Is Israel an independent state?

[CharleneG]

Whenever I read or hear criticism about something Israel has done, it's justified as a response, or a preemptive action, to something that Palestinians, or Iranians, or Syrians, or Americans (Obama, mainly) have done. It's as though Israel's foreign policies and activities are entirely controlled by outsiders.

I know much less about Israeli domestic affairs, so perhaps they follow some sort of self-established national agenda (not including anti-Arab actions, which would be more of the above).

But Israel's foreign affairs seem to be entirely reactive. Are there any examples of Israel acting internationally simply to advance its own peaceful, even idealistic, goals, without in any way justifying them in terms of what someone else has done or will do?

 

[Phoenall]

Whenever I read or hear criticism about something Israel has done, it's justified as a response, or a preemptive action, to something that Palestinians, or Iranians, or Syrians, or Americans (Obama, mainly) have done. It's as though Israel's foreign policies and activities are entirely controlled by outsiders.

I know much less about Israeli domestic affairs, so perhaps they follow some sort of self-established national agenda (not including anti-Arab actions, which would be more of the above).

But Israel's foreign affairs seem to be entirely reactive. Are there any examples of Israel acting internationally simply to advance its own peaceful, even idealistic, goals, without in any way justifying them in terms of what someone else has done or will do?

If the US was under constant attack from say Russian terrorists firing rockets into the heart of New York, Washington and Chicago how do you think the US government and people would react.
The muslim president is to blame for everything that comes his way, and he has made America the laughing stock of the world. Since he lost control of both houses he has been a president in name only and his wings have been clipped.

Looks like we have another islamomoron spouting islamomoron propaganda and RACIST LIES.

 

[Linkiloo]

Charlene what relatively smallish country can act unilertally in the world today? That is pretty naive to say the least.

 

[Daniyel]

Israel is (and was) in a fragile situation of which any action bare consequence, so it is a common sense not to dance on thin ice.
Criticism Follows Israeli Aid to Nepal - Bloomberg View

 

[TheOldSchool]

Whenever I read or hear criticism about something Israel has done, it's justified as a response, or a preemptive action, to something that Palestinians, or Iranians, or Syrians, or Americans (Obama, mainly) have done. It's as though Israel's foreign policies and activities are entirely controlled by outsiders.

I know much less about Israeli domestic affairs, so perhaps they follow some sort of self-established national agenda (not including anti-Arab actions, which would be more of the above).

But Israel's foreign affairs seem to be entirely reactive. Are there any examples of Israel acting internationally simply to advance its own peaceful, even idealistic, goals, without in any way justifying them in terms of what someone else has done or will do?

If the US was under constant attack from say Russian terrorists firing rockets into the heart of New York, Washington and Chicago how do you think the US government and people would react.
The muslim president is to blame for everything that comes his way, and he has made America the laughing stock of the world. Since he lost control of both houses he has been a president in name only and his wings have been clipped.

Looks like we have another islamomoron spouting islamomoron propaganda and RACIST LIES.

The US has a foreign policy where no one is firing rockets at us. So damn, I guess it's a waaaay better foreign policy than Israel has.

 

[Daniyel]

Whenever I read or hear criticism about something Israel has done, it's justified as a response, or a preemptive action, to something that Palestinians, or Iranians, or Syrians, or Americans (Obama, mainly) have done. It's as though Israel's foreign policies and activities are entirely controlled by outsiders.

I know much less about Israeli domestic affairs, so perhaps they follow some sort of self-established national agenda (not including anti-Arab actions, which would be more of the above).

But Israel's foreign affairs seem to be entirely reactive. Are there any examples of Israel acting internationally simply to advance its own peaceful, even idealistic, goals, without in any way justifying them in terms of what someone else has done or will do?

If the US was under constant attack from say Russian terrorists firing rockets into the heart of New York, Washington and Chicago how do you think the US government and people would react.
The muslim president is to blame for everything that comes his way, and he has made America the laughing stock of the world. Since he lost control of both houses he has been a president in name only and his wings have been clipped.

Looks like we have another islamomoron spouting islamomoron propaganda and RACIST LIES.

The US has a foreign policy where no one is firing rockets at us. So damn, I guess it's a waaaay better foreign policy than Israel has.

 

[Phoenall]

Whenever I read or hear criticism about something Israel has done, it's justified as a response, or a preemptive action, to something that Palestinians, or Iranians, or Syrians, or Americans (Obama, mainly) have done. It's as though Israel's foreign policies and activities are entirely controlled by outsiders.

I know much less about Israeli domestic affairs, so perhaps they follow some sort of self-established national agenda (not including anti-Arab actions, which would be more of the above).

But Israel's foreign affairs seem to be entirely reactive. Are there any examples of Israel acting internationally simply to advance its own peaceful, even idealistic, goals, without in any way justifying them in terms of what someone else has done or will do?

If the US was under constant attack from say Russian terrorists firing rockets into the heart of New York, Washington and Chicago how do you think the US government and people would react.
The muslim president is to blame for everything that comes his way, and he has made America the laughing stock of the world. Since he lost control of both houses he has been a president in name only and his wings have been clipped.

Looks like we have another islamomoron spouting islamomoron propaganda and RACIST LIES.

The US has a foreign policy where no one is firing rockets at us. So damn, I guess it's a waaaay better foreign policy than Israel has.

No you just don't have muslims as neighbours, but hold on muslims do fire rockets at you and mass murder 3,000 innocents in one attack.

 

[Correll]

Whenever I read or hear criticism about something Israel has done, it's justified as a response, or a preemptive action, to something that Palestinians, or Iranians, or Syrians, or Americans (Obama, mainly) have done. It's as though Israel's foreign policies and activities are entirely controlled by outsiders.

I know much less about Israeli domestic affairs, so perhaps they follow some sort of self-established national agenda (not including anti-Arab actions, which would be more of the above).

But Israel's foreign affairs seem to be entirely reactive. Are there any examples of Israel acting internationally simply to advance its own peaceful, even idealistic, goals, without in any way justifying them in terms of what someone else has done or will do?

The fact that they appear reactive just means they are in a bad place.

That in no way means they are not an independent nation.

 

[Penelope]

Israel pretty much blames all their bad behavior on others. They are the terrorists.

 

[Roudy]

Is Charlene a stinky sock?

 

[Daniyel]

The BDS threads always remind me I wasn't updating you all about the situation here, so you want to know what's new?

 

[Lipush]

Whenever I read or hear criticism about something Israel has done, it's justified as a response, or a preemptive action, to something that Palestinians, or Iranians, or Syrians, or Americans (Obama, mainly) have done. It's as though Israel's foreign policies and activities are entirely controlled by outsiders.

I know much less about Israeli domestic affairs, so perhaps they follow some sort of self-established national agenda (not including anti-Arab actions, which would be more of the above).

But Israel's foreign affairs seem to be entirely reactive. Are there any examples of Israel acting internationally simply to advance its own peaceful, even idealistic, goals, without in any way justifying them in terms of what someone else has done or will do?

I don't understand what the OP is trying to say. Sorry.

 

[Penelope]

Here I'll help you, Jews can put hate ads on city buses and have adult assemblies of Mohammed cartoonists and making fun of him , but

if your not PRO jew your anti Semitic. Get it now?

 

[Roudy]

For the same reasons Muslim animals walk around US campuses braying and waving their anti semitic banners, Jews can put ads on buses to make the American public aware of the evil of Islamism.

 

[Phoenall]

Here I'll help you, Jews can put hate ads on city buses and have adult assemblies of Mohammed cartoonists and making fun of him , but

if your not PRO jew your anti Semitic. Get it now?

No you need to provide links from non partisan sources to bolster your claims. By the way muslims can plae ads on city buses and have adult assemblies of Jewish cartoonists and make fun of the Jews. So where is the problem ?

 

[Penelope]

For the same reasons Muslim animals walk around US campuses braying and waving their anti semitic banners, Jews can put ads on buses to make the American public aware of the evil of Islamism.

I think we should put ads on Buses form the Talmud, you know Jew think Gentiles are lower than dogs, Jesus was a bas....d and Mary was a wh....re. What do you think. How about Zionist did 9-11.

 

[Roudy]

For the same reasons Muslim animals walk around US campuses braying and waving their anti semitic banners, Jews can put ads on buses to make the American public aware of the evil of Islamism.

I think we should put ads on Buses form the Talmud, you know Jew think Gentiles are lower than dogs, Jesus was a bas....d and Mary was a wh....re. What do you think. How about Zionist did 9-11.

We? You must be talking about those voices in your head again, crazy woman. But since it's a free country, you're more than welcome to try to put any of that garbage up in buses.

 

[Penelope]

For the same reasons Muslim animals walk around US campuses braying and waving their anti semitic banners, Jews can put ads on buses to make the American public aware of the evil of Islamism.

I think we should put ads on Buses form the Talmud, you know Jew think Gentiles are lower than dogs, Jesus was a bas....d and Mary was a wh....re. What do you think. How about Zionist did 9-11.

We? You must be talking about those voices in your head again, crazy woman. But since it's a free country, you're more than welcome to try to put any of that garbage up in buses.

Really, I really doubt Muslims could do that, the Jews would take them to court and win. Only jews can get away with hate speech. Jews want anti Semitism to be a crime internationally. But hey we know how "special" yous think you are with your tribal war god yahweh.

 

[RoccoR]

TheOldSchool, Phoenall, CharleneG, Daniyel, Penelope, Roudy, Correll, et al,

First, there is no question that Israel (The State of) is its own sovereignty and nation. It has its own foreign policy and national security programs. It has an active Internal Defense and Development (IDAD) Program and it has its own prioritized national interest list. But NO nation in the world, or in its immediate region, operates in isolation. When the Israelis do something, the risk inducing negative repercussions on America as one of their allies. So when Israel takes action, it is not unusual for someone like Senior Hamas Official, like Dr 'Issam 'Adwan, to incite The Islamic Resistance Movement (its assets and resources) to Attack Israel's Embassies, Interests, And Officials Worldwide – And The Interests Of Its Allies. This requires the US and Israel (most any nation) to perform a "Risk Assessment" on what might be more acceptable and less dangerous as one of the alternatives to a armed response or countermeasure. When the US made the conscience choice to help protect and preserve the Jewish National Home (AKA: Israel) from radicalist and extremist opponents (whatever the source), America openly assumed a certain level of risk from a variety of hostile elements. No nation, but most especially a Super Powers capable of shaping world events, operations in isolation. And the inverse of that is, it is not reasonable to assume that a close ally can take independent action of a controversial nature without splashing its allies that support them.

In November 2002, Osama bin Laden (ObL) of al-Qaeda fame, wrote an open letter to all Americans, which was heavily publicized all over the world. In this letter, ObL very first point was:

As for the first question: Why are we fighting and opposing you? The answer is very simple:

(1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.

a) You attacked us in Palestine:

(i) Palestine, which has sunk under military occupation for more than 80 years. The British handed over Palestine, with your help and your support, to the Jews, who have occupied it for more than 50 years; years overflowing with oppression, tyranny, crimes, killing, expulsion, destruction and devastation. The creation and continuation of Israel is one of the greatest crimes, and you are the leaders of its criminals. And of course there is no need to explain and prove the degree of American support for Israel. The creation of Israel is a crime which must be erased. Each and every person whose hands have become polluted in the contribution towards this crime must pay its*price, and pay for it heavily. SOURCE: Observer Worldview : Sunday November 24, 2002 ​

​

“In self-defense and in defense of the innocent, cowardice is the only sin.”
― Dean Koontz​

Whenever I read or hear criticism about something Israel has done, it's justified as a response, or a preemptive action, to something that Palestinians, or Iranians, or Syrians, or Americans (Obama, mainly) have done. It's as though Israel's foreign policies and activities are entirely controlled by outsiders.

I know much less about Israeli domestic affairs, so perhaps they follow some sort of self-established national agenda (not including anti-Arab actions, which would be more of the above).

But Israel's foreign affairs seem to be entirely reactive. Are there any examples of Israel acting internationally simply to advance its own peaceful, even idealistic, goals, without in any way justifying them in terms of what someone else has done or will do?

If the US was under constant attack from say Russian terrorists firing rockets into the heart of New York, Washington and Chicago how do you think the US government and people would react.
The muslim president is to blame for everything that comes his way, and he has made America the laughing stock of the world. Since he lost control of both houses he has been a president in name only and his wings have been clipped.

Looks like we have another islamomoron spouting islamomoron propaganda and RACIST LIES.

The US has a foreign policy where no one is firing rockets at us. So damn, I guess it's a waaaay better foreign policy than Israel has.

(REFERENCES)

Relative to the concept of proportionality in conflict.

Rule 14 --- Proportionality in Attack: Launching an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated, is prohibited. Source: Customary IHL

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.

Article 51(5b)

5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:

(b) an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.​

Article 57(2a)(iii)

2. With respect to attacks, the following precautions shall be taken:

• 
  (a) those who plan or decide upon an attack shall:

(iii) refrain from deciding to launch any attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

​

(COMMENT)

There are several conflicting concepts that affect the how any nation balances the idea of proportionality and response in respect to the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States.

• Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.
• Every State has the duty to refrain from any forcible action which deprives peoples referred to in the elaboration of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of their right to self-determination and freedom and independence.
• Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing or encouraging the organization of irregular forces or armed bands including mercenaries, for incursion into the territory of another State.
• Every State has the duty to refrain from organizing, instigating, assisting or participating in acts of civil strife or terrorist acts in another State or acquiescing in organized activities within its territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when the acts referred to in the present paragraph involve a threat or use of force.
• Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character.

There are some serious questions here pertaining to:

• What is "excessive" relative to an attack in response?
• What is a "concrete and direct military advantage?"
• Is "Launching an attack" different from "responding to an attack?"
• Is there a difference between an "attack launched to achieve a "direct military advantage" and that of an attack to achieve a "political outcome?"

These conflicting concepts were all developed and agreed upon after the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States.

• (1970) Affirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples under colonial and alien domination recognized as being entitled to the right of self-determination to restore to themselves that right by any means at their disposal;
• (1974) Reaffirms the legitimacy of the peoples' struggle for liberation form colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation by all available means, including armed struggle;
• (1978) Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle;

When all these elements are entered into the diplomatic equation, on finds that there is no such thing as a "Proportional Response" to a hostile opponent that claims the "right to use any and all means" or "all available means" authorized by the same General Assembly as the Partition Plan that was followed by three major conflicts and was not supported by the UN to maintain regional peace and security.

(THE FINAL QUESTION)

What is the "proportional response" to an opponent the is "entitled" to use "all available means?"

Most Respectfully,
R



Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hossfly]

For the same reasons Muslim animals walk around US campuses braying and waving their anti semitic banners, Jews can put ads on buses to make the American public aware of the evil of Islamism.

I think we should put ads on Buses form the Talmud, you know Jew think Gentiles are lower than dogs, Jesus was a bas....d and Mary was a wh....re. What do you think. How about Zionist did 9-11.

We should all give our appreciation to Penelope for showing us that she uses hates sites to get fake Talmud quotes. I wonder if she uses the same sites that a Muslim woman from India always used to get her fake Talmud quote.