Gaza Who's to Blame ? [Archive] - Debate Policy

Classact

01-02-2009, 07:10 AM

Gaza is invaded and its population starving prisoners. Who else could be at fault other than the invaders and the jailers ? The 'withdrawal' from Gaza is a myth.If there were a seige everyone would have starved to death by now.

Iran is running the show, they know Obama doesn't want to bomb them and will need Israel for the task so they are trying to separate Obama from Israel before he takes office. Iran thinks Obama will condemn Israel before their elections but Iran is wrong. Iran will then use Hezbollah to attack Israel from the north in Lebanon as the French peacekeepers watch. Iran is going to be bombed soon if it keeps acting stupid in public.

moon

01-02-2009, 07:23 AM

If there were a seige everyone would have starved to death by now.

If not for the Rafah tunnels. You sound like the quack who examines his patient and announces that he can't be sick because he isn't dead. Anybody proclaiming that 'there is no siege' is deserving of contempt.

5stringJeff

01-02-2009, 12:24 PM

If terrorists in Gaza weren't firing rockets at Israeli civilians, Israel wouldn't be seiging and invading Gaza.

Abbey Marie

01-02-2009, 12:43 PM

If terrorists in Gaza weren't firing rockets at Israeli civilians, Israel wouldn't be seiging and invading Gaza.

Such a simple truth, yet so incomprehensible to our resident anti-Semite.

moon

01-02-2009, 12:46 PM

Abbey;

Such a simple truth, yet so incomprehensible to our resident anti-Semite.

You don't even know what a Semite is, so that's the big flush on your contribution.

Classact;

If terrorists in Gaza weren't firing rockets at Israeli civilians, Israel wouldn't be seiging and invading Gaza.

You seem to have things backwards. No invasion- no rockets.

Abbey Marie

01-02-2009, 12:47 PM

You don't even know what a Semite is, so that's the big flush on your contribution.

Classact;

You seem to have things backwards. No invasion- no rockets.

:laugh2: "I'm right, and everyone else is wrong". What grade are you in? 5th?

moon

01-02-2009, 12:51 PM

Larf. You dump idiotic posts all over and spit the dummy when ridiculed. What's a Semite, Abbey ?

5stringJeff

01-02-2009, 12:52 PM

You seem to have things backwards. No invasion- no rockets.

I suppose that depends on your definition of "invasion." From everything I've seen you post, the presence of any Jews whatsoever in Israel and/or Palestine constitutes an "invasion," which gives the Palestinians the right to use all means necessary, to include firing rockets at kindergartens, to expel them. I reject that view. I believe there should be two states; Israel and Palestine, both held to the same standards of behavior among nations.

moon

01-02-2009, 12:58 PM

I suppose that depends on your definition of "invasion." From everything I've seen you post, the presence of any Jews whatsoever in Israel and/or Palestine constitutes an "invasion," which gives the Palestinians the right to use all means necessary, to include firing rockets at kindergartens, to expel them. I reject that view. I believe there should be two states; Israel and Palestine, both held to the same standards of behavior among nations.

'Invasion' isn't difficult to define, particularly in the context of Palestine. Zionists have lately given up trying to manipulate the definition, but go ahead, if you feel you need the exercise.

'Jews' ? If you'd care to present any evidence of me objecting to jews in Israel I'll enjoy exposing it as phoney. Again, feel free.

I don't know how you can keep strumming on the brutality of Palestinian resistance when the Zionist offense is so much more brutal. Don't you ever look at the news, or other accounts ? The Zionists have killed well over a thousand Palestinian children since 2000. Where's your sense of scale, man ?

Kathianne

01-02-2009, 01:06 PM

'Invasion' isn't difficult to define, particularly in the context of Palestine. Zionists have lately given up trying to manipulate the definition, but go ahead, if you feel you need the exercise.

'Jews' ? If you'd care to present any evidence of me objecting to jews in Israel I'll enjoy exposing it as phoney. Again, feel free.

I don't know how you can keep strumming on the brutality of Palestinian resistance when the Zionist offense is so much more brutal. Don't you ever look at the news, or other accounts ? The Zionists have killed well over a thousand Palestinian children since 2000. Where's your sense of scale, man ?

No matter how you phrase is, neither you nor the Palestinians are victims of anyone beyond Hamas. Without the attacks against the Israelis, none of this would be going on. Indeed, if Palestinians were not attacking Israel, instead working to help themselves, sanctions would happen if the checkpoints and wall were not removed. Ability to target is not beyond proportional.

BTW, where was all the talk of proportionality over the past 6 years of missiles from Gaza?

moon

01-02-2009, 01:17 PM

BTW, where was all the talk of proportionality over the past 6 years of missiles from Gaza?

You want to post a victims list ? I'll post a list of murdered Palestinians over the same period.

Which number do you think is the greater, the number of rockets and mortars fired into 'Israel' or the number of rockets and shells fired into Palestine ?

Kathianne

01-02-2009, 01:19 PM

You want to post a victims list ? I'll post a list of murdered Palestinians over the same period.

Which number do you think is the greater, the number of rockets and mortars fired into 'Israel' or the number of rockets and shells fired into Palestine ?

Again, it's not a tit for tat. The fact that the Hamas is not able to cause the damage they want, does not mean Israel needs to do the same. How about this, Hamas has dropped over 7k bombs since 2000. Israel should do the same?

moon

01-02-2009, 01:25 PM

It is estimated that between 7,000 and 9,000 Israeli artillery shells were fired into Gaza between September 2005 and June 2006
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Summer_Rains

Nice name for an attempted genocide that- 'Operation Summer Rains'.

Give it up, Kathianne. The Zionists are, demonstrably, the aggressors and the brutes. Just put your name down for a West Bank condo and forget about arguing the Zionist case. It's indefensible.

Kathianne

01-02-2009, 01:33 PM

Nice name for an attempted genocide that- 'Operation Summer Rains'.

Give it up, Kathianne. The Zionists are, demonstrably, the aggressors and the brutes. Just put your name down for a West Bank condo and forget about arguing the Zionist case. It's indefensible.

Moon, you will cite and make up anything that will 'back up' your claims. You are losing, whether here or not is really not the point, you are losing your goal.

Kathianne

01-02-2009, 01:35 PM

Moon, you will cite and make up anything that will 'back up' your claims. You are losing, whether here or not is really not the point, you are losing your goal.
From your site:

The neutrality and factual accuracy of this article are disputed. Please see the relevant discussion on the talk page. (March 2008)

moon

01-02-2009, 01:57 PM

So, look at 'the relevant discussion on the talk page' before using the usual Wiki get-out to challenge the numbers. Goddamned pathetic.

Kathianne

01-02-2009, 02:00 PM

So, look at 'the relevant discussion on the talk page' before using the usual Wiki get-out to challenge the numbers. Goddamned pathetic.

Top of the page, tool.

moon

01-02-2009, 02:06 PM

'Tool' is it ? Where's the challenge to the numbers, dumbkin ?

Disputes;

1 Casus Belli Again
2 Status of conflict as "ongoing"
3 Israeli Casualties
4 Dead Palestinians
4.1 Query
5 I think the article name is wrong!
6 Ongoing or not
7 There is something wrong with this article
8 Name issues
9 End Date
10 West Bank
11 YouTube links
12 Wounding of Amir Peretz's bodyguard
13 Move or not to move
14 totally disputed: conflict is over
15 Move and major changes
16 Request unprotection
17 Palestinian militants=Palestinian terrorists
18 Possible NPOV problem with pictures
19 The actual CAUSE of Israeli-Gaza Conflict
20 Should we call them Palestinian Terrorists or Militants?
21 to the militant/terrorist name issue
22 When did Operation Summer Rains end?
23 2007 May 16 Israeli air strike in Gaza
24 Fair use rationale for Image:Logoprc.jpg
25 Introduction Conflict of Interest

Kathianne

01-02-2009, 02:07 PM

'Tool' is it ? Where's the challenge to the numbers, dumbkin ?

Disputes;

Serious tool, thought you could do better than nonsense, but enjoy!

moon

01-02-2009, 02:10 PM

Kathianne

01-02-2009, 02:25 PM

So then your pathetic figure for Palestinian rockets over eight years pales by comparison with Zionist shells launched into Palestine in less than one month. I say again, don't bother, Kathianne. You ain't up to it. Nobody could be. The Zionist propaganda is being slaughtered by internet truths.

Dream on with your made up figures from propaganda sources. Interesting how you do use Israeli press when it suits your agenda, tool.

manu1959

01-02-2009, 02:44 PM

The Zionists are, demonstrably, the aggressors and the brutes.

so let us see ..... international law created israel .... may 14, 1948 .....

may 15, 1948 ..... five arab nations; egypt, syria, jordan, lebanon and iraq –invaded supported by; morocco, sudan, yemen and saudi arabia ..... all in violation of international law and without un approval ......

and now that the arabs have been getting their ass handed to them for the past 60 years they want international law to help them .... oops ....

Abbey Marie

01-02-2009, 03:20 PM

http://www.robotmonkeylab.com/Monkeyshop/BigWrench/Props%20-%20Bigass%20wrench.jpg

Kathianne

01-02-2009, 03:33 PM

http://www.robotmonkeylab.com/Monkeyshop/BigWrench/Props%20-%20Bigass%20wrench.jpg

Abbey found Moon!

namvet

01-02-2009, 03:42 PM

If not for the Rafah tunnels. You sound like the quack who examines his patient and announces that he can't be sick because he isn't dead. Anybody proclaiming that 'there is no siege' is deserving of contempt.

are those the tunnels the rockets and missiles from Iran are???? great targets.

namvet

01-02-2009, 03:44 PM

So then your pathetic figure for Palestinian rockets over eight years pales by comparison with Zionist shells launched into Palestine in less than one month. I say again, don't bother, Kathianne. You ain't up to it. Nobody could be. The Zionist propaganda is being slaughtered by internet truths.

internet truths

to funny !!!!!!!!!!!:laugh2::laugh2::lol::lol:

Abbey Marie

01-02-2009, 03:47 PM

Abbey found Moon!

Yup. I just wonder who is his friend in the hardhat.

namvet

01-02-2009, 03:48 PM

Yup. I just wonder who is his friend in the hardhat.

so moons the lug nut :dance:

Abbey Marie

01-02-2009, 03:52 PM

so moons the lug nut :dance:

NV, I don't always know their exact names, but I know a tool when I see one. :laugh2:

namvet

01-02-2009, 03:57 PM

NV, I don't always know their exact names, but I know a tool when I see one. :laugh2:

http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/4870/pknblbprca3ic5.jpg

how bout that?????

5stringJeff

01-02-2009, 03:59 PM

so let us see ..... international law created israel .... may 14, 1948 .....

may 15, 1948 ..... five arab nations; egypt, syria, jordan, lebanon and iraq –invaded supported by; morocco, sudan, yemen and saudi arabia ..... all in violation of international law and without un approval ......

and now that the arabs have been getting their ass handed to them for the past 60 years they want international law to help them .... oops ....

Excellent points!

REDWHITEBLUE2

01-02-2009, 04:41 PM

So then your pathetic figure for Palestinian rockets over eight years pales by comparison with Zionist shells launched into Palestine in less than one month. I say again, don't bother, Kathianne. You ain't up to it. Nobody could be. The Zionist propaganda is being slaughtered by internet truths. HEY Moon beam no one gives a shit what your Muslim ass believes the rest of us know the truth

REDWHITEBLUE2

01-02-2009, 04:43 PM

Abbey found Moon! :laugh2: except for the tin foil hat :dance:

moon

01-03-2009, 05:55 AM

5stringJeff;

Excellent points !

Manu;
so let us see ..... international law created israel .... may 14, 1948 .....

may 15, 1948 ..... five arab nations; egypt, syria, jordan, lebanon and iraq –invaded supported by; morocco, sudan, yemen and saudi arabia ..... all in violation of international law and without un approval ......

and now that the arabs have been getting their ass handed to them for the past 60 years they want international law to help them .... oops ....

Not so, Jeff. Israel came into being according to the law of the British Mandate. That Mandate ceased to exist as soon as Britain derogated responsibility for Palestine , in 1947. Manu has his head up his ass and refuses to remove it. The Arab League did in fact move against Israel in 1948, after months of Zionist terrorism and slaughter of Palestinian villages outside of the Partition Resolution borders of Israel- theft and brutality, in short.
You now have a choice. You can accept recorded history and view events through the prism of reality , or you can throw truth to the wind and join the regurgitators of Zionist lies and propaganda in true New Klan style, like manu.

'Excellent points!' indeed. Anti-Islamic hogwash, Jeff.

moon

01-03-2009, 05:59 AM

Redwhite&blue;

HEY Moon beam no one gives a shit what your Muslim ass believes the rest of us know the truth

Sure. King bat says you're hanging the right way up.

5stringJeff

01-03-2009, 10:26 AM

5stringJeff;

Not so, Jeff. Israel came into being according to the law of the British Mandate. That Mandate ceased to exist as soon as Britain derogated responsibility for Palestine , in 1947. Manu has his head up his ass and refuses to remove it. The Arab League did in fact move against Israel in 1948, after months of Zionist terrorism and slaughter of Palestinian villages outside of the Partition Resolution borders of Israel- theft and brutality, in short.
You now have a choice. You can accept recorded history and view events through the prism of reality , or you can throw truth to the wind and join the regurgitators of Zionist lies and propaganda in true New Klan style, like manu.

'Excellent points!' indeed. Anti-Islamic hogwash, Jeff.

Incorrect. The UN Partition Plan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Partition_Plan), passed by the General Assembly of the UN, divided the land of Palestine into two parts: Jewish and Arab. So, since you adore the UN so much, are you willing to accept its mandate? Or will you still be insistent that Israel should not exist?

moon

01-03-2009, 02:04 PM

5stringJeff;

Incorrect. The UN Partition Plan, passed by the General Assembly of the UN, divided the land of Palestine into two parts: Jewish and Arab.

No, correct. I too thought that was the case, but apparently not;

Legal title to the land was not conferrred by Resolution 181 alone but rather by Great Britain's acceptance of the terms of Resolution 181. The State of Israel owes its entire legal existence to the proper exercise by Great Britain of its League of Nations' Mandatory Power over the territory of Palestine. It owes nothing to the United Nations and, by the same token, cannot claim any additional rights from the United Nations. Instead, as soon as Resolution 181 was passed (and of course Great Britain voted in its favor), the legal borders between Israel and Palestine were forever fixed. Those borders henceforth could only be changed by one of two processes: first, explicit agreement between Israel and the authorized representatives of Palestine, and second, in the few cases of limited disputed areas where the verbal description contained in Resolution 181 was ambiguous in terms of existing maps or surveys, by international arbitration. The Security Council had and has no power to change international borders.
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/world/israelborders.php

The Legal Boundaries of Israel in International Law
Anthony D'Amato
Leighton Professor of Law
Northwestern University School of Law

So, since you adore the UN so much, are you willing to accept its mandate? Or will you still be insistent that Israel should not exist?

What is this shit ? You must be confusing me with somebody else. It's me that's trying to get the New Klan to abide by international law.

Gaffer

01-03-2009, 03:08 PM

5stringJeff;

No, correct. I too thought that was the case, but apparently not;

What is this shit ? You must be confusing me with somebody else. It's me that's trying to get the New Klan to abide by international law.

I'll abide by the Constitution of the US. Take your international law and shove it.

actsnoblemartin

01-03-2009, 03:38 PM

that is an outright lie.

the british owned the land, and gave it to the u.n.

u.n. partishioned it.

arabs couldnt share

they started a war

they tried to commit a 2nd holocaust

we did NOT

you are the worst kind of liar

you actually believe the lies you tell

5stringJeff;

Not so, Jeff. Israel came into being according to the law of the British Mandate. That Mandate ceased to exist as soon as Britain derogated responsibility for Palestine , in 1947. Manu has his head up his ass and refuses to remove it. The Arab League did in fact move against Israel in 1948, after months of Zionist terrorism and slaughter of Palestinian villages outside of the Partition Resolution borders of Israel- theft and brutality, in short.
You now have a choice. You can accept recorded history and view events through the prism of reality , or you can throw truth to the wind and join the regurgitators of Zionist lies and propaganda in true New Klan style, like manu.

'Excellent points!' indeed. Anti-Islamic hogwash, Jeff.

actsnoblemartin

01-03-2009, 03:40 PM

I'll abide by the Constitution of the US. Take your international law and shove it.

you forgot to add: up your ass

thank you :salute:

I dont give a flying fuck about international law

its more or less a bunch of anti americans faggots trying to tell us what to do, when to do it, and how to do it.

Americans first, allies second, the rest of the world third

avatar4321

01-03-2009, 05:17 PM

What is this shit ? You must be confusing me with somebody else. It's me that's trying to get the New Klan to abide by international law.

International law is overrated and easily changed/ignored when the parties want it.

avatar4321

01-03-2009, 05:18 PM

If you want to blame someone, blame France.

namvet

01-03-2009, 05:22 PM

hey moon. the invasion is underway. Muslims are right now being exterminated !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:dance::dance:

Kathianne

01-03-2009, 05:28 PM

If you want to blame someone, blame France.

Yep, Sarkozy has shown himself to be another 'relevancy' tool.

bullypulpit

01-03-2009, 09:53 PM

They're ALL fuckin' nuts...Israel, the Palestinians, Hamas...the lot of 'em.

Kathianne

01-03-2009, 10:19 PM

They're ALL fuckin' nuts...Israel, the Palestinians, Hamas...the lot of 'em.

Wait, I thought it was only those GW backed, wrong?

bullypulpit

01-04-2009, 12:14 PM

Wait, I thought it was only those GW backed, wrong?

The whole issue would be moot if the British hadn't capitulated to David Ben Gurion and his followers after their wave of terrorism in the aftermath of WWII.

The oppression the Jewish people suffered during WWII led the more extremist among them to take violent and desperate actions to secure a homeland in Palestine, based on centuries old and, by that time, largely irrelevant claims rooted in religious doctrine. Palestine could have been shared amongst Jew and Arab alike, but the Zionists did not want to be the political and ethnic minority, having seen the consequences of this during WWII. The Zionists wanted a "Homeland"..."Liebensraum" as it was put by an infamous maniac but a few years before.

What we see occurring today is but the bitter fruit of that seed planted after WWII. Actions have consequences which sometimes take decades to come to fruition, sometimes bloodily.

Yurt

01-04-2009, 02:21 PM

The whole issue would be moot if the British hadn't capitulated to David Ben Gurion and his followers after their wave of terrorism in the aftermath of WWII.

The oppression the Jewish people suffered during WWII led the more extremist among them to take violent and desperate actions to secure a homeland in Palestine, based on centuries old and, by that time, largely irrelevant claims rooted in religious doctrine. Palestine could have been shared amongst Jew and Arab alike, but the Zionists did not want to be the political and ethnic minority, having seen the consequences of this during WWII. The Zionists wanted a "Homeland"..."Liebensraum" as it was put by an infamous maniac but a few years before.

What we see occurring today is but the bitter fruit of that seed planted after WWII. Actions have consequences which sometimes take decades to come to fruition, sometimes bloodily.

yeah, like the arabs expelling the jews from arabia and other islamic lands...funny how you take the jews to task yet conveniently ignore islamic slaughters and taking over of homelands.

tell me, what really is your problem by giving jews a small piece of land and allowing them to have a government? if you don't believe in religion, then you can't claim a superior claim for muslims who live there, they lost the war, their empire crumbled, forfeited their right to the land that if you honestly look at history you will see was considered a backwater waste by the muslims, but all of a sudden the jews wanted and it becomes the holy grail.

emmett

01-04-2009, 02:39 PM

It's all GW's fault!

bullypulpit

01-04-2009, 04:11 PM

yeah, like the arabs expelling the jews from arabia and other islamic lands...funny how you take the jews to task yet conveniently ignore islamic slaughters and taking over of homelands.

tell me, what really is your problem by giving jews a small piece of land and allowing them to have a government? if you don't believe in religion, then you can't claim a superior claim for muslims who live there, they lost the war, their empire crumbled, forfeited their right to the land that if you honestly look at history you will see was considered a backwater waste by the muslims, but all of a sudden the jews wanted and it becomes the holy grail.

Actually, Jews made great progress and contributions to the fields of mathematics, chemistry, philosophy and astronomy under Muslim rule of the Iberian Peninsula. It is also worth noting that the vizier of Baghdad placed his finances in the care of Jewish bankers, and the port of Siraf, under the caliphate, had a Jewish governor.

As for the situation that began after WWII, the Zionists laid claim to Palestine based on nothing more than religious doctrine, while the Palestinians who had been living there had spent centuries putting down roots, building homes and farms, orchards and pastures. They had far more claim to the land than anything David Ben Gurion and his followers put forth. Religion isn't the issue...Justice is. Religion has little concern for justice.

Trigg

01-04-2009, 04:32 PM

No matter how you phrase is, neither you nor the Palestinians are victims of anyone beyond Hamas. Without the attacks against the Israelis, none of this would be going on. Indeed, if Palestinians were not attacking Israel, instead working to help themselves, sanctions would happen if the checkpoints and wall were not removed. Ability to target is not beyond proportional.

BTW, where was all the talk of proportionality over the past 6 years of missiles from Gaza?

This is the best post I've seen in this entire argument.

Hamas, if they stay in power, would do them selves a lot of good by getting on with running the country.

STOP the suicide bombings, stop the rocket launches and start educating the population. Or, they can continue to raise a few more generations of hatefull people who never better their situation.

Yurt

01-04-2009, 05:07 PM

Actually, Jews made great progress and contributions to the fields of mathematics, chemistry, philosophy and astronomy under Muslim rule of the Iberian Peninsula. It is also worth noting that the vizier of Baghdad placed his finances in the care of Jewish bankers, and the port of Siraf, under the caliphate, had a Jewish governor.

As for the situation that began after WWII, the Zionists laid claim to Palestine based on nothing more than religious doctrine, while the Palestinians who had been living there had spent centuries putting down roots, building homes and farms, orchards and pastures. They had far more claim to the land than anything David Ben Gurion and his followers put forth. Religion isn't the issue...Justice is. Religion has little concern for justice.

are you denying the jewish massacres in arabia? oh yeah, a couple of jews get some nice dhimmi positions under islamic rule and bully touts that as equality...laughable...if he wasn't so serious....tell us bully of the equality jews share under islamic law...tell how many jews used to live in arab lands and how many live there after mumu was born...

the arabs (they were NOT called palestinians bully) did not live there any longer than the jews...as i said and as you can research, hardly anyone lived there until the jews started buying land in the late 19th century. it was backwater until jews wanted the land....you should really research this more bully.

moon

01-06-2009, 05:21 AM

hardly anyone lived there until the jews started buying land in the late 19th century. it was backwater until jews wanted the land....you should really research this more bully.

Horseshit. The region has been populated since the Paleolithic. Semitic cultures have lived there, uninterrupted, since before recorded history. Your erroneous claim is reminiscent of the 'invisible' indigenous North American inhabitants. Worse, it's Zion-pumping propaganda as you've already been corrected in your misconception.

Muslim Semites and jewish Semites coexisted relatively peacefully for generations until Western interference caused division . That's the underlying reason for the conflict, an interference perpetuated to this day. You armchair Zionists are blind to your own contributions to the chaos from Day One.

In more modern terms, the British Palestine Mandate was a train-wreck of a policy by the fag-end of hated British colonialism. The concept of some bewigged British toff drawing up a 'deal' for Zionists to occupy an already-inhabited region is the stuff of cartoons and satirists. The regional Arabs voted against it at the newly-formed post-war United Nations but the winners of WW2 pushed it through, with the support of States around the world who, like friend Yurt, didn't have a clue or were propaganda victims themselves. The fact that the Zionists immediately began to steal non-UN-designated territory and to ethnically cleanse it of its indigenous people is only just coming to general realization on account of the misinformation spread over the sixty intervening years by Zionist-owned Western media. The internet has changed that and the suppressed voices are now being heard.
Make no mistake, Zionism is racist. It is a doctrine designed to displace the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine and replace them with Zionists. This is borne out by historic records of the writings and speeches of early Zionist leaders. Terrorism was encouraged through death-squads such as the Irgun and the Stern Gang, terror organisations to which the father of Obama's man, Emmanuel, belonged. Thus the final days of the conflict will be seen out between the force of America and the intelligence of the combined States of the United Nations, and may the UN's victory be swift and conclusive.

To gain an insight into the ingrained anti-Islamism prevalent throughout America, and in microcosm through the combined ignorance of DP's own New Klan, take a look at the dumb poll in this thread. You are given one option to blame Zionism, three options to blame muslims and no options at all to blame the British or the subsequent American bungling. Wakey, wakey America.

Classact

01-06-2009, 07:56 AM

moon

01-06-2009, 08:40 AM

. the spoils of wars goes to the victors.
__________________

Unambiguously false. Territory cannot be permanently annexed by war. It's illegal.

bullypulpit

01-06-2009, 08:41 AM

Palestine has never existed as a nation that is usually depicted on a map with borders... never... the rug heads chose the wrong side in WWI and WWII and the maps of the ME were drawn by Western Europe... the spoils of wars goes to the victors.

And it was the oppressive restrictions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles on the Krauts at the end WW I that led to Hitler's rise to power. The Darwinian view of geopolitics has always led to far more and greater suffering than it has ever prevented.

moon

01-06-2009, 08:49 AM

As far as the Israeli settlements are concerned, they are clearly illegal; an occupying power has no right to de facto annexation of portions of the territory by population transfers.

9. Overshadowing the arguments in Paragraph 8 above is the undeniable fact that the Kellogg-Briand Peace Pact of 1928, as definitively glossed by the International Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1948, has abolished forever the idea of acquisition of territory by military conquest. No matter who was the aggressor, international borders cannot change by the process of war. Resort to war is itself illegal, and while self-defense is of course legal, the self-defense cannot go so far as to constitute a new war of aggression all its own. And if it does, the land taken may at best be temporarily occupied, but cannot be annexed.

The Legal Boundaries of Israel in International Law
Anthony D'Amato
Leighton Professor of Law
Northwestern University School of Law

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/world/israelborders.php

Of course, you'd know all about the Nuremberg trials, wouldn't you, Classact.

avatar4321

01-06-2009, 09:23 AM

Unambiguously false. Territory cannot be permanently annexed by war. It's illegal.

yet its happened for thousands of years.

bullypulpit

01-06-2009, 09:42 AM

yet its happened for thousands of years. Well, golly, we're not talking about what happened centuries ago, are we? The Fourth Geneva Convention, Art 47, clearly states...

<blockquote>Protected persons who are in occupied territory shall not be deprived, in any case or in any manner whatsoever, of the benefits of the present Convention by any change introduced, as the result of the occupation of a territory, into the institutions or government of the said territory, nor by any agreement concluded between the authorities of the occupied territories and the Occupying Power, nor by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory.</blockquote>

Article 49 goes on to state:

<blockquote>Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.</blockquote>

Forcible annexation of territories by military forces is illegal under international law as it currently stands.

moon

01-06-2009, 09:47 AM

yet its happened for thousands of years.

You fancy yourself as a student of international law, avatar. Demonstrate for us the underpinning legal principles of ' gimme or else' .

namvet

01-06-2009, 09:52 AM

Of course, you'd know all about the Nuremberg trials, wouldn't you, Classact.

put the chicken on

moon

01-06-2009, 09:57 AM

I'm afraid that a lot of your guys got hung after Nuremberg. Once they were gone, everybody else agreed that expansionism was for fascists . Tough titty. All those Zionists hunkered-down comfy and they've got to get off their illegal asses and go home.

namvet

01-06-2009, 09:59 AM

Classact

01-06-2009, 10:20 AM

Well, golly, we're not talking about what happened centuries ago, are we? The Fourth Geneva Convention, Art 47, clearly states...

<blockquote>Protected persons who are in occupied territory shall not be deprived, in any case or in any manner whatsoever, of the benefits of the present Convention by any change introduced, as the result of the occupation of a territory, into the institutions or government of the said territory, nor by any agreement concluded between the authorities of the occupied territories and the Occupying Power, nor by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory.</blockquote>

Article 49 goes on to state:

<blockquote>Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.</blockquote>

Forcible annexation of territories by military forces is illegal under international law as it currently stands.The US and Israel are not signatures of these protocols... we reserve the right to treat Unlawful Combatants {terrorists} as terrorists under the authority of the Laws of Land Warfare and the GC of 1949 which states a hearing and a firing squad if found guilty of fighting out of uniform or combating innocent civilians.

Why don't the Palestianians just run over to Egypt for all their aid and comfort? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September_in_Jordan

moon

01-06-2009, 10:25 AM

The Fourth Geneva Convention, Art 47, clearly states...

Classact;

The US and Israel are not signatures of these protocols...

You going to hang your trousers on that peg, Classact ?

Classact

01-06-2009, 10:28 AM

Classact;

You going to hang your trousers on that peg, Classact ?The US and Israel did not sign the GC protocols of the 1970's... had we would have to have removed the land mines between north and south Korea. We reserve the right to use fire bombs and execute Unlawful Combatants as long as we keep them away from our borders and our suck ass Supreme Court.

moon

01-06-2009, 10:34 AM

The text was clearly part of the Articles of the 4th Geneva Conventions. You claim that the US and Israel are not signatories to the 4th GC. Are you going to hang your trousers on your own peg or are you going to shimmy and shuffle ?

Classact;
Quote:The US and Israel are not signatures of these protocols...

Classact

01-06-2009, 10:39 AM

Bush was in full compliance of international law in the detention of Unlawful Combatants {terrorists} and lawful combatants, POW's and neither deserved anything more than a military tribunal had then not been determined to being held in US jurisdiction (Gitmo)... had they been outside of the US POW's could be held until the war ends and Unlawful Combatants could be tried by the rules established by congress and executed... there is no basis for habeas corpus... guilt is being under arms without uniform, prove that and face a firing squad.