United Nations Is Guilty Of Crimes Against Humanity

[cunard]

It is true that the UN has failed in certain circumstances such as Kosovo, Bosnia, Chechnya and the Israeli and Palestinian conflict and there are others. The UN has failed to stop huge massacres such as in Sudan, Rawanda, and The Congo. But the UN has had huge succeses also such as South Africa, Lebannon, East Timor (though it did take time), Panama, and others. Just like almost every other nation, the UN has failed in its obligations. Even though India and Pakistan are some of the largest donors for Peacekeeping Troops, they themselves have done some of the most repulsive violations of International Law, just like Israel has in the West Bank and Gaza, Canada has such as in Somolia, The US in Afghanistan in which hundreds of captured taliban soliders died in metal crates, China in Tibet, Indonesia in East Timor, India in Kashmir and Gujirat and Punjab, or even Chile and and Argentina against there own people. Every nation has to burdun the blame, the fundamental ideals of the UN are as true as ever before trying to bring peace and liberty to the world, but it is the world which has failed itself for there own selfish reasons. Mistakes have been made and will continue to be made by the UN just like the rest of the world.

[Oh Jerusalem]

Originally posted by cunard
they themselves have done some of the most repulsive violations of International Law, just like Israel has in the West Bank and Gaza

Really? And what might that be now?

[Ahava]

http://www.israelforum.com/board/sho...?threadid=4898

Excerpts:

The UN and the Jews

by Anne Bayefsky - February 26, 2004

It was not an event that any of the big newspapers saw fit to cover, but this past December, a draft United Nations resolution condemning anti-Semitism was quietly withdrawn by Ireland, its sponsor in the General Assembly. In a complicated exchange, Irish Foreign Minister Brian Cowen had promised the measure to his Israeli counterpart Silvan Shalom, but in the end Cowen refused to carry out his side of the bargain, pointing to a lack of consensus on the issue. (Several Arab and Muslim states had objections.) Thus went by the boards what would have been the first-ever General Assembly resolution dealing directly with the problem of anti-Semitism.

...

Not until 1959, when some 2,000 anti-Jewish incidents, ranging from serious property damage to threats of bodily harm, were reported in almost 40 countries (a large number of them in West Germany), did the UN’s Commission on Human Rights pass a resolution titled "Manifestations of Anti-Semitism and Other Forms of Racial Prejudice and Religious Intolerance of a Similar Nature." By the time the resolution reached the floor of the General Assembly, however, the term "anti-Semitism" had been dropped.

Drafters of the UN’s key declarations on human rights soon became masters at evading the issue. When, in 1964-65, the American delegation (with the assistance of Brazil) tried to include a reference to anti-Semitism in the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the effort failed, thanks to the Soviet Union, its satellites, and its Arab allies, who among other things insisted that anti-Semitism was a question not of race but of religion. When the UN finally got around to adopting its first declaration on religious intolerance in 1981, anti-Semitism was again excluded. By 2003, the lead sponsor of the perennial resolution on religious tolerance, Ireland, insisted with a straight face that anti-Semitism should be omitted because it was more properly considered under the rubric of race.

By the summer of 2001, at the now notorious UN World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa, the notion that Jews were the target of any special animus, now or in the past, was being treated with simple contempt. References to anti-Semitism were removed from almost all parts of the final declaration. Not only was there no mention of the Holocaust in the conference’s demand that those who incite racial hatred should be brought to justice, but absent as well was any mention of the need to study the Nazi war against the Jews. The only references to the Holocaust and anti-Semitism appeared as part of a "Middle East package" in which Palestinians were declared to be victims of Israeli racism.

...

In 1975 the UN General Assembly passed its notorious resolution explicitly equating Zionism with racism. Ever since then, and notwithstanding the formal repeal of the resolution in 1991, the repellent imagery of Israelis as racists has been a staple of UN rhetoric. Today, diplomats from Arab and Muslim states—states that effectively rendered themselves Judenrein in the late 1940’s—refer to Israel’s new security fence against terrorism as an "apartheid wall." Palestinian towns and villages are called "Bantustans." And the Palestinian Marwan Barghouti, on trial in Israel for acts of terrorism, is labeled another Nelson Mandela.
...
Israel has been singled out in other ways as well. In the UN bureaucracy, it is the only country with its own standing inter-state monitor: the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories.
..
In 2003 alone, the UN bureaucracy generated 22 reports and formal notes on "conditions of Palestinian and other Arab citizens living under Israeli occupation."

The UN’s response to an Israeli military incursion into the West Bank town of Jenin in April 2002 typifies the organization’s treatment of the Jewish state. At the time, even a report by Yasir Arafat’s Fatah movement recognized Jenin as "the suicider’s capital," a place where organizations like Hamas and Islamic Jihad had sought shelter, among civilians, for their ongoing murderous operations. But the UN saved its venom for Israel’s armed response to the violence directed against its citizens. Terje Roed-Larsen, the organization’s special coordinator for the Middle East peace process, described the scene after Israel’s strike—a strike expressly designed to limit civilian casualties—as "horrific beyond belief." Peter Hansen, commissioner general of the UN Relief and Works Agency, called it "a human catastrophe that had few parallels in recent history." A UN press release was headlined, "End the horror in the camps." Only much later, in mid-summer, did the UN Secretary General release a report on Jenin noting that the Palestinian death toll from this "massacre" was 52, approximately 35 of whom were armed combatants.

In 2003, the General Assembly passed eighteen resolutions that singled out Israel for criticism; human-rights situations in the rest of the world drew only four country-specific resolutions. Nor, despite serious and well-documented charges of abuse reported to the UN over the years from, among others, the organization’s own special rapporteurs, has any resolution of the UN Commission on Human Rights ever been directed at China, Syria, Bahrain, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Pakistan, Malaysia, Mali, or Zimbabwe.

Consider the case of Sudan. This past year, members of the UN Commission on Human Rights had before them the report of their own special rapporteur on torture, which described the articles of the Sudanese penal code mandating "cross amputation"—the amputation of the right hand and the left foot—for armed robbery and, for other offenses, "death by hanging crucifixion." The report also took note of various cases in which Sudanese women had been stoned to death for adultery after trials conducted in a language they did not understand and in which they were denied legal representation.

The response to these gruesome findings? On behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Pakistan vehemently objected to a draft resolution condemning this sort of "cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment," declaring such views "an offense to all Muslim countries." The resolution went down to defeat; for good measure, the commission terminated the ten-year-old position of rapporteur on human rights for the long-suffering people of Sudan.

The justifications that are typically given for turning a blind eye to human-rights violations in 95 percent of UN states are predictable enough. In 2003, teaming up to defeat a resolution condemning Russian behavior in Chechnya, Syria and China called it "interference in the internal affairs of that country." India said that "every state had the right to protect its citizens from terrorism." When it came to reproving Zimbabwe, South Africa objected to "naming and shaming," while Libya, complaining that the resolution was "an attempt to make the commission a forum to settle differences between countries," declared its preference for "the language of cooperation and dialogue."

How is it, one might wonder, that such reservations never give the UN a moment’s pause when it comes to the organization’s relentlessly one-sided prosecution of Israel—a democratic state with an independent judiciary that, unlike all these others, can point to a long and distinguished record of respect for human rights? The demonization of Israel would seem to be about something else entirely.

What that something is has become too clear to deny: over the past several decades, the UN has fashioned itself into perhaps the foremost global platform for anti-Semitism.

[David_in_NYC]

Originally posted by cunard
...the fundamental ideals of the UN are as true as ever before trying to bring peace and liberty to the world, but it is the world which has failed itself for there own selfish reasons. Mistakes have been made and will continue to be made by the UN just like the rest of the world.

Here we go again... Cunard, there is nothing in the UN charter that even remotely suggests it should be a vehicle to bring liberty to the world. If there were, the USSR and China would never have signed on, and there would be no UN.

The purpose of the UN is to perpetuate the security situation that existed in 1945 with the defeat of Hitler and Tojo. Given the profound changes in the global balance of power since then, there is no mission left for the UN that has any relevance to its original reasons for coming into being.

[cunard]

Originally posted by Oh Jerusalem
Really? And what might that be now?

When I stated that, I included other countires not just Israel in Human Right violations. The Palestinians have also carried put huge repulsive violations of human rights. As has Canada and France and the UK and etc... When i mentioned Israel it was for the demolation of homes between Gaza and Egypt, or in East Jerusalum, or Hebron, or Jenin, while Israel has the right to self defense I higly doubt all 13,361 homes destroyed in the past 3 years leaving thousands homeless was needed or if it at all helped Israel. If anything it only helped the political ideals of right wing fanatics on both sides, reasons for Islamists to hit back and for the Israeli govt to show the public thier tough stance. There have been about 120 attacks inside Israel so that would equal about 120 homes destroyed. Attacks against Military targets are legite just like any other war or conflict in the world, the reaction after such an attack such as holding dead soliders bodies is a violation that the palestinians ahve done but Israel has done the same such as holding the bodies of 600 Lebannese fighters for the 1980's which were used as bargaining chips to get the Israeli businessman and IDF soldiers remains. Like i said before, both sides have done it, both are to blame. Hopefully that some what clears up any questions, if not, please do write comments or email me.

[cunard]

Originally posted by David_in_NYC
Here we go again... Cunard, there is nothing in the UN charter that even remotely suggests it should be a vehicle to bring liberty to the world. If there were, the USSR and China would never have signed on, and there would be no UN.

The purpose of the UN is to perpetuate the security situation that existed in 1945 with the defeat of Hitler and Tojo. Given the profound changes in the global balance of power since then, there is no mission left for the UN that has any relevance to its original reasons for coming into being.

The only reason that China, USSR and the rest who are in the security council are cause they were the victors of the war. Again it was politics being played. And to the note that they have no relevance today? I would think they would, what would happen to Africa if there was no UN, it would just collapse onto itself and slowlt destabalize which would put even more pressure on the milddle east and i think that we can all agree that the middle east has enough of its own problems to deal with. What I have always wondered is why there are no UN troops along the green line or Gaza and Egypt. I know Palestinians have been calling for this but Israel has refused. You always see (or most of the time see) UN troops being deplyed to certain hot spots such as Haiti and such. Anyways enough of me going on and on, below are a few lines from the UN Charter.


WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,



AND FOR THESE ENDS
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and

to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and

to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and

to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,


HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS
Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.

[Gilgamesh]

Originally posted by cunard
When I stated that, I included other countires not just Israel in Human Right violations. The Palestinians have also carried put huge repulsive violations of human rights. As has Canada and France and the UK and etc...

Violation of human rights are wrong, each nation carries it own responsibility for such crimes not to happen on the first place, never to happen in the future as well. Hiding within a group of violators does not deminish the national responsibility of each nation.

If "every body" committ a crime (gang rape, drugs, ect..) and you decide to join the party, do not deminish your blame or criminal responsibility.

When i mentioned Israel it was for the demolation of homes between Gaza and Egypt, or in East Jerusalum, or Hebron, or Jenin, while Israel has the right to self defense I higly doubt all 13,361 homes destroyed in the past 3 years leaving thousands homeless was needed or if it at all helped Israel.

Where the heck you taken that figure from? What is your defenition of a "demolished house" was a house it's garden fence was party demolished, was taken into the list, or not? Who are you, anyway, to judge which house demolition was neccary part of warfare or not? Who are you to judge the decision of brave fighting Jews, when common Israeli citizens are carful to judge? None can enter the shoes of a fighting commander in the midst of battle, critizes him from the armchair across an ocean, while he and his men are on the ground?!

Each of us Israelis spent 3 years in the Army, and then some time each year in reserve duty. We don't need the media to teach us what REALLY happaning. We knows both what the media says and what the pro-Arab media hides. How about you? Do YOU know how to hold a rifle at the very least? And upon your ignorance you critize us and give instructions... What do you think it is? A football match? A thried grade holywood war movie?

If anything it only helped the political ideals of right wing fanatics on both sides, reasons for Islamists to hit back and for the Israeli govt to show the public thier tough stance.

Israeli goverment does not have a "tough stance". we are soft beyonned beliefe. Most Israelis are angry with our goverment softness. The actions you see are far less then the minimal actions requiered to combat terrorism. Hard to believe, but this is the truth. It took us 3 years to finish off Yassin and Rantissi. Not because we couldn't, but because we are too soft to act and most undecisive and self critical about taking a life. This is soft.

There have been about 120 attacks inside Israel so that would equal about 120 homes destroyed. Attacks against Military targets are legite just like any other war or conflict in the world, the reaction after such an attack such as holding dead soliders bodies is a violation that the palestinians ahve done but Israel has done the same such as holding the bodies of 600 Lebannese fighters for the 1980's which were used as bargaining chips to get the Israeli businessman and IDF soldiers remains.

We have buried enemy bodies, which the enemy don't want back. Israeli soldiers body parts, still decorates many Arabs living rooms to this date. This is the difference between Jews and Arabs.

Arabs hold the remains of a Israeli POW downed pilots who was turtured and murderud in captivity, while the red cross failed to take care for him in accordance with the organization charter and Geneva conventions. Also, the Arabs in Lebanon hold the bodies of 3 more soldiers killed by thier captors in Lebanon war. Both are war crimes the internation community ignores. (what can we expect, when a genocide is taking place in Sudan and the UN compaletly over looking that).

Like i said before, both sides have done it, both are to blame. Hopefully that some what clears up any questions, if not, please do write comments or email me.

Both sides maybe to blame, but on far different grounds. Israel should be blamed for not acting swift and mighty enough to end terrorism or any other problem eminates from Arab side.

We Jews and our Arab enemies are two different cultures, working on different motives and holding far different moral values. We can't be judged as equalls. A crimminal is not equall to his victim in any way. Both humans, of course, but the crimminal is evil and demands the treatment used for evil people. So are the Arabs who largely involove and support terrorism, both in Israel and outside.

[Da Chuckstar]

Originally posted by cunard
or Jenin.

Oh here we go. I take it that you didn't hear about the fact that there was no massacre at Jenin and that the media lied? Or is it because you only hear what you want to hear, which is that Israel is an evil fascist country?

I higly doubt all 13,361 homes destroyed in the past 3 years leaving thousands homeless was needed or if it at all helped Israel.

Well all the facts seem to go against your argument. Because the Palestinians are finding it much much harder to get their grubby little hands on weapons and ammunition. And parents are a lot less likely to let their children blow themselves up for fear of having their house gone, especially since now their buddy Saddam isn't there anymore to compensate them.

If anything it only helped the political ideals of right wing fanatics on both sides

Are you trying to call most of the Israeli public right wing fanatics? Because they support these actions too. Your credibility just keeps sinking lower and lower, especially when you try to compare people who kill innocent civilians on purpose just for being Jews, to people who are just trying to defend themselves from these murderers.

There have been about 120 attacks inside Israel so that would equal about 120 homes destroyed.

Good riddance.

but Israel has done the same such as holding the bodies of 600 Lebannese fighters for the 1980's which were used as bargaining chips to get the Israeli businessman and IDF soldiers remains.

Wrong. They traded 400 "live" Palestinians, 20 "live" Lebanese, and 59 dead Lebanese for the businessman and the three dead soldiers. And some of those released said they were likely to re-offend. You apparently don't know much do you to keep getting all your facts wrong?

both are to blame

No, one side is to blame. That is the Arab world. If they didn't act like such barbarians that still can't seem to get their mindset out of the stone age, then we wouldn't be having all these problems in the Middle East.

[Mil]

Posted by Cunrad:



The only reason that China, USSR and the rest who are in the security council are cause they were the victors of the war.

The real reason why China, USSR and the rest are in the security council because these countries are clearly recognized Super Powers in their prespective regions and internationally; this was especially true in 1945 with China being a later addition.


Again it was politics being played.

No. It was a normal continuation of events. Before UN there was a League of Nations which happened to not include the most important super-powers at the time which were Germany, USSR, and the US - the main reason of why LON failed.


And to the note that they have no relevance today? I would think they would, what would happen to Africa if there was no UN, it would just collapse onto itself and slowlt destabalize which would put even more pressure on the milddle east and i think that we can all agree that the middle east has enough of its own problems to deal with.


That's too subjective.


What I have always wondered is why there are no UN troops along the green line or Gaza and Egypt.

Apparently you haven't really looked at UN troop deployments lately. There are UN troops on the border of Egypt/Israel in the Sinai, Syria/Israel in the Golan, and between Israel and Lebanon. UN troops stayed in Sinai since 1956 and were thrown out by Egypt in 1967 which was one of the main reason of the Six Days War. The UN troops also did not prevent Syrian agression in October 1973 and do not guarantee Israeli security on the Lebanese border.


I know Palestinians have been calling for this but Israel has refused. You always see (or most of the time see) UN troops being deplyed to certain hot spots such as Haiti and such.

Apparently you have never read the Charter on that particular matter.



Anyways enough of me going on and on, below are a few lines from the UN Charter.


I hope you read the Charter in its entirity - I did.

[cunard]

Originally posted by Gilgamesh
Violation of human rights are wrong, each nation carries it own responsibility for such crimes not to happen on the first place, never to happen in the future as well. Hiding within a group of violators does not deminish the national responsibility of each nation.

If "every body" committ a crime (gang rape, drugs, ect..) and you decide to join the party, do not deminish your blame or criminal responsibility.

[/b]
Where the heck you taken that figure from? What is your defenition of a "demolished house" was a house it's garden fence was party demolished, was taken into the list, or not? Who are you, anyway, to judge which house demolition was neccary part of warfare or not? Who are you to judge the decision of brave fighting Jews, when common Israeli citizens are carful to judge? None can enter the shoes of a fighting commander in the midst of battle, critizes him from the armchair across an ocean, while he and his men are on the ground?!

Each of us Israelis spent 3 years in the Army, and then some time each year in reserve duty. We don't need the media to teach us what REALLY happaning. We knows both what the media says and what the pro-Arab media hides. How about you? Do YOU know how to hold a rifle at the very least? And upon your ignorance you critize us and give instructions... What do you think it is? A football match? A thried grade holywood war movie?

[/b] Israeli goverment does not have a "tough stance". we are soft beyonned beliefe. Most Israelis are angry with our goverment softness. The actions you see are far less then the minimal actions requiered to combat terrorism. Hard to believe, but this is the truth. It took us 3 years to finish off Yassin and Rantissi. Not because we couldn't, but because we are too soft to act and most undecisive and self critical about taking a life. This is soft.

[/b] We have buried enemy bodies, which the enemy don't want back. Israeli soldiers body parts, still decorates many Arabs living rooms to this date. This is the difference between Jews and Arabs.

Arabs hold the remains of a Israeli POW downed pilots who was turtured and murderud in captivity, while the red cross failed to take care for him in accordance with the organization charter and Geneva conventions. Also, the Arabs in Lebanon hold the bodies of 3 more soldiers killed by thier captors in Lebanon war. Both are war crimes the internation community ignores. (what can we expect, when a genocide is taking place in Sudan and the UN compaletly over looking that).

Both sides maybe to blame, but on far different grounds. Israel should be blamed for not acting swift and mighty enough to end terrorism or any other problem eminates from Arab side.

We Jews and our Arab enemies are two different cultures, working on different motives and holding far different moral values. We can't be judged as equalls. A crimminal is not equall to his victim in any way. Both humans, of course, but the crimminal is evil and demands the treatment used for evil people. So are the Arabs who largely involove and support terrorism, both in Israel and outside. [/B]

When I mentioned the 600 hundred, I had added all bodies returned to the Lebanese such as 127 in 1996 in which two IDF bodies were given to the Israelis from a 1986 conflict. In the 600 count In included those bodies realised by the Israeli ally The
South Lebanon Army . My apologies for any misunderstanding on that part.


To the point that the IDF has been to soft to which you say that Israelis believe a tougher stance is needed i highly doubt that. Only those such as settlers would agree to a tougher stance. After an attack inside Israel the Israelis would feel in such a way to hit back hard,, but they realize that has soon as they hit back the other side will try just as hard to hit back as well making this bloody cycle continue on and on.

And for the point that it is the arabs this and the arabs that and we are superior antic, I can say nothing on this matter, these views you hold for yourself and i cannot change them. All i can say is that the haterd you have for them, believe me, they will have just as much haterd right back at you so this will get you no where in reality.

To the note that I do not know what war is made me laugh, in 1967 my grandfather was killed by the IDF in Gaza, while he was on a UN patrol part on an Indian UN Force in which he and 13 others were killed. My father was in wars with Pakistan and one with China, the one with China, India was wiped put after wave after wave of Chinese troops attacked, My father served his nation with pride but did the nation come to his defense when Hindu mobs were going out and attacking anyone who was or looked like a sikh in the 80's and 90's. My father died including 19 members of my family while 7 more we do n ot know what happend to them, all 7 missing were just under 30 years old and probably killed in so called fake encounters with police. This day now with those wounds still freash, sikhs and hindus are coming together again, India even elected a Sikh Prime Minister. Jow could this happen after only 20 years of bitter haterd. Because we talked, Those sikhs being held in prisons for nealry two decades were realised and some were compensated, Punjab where sikhs are from had money pumped into it so jobs and prosperity were there. If fanatics have no issue to grasp and bring the masses to, no one in there right mind will leave there warm bed to go fight a war.

To the number of houses demolished the number was taken from the BBC, the CNN estimate was about 500 less while Fox news had even a higher number, so i took the average, For anyone to say that Fox news is being bias will be lying to themsleves. For those in North America know that fox news is right wing.

As before, comments are very much welcomed

[cunard]

Originally posted by Mil
Posted by Cunrad:



The only reason that China, USSR and the rest who are in the security council are cause they were the victors of the war.

The real reason why China, USSR and the rest are in the security council because these countries are clearly recognized Super Powers in their prespective regions and internationally; this was especially true in 1945 with China being a later addition.


Again it was politics being played.

No. It was a normal continuation of events. Before UN there was a League of Nations which happened to not include the most important super-powers at the time which were Germany, USSR, and the US - the main reason of why LON failed.


And to the note that they have no relevance today? I would think they would, what would happen to Africa if there was no UN, it would just collapse onto itself and slowlt destabalize which would put even more pressure on the milddle east and i think that we can all agree that the middle east has enough of its own problems to deal with.


That's too subjective.


What I have always wondered is why there are no UN troops along the green line or Gaza and Egypt.

Apparently you haven't really looked at UN troop deployments lately. There are UN troops on the border of Egypt/Israel in the Sinai, Syria/Israel in the Golan, and between Israel and Lebanon. UN troops stayed in Sinai since 1956 and were thrown out by Egypt in 1967 which was one of the main reason of the Six Days War. The UN troops also did not prevent Syrian agression in October 1973 and do not guarantee Israeli security on the Lebanese border.


I know Palestinians have been calling for this but Israel has refused. You always see (or most of the time see) UN troops being deplyed to certain hot spots such as Haiti and such.

Apparently you have never read the Charter on that particular matter.



Anyways enough of me going on and on, below are a few lines from the UN Charter.


I hope you read the Charter in its entirity - I did.

What I ment by UN troops deplyments is why arent there troops posted to seperate both sides so that UN troops can take place of the IDF, also there are no UN troops there epecially between Gaza rafah and Egypt Rafah, there are UN observers in the Sinai as they are there as observers in the Golan and other place there. There only a few dozen troops who act as observers, not as a buffer.

And like i said before the only reason that China, USSR and the rest who are in the security council are cause they were the victors of the war. Tougest in the region is the same thing. the loser wouldnt be the victor or the toughest in the region, Mil, your just playing word games now.

[Oh Jerusalem]

Originally posted by cunard
To the point that the IDF has been to soft to which you say that Israelis believe a tougher stance is needed i highly doubt that. Only those such as settlers would agree to a tougher stance.

Israel's population is split in several ways on such issues. But to think that only Judea, Samaria and Gaza residents are of such an opinion shows your ongoing ignornace.

After an attack inside Israel the Israelis would feel in such a way to hit back hard,, but they realize that has soon as they hit back the other side will try just as hard to hit back as well making this bloody cycle continue on and on.

The old "cycle of violence cliche" ("cliche"? I spoke French! ) is passe. ("Passe"?! Not again! ).

And for the point that it is the arabs this and the arabs that and we are superior antic,

I don't know what is particulalrly superior about us but I was brought up to understand that people who desire to kill you should be stopped before they succeed. This is not a question of superior/inferior and is not a race issue, at least from the Israeli side. Of course, don't bother mentioning what Moslem Imans and Sheiks preach about superiority from the pulpits of their mosques in Gaza, Mecca, London or Dearborn. That wouldn't be politically correct now, would it?

I can say nothing on this matter

An excellent observation.

these views you hold for yourself and i cannot change them. All i can say is that the haterd you have for them, believe me, they will have just as much haterd right back at you so this will get you no where in reality.

We have no problem with the existance of all of the surrounding Arab countries. They, on the other hand, continue to seek our destruction and annihilation. You are talking to the wrong side. Your failure to recognize this is in fact the same as the failure of the rest of the western oil hungry nations, except that their motive is purely selfish. So what's yours?

To the note that I do not know what war is made me laugh, in 1967 my grandfather was killed by the IDF in Gaza, while he was on a UN patrol part on an Indian UN Force in which he and 13 others were killed. My father was in wars with Pakistan and one with China, the one with China, India was wiped put after wave after wave of Chinese troops attacked, My father served his nation with pride but did the nation come to his defense when Hindu mobs were going out and attacking anyone who was or looked like a sikh in the 80's and 90's. My father died including 19 members of my family while 7 more we do n ot know what happend to them, all 7 missing were just under 30 years old and probably killed in so called fake encounters with police. This day now with those wounds still freash, sikhs and hindus are coming together again, India even elected a Sikh Prime Minister. Jow could this happen after only 20 years of bitter haterd. Because we talked, Those sikhs being held in prisons for nealry two decades were realised and some were compensated, Punjab where sikhs are from had money pumped into it so jobs and prosperity were there. If fanatics have no issue to grasp and bring the masses to, no one in there right mind will leave there warm bed to go fight a war.

I am sorry to hear about your tragic family history. I now undestand better where part of your point of view is coming from.

Had we been at war with Hindus or Sikhs, I bet this would all blow over faster than you can say Katmandu.

Unfortunately, we lucky Israelis live on the doorstep to the heart of the Radical Islamic world. The other side is not interested in accepting our physical existence here, whether we retreat to 1967, 1948 or Partition Plan borders.

Until you recognize just who our enemy is and what they want at the end of the day, you will continue to unfairly slander us as religious fanatics. The funniest thing is that the vast majority of Israelis are secular to begin with but don't let another small fact get in the way of your thinking.

To the number of houses demolished the number was taken from the BBC, the CNN estimate was about 500 less while Fox news had even a higher number, so i took the average, For anyone to say that Fox news is being bias will be lying to

Fine. Now, as already requested by others, why don't you give us a statistical breakdown and analysis as to the circumstances of and the reasons for those houses being demolished.

[cunard]

Unfortunately, we lucky Israelis live on the doorstep to the heart of the Radical Islamic world. The other side is not interested in accepting our physical existence here, whether we retreat to 1967, 1948 or Partition Plan borders.

Until you recognize just who our enemy is and what they want at the end of the day, you will continue to unfairly slander us as religious fanatics. The funniest thing is that the vast majority of Israelis are secular to begin with but don't let another small fact get in the way of your thinking.

Fine. Now, as already requested by others, why don't you give us a statistical breakdown and analysis as to the circumstances of and the reasons for those houses being demolished. [/B][/QUOTE]


To the first point, The Arab world would except an Israeli state (perhaps not all the arab world, just like any society there will be those who will continue in there "only islam is the way to go" speeches and actions) if there was peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. Peace will only come when as Ariel Sharon himself said that the " "occupation" of 3.5 million palestinians is not good for them or us." It has to end. The israelis should continue building the wall as long as it doesnt take chunks of land for settlements.
Everyone knows that the Israeli army is undefeatable in a war such as tank vs tank, fighter aircraft vs fighter aircraft, Cause Syria is weak and dirt poor, Iraq dosent really exsit at the moment, Saudi Arabia wouldn't have the guts to do it since all those princes and kings are probably some of the fakest islamists out there and cant risk there army away to protect them, Only other real islamist nation is Iran which is surrounded on both sides by american troops. As soon as this is done peace will come, but it wont be overnight, it will take years!! the situation here in middle east is not any different then those seen in South America such as in Columbia, Chile, Honduras, or Argentina, or in South East Asia in Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia. When foreign troops who are seen as the enemy in the arab eyes leave and return to there rightful places the cards will fall into place. The arabs know that Israel is not going to go anywhere, and Israelis know that holding 3.5 million hostage to get at those couple hundred militants will go no where either. When the streets are full of all those Palestinians waving Hamas flags, how many of them are actual die hards, perhaps a couple hundred, they show up cause there angry then go home. Hamases only rallying cry is the settlements and israeli checkpoints. Before Rantisi was killed in the air strike, he appeared on NBC Nightly News via Video phone before that Hamas spirtual figure was killed. He said that Hamas would except the 67 green line. Even though this man probably did order attacks, he was a moderate palestinian who was not really relgious, a doctor so he was well educated, He was angry and rightfully so since he became a refugee twice before the age of 20. this man would have been much easier to control and deal with then the new Hamas figure who is in Syria i believe. He was one of the few moderates. I know he gave many firey speechs, but thats what every politician does, give speeches so the masses will follow him.

To the point of recognizing your enemy, ok fine, this is what i see, I see 3.5 million miserable people living under a Iron Curtain for the past nearly 50 years, remember, sucide attacks only started in the 80's so the excuse that the palestinians started in all doesnt quite fly with me or much of the world. To bring in the PLO, the israelis should go after them not the population at large. Cause back in the 70's and early 80's Israeli companys were feaverishly buliding settlements which continue on today. Just last week the Haaretz published in there paper of 30 millions dollars more for settlement construction this year. Now i know while reading through some posts here that the Haaretz in considered to leftist but 30 million dollars towards construction is 30 million dollars towards construction in my books.

To the point that some said i labeld all israelis as right wing fanatics or religious fanatics? NOT TRUE, i called that only to most settlers. To those Israelis that beleived that that statement was directed to all Israelis which it didnt so my sincereist apologies.
And to those who think that I an ARAB lover or muslem lover, nothing could be farther from the truth. As a sikh I envy the nation of Israel that it exsists even with its troubles. Sikhs have wanted and tried for there own independent nation but failed. And for the muslem or Arab lover thing, nothing is farther from the truth, Sikhs lost two of its founding fathers to Muslem rulers in India because they refused to convert to Islam so they were killed. The Golden Temple or also known as Harmander Shaib which is equal to us as is Mecca to muslems, Vatican is to Catholics or the Temple Mount to Jews. The Golden Temple was razed to the ground three times in 150 years by Muslem armies and twice by the indian army (once totally destroyed in 1984 with tanks and once in 1991 there was slight damage with one wall collapsing.)

For the statistics, they will be posted shortly for those who have asked for them.

If there is somthing still unclear about my views do let me know by posting here or emailing me (email is always at the bottem of all my posts) Comments are always welcome, nagative and posative.

[Batman]

Originally posted by cunard
Unfortunately, we lucky Israelis live on the doorstep to the heart of the Radical Islamic world. The other side is not interested in accepting our physical existence here, whether we retreat to 1967, 1948 or Partition Plan borders.

Until you recognize just who our enemy is and what they want at the end of the day, you will continue to unfairly slander us as religious fanatics. The funniest thing is that the vast majority of Israelis are secular to begin with but don't let another small fact get in the way of your thinking.

Fine. Now, as already requested by others, why don't you give us a statistical breakdown and analysis as to the circumstances of and the reasons for those houses being demolished.

To the first point, The Arab world would except an Israeli state (perhaps not all the arab world, just like any society there will be those who will continue in there "only islam is the way to go" speeches and actions) if there was peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. Peace will only come when as Ariel Sharon himself said that the " "occupation" of 3.5 million palestinians is not good for them or us." It has to end. The israelis should continue building the wall as long as it doesnt take chunks of land for settlements.
Everyone knows that the Israeli army is undefeatable in a war such as tank vs tank, fighter aircraft vs fighter aircraft, Cause Syria is weak and dirt poor, Iraq dosent really exsit at the moment, Saudi Arabia wouldn't have the guts to do it since all those princes and kings are probably some of the fakest islamists out there and cant risk there army away to protect them, Only other real islamist nation is Iran which is surrounded on both sides by american troops. As soon as this is done peace will come, but it wont be overnight, it will take years!! the situation here in middle east is not any different then those seen in South America such as in Columbia, Chile, Honduras, or Argentina, or in South East Asia in Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia. When foreign troops who are seen as the enemy in the arab eyes leave and return to there rightful places the cards will fall into place. The arabs know that Israel is not going to go anywhere, and Israelis know that holding 3.5 million hostage to get at those couple hundred militants will go no where either. When the streets are full of all those Palestinians waving Hamas flags, how many of them are actual die hards, perhaps a couple hundred, they show up cause there angry then go home. Hamases only rallying cry is the settlements and israeli checkpoints. Before Rantisi was killed in the air strike, he appeared on NBC Nightly News via Video phone before that Hamas spirtual figure was killed. He said that Hamas would except the 67 green line. Even though this man probably did order attacks, he was a moderate palestinian who was not really relgious, a doctor so he was well educated, He was angry and rightfully so since he became a refugee twice before the age of 20. this man would have been much easier to control and deal with then the new Hamas figure who is in Syria i believe. He was one of the few moderates. I know he gave many firey speechs, but thats what every politician does, give speeches so the masses will follow him.

To the point of recognizing your enemy, ok fine, this is what i see, I see 3.5 million miserable people living under a Iron Curtain for the past nearly 50 years, remember, sucide attacks only started in the 80's so the excuse that the palestinians started in all doesnt quite fly with me or much of the world. To bring in the PLO, the israelis should go after them not the population at large. Cause back in the 70's and early 80's Israeli companys were feaverishly buliding settlements which continue on today. Just last week the Haaretz published in there paper of 30 millions dollars more for settlement construction this year. Now i know while reading through some posts here that the Haaretz in considered to leftist but 30 million dollars towards construction is 30 million dollars towards construction in my books.

To the point that some said i labeld all israelis as right wing fanatics or religious fanatics? NOT TRUE, i called that only to most settlers. To those Israelis that beleived that that statement was directed to all Israelis which it didnt so my sincereist apologies.
And to those who think that I an ARAB lover or muslem lover, nothing could be farther from the truth. As a sikh I envy the nation of Israel that it exsists even with its troubles. Sikhs have wanted and tried for there own independent nation but failed. And for the muslem or Arab lover thing, nothing is farther from the truth, Sikhs lost two of its founding fathers to Muslem rulers in India because they refused to convert to Islam so they were killed. The Golden Temple or also known as Harmander Shaib which is equal to us as is Mecca to muslems, Vatican is to Catholics or the Temple Mount to Jews. The Golden Temple was razed to the ground three times in 150 years by Muslem armies and twice by the indian army (once totally destroyed in 1984 with tanks and once in 1991 there was slight damage with one wall collapsing.)

For the statistics, they will be posted shortly for those who have asked for them.

If there is somthing still unclear about my views do let me know by posting here or emailing me (email is always at the bottem of all my posts) Comments are always welcome, nagative and posative.

ARE YOU REWRITING HISTORY HERE? Your facts are all wrong.

Tell me of a suicide attack that took place in the 1980s?

The fact is that suicide attacks started after the signing of the OSLO AGREEMENT IN 1994.

There are many other wrong facts in your essays. Please do more research on this forum and see the facts.

[KSO]

Originally posted by Batman
.

Tell me of a suicide attack that took place in the 1980s?

The Intifada wasn't a terror attack but it was an act of rebellion.

[i]
The fact is that suicide attacks started after the signing of the OSLO AGREEMENT IN 1994.[/B]

After your friend and mine Baruch Goldstein commited the first suicide terror attack in Israel.