Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by h.h.h.h.h)
    I'm not a zionist though.....
    IF I was a zionist I would not mention Deir Yassin, a massacre committed by facist elements of the zionist movement - Irgun and Lehi - or mentioned Jenin massacre committed by the IDF. I mentioned it and said that "I DO NOT CONDONE it". I can name a few more massacres committed by the IDF.

    So, before you put a libel on me you should carefully read what I wrote.

    Ha, a good new age libel, a common tactic of far leftists, extreme ight wingers, Islamists, conspiracy nuts, Westburo church and Western apologists.
    Forgive me but your incessant whining about the "other side" is taken directly from the "Zionist PR Manual".

    If you were not a Zionist, you wouldn't attempt to defend or deflect the attention onto another country.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footstool1924)
    Forgive me but your incessant whining about the "other side" is taken directly from the "Zionist PR Manual".

    If you were not a Zionist, you wouldn't attempt to defend or deflect the attention onto another country.
    First of all, I don't hate on all zionists, only far right, like the ***** Koch brothers, avigdor lieberman and o a certain extent Netanyahu and or facist zionist groups like the former Lehi and Irgun which were Zionist militias in the 40's.
    On another note:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vowNUOOMSHE
    I guess, this guy is a zionist to for pointing out George Galloway's hipocracy and him being a bigot for refusing to debate with an Israeli.
    I point out countries like turkey as they are guilty of genocide, which they still deny, and have the nerve to accuse Israel of Genocide.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1911609.stm
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    'palestinians' firing rockets at Israel, again.

    A projectile launched from the Gaza Strip on Thursday failed to cross into Israel and landed within Palestinian territory, IDF sources said.

    Alert sirens warning of the possible attack were sounded in Asheklon and the Ashkelon Coast Regional Council in light of the failed launching.

    Security sources said a single rocket launch appeared to have been detected.


    They're chancing their arm. This is typical 'palestinian' tactics.



    1) Start firing small amounts of rockets sporadically to prod and test Israel.

    2) Gradually increase rate of rocket attacks so as to create a 'new reality' for Israel whereby it must sit there and sustain a rocket or two every other day because hitting back would be 'disproportionate' at this point.

    3) Ratchet up the rocket attacks until they reach a daily occurrence. Incur some Israel strikes in empty fields as a warning, but continue the rate of fire and claim this is now 'revenge' for the Israeli strikes on the fields.

    4) This is when the international media then starts to pay attention. Usually leading with a headline such as "Israel pounds Gaza after alleged rocket strike.

    5) Rockets increase under the guise of "resistance" to Israeli retaliatory strikes.

    6) Eventually, all out confrontation ensues and the media goes into an anti-Israel frenzy.

    7) Israel pummels Gaza, the media give the 'palestinians' 24/7 coverage which they crave. The UN goes into a political frenzy.

    8) Eventually political pressure comes to bear on Israel and the conflict is stopped before Israel has been able to deal a decisive blow.

    9) 'palestinians' declare victory and begin begging for hand-outs

    10) Calm is restored

    11) 6 - 12 months on, sporadic rocket attacks begin to prod and test Israel

    Rinse and repeat.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by h.h.h.h.h)
    First of all, I don't hate on all zionists, only far right, like the ***** Koch brothers, avigdor lieberman and o a certain extent Netanyahu and or facist zionist groups like the former Lehi and Irgun which were Zionist militias in the 40's.
    On another note:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vowNUOOMSHE
    I guess, this guy is a zionist to for pointing out George Galloway's hipocracy and him being a bigot for refusing to debate with an Israeli.
    I point out countries like turkey as they are guilty of genocide, which they still deny, and have the nerve to accuse Israel of Genocide.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1911609.stm
    Another instance of whataboutery?

    You can't make a sentence about one of Israel's atrocious actions without referencing some other country doing what you feel to be the same to deflect attention away.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footstool1924)
    Another instance of whataboutery?

    You can't make a sentence about one of Israel's atrocious actions without referencing some other country doing what you feel to be the same to deflect attention away.
    Because both sides are wrong. It's not difficult to come to such a conclusion.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by h.h.h.h.h)
    Because both sides are wrong. It's not difficult to come to such a conclusion.
    Both countries as in Israel and Palestine?
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    yes, wrong in such that there were many chances to secure peace in the region but events like the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin by far right wing orthodox jew - Zionist.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The Palestinians have rejected peace at every single possible opportunity (1936 - Peel commision, 1947 and 2000 notably at Camp David). Although Israel have made some mistakes (no worse than what other countries make) they have tried to have peace and end the conflict multiple times. The Palestinian leadership want war (as shown by the Hamas charter) and teach anti semitism to their children. This is not the case of both sides are wrong. One side wants to protect their children with their army (Israel) the other wants to protect their weapons with their children (Hamas)
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RabbiKaplan)
    The Palestinians have rejected peace at every single possible opportunity (1936 - Peel commision, 1947 and 2000 notably at Camp David). Although Israel have made some mistakes (no worse than what other countries make) they have tried to have peace and end the conflict multiple times. The Palestinian leadership want war (as shown by the Hamas charter) and teach anti semitism to their children. This is not the case of both sides are wrong. One side wants to protect their children with their army (Israel) the other wants to protect their weapons with their children (Hamas)
    "Although Israel have made some mistakes (no worse than what other countries make) they have tried to have peace and end the conflict multiple times."
    Yes but will "eradicating Goyim" make you better than the other side?
    This is not the right reaction.

    Jeez, please do not accuse me of being a far radical leftist, nazi, anti semite or islamist sympathizer as I have been accused by the other side of being a Zionist.
    The best way to describe the history of the Levant (in fact also every other disputed region in history):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-evIyrrjTTY
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There has been no eradication of the Goyim. Christian and Muslim populations are booming in Israel. Whereas all indigenous people in the whole Arab world (including Jews and Christians) have been ethnically cleansed. One of the main reasons why there is no peace is that Palestinian leaders like Abbas insist on a Judenrein state whereby the Jews in the West Bank and other land given over will be kicked out of their homes if a peace agreement is made. The Palestinians need to rethink this policy if they want peace.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Newspaper archives that debunk 'palestinian' revisionism


    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RabbiKaplan)
    There has been no eradication of the Goyim. Christian and Muslim populations are booming in Israel. Whereas all indigenous people in the whole Arab world (including Jews and Christians) have been ethnically cleansed.
    Why do you assume it's not possible for Arabs to be indigenous?

    One of the main reasons why there is no peace is that Palestinian leaders like Abbas insist on a Judenrein state whereby the Jews in the West Bank and other land given over will be kicked out of their homes if a peace agreement is made. The Palestinians need to rethink this policy if they want peace.
    No, they insist all illegal settlers are kicked out. That Israel has only opted to colonise the West Bank with Jewish people is something of their own making.

    Bear in mind we are already discussing the compromise solution here. If you want the settlers to be able to stay, then call for a one-state solution.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RabbiKaplan)
    There has been no eradication of the Goyim. Christian and Muslim populations are booming in Israel. Whereas all indigenous people in the whole Arab world (including Jews and Christians) have been ethnically cleansed. One of the main reasons why there is no peace is that Palestinian leaders like Abbas insist on a Judenrein state whereby the Jews in the West Bank and other land given over will be kicked out of their homes if a peace agreement is made. The Palestinians need to rethink this policy if they want peace.
    Gershmoigenberg said that in his statement.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Why do you assume it's not possible for Arabs to be indigenous?



    No, they insist all illegal settlers are kicked out. That Israel has only opted to colonise the West Bank with Jewish people is something of their own making.

    Bear in mind we are already discussing the compromise solution here. If you want the settlers to be able to stay, then call for a one-state solution.
    I am afraid you have misunderstood international law. Technically settlers in disputed lands that have been held from a defensive war are not illegal. Yes, some settlers have behaved badly. But there is no colonisation of the West Bank. The Palestinians have benefited hugely from the Jews in the West Bank. It has created jobs and provided them with resources such as water and fruit. Although the Anti Semetic Western Media wont tell you that
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RabbiKaplan)
    I am afraid you have misunderstood international law. Technically settlers in disputed lands that have been held from a defensive war are not illegal.
    Leaving aside the nature of the Six Day War for the moment, who exactly disputes the West Bank? With the exception of East Jerusalem, Israel makes no formal claim to it (as that would oblige it to annex it).

    Also, this is all largely irrelevant. The relevant article of the Fourth Geneva Convention (the most oft-cited source prohibiting settlements) makes no mention of the nature of the war or whether there is a territorial dispute.

    Yes, some settlers have behaved badly. But there is no colonisation of the West Bank. The Palestinians have benefited hugely from the Jews in the West Bank. It has created jobs and provided them with resources such as water and fruit. Although the Anti Semetic Western Media wont tell you that
    Colonists always claim they are actually benefiting the colonised (which if it were true, would not negate the colonial nature of the process). Nothing new there.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Lets put aside the legitimacy of the settlements for one point, (as we clearly disagree on this one.)

    Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005 and left it with greenhouses and resources. They forcibly removed Jewish settlers against their will. The Palestinians did not respond with any offer of peace or even show up to negotiate. They decided to shoot rockets from the land, thereby terrorising Jewish families in Sderot and made one of the most amazing pieces of land, geographically (Gaza) into a hybrid of violence and antisemitism. In light of this, is there any reason why it would be in Israel's security interests or in the interest of Palestinian citizens who want peace, for Israel to evacuate themselves and their settlers from the West Bank? I think not....
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    World renowned experts from several major countries back Israel over Gaza conflict. Says they abided by international law.


    The IDF acted within the bounds of international law during its war with Hamas in Gaza last summer, a high-level group of former diplomats and military experts concluded after a fact-finding mission to Israel in May, according to the NGO UN Watch.

    UN Watch said a full copy of the report had been submitted to the UN Human Rights Council’s fact-finding mission into last summer’s conflict. The two-member UNHRC probe, headed by former New York Supreme Court justice Mary McGowan Davis, is expected to publish its own findings with the next 10 days, possibly as early Monday.

    On Friday, Geneva-based UN Watch published sections from a report in support of Israel by the ad-hoc High Level International Military Group, whose 11 members include the former NATO Military Committee chairman Gen. Klaus Naumann of Germany; former Italian foreign minister Guilio Terzi; former US State Department ambassador at large for war crimes issues Pierre-Richard Prosper; and the former commander of British Forces in Afghanistan, Col. Richard Kemp.

    During Operation Protective Edge last summer, in the air, on the ground and at sea, Israel not only met a reasonable international standard of observance of the laws of armed conflict, but in many cases significantly exceeded that standard,” the group concluded.

    “We saw clear evidence of this from the upper to the lower levels of command. A measure of the seriousness with which Israel took its moral duties and its responsibilities under the laws of armed conflict is that, in some cases, Israel’s scrupulous adherence to the laws of war cost Israeli soldiers’ and civilians’ lives,” the group said.



    The UN is expected to ignore this and accuse Israel of war crimes - a judgement which was predetermined by the UN because of the Islamic bloc and its allies' dominance at the UN.

    Obviously the BBC did not deem it important enough to report this, but rest assured they will have the predetermined UN kangaroo court judgement as headline news.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LockheedSpooky)
    World renowned experts from several major countries back Israel over Gaza conflict. Says they abided by international law.


    [u][size=5][color=#ef5c61]


    The UN is expected to ignore this and accuse Israel of war crimes - a judgement which was predetermined by the UN because of the Islamic bloc and its allies' dominance at the UN.

    Obviously the BBC did not deem it important enough to report this, but rest assured they will have the predetermined UN kangaroo court judgement as headline news.
    I'm interested to know about this High Level International Military Group; no website, no wikipedia page, nothing on Naumann's wikipedia page... A Der Spiegel article shows him to be someone who thinks that Wikileaks is unjustified to publish widely known documents on western involvement in Afghanistan.

    Guilio Terzi was the Italian foreign minister until 2013 and the Italian ambassador to Israel for 3 years. He resigned in 2013 after his involvement in the shooting of two innocent, unarmed indian fishermen off the indian coast. Marines guarding a cargo ship had shot them in the belief that they were pirates. Accounts say that they opened fire on them for 2 minutes unprovoked. He resigned because he was sympathetic with the two marines who had shot the fishermen. They were later charged with murder, conspiracy and mischief. The case continues. Terzi blames it on the local police, tricking the cargo ship into going into Indian waters, so that conflict would occur.

    Prosper worked as the chief ambassador for war crimes issues under George Bush... #nuffsaid

    Apart from immediately accusing a pro Palestine professor who occupied one of his lectures at the University of Sydney of anti-semitism, he is also a well known speaker for the organisation SFI, which believe in a Europe-wide ant-Israeli conspiracy - "If we don't do anything then we are all anti-semitic."

    So, we have a german General who thinks that what happened in Afghanistan should stay in Afghanistan, an Italian diplomat who sympathised with two suspected murderers, an American lawyer and ambassador who worked for George Bush dealing with war crimes issues (alarm bells ringing) and a British Colonel who thinks that there is also a media agenda against Israel, and speaks for a group which calls for action among every Jewish person in Europe. All part of a group that hasn't got a website, or a wikipedia page (all the people listed above did) and hasn't been picked up upon apart from one pro-Israel outlet, probably the jpost, and has been copied and pasted (I checked) everywhere. Maybe that's why mainstream media outlets are suspicious.

    What I see is a group of right-wing ambassadors, lawyers and military leaders who formed a group, gave it a fancy name, went to Israel with their minds already made up and submitted an entirely opinionated and subjective piece on the situation. They cannot be considered credible.

    No watchdog, organisation or thinktank can be entirely objective, but the UN has proven itself to be historically as close as we can get. This group, with no regulation, history or even anything to prove its existence beyond possibly a few emails between it's members, cannot say the same for itself. The UN probably published this document to prove it's neutrality.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Do you think Palestinians will ever get their statehood? I can hardly see them being included into Israel, their influence wouldn't be tolerated nor can I see the current Israeli government giving in.

    Legitimacy aside, Israel is the greater of two evils in my opinion. The sheer number of civilians killed and restrictions placed on them is astounding.

    I also dislike the lack of attention being paid to all other people being suffered around the world. Thankfully, the Rohingya are finally coming to people's attention but I dont believe it will be for long.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Guills on wheels)
    lots of waffle...

    Major US military law experts: IDF ‘contentious’ targeting complies with international law


    Two leading US experts on the law of armed conflict have concluded that IDF targeting complies with international law even where it was “contentious,” and that IDF positions “on targeting largely track those of the US military.”

    Although formally their report says it is not judging specific instances from the summer Gaza War, the unmistakable conclusion of the report is to support the IDF’s approach almost across the board in the principles it brought to targeting during the war – principles at the core of the public debate over alleged war crimes.

    Because of the authors’ prominence and the unprecedented inside access they were given to IDF operations, the impact of the report could be wide-ranging and even influence decisions by the International Criminal Court on the issues.
    The two authors of the 52-page report – a summary of which was posted on the academic legal blog Just Security on Friday, but is being reported in the mainstream media for the first time here, in The Jerusalem Post – are Michael Schmitt and John Merriam.

    In the academic debate over how aggressively Western militaries can fight against adversaries such as Hamas or al-Qaida, which purposely endanger civilians in war, Schmitt is one of the leading voices in the US and globally for a more aggressive posture.

    Schmitt is the top expert on the law of armed conflict at the US Naval War College and also holds posts at NATO, Harvard and Exeter in England. Previously, he was a US Air Force lawyer and is widely influential on militaries’ practices even beyond the US.

    Merriam also holds a post on the law of armed conflict at the Naval War College and continues to serve as a major and a lawyer in the US Army.

    The summary says that “Israel has long resisted publicly revealing its targeting methods and even some of its specific positions on the law of armed conflict, fearing that doing so” would help “its adversaries” and “be exploited” by its international critics.

    It continues, “This may be changing….The IDF invited us to Israel to examine its targeting practices…. We visited an operational IDF headquarters (the Gaza Division) and observed its targeting cells; reviewed the targeting procedures of both ground and air forces … visited a Hamas attack tunnel; examined combat footage… and interviewed IDF officers – both legal advisers and operators.”

    Schmitt writes that the IDF’s targeting practices are “broadly within the mainstream of contemporary state practice, but the nuances… can only be understood” in Israel’s specific context.

    He notes that the “Israeli population views itself as ‘under siege’ – Israel is surrounded by foes” who regularly launch rockets at Israeli populations centers.

    “These rockets are capable of ranging virtually the entire country,” states Schmitt.

    He adds, “Put in terms of the law of armed conflict, the destruction of rockets and rocket-launching infrastructure (often in the form of civilian houses converted to military use in order to deter Israeli attack) has a high degree of ‘anticipated military advantage,’ such that it may justify (from the IDF’s standpoint) levels of collateral damage that may strike outside observers as potentially excessive.”

    Next, the report focuses on “the acute casualty aversion in Israeli society writ large, coupled with a pervasive fear of IDF soldiers being taken prisoner and used to exert strategic leverage over Israel.”

    Schmitt says the US’s highly criticized decision to trade five Taliban fighters for the release of US Sgt.

    Bowe Bergdahl as compared to Israel routinely releasing hundreds or even thousands of captured fighters for the return of IDF soldiers or their remains illustrates the unique Israeli mentality on the issue.

    He points out that whereas the US is a volunteer force, the IDF is a conscript force and that “nearly every Israeli family has loved ones who have confronted, are confronting, or will confront the risk of capture or death in combat.”

    Schmitt discusses how the IDF’s approach and strikes on Hamas’s tunnels, cement plants and its soldiers concentrated in civilian settings sometimes lead outside observers to question Israel’s commitment to basic principles such as distinction, proportionality and minimizing civilian casualties.

    In contrast, he repeatedly equates IDF practice with US military practice and concludes that even where the IDF differs from the US, “the Israeli approach remains within the ambit of generally accepted state practice” and “in many cases, worthy of emulation.”

    He adds that the IDF legal advisers are “highly competent,” “well-trained” and have a “remarkable degree of autonomy.”

    At its core, Schmitt’s report explains the basis for unique and aggressive Israeli interpretations of what is a military objective; when civilians cross over and become “direct participants” in hostilities; “voluntary human shields”; open-ended targeting of “organized armed groups”; how much weight is given to uncertainty and doubt in targeting; and Israel’s controversial “roof-knocking” warning policy.

    Schmitt’s conclusions will be viewed as controversial in opposing academic circles and within much of the human rights community, but he is taken seriously by most parties.

    Neither the IDF, nor the Justice Ministry nor the Foreign Ministry wished to comment on the report – likely because the report’s positive analysis speaks for itself.


    You shouldn't have any confusion as to their prominence, as even the UN itself defers to them for advice.



    Professor Michael Schmitt

    Professor of Public International Law In addition to serving as Professor of Public International Law at Exeter Law School and a member of Exeter University's Strategy and Security Institute, Professor Schmitt is the Charles H. Stockton Professor and Director of the Stockton Center for the Study of International Law at the United States Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island. He is also a Fellow at Harvard Law School's Program on International Law and Armed Conflict, Senior Fellow at the NATO Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, and General Editor of International Law Studies. Professor Schmitt was previously Professor of International Law at Durham University, Dean of the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Germany, and General Editor of the Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law. Before joining the Marshall Center, Professor Schmitt served 20 years in the United States Air Force as a judge advocate specializing in operational and international law. Professor Schmitt has been an invited visiting scholar at Melbourne University, Australian National University, Yale Law School and Emory University, and has delivered the Sir Ninian Stephen Lecture at Melbourne University, the Hilaire McCoubrey Lecture at Hull University and the Waldemar Solf Lecture at the US Army’s Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center and School. He serves on many boards of institutions, learned and professional societies, and publications dealing with international humanitarian law. The author of over 130 scholarly publications, his academic degrees include a D.Litt (Durham University), JD (University of Texas), LL.M (Yale University), MA (Naval War College), and MA (Texas State University). He is a life member of the Council on Foreign Relations and a Fellow of the Royal Society of the Arts.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 8, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.