International Politics Thread

[chops 111]

Baff1, you'd best get on to Amnesty International and tell them to stop their cultural imperialism quick smart. The nerve of them!

I trust they will find your unique brand of anti-logic as hilarious as I do.

Please point me to a link where race is defined by religion.

Bernadotte, neither name-calling nor bigger fonts will get you anywhere.

Quote[/b] ]The israeli claim that palestinian civillians are supporting Hamas and are therefore responsible for the high deathtoll on civilian side is bullshit. The use of incendiary ammunition in crowded areas is murder. Intentional murder for political goals, not military goals.  The result of the military strike is ridiculous at best. Oh yes, certainly the western world will have to pay for the rebuilding of infrastructure in the palestinian territories ONCE MORE just because the israelis still get a hard-on when having another war. What are the results of this war ? What did the israelis achieve ? I´d say it´s about time for the US to redifine their position towards Israel drastically. Right now the US support ethnic cleansing. That´s the bottom line.

Balschoiw, well said sir.

Imagine the death toll were the UK to have responded to the IRA in Israeli style, or the Indians to Pakistani militants etc etc etc.

I could scarcely believe my ears when I heard the Israeli spokesman Mark Regev saying the IDF is doing it's utmost to prevent Palestinian civilian casualties. A strange thing to say while dropping bombs on their houses. And to then tell them that Hamas is to blame! Are they seriously thinking that support for Hamas will decrease after the IDF murder people's kids and destroy their houses?

Israel has defied about four times the number of UN Security Council resolutions that Iraq ever has. It was the enforcement of one resolution that the US et al used to invade Iraq.

[Baff1 0]

Please point me to a link where race is defined by religion.

WWW.dictionary.com

I shouldn't have to post you such basic links mate.

I'm not your dad.

Next time please take the time to educate yourself before posting.

Race can be defined by many things, including genetics, skin colour, geography, nationality and religion.

It can even be defined by species.

You are judging people by the reputation of others and not on their own individual actions.

Quote[/b] ]And to then tell them that Hamas is to blame! Are they seriously thinking that support for Hamas will decrease after the IDF murder people's kids and destroy their houses?

While I concur with yours and Balschows assessment of who carries the most blame, no one likes a loser.

It is very common for peoples who lose a war to overthrow their government straight after.

Stranger things have happened.

[chops 111]

Baff1, you make no sense whatsoever. You accuse me of things you openly admit to yourself, your standpoint changes with every post.

Before I wash my hands of this round-and-round-the-mulberry bush nonsense, I will leave you with what my research into the link you provided uncovered;

Quote[/b] ]Racism

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Surely you would have checked that first yourself?

Trying to have a debate with you is a bit like the Mad Hatter's Tea Party, just without the tea or the fun.

[ShadowY 0]

"........and also....A PALESTINIAN DREAM"

[Balschoiw 0]

OMG...

it´s...

the...

riddler !

[Baff1 0]

Baff1 mentioned racial intolerance of not being understanding of other culture's customs, well they (the more zealous types) don't care for our feelings and customs, but we have to do for theirs, and that is racial tolerance? It's still one-sided. Muslims are not a majority in the Netherlands, so we don't have to do anything, if they were the culture would be different, and would suit them and not us.

Whether you like it or not those minorities are a part of your culture now. It's not just them that needs to adjust to it.

I would suggest to you, that "they" do care about your culture and customs.

That they have chosen your country as their new homes precisely because they agree with so many of them.

It's pretty normal for migrants to be fans of the countries they move to. (Dutchophiles? is there such a word?).

They aren't like the indiginous inhabitants. They don't live there as an accident of birth.

They actively chose to live there and went to considerable lengths to become a part of that culture. It was a conscious decision.

I understand that integrating immigrants into a society comes with it's frictions, but since you mentioned majority rule...

You might want to recognise that your countries majority, agreed to their migration.

So you probably do have to do something, whether you individually, or even as part of a minority, agree with it or not.

[Baff1 0]

Baff1, you make no sense whatsoever. You accuse me of things you openly admit to yourself, your standpoint changes with every post.

I'm wasn't trying to have a go at your beliefs mate, I share many of them.

I was just correcting your errors.

You asked a symantic question and I gave you a factual reply.

I'm sorry it couldn't have been the reply you were looking for.

I gave it because it was the correct one, not because it reinforced any of my own opinions.

Please do not try and read any personal standpoint into the errors I have attempted to correct.

My goal in replying to you was to correct your inaccuracies not to pass judgement over the morality of your views.

I do hold views on the subject and have endeavoured to share them in this thread.

I had hoped that it was clear from my writing when I am attempting to give my personal standpoint and when I am attempting to correct a factual mistake.

I will try harder to make this distinction more apparent in future.

[Bernadotte 0]

Obama started his first day doing exactly what I'd have done.  His first phonecall as president was made to Palestinian President Abbas.  He then spoke with the leaders of Israel, Jordan and Egypt.

Quote[/b] ]The spokesman for President Abbas revealed that Mr Obama had told the Palestinian leader that their conversation was his first with a foreign leader since taking office. The new President had promised to “deploy every possible effort to achieve peaceâ€, the spokesman said.

Mr* Obama also spoke to President Mubarak of Egypt, Ehud Olmert, the Prime Minister of Israel, and King Abdullah of Jordan.

-- Times

* Odd that the Times still refers to Obama as mister.

If Obama has seriously tried to envision the end of this conflict as a grand peace treaty signing ceremony then he knows there's no room in that picture for a Hamas Prime Minister.  So his first objective is to get rid of Hamas in this April's elections by providing the Palestinians with a viable alternative.

At the moment, the most effective way to empower Abbas' opposition Fatah party is to give them reconstruction aid for Gaza.  If the people of Gaza finally get the help from Abbas that they never got from Arafat then this will eliminate one of their main reasons for supporting Hamas.  Conversely, if Hamas refuses to accept aid unless it is given directly to them then Gazans will start holding Hamas responsible for prolonging the suffering.

Another interesting factor in all this is the fate of one Israeli and one Palestinian.  The Israeli is kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit and the Palestinian is politician/ex-militant leader Marwan Barghouti, now serving 5 life sentences in Israel.  From his jail cell, Barghouti would have defeated Abbas for the presidency during the last general election if he'd not been convinced to withdraw.  Hamas has offered to release Shilat in exchange for Barghouti's freedom, perhaps because this would probably get rid of Abbas this April.  Israel has said no because they refuse to deal with Hamas, but more likely because they don't want Barghouti to replace Abbas as President.

 Marwan Barghouti...  Possible post-Hamas Palestinian Prime Minister?

I've always liked Barghouti.  He knows English and is also fluent in Hebrew (self-taught while serving time after First Intafada).  As a militant, he's always opposed acts of resistance outside of the West Bank and Gaza.

Quote[/b] ]"And while I, and the Fatah movement to which I belong, strongly oppose attacks and the targeting of civilians inside Israel, our future neighbor, I reserve the right to protect myself, to resist the Israeli occupation of my country and to fight for my freedom."

"I am not a terrorist, but neither am I a pacifist. I am simply a regular guy from the Palestinian street advocating only what every other oppressed person has advocated—the right to help myself in the absence of help from anywhere else."

-- Marwan Barghouti

If he can be convinced to return to Fatah and run for Prime Minister this April then Hamas will be finished and Obama will be well on the way to winning his Nobel.

And this just in:  Late today, Obama appointed George Mitchell to be his administration's Middle East envoy.  This is very good news.  Mitchell's famous report on the causes of the Second Intafada openly placed blame on Israel's construction of Jewish settlements across Palestinian territory as well as Palestinian terrorism.  Btw, when Mitchell served as special envoy to Northern Ireland he successfully instigated a peace process there that has held to this day.

[Baff1 0]

It was a pretty ease thing for him to do.

All he had to do was stop U.S. funding to the IRA.

With that done, it was just a matter of time.

It is perhaps a little premature to call that one over however.

Quiet, yes, but it's been this quiet before.

Will he do the same and cut off funding for Israel?

I doubt it.

There is no domestic American will to see Israel lose.

Bush only cut off the IRA because of 9/11. It would take another world event of that proportion for the US to abandon funding Israel.

[billybob2002 0]

It was a pretty ease thing for him to do.

All he had to do was stop U.S. funding to the IRA.

With that done, it was just a matter of time.

It is perhaps a little premature to call that one over however.

Quiet, yes, but it's been this quiet before.

Will he do the same and cut off funding for Israel?

I doubt it.

There is no domestic American will to see Israel lose.

Bush only cut off the IRA because of 9/11. It would take another world event of that proportion for the US to abandon funding Israel.

The United States government did not support the pIRA. In fact, back in the 1980s, the FBI set up a task force to combat the shipment of arms to the pIRA from the United States by private American citizens. I think you got Libya confused with the United States.

[Baff1 0]

It was a pretty ease thing for him to do.

All he had to do was stop U.S. funding to the IRA.

With that done, it was just a matter of time.

It is perhaps a little premature to call that one over however.

Quiet, yes, but it's been this quiet before.

Will he do the same and cut off funding for Israel?

I doubt it.

There is no domestic American will to see Israel lose.

Bush only cut off the IRA because of 9/11. It would take another world event of that proportion for the US to abandon funding Israel.

The United States government did not support the pIRA. In fact, back in the 1980s, the FBI set up a task force to combat the shipment of arms to the pIRA from the United States by private American citizens. I think you got Libya confused with the United States.

The government allowed fund raising in the U.S.

President Bill Clinton was a personal sponsor even while in office.

Bush stopped it after 9/11.

Congress has already attempted to recind that ban once since he passed it.

The Irish vote is a big lobby group in the U.S. just as the Jewish vote is.

**Edit** as a little update, a 300lb car bomb was found in County Down today. Just in case you didn't want to take my word for it that IRA are still active.

A lot of people have stepped up to take the credit for the peace in Northern Ireland. It's pretty sickening to listen to the very people that funded the bombings claim that title.

[Bernadotte 0]

And again, Israel just got hit by a few rockets from Gaza that harmed nobody and caused no damage.  The greater harm probably comes from 3 different news agencies for being able to report 3 different versions of events:

Quote[/b] ]Israel threatens 'disproportionate' response to Hamas rocket fire

-- CBC News

Quote[/b] ]Israeli PM Threatens 'Disproportionate Response' to Palestinian Rockets

No group claimed responsibility for the attack...

-- Voice of America

Quote[/b] ]Israel vows "disproportionate" response to rockets

A wing of al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, a group belonging to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah faction, claimed responsibility.

-- Reuters

Given that Israeli intelligence has already blamed West Bank militants for Gaza rocketfire, I'm inclined to believe the Reuters version.  But even Reuters avoids asking the bigger question:  How does an enemy of Hamas like the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade manage to get out of the West Bank, across Israeli territory, and into beseiged Gaza armed with rockets that ultimately do no harm except to give Israel an excuse to attack Hamas? And why wouldn't West Bank militants simply aim their rockets at targets right within the West Bank such as Israeli settlements?

Hmm...  

[Maddmatt 1]

And again, Israel just got hit by a few rockets from Gaza that harmed nobody and caused no damage...

So if rockets were fired at your neighbourhood and you were lucky enough for nobody to be harmed, you would be perfectly fine with those responsible getting away with it?

If nothing was done, there would be more attacks and they could be worse.

When you fire rockets at the big country next door, what the hell do you expect?

Many of us are lucky not to live in these kind of war zones.

[Bernadotte 0]

So if rockets were fired at your neighbourhood and you were lucky enough for nobody to be harmed, you would be perfectly fine with those responsible getting away with it?

Wow... Way to miss the entire point of what I'd posted.  

I'll try to simplify the matter:

If some guys in neighbourhood A shot rockets at you from neighbourhood B who would you retaliate against, the guys in A or the guys in B?

[Maddmatt 1]

So if rockets were fired at your neighbourhood and you were lucky enough for nobody to be harmed, you would be perfectly fine with those responsible getting away with it?

Wow... Way to miss the entire point of what I'd posted.  

I'll try to simplify the matter:

If some guys in neighbourhood A shot rockets at you from neighbourhood B who would you retaliate against, the guys in A or the guys in B?

I was only responding to the part I quoted.

[Bernadotte 0]

I was only responding to the part I quoted.

Oh really?  What the hell did your response have to do with the part you quoted?   How did my brief summary about a recent rocket attack lead you to think that I might "be perfectly fine with those responsible getting away with it?"

Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and other militants from the West Bank have claimed responsibility for these attacks out of Gaza. So far they've been getting away with it, and no, I'm not fine with that at all.  Are you?

[Maddmatt 1]

Oh really?  What the hell did your response have to do with the part you quoted?   How did my brief summary about a recent rocket attack lead you to think that I might "be perfectly fine with those responsible getting away with it?"

Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and other militants from the West Bank have claimed responsibility for these attacks out of Gaza.  So far they've been getting away with it, and no, I'm not fine with that at all.  Are you?

I didn't read much of your previous posts so I guess it was taken out of context by me. It looked like you were saying the rocket attacks were no big deal.

Oh well, forget it. My mistake I guess.

[Baff1 0]

There were 3 casualties from those rocket attacks as I understood it.

But to take them in isolation of the other events this week would in my opinion be wrong.

There have also been mortar attacks and IED attacks on Isreali's in the past week that have also resulted in injuries and even deaths.

(Palestians have also been bombed).

While the Israeli's may not be able to indentify and investigate the sources of every and each individual attack, you can be sure they have a pretty good overview of the situtation as a whole. At least, a more accurate one than either you or I has.

[Bernadotte 0]

While the Israeli's may not be able to indentify and investigate the sources of every and each individual attack, you can be sure they have a pretty good overview of the situtation as a whole.

True.  Here's an excerpt from an Israeli intel overview about who was to blame last year:

Quote[/b] ]Despite the lull arrangement, sporadic rocket and mortar shell fire has continued, carried out by rogue terrorist organizations using the excuse of Israeli violations. Most conspicuous among those networks are the Palestinian Islamic Jihad and groups within Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade in the Gaza Strip. The objective of the rocket and mortar shell fire is not only to protest so-called Israeli violations of the arrangement but to make Hamas aware of their reservations regarding the lull, especially the fact that it does not include Judea and Samaria [West Bank]. As in the past, internal Palestinian rivalries and power struggles make it difficult to fully implement the lull arrangement, even though Hamas has a vested interest in its implementation and the other terrorist organizations pay lip service to honoring it.

-- Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, pre-war 2008

<span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'>Question:</span>  If Israel knows it wasn't Hamas then why did they retaliate against Hamas?  If Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade claimed responsibility for the latest rocketfire then why did the Israeli PM and news organisations like CBC News blame Hamas?

<span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'>Answer:</span>  The Israelis want to get rid of Hamas and would blame the Alaskan earthquake on them if they could get away with it.

[Baff1 0]

Everybody wants to get rid fo Hamas, not just the Isreali's.

Just because other Palestinian factions are also fighting Israelis, doesn't mean Hamas is not.

If 8 attacks are made on Israel, and only 4 of them made by Hamas, Israel is still going to retaliate gainst Hamas.

Hamas gets the blame by default because it is involved in the same kind attacks on a daily basis and has been for years.

This isn't an isolated event.

And quite frankly what difference wpould it make anyway if the rockets were fired by AL Whoever's Matyr Brigade or Hamas? The military response is the same. Bomb the rocket sites. Target the leaders.

[Bernadotte 0]

While the Israeli's may not be able to indentify and investigate the sources of every and each individual attack, you can be sure they have a pretty good overview of the situtation as a whole. At least, a more accurate one than either you or I has.

So, if Israel has a much more accurate overview than either you or I then which accurate Israeli overview did you get the following numbers from?

If 8 attacks are made on Israel, and only 4 of them made by Hamas...

Hamas gets the blame by default because it is involved in the same kind attacks on a daily basis and has been for years.

Daily basis?  And which accurate Israeli source did you get this info from?  As I've tried to show you with the CBC report, just because you read about Hamas attacks in the news doesn't mean they were carried out by Hamas.

Everybody wants to get rid fo Hamas, not just the Isreali's.

No kidding, but anyone who honestly believes that Hamas can be bombed out of existence hasn't learned anything from the past.  Hamas needs to lose power the same way they won it; in a national election.

And quite frankly what difference wpould it make anyway if the rockets were fired by AL Whoever's Matyr Brigade or Hamas? The military response is the same. Bomb the rocket sites.

I hope you realise that Israel's recent invasion did far more than bomb the rocket sites.

Target the leaders.

I hope you realise that Israel's recent invasion did not target the leaders of the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, the faction that actually broke the ceasefire.

[Baff1 0]

I hope you realise that they weren't the only people that broke the ceasefire.

Yes mate, daily basis. Week in week out. For years. Those rockets fired were not the first ones. There is no point trying to portay this as an isolated incident. It isn't one.

There have literally been thousands of similar attacks to this in the last 50 days. Thousands. And Hamas has laid claim to making thousands of them.

Doubtless some of the ones Hamas laid claim to launching were actually fired by Al Whoever too.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that whoever claimed that the rocket attack was made by Al Whoever Matyrs wasn't lying?

Or do you believe that Israeli's are the only people who know how?

If you start micro analysing each detail I think you are in danger of losing your perspective of the overall picture.

Hamas are engagaed in and responsable for continued rocket attacks agasint Israel. Why deny it? They don't. They are proud of it.

As for the figures, no need for you to get into any Israeli conspiracy/propaganada theories with me, I made them up.

And yes I honestly believe that a government can be bombed out of existance.

We just did it to Saddam's government the other year. We did it to Germany's. Japan's.

This has been successfully achieved time and time again throughout history.

Don't kid yourself that Hamas is in a strong position to withstand Israel's aggression. It isn't.

Now, since you have asked me where I got my figures from, I shall ask you how you know that Israel isn't targeting whoever they believed fired those rockets at them.

I put it to you that Israel has a long track record of attacking all the Palestinians, not just Hamas.

And yes I'm quite aware of Israels actions.

I'm not trying to envision this war as a good guys vs bad guys adventure. I'm just trying to get a reasonable estimation of the events.

[Bernadotte 0]

I hope you realise that they weren't the only people that broke the ceasefire.

Of course they weren't.  The Israelis broke it too.

Yes mate, daily basis. Week in week out. For years. Those rockets fired were not the first ones. There is no point trying to portay this as an isolated incident. It isn't one.

Not my portrayal, mate.  It was Israel's Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center that said attacks were "sporadic" and carried out by militants other than Hamas.  They even acknowledged Hamas' vested interested in upholding the ceasefire.  Unlike you, I'm inclined to believe the Israeli think tank.  

Do you have any evidence to suggest that whoever claimed that the rocket attack was made by Al Whoever Matyrs wasn't lying?

No, I have no proof that the Israeli think tank that wrote those reports wasn't lying.

Or do you believe that Israeli's are the only people who know how?

That really makes no sense given that it is you who refuses to believe what the Israeli think tank reported.

If you start micro analysing each detail I think you are in danger of losing your perspective of the overall picture.

Kinda complicated, huh?  

Hamas are engagaed in and responsable for continued rocket attacks agasint Israel. Why deny it? They don't. They are proud of it.

As for the figures, no need for you to get into any Israeli conspiracy/propaganada theories with me, I made them up.

I'm not denying anything.  I've got plenty of reasons to hate Hamas without having to make stuff up.

...anyone who honestly believes that Hamas can be bombed out of existence hasn't learned anything from the past.

And yes I honestly believe that a government can be bombed out of existance.  We just did it to Saddam's government the other year. We did it to Germany's. Japan's.  This has been successfully achieved time and time again throughout history.

Bombing a government into surrender is very different than "bombing Hamas out of existence."  The Palestinians surrendered long ago.  That's why it's called occupied territory?

Now, since you have asked me where I got my figures from, I shall ask you how you know that Israel isn't targeting whoever they believed fired those rockets at them.

The leaders of the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade are in the West Bank.  Israel's recent operation against their rockets was retricted to Gaza.

Trust me, if blaming every bad thing on Hamas would help get rid of them I'd also be totally cool with the lies.  However, I just can't ignore that lying and corruption is what got Hamas elected in the first place.

[Baff1 0]

I hope you realise that they weren't the only people that broke the ceasefire.

Of course they weren't.  The Israelis broke it too.

You're half way there now mate.... The israeli's and who else?

[Bernadotte 0]

I hope you realise that they weren't the only people that broke the ceasefire.

Of course they weren't.  The Israelis broke it too.

You're half way there now mate.... The israeli's and who else?

I've already posted it twice.  Maybe a big-print version will help:

Quote[/b] ]Despite the lull arrangement, sporadic rocket and mortar shell fire has continued, carried out by <span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'>rogue terrorist organizations</span> using the excuse of <span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'>Israeli violations</span>. Most conspicuous among those networks are the <span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'>Palestinian Islamic Jihad and groups within Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade</span> in the Gaza Strip. The objective of the rocket and mortar shell fire is not only to protest so-called Israeli violations of the arrangement but to make Hamas aware of their reservations regarding the lull, especially the fact that it does not include Judea and Samaria [West Bank]. As in the past, internal Palestinian rivalries and power struggles make it difficult to fully implement the lull arrangement, even though <span style='font-size:11pt;line-height:100%'>Hamas has a vested interest in its implementation and the other terrorist organizations pay lip service* to honoring it.</span>

-- Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, pre-war 2008

Baff1, I'm just the messenger.  If you continue to disagree with this assessment then please take it up with the source; not me.

Perhaps you could try telling them about how "micro analysing each detail puts them in danger of losing their perspective."  

* lip service n. an expression of agreement unsupported by real conviction or action