Any one wish to discuss Israel vs. Palestine here?

[BecauseIKnow]

That's in november 14th, Israel broke the 4 month ceasefire on November 4th

 

[Foxfyre]

Gaza truce broken as Israeli raid kills six Hamas gunmen | World news | guardian.co.uk, this is the attack the ended the ceasefire

And here is the New York Times version that leaves room for a difference opinion as to whether taking out a secret tunnel created by the Palestinians into Gaza constitutes breaking the cease fire. Which is the less defensible hostile act?

The Jewish Virtual Library accounts report that the the rockets never fully stopped during the cease fire, but I have not been able to verify that from any other source either.

That's still breaking the ceasefire, and this tunnel was in Deir al balah which raises another question, that would not make it an act of defense

Not sure I'm following your reasoning there. Certainly a tunnel created by the Palestinians in Deir al balah would be seen as a definite threat by the Israelis:

Deir el-Balah or Dayr al-Balah is located in the central Gaza Strip and is the capital or muhfaza (seat) of the Deir el-Balah Governorate. According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, the city had a population of 49,751 in mid-year 2006. Well-known for its beaches and date palms, recent archeological excavations uncovered a cemetery dating back to the late Bronze Age filled with pottery, tombs, bronze pots and a mosaic floor. Deir al-Balah also contains a monastery built by St. Helena in 372 AD. The city has been a frequent target of Israeli incursions, particularly since the beginning of the Second Intifada in 2001, with the stated aim of stopping Qassam rocket fire into Israel. Ahmad Kurd, a Hamas member, was elected mayor in late January 2005 and of the city's council seats, 13 of 15 were won by Hamas candidates in February 2005.
Deir al-Balah - News - The Jerusalem Post

 

[BecauseIKnow]

And here is the New York Times version that leaves room for a difference opinion as to whether taking out a secret tunnel created by the Palestinians into Gaza constitutes breaking the cease fire. Which is the less defensible hostile act?

The Jewish Virtual Library accounts report that the the rockets never fully stopped during the cease fire, but I have not been able to verify that from any other source either.

That's still breaking the ceasefire, and this tunnel was in Deir al balah which raises another question, that would not make it an act of defense

Not sure I'm following your reasoning there. Certainly a tunnel created by the Palestinians in Deir al balah would be seen as a definite threat by the Israelis:

Deir el-Balah or Dayr al-Balah is located in the central Gaza Strip and is the capital or muhfaza (seat) of the Deir el-Balah Governorate. According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, the city had a population of 49,751 in mid-year 2006. Well-known for its beaches and date palms, recent archeological excavations uncovered a cemetery dating back to the late Bronze Age filled with pottery, tombs, bronze pots and a mosaic floor. Deir al-Balah also contains a monastery built by St. Helena in 372 AD. The city has been a frequent target of Israeli incursions, particularly since the beginning of the Second Intifada in 2001, with the stated aim of stopping Qassam rocket fire into Israel. Ahmad Kurd, a Hamas member, was elected mayor in late January 2005 and of the city's council seats, 13 of 15 were won by Hamas candidates in February 2005.
Deir al-Balah - News - The Jerusalem Post

That tunnel is in the Gaza strip, Deir al balah will not reach Israeli borders, I've been to Deir al balah many times personally they are talking about rafah maybe or beit Layha

 

[Billo_Really]

False. Keeping land you won in wartime is precedented by at least 5000 years of international law.

This is -especially- the case when the state that lost the land gives up its claim on it, as Jordan did.

And that has all changed since the end of WWII.

The right of conquest is the right of a conqueror to territory taken by force of arms. It was traditionally a principle of international law which has in modern times gradually given way until its proscription after the Second World War when the crime of war of aggression was first codified in the Nuremberg Principles and then finally, in 1974, as a United Nations resolution 3314.

The completion of colonial conquest of much of the world, the devastation of World War I and World War II, and the alignment of both the United States and the Soviet Union with the principle of self-determination led to the abandonment of the right of conquest in formal international law. The 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact, the post-1945 Nuremberg Trials, the UN Charter, and the UN role in decolonization saw the progressive dismantling of this principle. Simultaneously, the UN Charter's guarantee of the "territorial integrity" of member states effectively froze out claims against prior conquests from this process.

It is illegal to hold onto land seized in a war. You can thank the German's for that one. The world was so sick of Germany's wars of aggression and it's annexing of neighboring country's, the we wrote the Nuremberg Principles thus codifying this law.

That's why Israel will never own this land. If the world community allowed this to happen, then it's like saying it was okay for Hitler to annex Poland. That was wrong and this is wrong.

 

[Foxfyre]

That's still breaking the ceasefire, and this tunnel was in Deir al balah which raises another question, that would not make it an act of defense

Not sure I'm following your reasoning there. Certainly a tunnel created by the Palestinians in Deir al balah would be seen as a definite threat by the Israelis:

Deir el-Balah or Dayr al-Balah is located in the central Gaza Strip and is the capital or muhfaza (seat) of the Deir el-Balah Governorate. According to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, the city had a population of 49,751 in mid-year 2006. Well-known for its beaches and date palms, recent archeological excavations uncovered a cemetery dating back to the late Bronze Age filled with pottery, tombs, bronze pots and a mosaic floor. Deir al-Balah also contains a monastery built by St. Helena in 372 AD. The city has been a frequent target of Israeli incursions, particularly since the beginning of the Second Intifada in 2001, with the stated aim of stopping Qassam rocket fire into Israel. Ahmad Kurd, a Hamas member, was elected mayor in late January 2005 and of the city's council seats, 13 of 15 were won by Hamas candidates in February 2005.
Deir al-Balah - News - The Jerusalem Post

That tunnel is in the Gaza strip, Deir al balah will not reach Israeli borders, I've been to Deir al balah many times personally they are talking about rafah maybe or beit Layha

Well, I have not been there and I wasn't there at the time--I'm pretty sure you weren't either--so we both may be limited to what information is provided by an overwhelmingly mostly pro-Palestinian mainstream media tempered by opinions and observations reported by more pro-Israel sources.

Also, I find myself more often defending Israel because of the prevailing accusations that any defensive measures they take prior to actual attack is almost always related as oppressive or brutal Israeli aggression. Which, given the long history of terrorist attacks against Israelis, I see as absolutely absurd. So I have cause to take seriously reports from reliable sources of a tunnel approaching or leading into Israeli territory.

 

[Billo_Really]

The link I posted notes that Israel acted in response to a Palestininan action.
That's the opposite of 'unprovoked'.

No it did not say that at all. If you think it did, then show me.

Yep. Show that to tbe the case for each of the incidents you cited.
remember that we're looking for something akin to sending a suicide bomber specifically to blow up a bus full of schoolkids.

It doesn't matter if its a suicide bomber or an Israeli air strike on a civilian target, in both cases, non-combantants are killed. And dead is dead. There's no difference in death. When Israel deliberately bombs a hospital in Gaza, that is an act of terrorism.

 

[Billo_Really]

The UN is not the sole source or arbiter of International law, and that someting go against the tenets of the UN does not in any way necessarily make it 'illegal' under international law.

And, as I said: Jordan gave up cliam to the land and its rights to the West Bank and thus, under International law, it belongs to Israel.

It does if you are a member nation of the UN, then you're duty bound to honor its Charter.

BTW, if the UNSC say's you did something illegal, then you did something illegal.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Not sure I'm following your reasoning there. Certainly a tunnel created by the Palestinians in Deir al balah would be seen as a definite threat by the Israelis:

That tunnel is in the Gaza strip, Deir al balah will not reach Israeli borders, I've been to Deir al balah many times personally they are talking about rafah maybe or beit Layha

Well, I have not been there and I wasn't there at the time--I'm pretty sure you weren't either--so we both may be limited to what information is provided by an overwhelmingly mostly pro-Palestinian mainstream media tempered by opinions and observations reported by more pro-Israel sources.

Also, I find myself more often defending Israel because of the prevailing accusations that any defensive measures they take prior to actual attack is almost always related as oppressive or brutal Israeli aggression. Which, given the long history of terrorist attacks against Israelis, I see as absolutely absurd. So I have cause to take seriously reports from reliable sources of a tunnel approaching or leading into Israeli territory.

The US media is not pro Palestinian....they are more pro Israel, I don't need sources I just know haha, but really it doesn't matter if I wasn't there at the time I went right after the war, a tunnel isn't that long to reach Israeli borders and you realize it was a raid as well. Also the tunnels aren't used to attack Israeli civilians

 

[Full-Auto]

I'm curious to see how the discussions will go in a temperate zone.

Just one comment....

I recall the Palestinians dancing in the streets because of 9-11. They didnt want peace and they should not be given it.

 

[Billo_Really]

Just one comment....

I recall the Palestinians dancing in the streets because of 9-11. They didnt want peace and they should not be given it.

If it was the one broadcasted by CBS, they've already admitted that the footage was from an earlier event prior to 9/11.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

Gaza truce broken as Israeli raid kills six Hamas gunmen | World news | guardian.co.uk, here's the source again..

 

[georgephillip]

I'm curious to see how the discussions will go in a temperate zone.

Just one comment....

I recall the Palestinians dancing in the streets because of 9-11. They didnt want peace and they should not be given it.

One reason, among many, why SOME Arabs (and other Semites) danced in the streets after 911:

"These results provide strong evidence that the Gulf war and trade sanctions caused a threefold increase in mortality among Iraqi children under five years of age. We estimate that an excess of more than 46,900 children died between January and August 1991. (N Engl J Med 1992;327:931–6.)"

MMS: Error

 

[Jos]

I'm curious to see how the discussions will go in a temperate zone.

Just one comment....

I recall the Palestinians dancing in the streets because of 9-11. They didnt want peace and they should not be given it.

Some people celebrate without dance
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-W6LdB24-wU]"Sept 11 was good for Israel." -- Netanyahu - YouTube[/ame]

 

[georgephillip]

What Role Did the US-Israeli Relationship Play in 911?

"On the day of the 9-11 attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked what the attack would mean for US-Israeli relations. His quick reply was: 'It’s very good….Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel).'

"Intelligence wars rely on mathematical models to anticipate the response of 'the mark' to staged provocations. Reactions thereby become foreseeable—within an acceptable range of probabilities.

"When Israeli mathematician Robert J. Aumann received the 2005 Nobel Prize in economic science, he conceded that 'the entire school of thought that we have developed here in Israel' has turned 'Israel into the leading authority in this field.'”

What Role Did the U.S.-Israeli Relationship Play in 9-11? | Criminal State

 

[M14 Shooter]

Well I need 15 posts to post a URL so let me catch up lol

It isn'tall that important. I have seen the youtube video and have also noted that it is posted on almost every anti-Israel site with the exact same commentary accompanying it. I just haven't been able to find any more objective source supporting it or confirming it. And we all know that youtube can be edited to make a person appear to say something other than what was actually said. That was underscored in a major way with that altered youtube video of Obama's now infamous 'you didn't build that' speech. And shame on the anti-Obama people who resorted to that.

Again I am not a committed apologist for Israel. Just trying to keep it honest here though.

Gaza truce broken as Israeli raid kills six Hamas gunmen | World news | guardian.co.uk, this is the attack the ended the ceasefire

Israeli troops crossed into the Gaza Strip late last night near the town of Deir al-Balah. The Israeli military said the target of the raid was a tunnel that they said Hamas was planning to use to capture Israeli soldiers positioned on the border fence 250m away

Clearly, the Israelis acted w/o provocation.

 

[M14 Shooter]

False. Keeping land you won in wartime is precedented by at least 5000 years of international law.

This is -especially- the case when the state that lost the land gives up its claim on it, as Jordan did.

And that has all changed since the end of WWII.

The right of conquest is the right of a conqueror to territory taken by force of arms. It was traditionally a principle of international law which has in modern times gradually given way until its proscription after the Second World War when the crime of war of aggression was first codified in the Nuremberg Principles and then finally, in 1974, as a United Nations resolution 3314.

The completion of colonial conquest of much of the world, the devastation of World War I and World War II, and the alignment of both the United States and the Soviet Union with the principle of self-determination led to the abandonment of the right of conquest in formal international law. The 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact, the post-1945 Nuremberg Trials, the UN Charter, and the UN role in decolonization saw the progressive dismantling of this principle. Simultaneously, the UN Charter's guarantee of the "territorial integrity" of member states effectively froze out claims against prior conquests from this process.

It is illegal to hold onto land seized in a war. You can thank the German's for that one. The world was so sick of Germany's wars of aggression and it's annexing of neighboring country's, the we wrote the Nuremberg Principles thus codifying this law.

That's why Israel will never own this land. If the world community allowed this to happen, then it's like saying it was okay for Hitler to annex Poland. That was wrong and this is wrong.

Tell me: In regards to the West Bank, under international law, who is the injured party?

 

[M14 Shooter]

The link I posted notes that Israel acted in response to a Palestininan action.
That's the opposite of 'unprovoked'.

No it did not say that at all. If you think it did, then show me.

An Israeli military official, speaking on the condition of anonymity under army rules, said that the tunnel lay about 270 yards inside Gaza and was apparently intended for use in the abduction of a soldier or soldiers. The tunnel was ready for an “imminent” operation, the official said.

Provocation.

Yep. Show that to tbe the case for each of the incidents you cited.
remember that we're looking for something akin to sending a suicide bomber specifically to blow up a bus full of schoolkids.

It doesn't matter if its a suicide bomber or an Israeli air strike on a civilian target....

It very much does, given the context of the conversation.
Please provide the information I asked for, keepong in mind that context and the definition you provided.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The UN is not the sole source or arbiter of International law, and that someting go against the tenets of the UN does not in any way necessarily make it 'illegal' under international law.
And, as I said: Jordan gave up cliam to the land and its rights to the West Bank and thus, under International law, it belongs to Israel.

It does if you are a member nation of the UN, then you're duty bound to honor its Charter.
BTW, if the UNSC say's you did something illegal, then you did something illegal.

"Duty bound" and "international law" are different issues.
International law exists outside the UN; as such, an action disapporoved of By the UN in no wa necessarily breaks international law.

 

[Billo_Really]

"Duty bound" and "international law" are different issues.
International law exists outside the UN; as such, an action disapporoved of By the UN in no wa necessarily breaks international law.

International law includes the UN Charter, the Geneva Conventions, the Hague and Rome statutes and the Nuremberg Principles. The UN is based on international law.

 

[Billo_Really]

Provocation.

That doesn't change the fact that it was Israel's decision to enter Gaza.

It very much does, given the context of the conversation.
Please provide the information I asked for, keepong in mind that context and the definition you provided.

We're just going to have to agree, to disagree on this one, my friend, because it looks like our definitions of terrorism are quite different and I have no intention of splitting hairs on this subject.