authors like Dershowitz!! Nice to have it confirmed that he gets his so-called "facts" from totally spurious sources.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I KNEW he was relying on authors like Dershowitz!! Nice to have it confirmed that he gets his so-called "facts" from totally spurious sources.

R18 tried to puff Dershowitz as an "honest broker" on Zionism some time back. Pity that Norm Finkelstein had followed up Chomsky's mid 1980s kick in Dersh's balls over his (let's say it plainly) lying and attempts to bully, by dissecting Dersh's "The Case for Israel" and bringing to light the multiple incidences of falsehood, plagiarism and plain lying. Then Dersh was stupid enough to try the same bullying tactics he'd unsuccessfully used on Chomsky a decade and a half before, attempting to "monster" Finkelstein in the press.

Like I said, what a fucking loser.

 

[nino_savatte]

When I think of Dershowitz, I think of the phrase "the finest legal minds" and then I laugh.

 

[ViolentPanda]

When I think of Dershowitz, I think of the phrase "the finest legal minds" and then I laugh.

My mate Miri calls him "Johnny Cochrane's older and uglier brother".