Israel’s Big Lie of “Self-Defence”

[Billo_Really]

An occupier does not have the right to use arms in “self-defence”.​

There are four reasons why Israel cannot cite a legal right to self-defence in response to Palestinian violence.

First and foremost is that the ability of a very strong military power to achieve anything defensive by the attrition of a much weaker military power is spurious and leads into the genocidal logic of attempting to deprive a people of all capacity for violence.

The second reason is that Israel is actively contravening UN Security Council resolutions and the UN Charter is very clear on the fact that the right to self-defence exists “until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” A state that works to thwart UNSC measures to maintain peace and security cannot logically be extended the unimpaired right to self defence.

On the third count Israel is an occupying power and the occupied have a legal right to armed resistance. It would be nonsensical to accord a legal right to use arms to defend against another’s legal resistance.

Fourthly, it would be equally paradoxical to allow each party to act in self-defence against each other’s acts of self defence. Thus one of the parties must be the aggressor. On several counts, not least its defiance of UNSC resolutions, Israel must be considered the aggressor.
Israel’s only legitimate way of defending itself begins with ending its occupation. Israelis have a right to life and they deserve peace and security as we all do, but they have no right to kill Palestinians and claim that they are pursuing those things.

Let's make no mistake, Israel is the aggressor! And it is committing genocide. According to Arnon Soffer...

“When 2.5 million people live in a closed-off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today … The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day..."

These words are shockingly Himmleresque in labelling a people animals; in stating that mass killing is neither choice nor desire, but necessity...

All the Israeli supporters at this website echo this theme that it is "necessary" to inflict all this damage on the Palestinian's. This is Germany in the 30's all over again!

 

[Ringo]

 

[TNHarley]

If they have a right to defend against occupiers, why did they have to cross borders?
Weird huh?

 

[DGS49]

The situation in Gaza is unique. The ruling body in Gaza has (a) stated in its founding documents the firm intention to eradicate all Jews from the territory in question, and has (b) continually for more than a decade mounted terroristic attacks - mainly in the form of missiles fired into civilian enclaves - against the State of Israel. Thousands of missiles over more than a decade.

Even now, the military forces attacking Israel could bring hostilities to a close almost immediately if they would release the hostages and stop their attacks. Indeed ALL of Israel's military actions have been reactive to stop "Palestinian" military initiatives.

As long as Hamas and its allies continue their attacks, Israel's action are defensive.

 

[Ringo]

 

[1srelluc]

Oh look, another Hamas apologist.....The MSM has given the leftist contrarian children a new loud toy to pester the adults with.

 

[Votto]

An occupier does not have the right to use arms in “self-defence”.​

There are four reasons why Israel cannot cite a legal right to self-defence in response to Palestinian violence.

First and foremost is that the ability of a very strong military power to achieve anything defensive by the attrition of a much weaker military power is spurious and leads into the genocidal logic of attempting to deprive a people of all capacity for violence.

The second reason is that Israel is actively contravening UN Security Council resolutions and the UN Charter is very clear on the fact that the right to self-defence exists “until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” A state that works to thwart UNSC measures to maintain peace and security cannot logically be extended the unimpaired right to self defence.

On the third count Israel is an occupying power and the occupied have a legal right to armed resistance. It would be nonsensical to accord a legal right to use arms to defend against another’s legal resistance.

Fourthly, it would be equally paradoxical to allow each party to act in self-defence against each other’s acts of self defence. Thus one of the parties must be the aggressor. On several counts, not least its defiance of UNSC resolutions, Israel must be considered the aggressor.
Israel’s only legitimate way of defending itself begins with ending its occupation. Israelis have a right to life and they deserve peace and security as we all do, but they have no right to kill Palestinians and claim that they are pursuing those things.

Let's make no mistake, Israel is the aggressor! And it is committing genocide. According to Arnon Soffer...

“When 2.5 million people live in a closed-off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today … The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day..."

These words are shockingly Himmleresque in labelling a people animals; in stating that mass killing is neither choice nor desire, but necessity...

All the Israeli supporters at this website echo this theme that it is "necessary" to inflict all this damage on the Palestinian's. This is Germany in the 30's all over again!

Can't imagine why Israel says they are just defending themselves.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article280341239.html

This is what you support. Go there and fight for islam.

 

[Darkwind]

The UN has ceased to be a legitimate organization and lacks any moral stance on any issue facing the planet today.

To cite the UN as a reason why Jews must allow themselves to be exterminated is beyond stupid and borders on that person being [placed on the spectrum of mental developmental handicap.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

If they have a right to defend against occupiers, why did they have to cross borders?
Weird huh?

The claim is that it is the whole of Israel that is occupied Palestine.
The entire nest needs to be wiped out.

 

[westwall]

An occupier does not have the right to use arms in “self-defence”.​

There are four reasons why Israel cannot cite a legal right to self-defence in response to Palestinian violence.

First and foremost is that the ability of a very strong military power to achieve anything defensive by the attrition of a much weaker military power is spurious and leads into the genocidal logic of attempting to deprive a people of all capacity for violence.

The second reason is that Israel is actively contravening UN Security Council resolutions and the UN Charter is very clear on the fact that the right to self-defence exists “until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” A state that works to thwart UNSC measures to maintain peace and security cannot logically be extended the unimpaired right to self defence.

On the third count Israel is an occupying power and the occupied have a legal right to armed resistance. It would be nonsensical to accord a legal right to use arms to defend against another’s legal resistance.

Fourthly, it would be equally paradoxical to allow each party to act in self-defence against each other’s acts of self defence. Thus one of the parties must be the aggressor. On several counts, not least its defiance of UNSC resolutions, Israel must be considered the aggressor.
Israel’s only legitimate way of defending itself begins with ending its occupation. Israelis have a right to life and they deserve peace and security as we all do, but they have no right to kill Palestinians and claim that they are pursuing those things.

Let's make no mistake, Israel is the aggressor! And it is committing genocide. According to Arnon Soffer...

“When 2.5 million people live in a closed-off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today … The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day..."

These words are shockingly Himmleresque in labelling a people animals; in stating that mass killing is neither choice nor desire, but necessity...

All the Israeli supporters at this website echo this theme that it is "necessary" to inflict all this damage on the Palestinian's. This is Germany in the 30's all over again!

Why did your heroes rape and murder foreigners at a music festival?

 

[HeyNorm]

An occupier does not have the right to use arms in “self-defence”.​

There are four reasons why Israel cannot cite a legal right to self-defence in response to Palestinian violence.

First and foremost is that the ability of a very strong military power to achieve anything defensive by the attrition of a much weaker military power is spurious and leads into the genocidal logic of attempting to deprive a people of all capacity for violence.

The second reason is that Israel is actively contravening UN Security Council resolutions and the UN Charter is very clear on the fact that the right to self-defence exists “until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” A state that works to thwart UNSC measures to maintain peace and security cannot logically be extended the unimpaired right to self defence.

On the third count Israel is an occupying power and the occupied have a legal right to armed resistance. It would be nonsensical to accord a legal right to use arms to defend against another’s legal resistance.

Fourthly, it would be equally paradoxical to allow each party to act in self-defence against each other’s acts of self defence. Thus one of the parties must be the aggressor. On several counts, not least its defiance of UNSC resolutions, Israel must be considered the aggressor.
Israel’s only legitimate way of defending itself begins with ending its occupation. Israelis have a right to life and they deserve peace and security as we all do, but they have no right to kill Palestinians and claim that they are pursuing those things.

Let's make no mistake, Israel is the aggressor! And it is committing genocide. According to Arnon Soffer...

“When 2.5 million people live in a closed-off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today … The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day..."

These words are shockingly Himmleresque in labelling a people animals; in stating that mass killing is neither choice nor desire, but necessity...

All the Israeli supporters at this website echo this theme that it is "necessary" to inflict all this damage on the Palestinian's. This is Germany in the 30's all over again!

Have you baked a baby today?

 

[Roudy]

An occupier does not have the right to use arms in “self-defence”.​

There are four reasons why Israel cannot cite a legal right to self-defence in response to Palestinian violence.

First and foremost is that the ability of a very strong military power to achieve anything defensive by the attrition of a much weaker military power is spurious and leads into the genocidal logic of attempting to deprive a people of all capacity for violence.

The second reason is that Israel is actively contravening UN Security Council resolutions and the UN Charter is very clear on the fact that the right to self-defence exists “until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” A state that works to thwart UNSC measures to maintain peace and security cannot logically be extended the unimpaired right to self defence.

On the third count Israel is an occupying power and the occupied have a legal right to armed resistance. It would be nonsensical to accord a legal right to use arms to defend against another’s legal resistance.

Fourthly, it would be equally paradoxical to allow each party to act in self-defence against each other’s acts of self defence. Thus one of the parties must be the aggressor. On several counts, not least its defiance of UNSC resolutions, Israel must be considered the aggressor.
Israel’s only legitimate way of defending itself begins with ending its occupation. Israelis have a right to life and they deserve peace and security as we all do, but they have no right to kill Palestinians and claim that they are pursuing those things.

Let's make no mistake, Israel is the aggressor! And it is committing genocide. According to Arnon Soffer...

“When 2.5 million people live in a closed-off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today … The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day..."

These words are shockingly Himmleresque in labelling a people animals; in stating that mass killing is neither choice nor desire, but necessity...

All the Israeli supporters at this website echo this theme that it is "necessary" to inflict all this damage on the Palestinian's. This is Germany in the 30's all over again!

Oh no it isn’t self defense when Palestinian animals stick a newborn in an oven, tie the father to a chair and then gang rape the mother in front of the father while the baby is cooking. Finishing off the act by burning the father and mother alive.

Around 1400 Israelis were killed in more or less the same fashion. The animals made it a point for the world to see who Palestinians truly are.

 

[surada]

If they have a right to defend against occupiers, why did they have to cross borders?
Weird huh?

How Israel Helped to Spawn Hamas - WSJ

www.wsj.com

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

An occupier does not have the right to use arms in “self-defence”.​

There are four reasons why Israel cannot cite a legal right to self-defence in response to Palestinian violence.

First and foremost is that the ability of a very strong military power to achieve anything defensive by the attrition of a much weaker military power is spurious and leads into the genocidal logic of attempting to deprive a people of all capacity for violence.

The second reason is that Israel is actively contravening UN Security Council resolutions and the UN Charter is very clear on the fact that the right to self-defence exists “until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” A state that works to thwart UNSC measures to maintain peace and security cannot logically be extended the unimpaired right to self defence.

On the third count Israel is an occupying power and the occupied have a legal right to armed resistance. It would be nonsensical to accord a legal right to use arms to defend against another’s legal resistance.

Fourthly, it would be equally paradoxical to allow each party to act in self-defence against each other’s acts of self defence. Thus one of the parties must be the aggressor. On several counts, not least its defiance of UNSC resolutions, Israel must be considered the aggressor.
Israel’s only legitimate way of defending itself begins with ending its occupation. Israelis have a right to life and they deserve peace and security as we all do, but they have no right to kill Palestinians and claim that they are pursuing those things.

Let's make no mistake, Israel is the aggressor! And it is committing genocide. According to Arnon Soffer...

“When 2.5 million people live in a closed-off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today … The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day..."

These words are shockingly Himmleresque in labelling a people animals; in stating that mass killing is neither choice nor desire, but necessity...

All the Israeli supporters at this website echo this theme that it is "necessary" to inflict all this damage on the Palestinian's. This is Germany in the 30's all over again!

The second reason is that Israel is actively contravening UN Security Council resolutions and the UN Charter is very clear on the fact that the right to self-defence exists “until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” A state that works to thwart UNSC measures to maintain peace and security cannot logically be extended the unimpaired right to self defence.

Fuck the UN and their resolutions.

On the third count Israel is an occupying power and the occupied have a legal right to armed resistance. It would be nonsensical to accord a legal right to use arms to defend against another’s legal resistance.

They aren't occupying Gaza or any place else.

 

[Roudy]

Press tv from Iran. What are you, a paid shill of the Islamic republic of Iran now?

 

[Roudy]

How Israel Helped to Spawn Hamas - WSJ

www.wsj.com

And yet the Palestinians voted for them twice.

 

[Dekster]

Israel has a right to defend itself. The issue is how they are choosing to do it. We shouldn't be condoning and rationalizing rules of engagement that we wouldn't even allow our own troops to engage in.

 

[Mac-7]

An occupier does not have the right to use arms in “self-defence”.​

There are four reasons why Israel cannot cite a legal right to self-defence in response to Palestinian violence.

First and foremost is that the ability of a very strong military power to achieve anything defensive by the attrition of a much weaker military power is spurious and leads into the genocidal logic of attempting to deprive a people of all capacity for violence.

The second reason is that Israel is actively contravening UN Security Council resolutions and the UN Charter is very clear on the fact that the right to self-defence exists “until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.” A state that works to thwart UNSC measures to maintain peace and security cannot logically be extended the unimpaired right to self defence.

On the third count Israel is an occupying power and the occupied have a legal right to armed resistance. It would be nonsensical to accord a legal right to use arms to defend against another’s legal resistance.

Fourthly, it would be equally paradoxical to allow each party to act in self-defence against each other’s acts of self defence. Thus one of the parties must be the aggressor. On several counts, not least its defiance of UNSC resolutions, Israel must be considered the aggressor.
Israel’s only legitimate way of defending itself begins with ending its occupation. Israelis have a right to life and they deserve peace and security as we all do, but they have no right to kill Palestinians and claim that they are pursuing those things.

Let's make no mistake, Israel is the aggressor! And it is committing genocide. According to Arnon Soffer...

“When 2.5 million people live in a closed-off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today … The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day..."

These words are shockingly Himmleresque in labelling a people animals; in stating that mass killing is neither choice nor desire, but necessity...

All the Israeli supporters at this website echo this theme that it is "necessary" to inflict all this damage on the Palestinian's. This is Germany in the 30's all over again!

It was the Palestines attacking and murdering Israel civilians, which is what started the current war

 

[westwall]

Israel has a right to defend itself. The issue is how they are choosing to do it. We shouldn't be condoning and rationalizing rules of engagement that we wouldn't even allow our own troops to engage in.

The pali's set the rules of engagement. The Israelis are merely following the Pali's lead.