Turkey Identifies 174 Israeli Soldiers Implicated in Mavis Marmara Massacre
- Thread starter gryfin
- Start date
I see, any nation that Israel attacks should automatically be removed from the UN HRC.I'm talking about nations that have actually fought hot wars with Israel in the last 40 years. They dominate the UN HRC.
If you can't see why that is a problem then you are really, really, really stupid.
Gotcha.
Fuji politics in action.
I take it by this response that you have not and will not read the report.Are you practicing in front of the mirror again?
Therefore I will not respond to any more comments from you, since you obviously have no idea what you are talking about.
I'm sure I read more of it than you did.Have you read the report?
Can you quote any proof for any of those accusations?
If not, shut up.
If a nation is at war with another nation, or has recently been at war with that nation, then the two warring nations should be excluded from discussing each other at UN HRC, other than as complainants.I see, any nation that Israel attacks should automatically be removed from the UN HRC.
That rule would preclude the Arab League from discussing Israel at the UN HRC, voting on measures related to Israel, and so on, because with the exception of Egypt they are ALL at war with Israel. Still.
They are still to this day in a state of war with Israel. Hardly unbiased!!!!
Wow.If a nation is at war with another nation, or has recently been at war with that nation, then the two warring nations should be excluded from discussing each other at UN HRC, other than as complainants.
That rule would preclude the Arab League from discussing Israel at the UN HRC, voting on measures related to Israel, and so on, because with the exception of Egypt they are ALL at war with Israel. Still.
They are still to this day in a state of war with Israel. Hardly unbiased!!!!
So you say Israel is at war with the lands they've occupied for the last 40 years or so.
And now you say Israel is at war with all of the UN HRC, or at least every Arab nation.
Wow.
You really are an idiot.
The scary thing is the thought of you playing with guns.
You probably think you're at war with Toronto, ready to attack any 'terrorist' who comes knocking at your door selling cookies.
Jordan as well....
That rule would preclude the Arab League from discussing Israel at the UN HRC, voting on measures related to Israel, and so on, because with the exception of Egypt they are ALL at war with Israel. Still. ...
So now it is a war? I guess that makes Israel 100% justified in blockading Gaza.Wow.
So you say Israel is at war with the lands they've occupied for the last 40 years or so.
And now you say Israel is at war with all of the UN HRC, or at least every Arab nation.
Wow....
And yes, The Arab League nations declared war on Israel and with the exception of Jordan and Egypt have not a peace deal so (although most countries among them aren't actively engaged with their own armies) they are technically at war.
I was quoting Fuji.So now it is a war? I guess that makes Israel 100% justified in blockading Gaza.
And yes, The Arab League nations declared war on Israel and with the exception of Jordan and Egypt have not a peace deal so (although most countries among them aren't actively engaged with their own armies) they are technically at war.
I think I better just put you back on ignore.
Correct. Just the same as the US is at war in Afghanistan, and continued to be after Afghanistan had been occupied, and even now that it has been reconstituted. "Occupation" and "war" are NOT mutually exclusive. Very obviously.So you say Israel is at war with the lands they've occupied for the last 40 years or so.
Correct. Except for Egypt and Jordan, Israel is at war with all of the other Arab nations, and has been since 1948. Only Egypt and Jordan have signed peace treaties with Israel. The others all remain at war, all they have is a ceasefire. Given that both Egypt and Jordan have fought hot wars with Israel in living memory they're not exactly unbiased either, despite having signed peace treaties.And now you say Israel is at war with all of the UN HRC, or at least every Arab nation.
Is it getting across to you how hopelessly biased against Israel these nations are??? They are at WAR with Israel. They are not unbiased.
Its pretty sad how Israel hasn't been able to make peace in 60 years, and even more sad how much further away from that they are now with Netanyahu leading them.
Wouldn't you agree?
For instance, Israel's insistence of its innocence in the flotilla killings, like yours, has resulted in the loss of their only Muslim ally in the region. Their 'the world is against us' mantra is creating a self fulfilling prophesy. Israel could have apologized and restored diplomatic relations, but they didn't. Just as Israel could easy the blockade of Gaza and less of the world would be pissed off at them.
Wouldn't you agree?
For instance, Israel's insistence of its innocence in the flotilla killings, like yours, has resulted in the loss of their only Muslim ally in the region. Their 'the world is against us' mantra is creating a self fulfilling prophesy. Israel could have apologized and restored diplomatic relations, but they didn't. Just as Israel could easy the blockade of Gaza and less of the world would be pissed off at them.
So you continue to back stupid Israeli policies that will never lead to peace?You are a propaganda clown. At any rate, you've acknowledged in your way that UN HRC is full of nations at war with Israel and thus biased.
You support killing international activists.
You support the illegal blockade.
You support racist laws and policies.
You support the colonization of occupied lands.
Nobody supports the stupid policies but if the Palestinians want to control what is brought into the country they should stop importing materials to manufacture rockets, then they could reasonably argue Israel is denying them a fundamental right. Is this fair, it doesn't matter because the Palestinians know the Israel's will never give up control until there is no reason to feel threatened. Life is hell in the Ghaza strip and will be for some time but if the Palestinians want to be able to control their borders they must stop posing a military threat. Is this lop sided because Israel's arsenal is so much greater the answer is yes but if the goal is peace they must force the Israeli's to the table with as much leverage as possible. Giving up the ability to fire a bunch of low tech antiquated rockets hardly seems a major concession. It would certainly lead to the saving of innocent lives on both sides. If the Palestinians wish to split the Israelis politically they must dramatically reconfigure their strategy so as to empower the left in Israel otherwise they will deny those who have the most in common with them the ability to approach the levels of support needed to bring a peace both sides can live with. This cannot be an all or nothing strategy but small tactical victories that drives peace forward.
You're exactly right cye. If the Palestinians were to adopt a non-violent stance there would be a seismic shift in Israeli politics. The hawks like Netanyahu would be voted out and replaced by much more moderate politicians. International pressure would ratchet up, and I believe the two sides would engage each other in increasingly productive talks that would make everyone's lives better.
And how does Hamas fit into your narrow view?Its pretty sad how Israel hasn't been able to make peace in 60 years, and even more sad how much further away from that they are now with Netanyahu leading them.
Wouldn't you agree?...
Its a nice theory and all, but in practice it hasn't happened.Nobody supports the stupid policies but if the Palestinians want to control what is brought into the country they should stop importing materials to manufacture rockets, then they could reasonably argue Israel is denying them a fundamental right. Is this fair, it doesn't matter because the Palestinians know the Israel's will never give up control until there is no reason to feel threatened. Life is hell in the Ghaza strip and will be for some time but if the Palestinians want to be able to control their borders they must stop posing a military threat. Is this lop sided because Israel's arsenal is so much greater the answer is yes but if the goal is peace they must force the Israeli's to the table with as much leverage as possible. Giving up the ability to fire a bunch of low tech antiquated rockets hardly seems a major concession. It would certainly lead to the saving of innocent lives on both sides. If the Palestinians wish to split the Israelis politically they must dramatically reconfigure their strategy so as to empower the left in Israel otherwise they will deny those who have the most in common with them the ability to approach the levels of support needed to bring a peace both sides can live with. This cannot be an all or nothing strategy but small tactical victories that drives peace forward.
In the West Bank, where the violence is under control the only thing happening is more settlements.
That's hardly an endorsement of peaceful ways.
In Gaza, where there has been a one sided voluntary ceasefire from Hamas for over a year, the blockade is still in effect.
Its just not true.
