The "I Stand With Israel" thread

[Slyhunter]

Billo_Really, Slyhunter, et al,

This is not exactly true.

Throwing rocks at tanks is not a capitol crime, it's legal resistance to a belligerent occupation.

(COMMENT)

It is covered in Article 68 of the Geneva Convention IV. It is not legal, any more than throwing rocks at police or military is legal in the US. Throwing rock is NOT legal resistance to a belligerent occupation.

ARTICLE 68:

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed.

SOURCE: Section III. Occupied territories

Most Respectfully,
R

Okay, RockyRacoon, I'll put it to you this way...

Is shooting a kid to death, proportionate to the offence committed?

Who says it has to be proportionate.
In a liberal war everyone stands in a circle and takes turns punching each other and that is what they think is a fair war. War isn't supposed to be fair.

 

[RoccoR]

Billo_Really, et al,

There are some events that I can't explain.

Billo_Really, Slyhunter, et al,

This is not exactly true.

Throwing rocks at tanks is not a capitol crime, it's legal resistance to a belligerent occupation.

(COMMENT)

It is covered in Article 68 of the Geneva Convention IV. It is not legal, any more than throwing rocks at police or military is legal in the US. Throwing rock is NOT legal resistance to a belligerent occupation.

ARTICLE 68:

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed.

SOURCE: Section III. Occupied territories

Most Respectfully,
R

Okay, RockyRacoon, I'll put it to you this way...

Is shooting a kid to death, proportionate to the offence committed?

(COMMENT)

This is a question that neither you or I can answer. It is not a matter of proportionality, but a matter relative to the "use of force." I wasn't there, and don't have access to the investigative jacket for the incident. It is necessary to clarify how the rules governing law enforcement and those regulating the conduct of hostilities interact in the context of the specific incident.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[TemplarKormac]

So whatever the Palestinians do is ok and the Israelites in turn can do nothing right. I may as well put you on ignore then.

You might as well put yourself there to, since you're so willing to put words in my mouth.

Interestingly enough... those with Pro Palestinian arguments have never been there either. Then there are those of us who make up for that weakness by educating ourselves, instead of spouting every bit of moral relativism we see or hear.

 

[P F Tinmore]

In the war between civilization and the savage, always choose civilization.

At least the Israeli's include the Disabled

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngICmpC5SNA]BBC News - Israeli strike on disability shelter in Gaza's Beit Lahiya - YouTube[/ame]

What do you expect? Look up for Hamas - Enemy of Humanity thread I posted it shows clearly the Hamas using of Human Shields.

That sure blows a hole in Israel's human shield bullshit.

Israel does not care if there are civilians there. Civilians shield nothing.

 

[teddyearp]

[MENTION=23819]MikeK[/MENTION], et al,

I respect your opinion.

(COMMENT)

There have been many times in my life when I had to choose, or not, to stand with my friend; or not. And sometimes, the choice comes with a price.

Standing with Israel - may - come with a price. I don't know. But the choice is about what is "right" and "who I am." My choice is somewhat on the order of the choice the Allied Powers made at San Remo; whether to take the action that would preserve and protect a culture, a decision for the greater good of humanity. No(t) everyone understands it, and not everyone agrees with it. But it was the choice they made.

I am willing to admit I know a great deal less than many of the erudite scholars involved in endless debate about who is right and who is wrong in the Israel/Palestine conflict. And one reason my knowledge of the finer details in the discussion is limited is I frankly don't care which side is right and which side is wrong. I see it as one more conflict in a world of numerous and constant conflicts -- none of which are any of our business.

(COMMENT)

To an extent, I have to agree with you on the point that, the final outcome is not "any of our business;" meaning US business. But that is sort of moot at this point. America is entwined and tangled in it now.

Of course, now it is impossible to just merely back away. All the various adverse and hostile influences would just swamp the Israelis, and that would lead to a negative outcome. And it wouldn't necessarily bring peace and security to the region.


(COMMENT)

Again, it is a hypothetical. While the Allied Powers made the initial decision in 1920 (San Remo), for all intent and purposes, the Resolution of November 1947 [GA/RES/181(II)], which set the conditions for independence (Arab and Jewish) was even more far reaching. With the exception of the UK (which abstained), all the 1947 Allied Powers voted to approve the measure (33 votes in favour and 13 against with 10 abstentions). It is not like the original decision of the Allied Powers (1920) was a single distant and far removed consideration in time. More than four decades later, the matter was reconsidered by the entire community of nations; including all the bad history of disagreements and discord over that period.

(SIDEBAR NOTE)

• Look at who then, voted against the measure, and what state status their countries are in now.
  Against:
  • Afghanistan,
  • Cuba,
  • Egypt,
  • Greece,
  • India,
  • Iran,
  • Iraq,
  • Lebanon,
  • Pakistan,
  • Saudi Arabia,
  • Syria,
  • Turkey,
  • Yemen,

(COMMENT)

Of course there are two sides to every story, just as neither side is totally wrong or totally right. And having been in the region, I can tell you that each side has heartbreaking stories and examples to share that they use to validate their perspective on history and the events as they unfolded. Having said that, and if all things were otherwise equal, the balance of my decision was heavily influenced by the actions and policies of the Arab Palestinian.

As for those that believe the land "was given to him by God," --- is beyond my ability to defend. But the religious component is certainly not unique to the Israelis. Next Sunday Morning, the airwaves and cable chances will be choked with the religious fever of the moment. And remember HAMAS is just the name used to describe in short, the Islamic Resistance Movement. And religion bring with it - its own brand of hardship, trouble and disagreement. But it is not unique to the Israelis.

I am not concerned with the right and wrong of that isolated example of the conflict in that region. Again, it's none of my business -- nor do I believe it's any of my Country's business. We have enough problems of our own to deal with. I simply believe we should avoid adding to our problems by supporting troublesome protectorates like Israel.

(COMMENT)

I am sure that there are many, many, Americans that might agree with you here. I am not in total disagreement with the concepts. I think we should stay out of the business in regards to failed states like Libya, Syria, (now) Iraq, and Yemen; as well as those ever in conflict states that pepper Africa. And there are still more issues we should remain silent. The US needs to back away from the idea that the US is a world leader and force behind the free-world. We certainly do not need to be the world police. We should allow these Islamic and Muslim States suffer at the hands of their own fate.

We've done enough for Israel and we don't need the problems.

(COMMENT)

And I would agree, except we will be leaving them stuck behind enemy lines; surrounded by nations riddled with strife and turmoil. They are nations of people that have very little in common with nations that think and act like western nations. They certainly do not have the same moral principles or concepts of humanity that our nations enjoy.

Again, having said that, I recognize you are not alone in your position.

Most Respectfully,
R

I dislike it when others quote huge posts like this, but I did it for one reason only:

"You must spread some reputation around some more before giving it to RoccoR again"

 

[Ibentoken]

They were offered their own country in 1948 and refused it and have done so repeatedly since then. Wise up.

I generally try to leave international law to Tinmore, coz he the man in that regard, but I can't help but ask, WHO exactly refused the partition plan in behalf of the Palestinians? and what was the source of that person's or group's legitimacy?

They have had numerous opportunities for statehood. The fact you're Ignorant of that isn't surprising. Carry on.

 

[Ibentoken]

Billo_Really, Slyhunter, et al,

This is not exactly true.

Throwing rocks at tanks is not a capitol crime, it's legal resistance to a belligerent occupation.

(COMMENT)

It is covered in Article 68 of the Geneva Convention IV. It is not legal, any more than throwing rocks at police or military is legal in the US. Throwing rock is NOT legal resistance to a belligerent occupation.

ARTICLE 68:

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed.

SOURCE: Section III. Occupied territories

Most Respectfully,
R

Okay, RockyRacoon, I'll put it to you this way...

Is shooting a kid to death, proportionate to the offence committed?

Take your proportionate propaganda and shove it up your lying ass.

 

[MHunterB]

Any American who values having friends in the world will dump Israel like a hot rock. Our tolerance of Israeli actions is responsible for our loss of support world wide, and particularly in the Muslim world. We don't need billions of enemies.

We never had 'support' from the Muslim world. And if we follow our 'error' of having supported the creation of Israel with dissolving the alliance for your 'reasons' - that will lose the US any remaining support we might have had, especially from Canada (and hence the rest of the Commonwealth nations).

We are not interested in deriving support from the Muslim world but rather peaceful co-existence with it and nothing more. We would like the religious crazies of that world to go on wiping each other out as they have done throughout history and to stay in their own back yard. In return we will stay in ours. And I believe the Muslim world will be very content with that arrangement. So we need to put an end to the Crusades.

Re: Canada: Canada is a cocker spaniel who lives next door to a massive pit bull who happens to like it. And don't lose sight of the fact that Canada depends on that pit bull for its very survival.

Nor would it gain any 'support' from the Muslim world - for they would see us as weak and open to be under their control (as so many of their leaders think would be proper: they've said so!)..... and they'd simply ramp up the pressure to re-shape the UN to suit global Islamic goals.

You are talking about a very tiny percentage of fanatical screwballs most of whom have never been able to afford more than two pairs of sneakers and a used AK-47. As for the majority of rational Muslims, they are not at all interested in having fifteen hydrogen bombs for breakfast. So whether they will "see us as weak," if you really believe that I won't try to pop the bubble. Go on believing it.

LOL, all that 'brilliant' analysis coming from a 'trufer' is hilarious. You seem to have forgotten something about Canada: it's part of a Commonwealth. The British bull dog may have lost half its teeth, but its jaws are still quite strong.

How do you propose we 'un-ally' with Israel, anyway? We need to have very good reason for breaking the treaties we've signed - and 'we can cut a better deal with the Arabs' just isn't the way it's ever been done.

Canada is probably our very closest ally - and they are *also* allied with Israel. They also supply the US with an increasing amounts of oil and hydroelectric power (the dam is on the Canadian side of the falls)

Meanwhile - what would we gain by having the 'support' of all those Arab "nations" which are mostly either iron-fisted dictatorships or chaotic hell-holes??

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not anywhere close to reality.

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is pretty straight forward.

You are cherry picking the occupation laws. Why don't you give us the rest of the story?

(COMMENT)

The inferred question was: Is throwing rocks at the Occupation Force legal?

The answer is: NO!

What is the rest of the story?

Most Respectfully,
R

An occupying power is authorized to enforce little local laws of the occupied territory and can make up some of its own. So far I have not seen anyone quote such a law.

For the most part Israel operates outside of the law of occupation so I am not sure that they even apply.

(COMMENT)

For the most part, Israel does comply to occupation law.

The problem is that Palestinians believe that they have some sort of special dispensation to violate the law. The fact is, that they don't.

Second, the situation in the Occupied Territories is complex. There are the two models that apply simultaneously. The law enforcement should be the default model. But the IDF often faces a threat that clearly originates in the armed struggle mode of the occupied territory from affiliated armed militant groups. The conduct-of-hostilities model becomes the applicable standard.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[amity1844]

Any American who values having any friends in the world would support Israel.

Any American who values having friends in the world will dump Israel like a hot rock. Our tolerance of Israeli actions is responsible for our loss of support world wide, and particularly in the Muslim world. We don't need billions of enemies.

So, whose 'support' have we lost, exactly? North Korea's? Anybody who matters? Or do you mean among some animals who never 'supported' us in the first place? What was this 'support' we support' we have allegedly 'lost'? Were they baking us free cookies or something? I recall we lost the 'support' of the Philippine govt. recently, but then they came crying and sniveling about the Red Chinese and suddenly want us back now, but that's about it. It's not like our 'supporters' aren't being paid or getting something for it in return, and then drop it the instant they can get a better advantage elsewhere.

Muslims are the best enemies to have; what kind of psychos and savages would want them for 'friends'? I mean besides neo-Nazis and other sociopaths and murderers.

Have you been hiding under a rock? Virtually the entire world condemns Israel now. And what is going on at this moment is NOT going to help.

 

[Vigilante]

UNDISPUTABLE!!!!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHC8KC5cLs8&list=UUWOkEnBl5TO4SCLfSlosjgg"]Why I support Israel - YouTube[/ame]

 

[teddyearp]

I STAND WITH ISRAEL!

So do I, with my boot right on its balls.

And with your boot on my balls, I would quickly draw my .45 and send a 230gr HP round into your head right between the eyes, **** face! Bye bye you muther ******!

don't worry I will self report.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not anywhere close to reality.

P F Tinmore, et al,

It is pretty straight forward.


(COMMENT)

The inferred question was: Is throwing rocks at the Occupation Force legal?

The answer is: NO!

What is the rest of the story?

Most Respectfully,
R

An occupying power is authorized to enforce little local laws of the occupied territory and can make up some of its own. So far I have not seen anyone quote such a law.

For the most part Israel operates outside of the law of occupation so I am not sure that they even apply.

(COMMENT)

For the most part, Israel does comply to occupation law.

The problem is that Palestinians believe that they have some sort of special dispensation to violate the law. The fact is, that they don't.

Second, the situation in the Occupied Territories is complex. There are the two models are applied simultaneously. The law enforcement should be the default model. But the IDF often faces a threat that clearly originates in the armed struggle mode of the occupied territory from affiliated armed militant groups. The conduct-of-hostilities model becomes the applicable standard.

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel is a mixed bag of occupying, colonizing, and invading.

As far as occupation is concerned there is a list of obligations and restrictions.

Israel disregards virtually all of them.

 

[Ibentoken]

Any American who values having friends in the world will dump Israel like a hot rock. Our tolerance of Israeli actions is responsible for our loss of support world wide, and particularly in the Muslim world. We don't need billions of enemies.

So, whose 'support' have we lost, exactly? North Korea's? Anybody who matters? Or do you mean among some animals who never 'supported' us in the first place? What was this 'support' we support' we have allegedly 'lost'? Were they baking us free cookies or something? I recall we lost the 'support' of the Philippine govt. recently, but then they came crying and sniveling about the Red Chinese and suddenly want us back now, but that's about it. It's not like our 'supporters' aren't being paid or getting something for it in return, and then drop it the instant they can get a better advantage elsewhere.

Muslims are the best enemies to have; what kind of psychos and savages would want them for 'friends'? I mean besides neo-Nazis and other sociopaths and murderers.

Have you been hiding under a rock? Virtually the entire world condemns Israel now. And what is going on at this moment is NOT going to help.

That's a lie. It's better to be silent than lie.

 

[Ibentoken]

P F Tinmore, et al,

This is not anywhere close to reality.

An occupying power is authorized to enforce little local laws of the occupied territory and can make up some of its own. So far I have not seen anyone quote such a law.

For the most part Israel operates outside of the law of occupation so I am not sure that they even apply.

(COMMENT)

For the most part, Israel does comply to occupation law.

The problem is that Palestinians believe that they have some sort of special dispensation to violate the law. The fact is, that they don't.

Second, the situation in the Occupied Territories is complex. There are the two models are applied simultaneously. The law enforcement should be the default model. But the IDF often faces a threat that clearly originates in the armed struggle mode of the occupied territory from affiliated armed militant groups. The conduct-of-hostilities model becomes the applicable standard.

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel is a mixed bag of occupying, colonizing, and invading.

As far as occupation is concerned there is a list of obligations and restrictions.

Israel disregards virtually all of them.

They should disregard all of them. Go **** yourself.

 

[teddyearp]

And what is going on at this moment with all the rocket fire from Gazais NOT going to help.

Fixed it for you!

 

[teddyearp]

UNDISPUTABLE!!!!

Why I support Israel - YouTube

Now this video is awesome and pretty much says it all.

And for the record, I stand with Israel, and I love Israel.

Ani ohev et Yisrael!

p.s. I did read the link to Ted Pike's article. I am curious about some of his quotes from the bible, however anyone can quote a line or two of verse to make a point. I will have to go and read them in the full context of what was written as that is the best way to know what was the true meaning.

 

[Phoenall]

Any American who values having friends in the world will dump Israel like a hot rock. Our tolerance of Israeli actions is responsible for our loss of support world wide, and particularly in the Muslim world. We don't need billions of enemies.

We never had 'support' from the Muslim world. And if we follow our 'error' of having supported the creation of Israel with dissolving the alliance for your 'reasons' - that will lose the US any remaining support we might have had, especially from Canada (and hence the rest of the Commonwealth nations).

Nor would it gain any 'support' from the Muslim world - for they would see us as weak and open to be under their control (as so many of their leaders think would be proper: they've said so!)..... and they'd simply ramp up the pressure to re-shape the UN to suit global Islamic goals.

We never had any support from the Muslim world because we have been supporting Israel since before they even had their independence.

Canada isn't going to want to be associated with what is going on in Israel, any more than the US is.

No one is remotely concerned with "weak" or "strong", that is archaic foreign policy thinking. The Soviet Union is gone now, after all.

Also, WTF are "global Islamic goals?" Really?

bull crap


Read the Koran and hadiths were they are spelled out for all to see, lets just say TOTAL WORLD DOMINATION

 

[Phoenall]

Long time ago, I sent a audio clip from "X-Men" to israelnationalradio.com being an avid reader/listener containing the bit between Wolverine and Storm of:

"...There is a war coming. You sure you're on the right side?"

"At least I've chosen a side."

So with that in mind,

The war has come. You sure you're on the right side?


I STAND WITH ISRAEL!

I stand with the Palastinians.

1. Stop moving into their neighborhoods. You guys are probably running out of space so you keep expanding into their territory. Stop it.

2. Stop treating them like second class citizens. We've all seen how you guys treat them and we do not approve. But you can't talk to jewish people about anything. Either you agree with them or you are anti semetic.

3. Give them their own country with plenty of space. Don't give them a 4 block radius and then pick on them with check points and blockaids. Separate yourselves from them.

1) They have no neighbourhoods until they agree mutual borders.

2) Act like second class citizens and that is how you will be treated. As recent reports show the Palestinians are just blood thirsty monsters that revel in violence and killing

3) they have a country with plenty of space when they learn how to run it in accordance with International law and the UN charter. Until such time the blockade and occupation stand.

 

[Phoenall]

They were offered their own country in 1948 and refused it and have done so repeatedly since then. Wise up.

I generally try to leave international law to Tinmore, coz he the man in that regard, but I can't help but ask, WHO exactly refused the partition plan in behalf of the Palestinians? and what was the source of that person's or group's legitimacy?

The religious leadership of the arab league who denied the partition plan in 1947, which was the general consensus of the whole arab world. Then in 1948 they again denied the Palestinians the right to free determination and a nation of their own. On the closing date of the mandate the Palestinians tried to be smart and claimed independence on the whole of Palestine, and this was refused by the UN.

By the way tinny knows nothing about International law, he still believes that the treaties re written by the Palestinian teacher are the real ones