Political Crossfire Forums

[The Comrade]

superskippy wrote: Quote: israel recieves 8 billion a year. that's chump change in israel's coffers.

That is a grossly high number for our grants, we received a little more than Egypt at around 1.5 billion USD with economic aid being phased out completely in the next few years. As well as military grants being reduced but the base amount afforded to us, Egypt, and Jordan by various agreements and DOD dole outs remains the same.

ahh. i'll have to go back and recheck my facts. thanks for the correction.

[superskippy]

No problam, it is always an attempt by many to try and knock Israel down a peg by claiming that we only do so well because of US monitary support. While utterily ignoring that other Arab nations receive hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and also inflate the monitary statistics. Not to mention that the Palestinians before the election of Hamas received from the EU and US nearly $1,100,000,000 annually in aid, with it doing little to nothing.

[Somebloke]

superskippy wrote: No problam, it is always an attempt by many to try and knock Israel down a peg by claiming that we only do so well because of US monitary support. While utterily ignoring that other Arab nations receive hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, and also inflate the monitary statistics. Not to mention that the Palestinians before the election of Hamas received from the EU and US nearly $1,100,000,000 annually in aid, with it doing little to nothing.

So...really, all I have to do is call myself a country, and the Americans will give me money?

[Topside]

CountryGuy wrote: Chymical wrote: No one died in this article, doubtless some of you are sad at that, but fear not, the MIC will have it's fill of blood regardless, the oppressed will remain oppressed don't worry about it dear hearts!

Are you advocating that human shields are the way to protect terrorist assets? You seem to be very gung-ho for this idea.

I wonder if these 'shields' were forced to stand there?

[The Comrade]

Topside wrote:

I wonder if these 'shields' were forced to stand there?

considering the foul play most of these groups use it wouldn't surprise me.

and if not physically forced they were probably brainwashed by the silly ideology those militants were preaching.

[CountryGuy]

Topside wrote: CountryGuy wrote: Chymical wrote: No one died in this article, doubtless some of you are sad at that, but fear not, the MIC will have it's fill of blood regardless, the oppressed will remain oppressed don't worry about it dear hearts!

Are you advocating that human shields are the way to protect terrorist assets? You seem to be very gung-ho for this idea.

I wonder if these 'shields' were forced to stand there?

According to the story, they all came willingly. And there's been nothing thus far to dispute the story.

[agentkgb]

Mr. Sunshine wrote: agentkgb wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: A human shield is a conscious decision to act in a military conflict in a manner defensive to an opponent. Israel missed in opportunity to kill 52 birds with one stone. 8:)
They're not militants.

A conscious act to place your body in front of a position that has launching rockets into a civilian population of an opposing force is an act of a militant. We cannot discriminate against a willing enemy based on gender or age. It would violate their Constitutional Rights which current Democratic Leaders in Congress want to extend to them. 8:)

In Somalia, when the militant firing positions encased themselves in willing human shields; they became militants as well as KIAs. 8:)
Militants are people that fight, not people that stand in the way of soldiers.

[junglecitizen]

superskippy wrote: We didnt try to create a religous state, we created the most secular state in the Middle East.
It is fundamentally a religious state. If Israel were not a Jewish state, it could not logically be called Israel. It could not logically be a Jewish state without some special status being given to citizens on the basis of religion. It is a religious state. It is obviously a very undesirable form of government from the point of view of an Arab who lived in Jaffa or Haifa beforehand.

Quote: As for the notion that we simply went in and carved up a country thats absurd. By the time of partition there was interncine inter-community violence with 1 Jew for every 2 Arabs in the country and a constantly growing Jewish population. The only solution was either to completely expel or destroy one group, an insane proposal, or to partition into two countries.
The internecine violence was not entirely without causes, as Ben Gurion's 1937 statements make clear. The movement to create an exclusively Jewish state with Jerusalem as its capital was well underway by the time of partition.

Quote: in the aftermath gathered territory from the Palestinian state to be.
A nice bloodless way of describing it.

Quote: You really, really do not want to try and use Lebanon as an example of religous harmony. I dont mean any offense, but it is a bad example and there are plenty of better ones. Lebanon spent decades of religous fighting and civil war, which really only came to a close a few years ago. What has really prevented it is the fact that the groups are decisivly split with Christian strongholds in the north and Hezbollah and other muslim strongholds in the south and Beirut at the moment a tentative neutral ground.
But it is also true that much of the war was fuelled and funded by the manipulation of the country from outside as a proxy battleground, with Israel allied with the Christian factions, and Syria with the Muslim factions. Without that backing, it's unclear whether the war would have lasted nearly as long. Yes, there are plenty of other examples of ethnic harmony out there; but the fact that a peace was achieved surely demonstrates something.

Quote: There remains no evidence that we had some secret mass plan to evict the Palestinian residences,
No, it doesn't appear to have been secret. Ben Gurion appears to have been quite clear on the general idea, if not on the specifics. In the modern day, Avigdor Lieberman takes a similar attitude.
Quote: Nor is there any evidence to support a supposed mass explusion. The vast bulk of the Arabs fled the war because it was a war a basic response, and with many having fled before we could even reach the areas it is impossible to claim we evicted them. With the early weeks of the war mainly being inter-village battles and defences in the Galilee against Syrian incursions there is little to support the claim.
That may be the standard response, but given that it is rare in the extreme that 100% of the population of a city would flee a war (it would have to be a lot worse than Baghdad, for example) it seems highly unlikely to me that the various Zionist groups about at the time - not all of which were officially affiliated with any general movement - did not have either an official or just generally understood plan to remove the Arab population by force. It is also notable that virtually none of the Jewish population appeared to be affected by this 'basic response' to a general war situation.

[Somebloke]

To be honest, I could not hear about this particular piece of news without having gained a little more respect from the Israeli army. There are millions of soldiers worldwide that would have fired happily into the crowd; given it's long, semi-permanent state of seige, one would think that Israel's armed forces would be one of them.

It makes you wonder about the huge stress that must come doing that job- as if you were stationed in Iraq for the rest of your life.

[CountryGuy]

agentkgb wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: agentkgb wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: A human shield is a conscious decision to act in a military conflict in a manner defensive to an opponent. Israel missed in opportunity to kill 52 birds with one stone. 8:)
They're not militants.

A conscious act to place your body in front of a position that has launching rockets into a civilian population of an opposing force is an act of a militant. We cannot discriminate against a willing enemy based on gender or age. It would violate their Constitutional Rights which current Democratic Leaders in Congress want to extend to them. 8:)

In Somalia, when the militant firing positions encased themselves in willing human shields; they became militants as well as KIAs. 8:)
Militants are people that fight, not people that stand in the way of soldiers.

Really? Are nurses militants? How about cooks? Just because you don't have a weapon in hand does not mean you are immediately considered a civilian.

However, that doesn't matter. These people walked into a military outpost, so they must deal with the repercussions. If not, what's keeping them from hanging out at a rocket launching, etc.?

[superskippy]

Quote: It is fundamentally a religious state. If Israel were not a Jewish state, it could not logically be called Israel. It could not logically be a Jewish state without some special status being given to citizens on the basis of religion. It is a religious state. It is obviously a very undesirable form of government from the point of view of an Arab who lived in Jaffa or Haifa beforehand.

So the basis of your claim that we were and/or are a religous state despite the fact that we are secular and have maintained that to the utmost degree, is that there was a Jewish base for the creation of the state. Under this conclusion there are few states in Europe which had deep religous foundations that do not qualify. Our state was not religous, it was secular in both practice and principle.

Quote: The internecine violence was not entirely without causes, as Ben Gurion's 1937 statements make clear. The movement to create an exclusively Jewish state with Jerusalem as its capital was well underway by the time of partition.

The cause was clear, the growing Jewish population desired a seperate state, and the Arab communities opposed such a move and tension had been building for many decades before that and had boiled into violence.

Quote: A nice bloodless way of describing it.

Dont try and make my country out to be some sort of evil aggressor, the Arabs made the choice of attack and 1-2% of our entire population died because of it. They made their choice and reaped the consequances.

Quote: But it is also true that much of the war was fuelled and funded by the manipulation of the country from outside as a proxy battleground, with Israel allied with the Christian factions, and Syria with the Muslim factions. Without that backing, it's unclear whether the war would have lasted nearly as long.

The civil war had been brewing and erupting into violence for decades before Israels involvement and the internal eruptions continued despite our entrance and withdrawel.

Quote: Yes, there are plenty of other examples of ethnic harmony out there; but the fact that a peace was achieved surely demonstrates something.

But peace wasnt achieved by negotiation or harmony, it was achieved by the partition of ethnic strongholds by the barrel of the gun and the pyre of thousands of corpses. The groups in essence had to quit the fight and with the destruction of several groups the fuel of the civil war generally decreased.

I just think it is a poor choice at least at this juncture in time.

Quote: That may be the standard response, but given that it is rare in the extreme that 100% of the population of a city would flee a war

There areny any cases where 100% of a true city were forced to flee. The only case that comes close would be the battles and sieges of Jaffa in which the Arabs elected under British guard to leave the city. Though even then moderate factions of the population elected to remain, though many did not.

Quote: It is also notable that virtually none of the Jewish population appeared to be affected by this 'basic response' to a general war situation.

It is part of why we won. The Arabs had places to withdraw to we did not, our morale was thus much higher. They had hundreds of miles and millions of people where they could continue to go to. They could wait temporarily in Jordan or occuped Egyptian zones. Where could we go? We had nowhere to go, once we retreated to a certain point we had to either fight or be destroyed.

Not to mention that in the Arab countries the Jewish populations were victimized and generally expelled, the Jewish expulsions of nearly 900,000 exceded the Palestinian one.

Quote: Militants are people that fight, not people that stand in the way of soldiers.

Once you are activily involved in a combat situation you cease to be a soldier. If you are unarmed but in anyway become involved with a military objective then you are not a civilian. If you put up obstacles in a non violent manner but with the clear intention of preventing a military objective you arent a civilian. If you shield soldiers, you arent a civilian as you are becoming a participant in a military operation.

[Mr. Sunshine]

agentkgb wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: agentkgb wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: A human shield is a conscious decision to act in a military conflict in a manner defensive to an opponent. Israel missed in opportunity to kill 52 birds with one stone. 8:)
They're not militants.

A conscious act to place your body in front of a position that has launching rockets into a civilian population of an opposing force is an act of a militant. We cannot discriminate against a willing enemy based on gender or age. It would violate their Constitutional Rights which current Democratic Leaders in Congress want to extend to them. 8:)

In Somalia, when the militant firing positions encased themselves in willing human shields; they became militants as well as KIAs. 8:)
Militants are people that fight, not people that stand in the way of soldiers.

If you invite a terrorist into your home, then your home gets turned to rubble in an air strike. It is established as military precedent in this campaign. That is the law of choice and consequence.

If you try to block that air strike with your body, then you are committing your body to potentially deadly consequences, just like your home, choice and consequence. A human shield does not stop bullets. Bullets go through bodies. It is a false term and a useless way to die; easy pickens in full auto, though. The media is the only thing that makes this technique successful. Hopefully, Israel will wise up and realize the human shields of today are the militants of tomorrow. 8:)

[CountryGuy]

Oh, and a quick update: While the Israelis have stopped, the Palestinians have shown great restraint... :roll:

Palestinian Missles Fired Into Gaza
Quote: At least five of the homemade projectiles hit the southern city of Sdeirut. A local resident was seriously wounded.

Palestinian Missles Fired Into Gaza

[Nico]

Chymical wrote: All brown peoples are militants in bizarro-world

:lol:

[cool_chick]

CountryGuy wrote: Oh, and a quick update: While the Israelis have stopped, the Palestinians have shown great restraint... :roll:

Palestinian Missles Fired Into Gaza
Quote: At least five of the homemade projectiles hit the southern city of Sdeirut. A local resident was seriously wounded.

Palestinian Missles Fired Into Gaza


Too bad you don't feel the same way when Irael doesn't show restraint, which is daily...... Can you imagine, you actually linking that and using rolling eyes for Israel's agressive actions too?

[superskippy]

We certaintly show restraint, isnt that the whole point of this article? What other army in the world telephones ahead to make sure the people can get away safely before bombing a target? Now I fear we will have to cut down on doing that to prevent this from happening again and more people will die.

[cool_chick]

superskippy wrote: We certaintly show restraint, isnt that the whole point of this article? What other army in the world telephones ahead to make sure the people can get away safely before bombing a target? Now I fear we will have to cut down on doing that to prevent this from happening again and more people will die.

Dude, restraint would be leaving those people's land alone. Would you feel ok if you got a warning Hamas was going to blow your house up, so get out......sorry about the house man, s*cks to be you, but hey, you're alive, that's because we're restrained? Would you feel that's "restraint?"

[JRM4833]

Clarino wrote: Hey, worked for Gandhi.

And there it is. The place has become so anti-Israel that people are now actually comparing Palestinians to Ghandi. :lol:

[cool_chick]

JRM4833 wrote: Clarino wrote: Hey, worked for Gandhi.

And there it is. The place has become so anti-Israel that people are now actually comparing Palestinians to Ghandi. :lol:

How does not approving of Israel's aggressive actions become twisted and demented to mean "Anti-Israel" to you? What do you mean by that? Do you think we're anti-seminites or something? If this is what you mean, that's highly offensive thing to say about someone....you're calling Clarino and by proxy me essentially a racist....

If you don't mean this, what exactly do you mean by "anti-Israel?" Are you an "anti-Palestinian" or something?

[JRM4833]

cool_chick wrote: JRM4833 wrote: Clarino wrote: Hey, worked for Gandhi.

And there it is. The place has become so anti-Israel that people are now actually comparing Palestinians to Ghandi. :lol:

How does not approving of Israel's aggressive actions become twisted and demented to mean "Anti-Israel" to you? What do you mean by that? Do you think we're anti-seminites or something? If this is what you mean, that's highly offensive thing to say about someone....you're calling Clarino and by proxy me essentially a racist....

If you don't mean this, what exactly do you mean by "anti-Israel?" Are you an "anti-Palestinian" or something?

Are you seriously saying that anti-Israel isn't the new popular stance among PCFers? It sprung up here almost overnight while I've been away and now everytime I come back P&G is flooded with these threads.

People can be anti-whatever they want ... but at least call it what it is. It's not anti-Semetic; It's anti-Israel. They believe that Israel, as a country, is evil and that they don't deserve to exist. Ease up ... if I wanted to say something like that I would.

Feel free to answer the question though ... is acting as a human shield (many of them armed with machine guns) to protect militant terrorists something that can be compared to the work of Ghandi?