U.N. Resolutions - Do They Work?

[This_Heat]

Haven't you people learned anything from the American media? When Arabs attack and kill Israeli civilians, it is an act of terrorism. When Israel responds with conventional military tactics which inevitably kill Arab civilians, it is a legitimate response.

I know that might seem like a "double standard" to some of you, but if it does then you are simply anti-semitic. Why do you hate Jews? You're worse than Hitler. I can't believe you can't see the difference between killing civilians with helicopter-mounted rockets and killing civilians with a vest full of RDX. emoticon.

[dnpmakkah]

Nevermind I found numerous other sites/news outlets that support the same facts as Wikepida.

Following World War II, the British withdrew from their mandate of Palestine, and the UN partitioned the area into Arab and Jewish states, an arrangement rejected by the Arabs.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/is.html

1981: Israel bombs Baghdad nuclear reactor
The Israelis have bombed a French-built nuclear plant near Iraq's capital, Baghdad, saying they believed it was designed to make nuclear weapons to destroy Israel.
It is the world's first air strike against a nuclear plant.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/7/newsid_3014000/3014623.stm

In 1968, a US Central Intelligence Agency report concluded that Israel had begun to produce nuclear weapons.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3340639.stm

[dnpmakkah]

Haven't you people learned anything from the American media? When Arabs attack and kill Israeli civilians, it is an act of terrorism. When Israel responds with conventional military tactics which inevitably kill Arab civilians, it is a legitimate response.

I know that might seem like a "double standard" to some of you, but if it does then you are simply anti-semitic. Why do you hate Jews? You're worse than Hitler. I can't believe you can't see the difference between killing civilians with helicopter-mounted rockets and killing civilians with a vest full of RDX. emoticon.

OOOOOH well why didn't they just say so. Thanks for putting it so clearly...now it all makes sense to me.

[This_Heat]

Israel is upset that Hamas and Hezbollah kidnapped their soldiers. The irony is that Hamas and Hezbollah are demanding the release of soldiers that Israel kidnapped

What soldiers? You're talking about terrorists. The deliberately target civilians, they wear no uniforms, represent no country, do not carry their weapons in plain view. According to the Geneva Conventions you seem so fond of, That makes them unlawfull combatants. I'm glad you think this is funny.

There is a moral distinction, but a dubious one. In the past 24 hours, the BBC has reported that at least 48 Lebanese, mainly civilians, have been killed by Israeli airstrikes and shellings. I would agree that it is more wrong to deliberately attack non-military targets than to accidently kill civilians, but the Israeli military and the government(s) behind them do not seem to care who they kill, so long as the civilian deaths are not so excessive as to force the US government to do something besides lightly tut.

Statistically, the Israeli has killed far many more civilians than has the Lebanese, Palestinians, Syrians, Egyptians, or any other group that has attacked Israel. And this is ignoring the original robbery of the land that started this whole mess, which is a crime that is conveniently ignored in most of these discussions. I've said it elsewhere, but until proper reparation is made, no peace will come.

Here's a nice quote for you:

Unfortunately, the only way to stop Hizbullah actions against the Israeli forces in south Lebanon is to inflict heavy blows on the passive population...Then Hizbullah would be loathed.

--Yitzhak Bailey, Israeli Defense Ministry, fall 1995 (six months before Qana Massacre)

[UK Skins Fan]

Well, to answer the question at the start of this thread, NO.

Now, feel free to continue your discussion, and polarise opinions to your hearts' content.

[dnpmakkah]

Well, to answer the question at the start of this thread, NO.

Now, feel free to continue your discussion.

Oh yea that question. Sorry...in the midst of this type of topic you always have the usual people who come in and start name-calling not only the innocent people who are dying but also the poster in this case me...that it tends to drag the conversation in another path.

[dnpmakkah]

Unfortunately, the only way to stop Hizbullah actions against the Israeli forces in south Lebanon is to inflict heavy blows on the passive population...Then Hizbullah would be loathed.

Hmmm...that's an interesting quote for sure. But since it makes Israel look bad then I'm sure its more than likely fake.

[yupchagee]

Israel is upset that Hamas and Hezbollah kidnapped their soldiers. The irony is that Hamas and Hezbollah are demanding the release of soldiers that Israel kidnapped

What soldiers? You're talking about terrorists. They deliberately target civilians, they wear no uniforms, represent no country, do not carry their weapons in plain view. According to the Geneva Conventions you seem so fond of, That makes them unlawfull combatants. I'm glad you think this is funny.

There is a moral distinction, but a dubious one. In the past 24 hours, the BBC has reported that at least 48 Lebanese, mainly civilians, have been killed by Israeli airstrikes and shellings. I would agree that it is more wrong to deliberately attack non-military targets than to accidently kill civilians, but the Israeli military and the government(s) behind them do not seem to care who they kill, so long as the civilian deaths are not so excessive as to force the US government to do something besides lightly tut.

Statistically, the Israeli has killed far many more civilians than has the Lebanese, Palestinians, Syrians, Egyptians, or any other group that has attacked Israel. And this is ignoring the original robbery of the land that started this whole mess, which is a crime that is conveniently ignored in most of these discussions. I've said it elsewhere, but until proper reparation is made, no peace will come.

Israel takes greater care than any other army in the world to minimize civilian casualities, even at the cost of the lives of its own soldiers. Arabs deliberately place military targets in civilian areas, even using schools & hospitals. Are you saying that Israel should not target Arab weapons factories & storage facilities or even gun placements because they are in civilian areas? If Israel targeted civilians, the death toll would be orders of magnitude higher. If they didn't care if civilians were killed, the death toll would be at least 1 order of magnitude higher. When Israel was (falsely) accused of a "massacre" in Jenin, most of the world condemned Israel without waiting for facts.

Mandatory Palestine included all of what is now Israel AND JORDAN. Britian gave 3/4 of this land to the Arabs before the 2nd partition in 47 was even on the table. This area was virtually uninhabited untill Jews started moving in. There has never benn a nation of "Palestinine" & the "Palestinian people" is a recent invention. In addition, the Arabs sided with Hitler during WWII. There have always been some jews living in what is not Israel, including Judea & Samaria (west bank).

[yupchagee]

Haven't you people learned anything from the American media? When Arabs attack and kill Israeli civilians, it is an act of terrorism. When Israel responds with conventional military tactics which inevitably kill Arab civilians, it is a legitimate response.

I know that might seem like a "double standard" to some of you, but if it does then you are simply anti-semitic. Why do you hate Jews? You're worse than Hitler. I can't believe you can't see the difference between killing civilians with helicopter-mounted rockets and killing civilians with a vest full of RDX. emoticon.

This is beneath contempt. the "doub le standard" is in equating attacks TARGETING CIVILIANS with those targeting INFRASTRUCTURE. A bridge is a legitimate target & Israel usually attacks at night when traffic is minimal. An ice cream parlor, where there are no weapons, is NEVER a legitimate target.

[Countertrey]

Imagine, for a second (again, I know this will be difficult for those who start threads such as this) that al Qaeda as annexed portions of Mexican territory, just south of El Paso and vicinity. Mexico is fully aware that they are there, fully aware that they are a terrorist organization with murderous intentions against the US, and fully aware that they are creating a highly militarized zone. The US asks the Mexican government to remove this threat (which would certainly be in their own interests, as well, as they have violated Mexican sovereignty, and in the process, have terrorized and bullied Mexican citizens). Mexico, fearing reprisals, does nothing.

The pig thugs of al Qaeda, secure that Mexico is impotent to stop them, determines to initiate cross border attacks on El Paso. They cross the border, and ambush a number of El Paso police officers, killing several, and kidnapping two.

By failing to act against al Qaeda, the Mexican government has aquiessed to their activities, and is complicit in this attack on US territory. That is an act of war. There would be few (mostly the knee-jerk Blame America Firsters, such as those who start provokative threads such as this) who would question a powerful military response by the US. It would be fully justified, and unquestionably appropriate.

It is the same situation the Israelis find themselves in. The Lebanese government, by it's failure to evict Hezbollah, is complicit, and has committed an act of war against Israel.

If they wish it to stop, they should take it upon themselves to disarm and emasculate Hezbollah.

UK Skins Fan wrote:

Now, feel free to continue your discussion, and polarise opinions to your hearts' content.

One thing you will not find, my friend, is a single politically provokative thread such as this which was started by me. On the other hand, you will have no problem finding multiple such threads started by a handful of individuals, many of which have included deliberate collective slanders of members of my peer group. Should I accept that?

I choose to respond to them, but I don't ever start them. Please consider that. Were these inane provokations not posted, you would not have to endure my responses to them... I would also respectfully point out that,, knowing that posts by certain members are almost always of a provokative nature, those who object to these "discussions" could simply elect not to open.

[Redskin in Canada]

Well, to answer the question at the start of this thread, NO.

This is uncharacteristically simplistic and plain wrong.

There are numerous resolutions, on many topics, adopted by the UN General Assembly that succeeded in their objectives and their implementation. The UN is far from perfect but it is the best humankind has created.

The implementation of resolutions falls on States. If a resolution is not implemented, it is the State, not the UN that is at fault.

Please do not tempt me. I can quote a good number of great resolutions that several of our own countries have not implemented due to selfish and economic reasons.

Interestingly, on the topic of this thread, the State of Israel was created as a result of a UN resolution during the post-WW II era ...

[Redskin in Canada]

Glad to hear that you're okay, RiC.

Thanks.

I just get sometimes into some places without much communication as a result of work projects or ... -holidays-.

[yupchagee]

Well, to answer the question at the start of this thread, NO.

This is uncharacteristically simplistic and plain wrong.

There are numerous resolutions, on many topics, adopted by the UN General Assembly that succeeded in their objectives and their implementation. The UN is far from perfect but it is the best humankind has created.

The implementation of resolutions falls on States. If a resolution is not implemented, it is the State, not the UN that is at fault.

Please do not tempt me. I can quote a good number of great resolutions that several of our own countries have not implemented due to selfish and economic reasons.

Interestingly, on the topic of this thread, the State of Israel was created as a result of a UN resolution during the post-WW II era ...

A little history. Britain dumped things on the UN after their situation became untenable. The UN idea (backed by the US state dept) was to create 2 non viable states. Once they colapsed, they could wash their hands of the mess. Israel ruined their plan by surviving. They haven't been forgiven.

[dnpmakkah]

Israel takes greater care than any other army in the world to minimize civilian casualities.

Really....here is just 1 example that proves you wrong and I quote

The toll in three days of clashes rose to 73 killed in Lebanon and at least 12 Israelis

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060715/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon_israel

I guess all 73 are terrorist huh? I suppose if you say terrorist enough you might actually trick yourself to believe it. Well because I am feeling spicey tonight I would like to rain some more on your parade and once again prove those wrong who think countries like Israel and the U.S prevent civilian casualities.

PALESTINIANS KILLED BY ISRAELIS*
3,135 killed by security forces in the West Bank and Gaza including 627 aged under 18, 181 killed in extrajudicial executions and 288 (including at least 29 aged under 18) killed in the course of these assassinations.
54 killed by security forces in Israel including one aged under 18
34 killed by Israeli citizens in the West Bank and Gaza including three aged under 18

ISRAELIS KILLED BY PALESTINIANS

431 civilians killed in Israel including 78 aged under 18
218 civilians killed in the West Bank and Gaza Strip including 34 aged under 18
218 Israeli security forces killed in West Bank and Gaza
83 Israeli security forces killed in Israel

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3694350.stm

So why again do you have such a pro-Israel mentality. I'm sure it has nothing to do with facts because I just stated facts that show the killing of innocent life is done more by the Israeli milita...but I'm sure your answer will be something like "well ummmm....they were all terrorist."

The irony is that when you look at history there has been a constant group of people who have been in the middle of all the atrocities such as war, the holocust, and even salvery. These same type of people invade, destroy, and divide nations systematically. That is what you call terrorism and it can only be stopped face on.

[BossHog]

I just get sometimes into some places without much communication as a result of work projects or ... -holidays-.

Welcome back brother. Hope you had a nice holiday.


Folks... I know that these threads can get passionate so I appreciate you all keeping your posts within the rules. You're all doing a good job of it, but I do smell a little frustration brewing from some people. Please remember to refine your comments to the post and not the poster, and take personal comments to smack.

Thanks and carry on.

[Cappster]

I think that the war in the middle east will go on until either the jews or muslims wipe each other out. I am not picking sides but I think Isreal is right in what they are doing. They give them the west bank and get attacked for it. They have countries that would exterminate them if it wasn't for their military might. There are civilian casualities but these are people that strap bombs to their kids and send them to Isreal to blow up innocent civilians. Not all of them but the ones that support hamas, hezzbollah, and al-queada surely do.

I don't like to see war but it has happened for thousands of years between man. I think the U.N. nowadays is a joke. They might pass a measure but you could wipe your butt with it because it will not be honored. Too many different interests and business dealings for a unanimous resolution to pass that would be effective.

[dnpmakkah]

For the most part the war between the Arabs and the Jews of recent times is more over land and not over religion. Many western cultures (American & Britain) would like to make it seem that it is a religious issue instead of a political one because it helps divert attention from themselves as having a historical hand in this conflict.

That region is completly surrounded with Muslim land and lived upon by Muslim people. The only nation that is non-muslim is the area that is now ocuppied by Israel (kinda strange huh?). Here is where the problem begins. Historically no-one knows for sure who that land belongs too. Who were the first people to occupy it as a homeland? It sure wasn't the Jews because Judism did not always exist...so then why do they have a right to claim it as their homeland?

The greater question is why does the rest of the world mainly America and Britain feel like they should have played a role in taking a piece of land away from a group of people (Palestine) and dividing a majority portion of it and giving it to another group of people (Israel).

Historically land switches hands all the time. Mostly due to war and occupation but also due to turnover, migration and such. But it is highly frustrating to have your land taken away from you by a 3rd party (the West) and given to another group (Israelies) under the excuse that "well that is their homeland".

What the world should do is seperate the two people completely rather than try to make them live in peace together. Britian & the U.S. should buffer out New York City all the way down to D.C. and just give it to Israelies to claim as their homeland leaving what is now Israel in complete possesion of Palestinian control.

That way the two are seperated and Israelis can have a home of their own. I think this could work out beautifully. The area of New York-D.C is only about 400 miles but I'm sure its more than enough space. I think this would work better than thinking the Arabs and the Jews can live side-by-side in this current manner.

[Fios]

From a purely strategic standpoint it wouldn't make much sense for the U.S. to cede so much valuable land. In strictly pragmatic terms we'd be better served by carving out a chunk of Texas or Montana and establishing that as an Israeli state.

[dnpmakkah]

This is just one other example of the West invading land then dividing it however they deem fit. This Durand Line is the #1 reason there is so much hate between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Once again the West took a piece of land from one group of people and gave it to another not because of humanitarian reasons but mainly due to selfish ones. Then they leave and hope for the best and ever since the two nations have been at odds with eachother over this part of territory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durand_Line

After being defeated in two wars against Afghans, the British succeeded in 1893 in imposing the Durand Line dividing Afghanistan

The border was drawn intentionally to cut through the Afghan tribes whom the British feared and may have tried to disunite.

[Countertrey]

You like Wikepedia as a referrence, do you? You are aware that ANYONE, to include Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Osama bin Laudin, Fidel Castro, Michael Moore, YOU, and ME, can edit that, aren't you?

It sure wasn't the Jews because Judism did not always exist...so then why do they have a right to claim it as their homeland?

Well, perhaps because they were instructed by God to do so. Whether you believe in God or not is immaterial in this argument... the fact is that Christians, Jews (through their bible) and, yes, even Islam (through the Koran) believes this is true. Has Allah changed his mind? Or are those Muslims who wish the destruction of Israel in conflict with their Koran?

But it is highly frustrating to have your land taken away from you by a 3rd party (the West) and given to another group (Israelies) under the excuse that "well that is their homeland".

Check your history (again). The land that became the nation of Israel was part of Jordanian territory. JORDAN! There was no nation called "Palestine". At the time this occured, the intention was to also create a separate Palestine... however, this was not acceptable to either the Palestinians (even though they had no nation, and this would have resulted in one... they wanted a Palestinian state, but no Israel) nor the bordering Arab nations (who wanted neither). They wanted it all... no land for Israel. Had they accepted, there would be no issue today.

Your claim that this is not about religion is also curious. There are Christian and Jewish Palestinians. If this your contention is true, why, then, are none of the terrorists Christian or Jewish?

[Redskin in Canada]

The UN idea (backed by the US state dept) was to create 2 non viable states. Once they colapsed, they could ...

It was the result a US proposal and a heavy lobby from the winners of WWII. It was not a "UN idea". The UN adopted the resolution and ALL States bare the responsibility for that choice, not only the US.

I think that the war in the middle east will go on until either the jews or muslims wipe each other out.

Read the Bible. They have been trying to do that for over 6,000 years. The problem with this conclusion is that now they can (and have) spread the conflict way beyond Palestine itself. Iran anybody?

This is not a foreign policy forum and I understand all your concerns. I wish the American media would give you a more balanced perspective of ALL the facts. Unfortunately, the US has removed itself from the role of mediator to combatant to be able to broker a peace deal. It still can be done, I mean, a modus vivendi. But it will get worse before it gets better.

I do not know about you but I get a bit melancholic missing the good old days during the Cold War when this mess would not and could not have taken place. Oh! the good old days when we could obliterate humankind from the rest of the planet in a matter of hours. Stability or obliteration, a little scary but it worked.

[Deadskins]

why, then, are none of the terrorists Christian or Jewish?

I have purposefully tried to stay out of this argument, but I can't let this one pass. What is a terrorist? One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Can a person in his own occupied territory be a terrorist? Violence only begets more violence. I'm not saying that any side is right, but you have to look at the situation from all sides. The territory in question includes sites considered sacred by each of the warring factions.

[dnpmakkah]

You like Wikepedia as a referrence, do you? You are aware that ANYONE, to include Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Osama bin Laudin, Fidel Castro, Michael Moore, YOU, and ME, can edit that, aren't you?

So find me an link that is legit that proves the FACTs in Wikepida WRONG. If you do then more power to you and I will admit I was wrong.

Well, perhaps because they were instructed by God to do so. Whether you believe in God or not is immaterial in this argument... the fact is that Christians, Jews (through their bible) and, yes, even Islam (through the Koran) believes this is true. Has Allah changed his mind? Or are those Muslims who wish the destruction of Israel in conflict with their Koran?

So God GAVE that land to them. Well then what land did God give the Muslims...what land did God give the Christians. Does he only favor the Jews? Are the rest of us screwed? Besides doesn't America seperate the concept of Church and State?

Check your history (again). The land that became the nation of Israel was part of Jordanian territory. JORDAN! There was no nation called "Palestine". At the time this occured, the intention was to also create a separate Palestine... however, this was not acceptable to either the Palestinians (even though they had no nation, and this would have resulted in one... they wanted a Palestinian state, but no Israel) nor the bordering Arab nations (who wanted neither). They wanted it all... no land for Israel. Had they accepted, there would be no issue today.

Did you have a point here? So you are saying it was Jordanian land? Ok my bad. So the West took Muslim land that belonged to Jordan and decided to give half of it to the Jews. Ok there thats much better. Either way Britian and America took land from a Muslim nation and gave it to the Jewish state....and your point being?

Your claim that this is not about religion is also curious. There are Christian and Jewish Palestinians. If this your contention is true, why, then, are none of the terrorists Christian or Jewish?

So if all the Jews left Israel and the land went back to the Muslims do you still think they would go after the destruction of all Jews?

Oh and what do you think about the death toll numbers that I posted? Hope to hear from you soon.

[yupchagee]

You like Wikepedia as a referrence, do you? You are aware that ANYONE, to include Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Osama bin Laudin, Fidel Castro, Michael Moore, YOU, and ME, can edit that, aren't you?

It sure wasn't the Jews because Judism did not always exist...so then why do they have a right to claim it as their homeland?

Well, perhaps because they were instructed by God to do so. Whether you believe in God or not is immaterial in this argument... the fact is that Christians, Jews (through their bible) and, yes, even Islam (through the Koran) believes this is true. Has Allah changed his mind? Or are those Muslims who wish the destruction of Israel in conflict with their Koran?

But it is highly frustrating to have your land taken away from you by a 3rd party (the West) and given to another group (Israelies) under the excuse that "well that is their homeland".

Check your history (again). The land that became the nation of Israel was part of Jordanian territory. JORDAN! There was no nation called "Palestine". At the time this occured, the intention was to also create a separate Palestine... however, this was not acceptable to either the Palestinians (even though they had no nation, and this would have resulted in one... they wanted a Palestinian state, but no Israel) nor the bordering Arab nations (who wanted neither). They wanted it all... no land for Israel. Had they accepted, there would be no issue today.

Your claim that this is not about religion is also curious. There are Christian and Jewish Palestinians. If this your contention is true, why, then, are none of the terrorists Christian or Jewish?

Even Jordan has no historical legitimacy. It (& all the Arab countries) was carved out of the Turkish Empire after WWI. The Arabs had no prior history of national identity. As for the Jews not being the original inhabitants. who was? Philistines? Caananites, Amorites? There are none of these people left today, although the Arabs may well qualify as Molech worshipers. The only nation ever to exist there was Israel (& later the remnent Judah). By this "logic", no one has a right to any place because people have been displacing other people as long as there have been people. What right do Arabs have to anyplace other than the Arabian peninsula? Even there, they are not the original inhabitants.

It can be argued that this a war over lans because Moslems want ALL land, everywhere on earth. If you doubt this, just look. They are fighting Hindus in Kashmir, Buddhists in Thailand, Maronite Christians in Lebanon, Orthodox Christians in Russia & the Balkans, Catholics in the Phillipines....... Get transcripts of sermons from state sponsored mosques throughout the Moslem world (available ar www.imra.org among other places). Untill recently, Lebanon was majority Christian, as were the cities of Bethlehem & Nazereth. Moslems made there lives so difficult that most of them have left.

dnpmakkah & others who accept his views, WAKE UP! We are at war with Islam, & the sooner we & our leaders accept this & stop with the politically correct "war on terror" the sooner we can have peace.

[Countertrey]

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

The man who deliberately murders children on a school bus, noontime shoppers at a coffee shop, or commuters on a subway has no right to be called a "freedom fighter. You want that, then stick to attacking soldiers, and strategic targets. I remain astonished that a soldier cannot grasp this concept.