Israeli-Palestinian conflict (76 Viewers)

[Bjerknes]

They were pro-Nazi in the early thirties mostly due to Hitler's anti-communist policies. And if you know anything about American history, you know we hate the Pink-Os. Everyone makes mistakes.

Central bankers are some of the biggest terrorists on earth.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Enron]

Looking at the numbers of civilians killed over the past ten years at least, yes I would say that is a systematic killing off of a people. Israel targets refugee camps for Christ's sake.

You might say that yes. But do you matter? No. The world requires a bit more evidence than "Israelis are killing a lot of Palestinians". Once again unfortunate. What was it in Rawanda? Like 2 million people dead before the U.N. took action?

 

[ReBeL]

ReBeL, Someone and Turk are claiming that either the Holocaust didn't take place or the Jews orchestrated the Holocaust to get Israel or the Holocaust was no big deal.

I said I don't care about it if it happened or not because "the story" happened a long time ago and many people made use of it in a very bad way.

 

[CheSchifo!]

Looking at the numbers of civilians killed over the past ten years at least, yes I would say that is a systematic killing off of a people. Israel targets refugee camps for Christ's sake.

You can only talk about genocide if there is a genuine intent to destroy a whole people. It has been over sixty years. It would be the longest, slowest and sadly enough most unsuccesful genocide known to man.

 

[Bjerknes]

You might say that yes. But do you matter? No. The world requires a bit more evidence than "Israelis are killing a lot of Palestinians". Once again unfortunate. What was it in Rawanda? Like 2 million people dead before the U.N. took action?

Yes and that's why it happens, through legal bullshit that doesn't have any bearing on what's actually happening.

 

[CheSchifo!]

I said I don't care about it if it happened or not because "the story" happened a long time ago and many people made use of it in a very bad way.

It's not a story.

 

[Enron]

Central bankers are some of the biggest terrorists on earth.

Just what is a terrorist? I don't think anyone knows, the word has so many conotations beyond it's actual definition. I think we should just throw the word out, it's misused way too much. And it too easily justifies terrible actions.

 

[CheSchifo!]

Yes and that's why it happens, through legal bullshit that doesn't have any bearing on what's actually happening.

If the killing of 3000 people qualifies as a genocide, you're in trouble. That means the USA are guilty of several genocides. Looking at the numbers and the amount of time passed it's unlikely to talk about genocide here. It's going to be very hard to prove it anyway.

 

[Ahmed]

the USA is guilty of genocide

 

[CheSchifo!]

the USA is guilty of genocide

If you count the Indians, yes. What you could claim though is that the USA, like Belgium, are guilty for allowing genocide to happen.

 

[Lawnchair Bes]

i think everyone knows that and also everyone knows the constraints of living in the real world

 

[Enron]

Yes and that's why it happens, through legal bullshit that doesn't have any bearing on what's actually happening.

Sure it does. Many past wars could easily be considered a "genocide" by modern standards, purely by casualty rate, but they don't have the intend. That's why genocide isn't a word that should be lightly used.

 

[ReBeL]

Point of order. Andries mentioned DPR (Dem. Rep. of Congo) and I mentioned Zimbabwe, I think it was Someone that mentioned Angola in a poor piece of counter point. Anyway, no one is justifying Israel's terrible actions, but Africa was mentioned to shine light on places where actual qualified genocide was or had taken place. That's all.

Genocide is a quantified word. In order to prove a genocide you have to have evidence of a systematic killing off of a people. That's is very hard to discern, it's like proving motive in a murder case without a confession or concrete evident. Andries' point is that you can't usually do that during a conflict. l for one think that's a shame and believe that the international community should step in when the conflict levels reach massacre, which this action is.

I don't really care if the "international community" calls it genocide or a game or whatever. They should have stopped it, but they didn't because it was their spoiled kid that was playing there.

 

[Bjerknes]

Just what is a terrorist? I don't think anyone knows, the word has so many conotations beyond it's actual definition. I think we should just throw the word out, it's misused way too much. And it too easily justifies terrible actions.

The word should be used for true terrorists I believe.

If the killing of 3000 people qualifies as a genocide, you're in trouble. That means the USA are guilty of several genocides. Looking at the numbers and the amount of time passed it's unlikely to talk about genocide here. It's going to be very hard to prove it anyway.

Well sure, we took out the Native Americans. That was wrong too. Nobody is denying that.

 

[CheSchifo!]

The word should be used for true terrorists I believe.



Well sure, we took out the Native Americans. That was wrong too. Nobody is denying that.

Even for the Native Americans you can't really be so sure. But I guess it would qualify as a form of genocide.

 

[Alen]

CheSchifo, Alen...who else

You meant it as a joke but it wasn't funny at all. Not with a single word i defended Israel nor will i ever do it.
Even if it's hard to stay neutral while watching the pics and the clips of dead Palestinian children, i can at least be neutral about things that have little to do with Gaza.
Sadly, the Arabs and some other Muslim members aren't neutral at all, and are spreading some awful propaganda about the holocaust, which is equal to what CNN is doing.
My nature and my profession won't allow me to blindly say YES to what some members here said just because it suits their argument, when it's clearly not true.

As for Andries, you guys disagree with his posts and see them as anti-Islam even before reading them.

 

[Ahmed]

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2009/779/40192

 

[Bjerknes]

Sure it does. Many past wars could easily be considered a "genocide" by modern standards, purely by casualty rate, but they don't have the intend. That's why genocide isn't a word that should be lightly used.

I find this somewhat idiotic. "It's not a genocide until it's stated by some authority." "It's not a recession until some authority calls it a recession." It's happening right now and the numbers speak for themselves, but nobody wants to call it what it is. Fine.

It's just a lovely little needed slaughter of Palestinian "terrorists".

 

[Enron]

If you count the Indians, yes. What you could claim though is that the USA, like Belgium, are guilty for allowing genocide to happen.

Well, technically no. We didn't systematically "kill" the Indians, we merely moved them several hundred miles on foot and nature took it's course. Granted that's not a part of my countries history that I am proud of.

A more fitting analogy, would be the Haitian revolution led by Toussant L'Overture against the French colonials.

 

[CheSchifo!]

I find this somewhat idiotic. "It's not a genocide until it's stated by some authority." "It's not a recession until some authority calls it a recession." It's happening right now and the numbers speak for themselves, but nobody wants to call it what it is. Fine.

It's just a lovely little needed slaughter of Palestinian "terrorists".

It's not about some authority stating it. It's difficult to understand whether or not there was the intent to destroy a people and how exactly it was done. A genocide requires a plan. That's what was decided in the Yugoslavia case anyway (Alen can correct me on this one though, it's just one of the cases I've read now that I'm studying law).

Well, technically no. We didn't systematically "kill" the Indians, we merely moved them several hundred miles on foot and nature took it's course. Granted that's not a part of my countries history that I am proud of.

A more fitting analogy, would be the Haitian revolution led by Toussant L'Overture against the French colonials.

It depends on how you see it, but I myself wouldn't call it a genocide, no. But you could argue it was. At a certain point were a lot of killings and they did happen with the intent to break them.