UN independent panel rules Israel blockade of Gaza illegal - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

People need to man up and have the courage to face facts

but they are not facts, they are your opinions based off of a deep animosity for the Arabs (Muslims)

For the record, Israel is the good guy.

Since when? Last I checked the Zionists were the first in the region to use Terrorism, targeting civilians every chance they had... Almost every parcel of Israeli land today belonged to Arabs 65 years ago, but did Israel negotiate for that land or did they just Steal it from the Muslims living there for centuries?

Brad,

I agree. But it has been very difficult to get the world community to try these folks. No matter how many time Muslims commit atrocities, the world seems to ignore them. It's good to see Israel finally doing the right, proper and moral thing. Hopefully, Israel will be able to bring these folks to heel before they try something really stupid. Israel's only choice then, would be to use their nukes. Thanks for your comment.

Regards,

Mike

I agree, this is a bull@!$%# report from the AIUN (Anti-Israel United Nations). Israel is a free democracy besieged by dictatorships and terrorists. They gave Gaza to the Palestinians, who destroyed all the greenhouses and turned it into a launching pad for suicide bombers and rocket attacks. If there were no blockade they would bring in heavier weapons. By the way, Israel allows tons of food and consumer goods into Gaza regularly, after checking them for weapons.

Hippo,

Facts are stubborn things. Your post has a dearth of them. BTW, my animosity is towards elements of a religion/culture that does nothing but purport want, deprivation, envy and inspire its believers to either kill, convert or enslave all non believers. Like Golda Maier said, there will be continued conflict until the Arabs decide they love their children more than they hate Israel. Also, the land Israel occupies was either given to them by UN mandate or captured during a war in which Israel was attacked, thereby making annexation, legal.

Regards,

Mike

#2 reminded me of the "axis of evil" label. Some people view things as black or white - good or bad. Like Bush put counties on the "bad guy" list and then we were all supposed to do the patriotic thing and roll with him or be ready to be called an enemy to America. There were rationales supplied for the rest of the folk who don't see things in B&W or good v evil. They were mostly fabricated to support the pre-deternined judgement that Iraq was bad. It still doesn't matter to Bush & Cheney that they made @!$%# up. They feel justified because they were doing what they thought was needed to defeat evil. Making @!$%# up for us was one of the things they did and consider as protection.

The "decider" callin' out the "evil doers" ... ug, I saw way too much replay on the 10th anniversay of 9/11.

Brad,

I'm sorry. I thought you were referring to Arab or Palestinian war crimes and crimes against humanity....lots of evidence there. The fact is, it's a lot safer to be an Arab or Palestinian in Israel than it is to be a Jew in any Arab country...or a Christian for that matter. I find it interesting that folks wish to hammer Israel for the least and usually unsubstantiated violation, yet choose to ignore Arab brutality. Amazing.

Regards,

Mike

No hypocrisy at all. Those people allow criminals to shoot from close proximity to them, they are gonna get hurt. The difference is, the IDF does everything it possibly can to keep civilian casualties to a minimum. Hamas and their ilk deliberately target civilians. Hamas also deliberately puts its communications, ammunition storage and missile launch sites in the middle of civilian population, hoping the Israelis kill some so they can complain to the world court. Huge difference.

BTW my job requires I take annual refresher training in the Law of Land Warfare. Short version, spin it any way you want, Israel is the good guy and Hamas and their ilk are the bad guys, criminals if you will.

Regards,

Mike

Brad,

Sorry, wrong again. No cutting and pasting going on. Neither is there any massacring of the Palestinians, other than Hamas doing it. Also, the settlements are legal. Land seized during war, can be annexed in certain circumstances. Israeli annexation of the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and the Golan Heights is legal and proper according to international conventions...BTW, no such thing as international law...it's really a series of treaties & conventions.

Regards,

Mike

Mike - According to that training do you see Israel as a belligerent occupier?

They were one of the belligerants, yes. They were also the victims of an unprovoked attack by several Arab nations and as a result of beating back that attack and subsequent operations in that same conflict, occupied that territory. Because they were not the aggressors in this, they can legally annex those territories. And yes, while they are occupying and later if they annex those territories, they are responsible for ALL human beings that live there. There are even rules they must follow with Hamas, which until recently was not considered a regular Army, but more like an insurgent movement.

I am not trying to say Israel hasn't done some ugly things in the past...the Irgun comes to mind. But that was before they were a state. They have also made some mistakes, but the difference is, when Israeli officers cause undue or improper casualties, they are prosecuted according to military regulations and punished.

Regards,

Mike

There are cases that have prosecuted IDF. The problem with the way you say it is that it sounds like their soldiers are uniformly tried and punished for wrong doing. It's one of those circular logic statements because of the trial validating the charges. Are all soldiers who have been accused tried? No. Not even all those charged will stand trial. Are all soldiers who are tried and found guilty uniformly punished? No.

They have also made some mistakes, but the difference is,

Why do you think the difference (compared to what anyway?) is significant?

You note that Israel is entitled to annex the territories. Why hasn't Israel has legally annexed the occupied territories?

They were one of the belligerants, yes. They were also the victims of an unprovoked attack by several Arab nations

Israel attacked first in 1967. And wasn't the purpose of the subsequent 1973 Yom Kippur war fought to regain stolen territory lost during Israel's 1967 war, for which Israel started?

Hippo,

Yes, Israel attacked first in 1967...after seeing the Arab armies massing on their borders. You gotta tell the whole story bubba. Preemptive strikes are legal.

As for your comment regarding the Yom Kippur war...simply not true.

Regards,

Mike

hippo said:

Last I checked the Zionists were the first in the region to use Terrorism

so you dont think shiites have been terrorising sunni and vise versa in the area for about 1.5 thousand years prior to the creation of the jewish state?

if the palestinians had no weapons there would be peace,

if the israeli's had no weapons there would be genocide.

dont doubt that.

if the palestinians had no weapons there would be peace,

Utter bull@!$%#.

if the israeli's had no weapons there would be genocide.

The Israelis are committing genocide with some of the most modern weapons of war on Earth.

if the israeli's had no weapons there would be genocide

So tell me this, how come the jews were not exterminated in Palestine country before israel was created?

most modern weapons of war on Earth

Forget not this was american made weapons.

Mike Yes, Israel attacked first in 1967...

First you say Israel was attacked, now you say they did attack first but were acting in self defense. Make up your mind lol.

Mike after seeing the Arab armies massing on their borders.

Why did the Egyptians mass troops? Because Israel was massing their troops as well. According to Moscow, Israel deployed 10 Armored Brigades to their northern border to invade the Golan Heights.

http://www.sixdaywar.co.uk/6_day_war_aftermath_prof_adler_context_pt1.htm#1

• "Soviet disinformation tactics play a crucial role in instigating war. The Israeli air attacks over Syria put the Soviets in the position of being able to feed Syria and ultimately Egypt with disinformation about Israel's supposed intentions such that they provoked Egypt into taking military action against Israel. Commencing on May 8, 1966, a TASS cable from Damascus made the first mention of a suspicious concentration and movement of Israeli troops sighted lately on the border with Syria. By May 21 it was being asserted that about a third of the Israeli army was being transferred to the Syrian border." (The Cold War's Longest Cover Up: How and Why The USSR Instigated The 1967 War, vol. 7, Issue #3, Meria Journal, Sept. 2003)

• "The Soviet Union warned Syria about Israeli troop concentrations and the likelihood of attack. Nasser gave credence to these warnings and resolved to support Syria by concentrating Egyptian forces in Sinai….Nasser was obliged to act if his reputation in the Arab world was not to suffer because he had been subjected to a lot of criticism on the ground that he was sheltering behind UNEF. Presumably his hope was that his gestures of support for Syria would be sufficient to dissuade the Israelis from attacking Syria." (War and Peace in the Middle East, page 105)

Mike You gotta tell the whole story bubba.

Then you should also tell the whole story. You clearly left out the Russian misinformation that led to Egypt massing troops, or are you just unaware of the whole story?

Mike Preemptive strikes are legal.

Preemptive? Pfft, Operation focus was planned months before any Arab build up and the IAF began training weeks before any Arab build up. IT was an underhanded sneak attack, nothing more.

Do you also use the same Bull@!$%# to justify Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor? Remember, the US was massing their troops too, and doing plenty to provoke the Japanese. So I guess Pearl Harbor and 9-11 were just preemptive attacks, right? pfft! I guess 9-11 and Pearl Habor were then legal, right? pfft!

California Militia so you dont think shiites have been terrorising sunni and vise versa in the area for about 1.5 thousand years prior to the creation of the jewish state?

Islam didn't exist in the early 6th century, seems your math skills need some work... Furthermore, the Zionists were still the first to use terrorism in the region in question, and it looks like you want to deflect away from the subject at hand. We are talking Israel and Palestine, not Sunni and Shia Islam, which did not commit acts of Terrorism.

It wasn't until the Safavid dynasty (1501–1736) that the Sunni and Shi'ites began to fight one another. The Safavid dynasty marked the ending of the relative mutual tolerance between Sunnis and Shi'ites that existed from the time of the Mongol conquests onwards and marked the resurgence of antagonism between the two groups.

California Militia if the palestinians had no weapons there would be peace,

California Militia if the israeli's had no weapons there would be genocide.

Typical one-sided bull@!$%# lies I have come to expect from the Pro-Israel crowd. If the Palestinians had no weapons then Israel would have stolen all the land and killed all the Arabs (Genocide, duh!!!)... Seems you keep forgetting about all the Zionist Terrorist groups like the Irgun, Lehi, Stern, Haganah, etc etc who wanted to rid their future state of all Arabs (Genocide, duh!!!).

740,000 Arabs were displaced from their homeland by Israeli barbarism between 1947-1967... That is Genocide...

Clearly the Jews had weapons and chose to target civilians indiscriminately... These acts of terrorism led to Israel's creation, or has this fact been overlooked by you?

Wheel,

Sorry, what you have said is false to fact. Not to mention, your logic needs some work. If you wish, you can send me your drafts before you post. That way I can correct them before you put something out that is not correct and thereby making you look bad.

Regards,

Mike

Actually Mike, every thing I said is true. But you are giving a perfect example of the kind of person I was talking about here:

the people who disapprove of it are the same people who cheer the loudest when the U.N. does something Israel approves of.

And Mike, considering your demonstrated inability to understand or admit to simple and obvious facts, I think you might be better advised to let me proof your nonsense before you post it. Because it's already making you look bad Mike.

Wheel,

Just trying to help you out my friend...stuff I post is based on fact and backed up by 13 years personal experience in that part of the world. Have a great day.

Regards,

Mike

Gee, so you want to try to pass off your personal opinion in place of facts stated repeatedly by courts and the UN? Mike, you really do need to let me fact check your nonsense.

Here's a tip Mike, anecdotal statements of personal opinions do NOT trump court rulings.

when did the UN do something the isreali's approved of?

U.N. Resolution 181 California Militia and that vote was rigged. What a dumb question that was.

Mike, in full retreat already? That didn't take long.

HoC already answered your nonsense statements above. Was his answer too complicated for you?

Don't worry your pretty little head about the appearance of our 'leftist' cause. Anyone even moderately honest and capable of simple research understands the correctness of our position and hopelessness of your denial.

Wheelman,

No retreat here partner. Actually, the only thing that will determine which position is correct, will be whether Israel survives or not. The UN and international "courts" are pretty much irrelevant. Hamas will never obey UN dictates...same as the rest of the Arab world. Remember they (the Arabs) attacked a country whose land was designated by the UN within hours of that declaration.

Any peace in that area has been a result of the Israelis giving the Egyptians a good drubbing last time around that resulted in the longest lasting peace treaty between any Arab nation and Israel in history. I tell you this. The next time Israel is attacked, we won't be able to restrain them. They will thump Syria, Egypt and if pressed, will probably nuke Iran.

Regards,

Mike

Actually the only correct position is the one already decided by the courts and the UN, and Israel is the criminal nation.

The rest of your comment is irrelevant spew from someone in full retreat.

Wheel,

How are the court and UN decisions going to be enforced? Answer...They won't be...because they can't be. Ergo...they have no basis.

Regards,

Mike

Mike, that remains to be seen and does not invalidate the truth of their rulings. Unlike that anecdotal nonsense you tried to pass as fact till you got cut off at the knees.

And Mike, you are aware that many Israeli leaders and senior army officials are scared to set foot outside Israel for fear of being arrested for war crimes, right? So, maybe those court rulings aren't so toothless as you seem to want to believe.

Wheel,

Of course it invalidates the so called truth of the rulings. A ruling is only as good as its enforcement. Failing to enforce or promulgating rulings that are false to known fact are two sure ire ways to engender contempt for the law. As everyone knows, the world is pretty much in contempt of the UN as an enforcement entity...I won't even get into the corruption.

Also, I have yet to meet an Israeli officer who is scared of anything. They are some tough hombres.

Regards,

Mike

Wrong yet again. You just can't seem to stop yourself. I realize that contempt for legality is usual for Israel but like I said, invite some of those 'tough' hombres to go to France or England for a nice visit and see how that goes.

They're only tough when they can hide inside Israels borders.

Wheel,

You are making it too easy! They were also pretty tough at Entebbe...and in the Golan heights and when they completely encircled the Egyptian 3rd Army. Only our intervention kept the Egyptians from being wiped out.

Next.

Regards,

Mike

Yeah? is that the same bunch of sissies that deliberately bombed women and children during the atrocity of Cast Lead? That bunch of sissies? Not impressed. If that is all you've got to brag about you need to get a hobby. And like I said, invite the top army brass to visit France of England. They will remain in hiding in Israel.

Really Mike, your nonsense might fly around home but in the wider world people know better.

Brad,

See my precious post...and of course...documented history.

Regards,

Mike

It might be precious to you, but it's bull@!$%# as far as facts go.

Sorry about "precious." Was supposed to be "previous," but this IPAD types what it wants once inna while...and sometimes I miss the goobers.

By the way...ask any senior Egyptian military officer which army they have the most respect for. They will tell you the US and the IDF...and not always in that order.

Regards,

Mike

Actually...I am running outta gas...got an early day tomorrow...gotta go work so I can pay income taxes...mine and also for those who don't. :-) See y'all another time.

Regards,

Mike

GMan,

Glad you brought that up....I'm sure you know that most of that money is paid out as a result of the Camp David accords, which have kept the peace in that area since then. As an aside...between Egypt and Israel, together they eat up around 80 percent of our foreign aid budget. There is actually a formula that determines Egypt's portion...as a percentage of what Israel gets.

Regards,

Mike

most of that money is paid out as a result of the Camp David accords, which have kept the peace in that area since

"kept the peace" is more like kept the status quo with Israel as the dominant regional military power. It's not peace for millions of people subject to military occupation conducted by Israel. They are basically stateless persons. This situation would be destabilizing to any region.

The US aid was able to defer peace while Israel acquired more power (military, control over land resources, expanded economic relations).

Wheel HoC already answered your nonsense statements above. Was his answer too complicated for you?

Apparently so, lol. So they were "victims of an unprovoked attack" by Arab, until you bring up operation focus, then their story changes to "Yes, Israel attacked first in 1967... it was a preemptive attack"

Not much credibility if you ask me.

bradd2 Only with Us air reconnaissance help. Otherwise they were pretty much doomed on their own.

Nice one bradd. Most forget the Egyptian (Russian?) SAM system took out Israel's air superiority in '73 and the land war wasn't favoring Israel. The only reason Israel's counter attack had 'some' success was because they were using spy pictures from US air reconnaissance!!! All-in-all, it ended in a stalemate which showed that Egypt can stand up against Israel (as opposed to the previous failures in the 50's and 60's)

Israel's Lexicon consists of very few words, two of which are "perpetual" and "victim"

lol