[Rictor]

The general position I am espousing, I don't know about Gank, has more to do with regular IDF activity than with this particular incident. From  what information I have on the man, Israel had every right to kill Yassin. The same can not be said for the 10 people around him. And of course, the same can not be said for the scores of innocent Palestinians killed.

However, I blame Sharon for the deaths of the Israelis that are soon to follow. Every time, every single time, that Israel has asassinated a high ranking (or even medium ranking) Palestinian official, there has been reprisals, often within 24 hours. The retaliation that is to come is perfectly predicatable, a 5 year old could see it comming. However, these attacks give legitimcy to the Likud platform, and keep Sharon in power, so he has every reason to provoke the Palestinian militants into attacking.

I'll post some more later on about this issue.

[Gank]

My position:

Originally posted by Gank
Yay, now for Sharon.

[Liberator]

Originally posted by Gank
My position:
 

He's defending his charge in the only way the UN will allow.  I'm sick to death of you multilateralists trying to take away a given nation's sovereign right to defend itself against agressors.

[Gank]

Who the **** you calling a multilaterist? And I'm sick to death of idiots like you who talk without having a ****ing clue what they're talking about. Even Israel doesnt claim sovereignty over the occupied territorys.

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Gank
Sandwich, dont be so dense yourself. Muslims in general do not slaughter people of other religions. We were actually talking about Islam as a faith, not arabs in general.

Glad you pointed this out (I almost did in my previous post, just for clarity's sake) - don't confuse Muslims with Arabs. Many of one are the other, but it's not all-encompassing nor exclusive in either direction.

Anyway, I was talking about those who wage a war of terrorism against civillians. Call them Palestinians, fine. Call them extremist Muslims, fine. Call them "those-dudes-who-wage-wars-of-terror-against-civvies", fine. But there's a word for that - Terrorist. That's what they are, and that's who Israel's fight is against.

Originally posted by Gank
So are the Israeli soldiers who shoot kids for throwing stones. Dont try to tell me that doesnt happen, an IDF colonel admitted (actually it was more like bragging) it to my mother in Jerusalem.

I don't doubt that there have been instances where that occurred, esp. in the first Intifada. And yes, I would despise such soldiers if I knew any. But from my personal and first-hand experience with military service during the current intifada, the rules of fire set down are very clear and very moral:

If your life or the lives of innocents in your area are clearly and immidiately threatened, shoot to kill. Specifically concerning stone-throwers, it is the same rule - if life is being threatened, shoot to kill. Considering they are using rocks, an actual threat to one's life is not a David vs. Goliath situation, but a "boulder pushed over rooftop onto mass of people" situation.

Heck, when patrol jeeps drive through an Arab village and get stones thrown at them, they don't even bother to stop and address the issue. It's not endangering anyone, so leave well enough alone.

Originally posted by Bobboau
yeah, Sandwich, would you respond to the Sharon == war criminal thing, all I ever hear is there side of it.

To be honest, I really don't know anything about it. I never read up on it. I'm sure you can find plenty of Israeli POV articles by a Google search for "sharon war crimes site:il"

Originally posted by Gank
Btw rictor you forgot to mention that the majority of Israeli non-combatants killed were army reservists who could be considered by some as a military target.

I'm an army reservist ~25 days out of the year. I am, during that period, a "valid" target. The rest of my year is spent being a civillian, during which time I am NOT the army's property, so to speak, and am NOT a "valid" target.

IDF reserves is a yearly cycle - you become a reservist once or twice a year; the IDF has to draft you anew each year. You are not (legally) a reservist the rest of the time.

Originally posted by Gank
Its not the same Bobbaou, reservists ARE in the army, kids MIGHT become suicide bombers. Basic grammar.

Reservists ARE in the army, yes. But until they go in, once or twice each year, they are NOT in the Army. Period.

Originally posted by Rictor
The website never mentions how many of the Israeli casualties were part of the reserves, though I would guess that they are maybe included in the "uniformed noncombatants" section, which makes up around 10% of all Israeli casualties.  The fact that a large portion of the Israeli male population is permanently in the reserves does not mean that they are uniformed at any time when they are not actively serving.

Reservist casualties are included with the uniformed combatants.

...unless you wanna try telling me to my face when I'm in uniform w/ gun that I'm not a combatant.

Originally posted by Gank
Well, the majority statement was based on the facts that military service is complusary from 18-21 and the reserves are compulsary till the age of 40. Reservists can be called up with as little as 12 hours notice I think so the guy sitting on a bus in civvies one day could be raiding a refugee camp the next. Course its a moot point that they're valid military targets as they're not actually being targeted, buses and the like are being blown up regardless of whos on them. I was making the statement in regards to the non-combatent figures rictor gave, my apologys for the bad wording.

The cut-off age fluctuates every so often... currently I think it's at 40 for combatants, 45 for jobniks (paper-pushers).

Originally posted by Liberator
For my part, I have changed my position.  Evacuate the Israelis and nuke the entire region with neutron bombs.

Originally posted by Gank


Once again wrong libby, I mentioned soldiers who shot kids and mass murder, no mention of a bulldozer at all. Learn to ****ing read. Why would anyone give a **** if a bombers house was bulldozed? Hes dead ffs. If there were other people living in the house then it is wrong. Its called collective punishment and no other country in the civilised world practises it. You cannot be held responsible for the actions of other.

Although the end result may seem the same, it's not. Israel does not hold the family of suicide bombers responsible for the bombers' actions. However, one of the primary incentives given to the potential suicide bomber is the promise of large sums of money for his/her family, money which is most often poured into their house.

Israel neutralizes this incentive by destroying the houses, hoping to discourage future potential suicide bombers from seeing the monetary incentive as valid.

And yes, Israel does make sure the house is evacc'ed before toppling it. Any situation you might have heard about a house being toppled on top of people was a situation where there were armed terrorists inside the house, not a "suicide bomber's home" situation.

Originally posted by Gank
Who the **** you calling a multilaterist? And I'm sick to death of idiots like you who talk without having a ****ing clue what they're talking about. Even Israel doesnt claim sovereignty over the occupied territorys.

He said nothing about soverignty over the territories. Read his post again.

And darn you all, stop growing the thread so fast! Look at this huge post I just had to make!

[vyper]

[q]For my part, I have changed my position. Evacuate the Israelis and nuke the entire region with neutron bombs.[/q]

Lib, man c'mon there's no need.



They'll do it themselves eventually.

[Gank]

Originally posted by Sandwich
Anyway, I was talking about those who wage a war of terrorism against civillians. Call them Palestinians, fine. Call them extremist Muslims, fine. Call them "those-dudes-who-wage-wars-of-terror-against-civvies", fine. But there's a word for that - Terrorist. That's what they are, and that's who Israel's fight is against.

Aye but you see here your labelling palestinians terrorists. Very few palestinians are actually terrorists. Besides we werent talking about that, we were talking about Islam as a whole.

I don't doubt that there have been instances where that occurred, esp. in the first Intifada. And yes, I would despise such soldiers if I knew any. But from my personal and first-hand experience with military service during the current intifada, the rules of fire set down are very clear and very moral:

Not saying its policy, but it is done. Likewise not all Palestinians blow themselves up.

I'm an army reservist ~25 days out of the year. I am, during that period, a "valid" target. The rest of my year is spent being a civillian, during which time I am NOT the army's property, so to speak, and am NOT a "valid" target.

the point would be that you are in the army for 25 days of the year, therefore you will be a soldier in the near future. You are a military asset. Like I said before though I wasnt reffering to reservists as a valid target, it was just bad wording on my part.

Although the end result may seem the same, it's not. Israel does not hold the family of suicide bombers responsible for the bombers' actions. However, one of the primary incentives given to the potential suicide bomber is the promise of large sums of money for his/her family, money which is most often poured into their house.
 

Fair enough, if the family accept money then they are complicit in the act.

He said nothing about soverignty over the territories. Read his post again.

I know he didnt, but thats what the intifada is about. The occupation and the settlements. You can quote all the rhetoric for the hardliners you want, both you, I and they know theres as much chance of Hamas and co driving Israel into the sea as there is of Sharon becoming pope. If Israel was serious about getting rid of terrorism they'd dismantle settlements and pull out of the occupied territories, because its these two issues that give the hardliners the  support they have. I think we both know though Israel has no interest in doing either of these things.

[Drew]

Originally posted by Ace


Level-headed muslims don't do that either. You're just reinforced Gank's point by spouting out more stereotypical bull****.

Originally posted by Gank
Aye but you see here your labelling palestinians terrorists. Very few palestinians are actually terrorists. Besides we werent talking about that, we were talking about Islam as a whole.

I have been arguing against idea the palistinians just want their land back. All my posts may not have directly addressed that topic, they were merely introducing information.
Palistinian leadership dont fight Isreal simply because they want their land back. They fight against Isreal because they *hate* Jews. They have _always_ hated Jews.
Most of the high ranking palestinian leadership are devout belivers of the verses i quoted earlier. The majority of muslims may not belive that, but the these guys do.

"We the Palestinian nation, our fate from Allah is to be the vanguard in the war against the Jews until the resurrection of the dead, as the prophet Muhammad said: "'The resurrection of the dead will not arrive until you will fight the Jews and kill them…'"
- - Dr. Muhammed Ibrahim Madi, Palestinian Television, 30 March 2001

"Blessed is he who fights Jihad in the name of Allah, blessed is he who [goes on] raids in the name of Allah, blessed is he who dons a vest of
explosives on himself or on his children and goes in to the depth of the Jews and says: Allahu Akbar, Blessed be Allah. Like the collapse of the building upon the heads of the Jews in their sinful dance-hall, I ask of Allah that we see the Knesset collapsing on the heads of the Jews."
- - Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim Madi, Friday Sermon, Palestinian TV, June 8, 2001



"The oath is firm to continue this difficult Jihad (holy war), this long Jihad, in the path of martyrs, the path of sacrifices" ~Yasser Arafat

"Yes, brothers, with our souls and blood we redeem you, O Palestine. This is the decision of the people of exceeding strength. This is a sacred bond. We are up to this duty. You know I am saying this because I know our people. I know what it means that in the midst of this economic crisis, yet none of them complained. However, they said: Allah is great! Glory to Allah and his prophet! Jihad, jihad, jihad, jihad, jihad!" ~ Yasser Arafat

"No one believed him (Arafat) when he used to say it... [but] The choice is not at all between options of negotiation and fighting: you can have negotiations and fight at the same time...the Palestinian people fight with weapons, with jihad, with Intifada and suicide actions... and it is destined to always fight and negotiate at the same time." ~Nabil Sha'ath - Palestinian Cabinet Minister

"We are not the Israelis' policemen to arrest our own people" - referring to the Israeli demand that the Palestinians arrest terrorists. ~ Ahmed Qureia (Abu Ala?), Palestinian parliament speaker


and they use kids to work for them

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Gank
Aye but you see here your labelling palestinians terrorists. Very few palestinians are actually terrorists. Besides we werent talking about that, we were talking about Islam as a whole.

No, I'm not; if it came across that way, I apologize. I said "I was talking about those who wage a war of terrorism against civillians." Those are the people I was referring to. In Israel's fight against terrorisim, those people, with the possible exception of Hizbullah, are Palestinians. This does not mean that I think all Palestinians are terrorists - don't put words in my mouth please.

Originally posted by Gank
Not saying its policy, but it is done. Likewise not all Palestinians blow themselves up.

If and when it is done, the soldiers are prosecuted and jailed for years. The army is not very forgiving with such cases today.

And see above on the Palestinians part.

Originally posted by Gank
the point would be that you are in the army for 25 days of the year, therefore you will be a soldier in the near future. You are a military asset. Like I said before though I wasnt reffering to reservists as a valid target, it was just bad wording on my part.

High-school children are also going to be soldiers in the "near future", does that make them military assets? I was recruited one month after graduating 12th grade. You can't blur the lines like that.

Originally posted by Gank
Fair enough, if the family accept money then they are complicit in the act.

I'd encourage you to research this aspect, esp. considering it seems that you've never heard of it before. I'll go out on a limb and generalize by saying that all the families of Palestinian suicide bombers (I can't speak for other nations) receive large sums of money as a "thanks for the contribution to the cause" gift.

Originally posted by Gank
I know he didnt, but thats what the intifada is about. The occupation and the settlements. You can quote all the rhetoric for the hardliners you want, both you, I and they know theres as much chance of Hamas and co driving Israel into the sea as there is of Sharon becoming pope. If Israel was serious about getting rid of terrorism they'd dismantle settlements and pull out of the occupied territories, because its these two issues that give the hardliners the  support they have. I think we both know though Israel has no interest in doing either of these things.

Let me bring up a point that involves the religions again. The Muslim nations surrounding Israel, the Jewish state, made war on her in '48 when she was formed, and failed. Their failure was repeated in '67 and in '73, both full-out wars in which the victory of the Jewish state was against all odds.

The Muslim world sees the god of Islam being repeatedly beaten by the God of the Jews. This is an affront to Islam as a whole; an insult to the divinity of Allah. The existance of Israel is blasphemy to Islam, which is why they Muslim world is trying to wipe Israel out so hard. The territories issue is just something they can use as a catalyst.

Even if you do not believe me and what I've just stated here, remember what I said. You may be surprised somewhere down the line (like if you start reading transcripts of the Arabic-language, no foreign-press allowed speeches made by leaders such as Arafat).

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Sandwich
Let me bring up a point that involves the religions again. The Muslim nations surrounding Israel, the Jewish state, made war on her in '48 when she was formed, and failed. Their failure was repeated in '67 and in '73, both full-out wars in which the victory of the Jewish state was against all odds.

The Muslim world sees the god of Islam being repeatedly beaten by the God of the Jews. This is an affront to Islam as a whole; an insult to the divinity of Allah. The existance of Israel is blasphemy to Islam, which is why they Muslim world is trying to wipe Israel out so hard. The territories issue is just something they can use as a catalyst.

Even if this is correct though Sandwich wouldn't removing the catalyst and thereby slowing the problem down be a good idea? Building settlements in the occupied territories ranks as one of the most stupid political decisions ever made.  It's not just the palestinians who see it as a land grab.

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by karajorma


Even if this is correct though Sandwich wouldn't removing the catalyst and thereby slowing the problem down be a good idea? Building settlements in the occupied territories ranks as one of the most stupid political decisions ever made.  It's not just the palestinians who see it as a land grab.

On one hand, yes, it would probably appease things a bit. But on the other hand, since when is land won in a defensive war up for dispute anyway?

[Liberator]

Originally posted by Sandwich
Let me bring up a point that involves the religions again. The Muslim nations surrounding Israel, the Jewish state, made war on her in '48 when she was formed, and failed. Their failure was repeated in '67 and in '73, both full-out wars in which the victory of the Jewish state was against all odds.

The Muslim world sees the god of Islam being repeatedly beaten by the God of the Jews. This is an affront to Islam as a whole; an insult to the divinity of Allah. The existance of Israel is blasphemy to Islam, which is why they Muslim world is trying to wipe Israel out so hard. The territories issue is just something they can use as a catalyst.

Even if you do not believe me and what I've just stated here, remember what I said. You may be surprised somewhere down the line (like if you start reading transcripts of the Arabic-language, no foreign-press allowed speeches made by leaders such as Arafat).

Of course it never enters into their minds that if their god is all-powerful, any failure is either their fault or the Jewish god is more powerful than theirs.

[Rictor]

My God can kick your God's ass! Man, thats the attitude of children, and anyone who think that ain't quite right. You can not believe both in your God and also believe in the existence of another God. The big three religions are all monotheistic, so there is no other God for you to match yours up against, since you believe that only your God is real. Right?

If you are religious, thats basicaly the logic behind the Battle of the Gods crap. Or you can believe that your God and their God is the same God, and that all the religions do is worhip the same God in a different way. So, then too there is only one God, he just has different names, so again, there can be no my God vs your God. Or you can just not believe in God.

___

Anyways, the Jews and Muslims were the best of buddies before the British pitted them against each other.

Now, Sandwich, you'll forgive me if I don't believe you about the Muslim world believing that Israel is an affront to Islam. A fanatical few, yes, but not the majority. There are tons of fairly secular Muslims, especially in places like Turkey, Iran and Iraq. These people certainly have nothing religiously against Israel, its just that they percieve Israel to e the cause of of their suffering. Israel has the biggest bully on their side, so naturally many Muslims are going to resent the fact that Israel can do whatever it wants with impunity, and no justice will come. But even among the moderatly religious Muslims, which I think are the majority, I do not think that they would like to drive Israel to the sea on religious grounds, and in all likelyhood not at all.

[Goober5000]

Originally posted by Sandwich
The Muslim world sees the god of Islam being repeatedly beaten by the God of the Jews. This is an affront to Islam as a whole; an insult to the divinity of Allah.

This just struck me as interesting - there's an odd conclusion that this has to lead to.

Muslims honor a long line of prophets, starting with Abraham, through Jesus, and ending with Mohammed.  So then, Islam theology should say that the Muslim God is the same as the Christian God is the same as the Jewish God.  (Otherwise you have the ludicrous notion of honoring a prophet who was involved with the wrong god.)  And Muslims trace their lineage to Abraham, as do Jews.

But then here we have this "god-vs.-god" contest in which militant Muslims try to wipe out the Jews as a sort of microcosm of the battle of Islam's God against Judaism's God.

This sets up a contradiction.  Is the Muslim God the same as the Jewish God, or isn't he?  It seems that for the above to be true, not only do we have a schizophrenic God, but he's not even on his own side.

[Grey Wolf]

From my point of view, I condemn all sides.
The Palestinian extremists, for using the intolerable concept of suicide bombing.
The Israeli settlers, for basically flipping off the aforementioned extremists.
The Israeli hawks, for intentionally helping propogate the cycle of violence.
The Saudi Arabian ruling family, for helping breed the extremists.
Bin Laden, for funding extremists and providing them training facilities.
The United States, for funding both sides.
The press on all sides, for being extrememly biased.
The imperialists who helped write the Treaty of Versailles, for the concept of mandates.
The Zionist terrorists, for basically doing the same thing as the Palestinian extremists.

I end this post with a quote from Shakespeare:
Lord, what fools these mortals be!

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Rictor
My God can kick your God's ass! Man, thats the attitude of children, and anyone who think that ain't quite right. You can not believe both in your God and also believe in the existence of another God. The big three religions are all monotheistic, so there is no other God for you to match yours up against, since you believe that only your God is real. Right?

If you are religious, thats basicaly the logic behind the Battle of the Gods crap. Or you can believe that your God and their God is the same God, and that all the religions do is worhip the same God in a different way. So, then too there is only one God, he just has different names, so again, there can be no my God vs your God. Or you can just not believe in God.

Right, completely right. However, I phrased my post that way to be slightly curteous - I could just as easily have said up front what I really believe: Allah is a demon, if not the devil himself.

But then people'd get all uppity over something like that, wouldn't they? Yet there it is - posted.

Originally posted by Rictor
Anyways, the Jews and Muslims were the best of buddies before the British pitted them against each other.

Now, Sandwich, you'll forgive me if I don't believe you about the Muslim world believing that Israel is an affront to Islam. A fanatical few, yes, but not the majority. There are tons of fairly secular Muslims, especially in places like Turkey, Iran and Iraq. These people certainly have nothing religiously against Israel, its just that they percieve Israel to e the cause of of their suffering. Israel has the biggest bully on their side, so naturally many Muslims are going to resent the fact that Israel can do whatever it wants with impunity, and no justice will come. But even among the moderatly religious Muslims, which I think are the majority, I do not think that they would like to drive Israel to the sea on religious grounds, and in all likelyhood not at all.

I guess time will tell. But perhaps a more complete answer will come as a result of responding to Goober's post, so.....

Originally posted by Goober5000
Muslims honor a long line of prophets, starting with Abraham, through Jesus, and ending with Mohammed.  So then, Islam theology should say that the Muslim God is the same as the Christian God is the same as the Jewish God.  (Otherwise you have the ludicrous notion of honoring a prophet who was involved with the wrong god.)  And Muslims trace their lineage to Abraham, as do Jews.

Muslims do not trace their lineage to Abraham - Muslims are of the religion of Islam, which is not nationality/racially oriented. Arabs, however, are decendants of Abraham's son through Hagar, Ishmael.

I honestly do not know what Islam thinks about the "everyone worshipping the same god" nonsens-errr, theory. But the numerous statements along the lines of "There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is His prophet" come to mind.

Originally posted by Goober5000
But then here we have this "god-vs.-god" contest in which militant Muslims try to wipe out the Jews as a sort of microcosm of the battle of Islam's God against Judaism's God.

This sets up a contradiction.  Is the Muslim God the same as the Jewish God, or isn't he?  It seems that for the above to be true, not only do we have a schizophrenic God, but he's not even on his own side.

IMO it's all a matter of Satan doing his utmost to prove God a liar, which is of far greater import than proving OJ or Clinton to be liars. God has placed His reputation, His namesake, on the promises He makes in the Bible. Many, many of those promises say, in paraphrase, that the Jews shall never cease to be a nation before God. This is stated with the same breath as statements about the sun and moon passing away, and God makes these promises by swearing on His holy namesake.

Ergo, if Satan had succeeded in wiping out the Jews at any point in history, he would have basically won.

[Drew]

Originally posted by Goober5000
This just struck me as interesting - there's an odd conclusion that this has to lead to.

Muslims honor a long line of prophets, starting with Abraham, through Jesus, and ending with Mohammed.  So then, Islam theology should say that the Muslim God is the same as the Christian God is the same as the Jewish God.  (Otherwise you have the ludicrous notion of honoring a prophet who was involved with the wrong god.)  And Muslims trace their lineage to Abraham, as do Jews.

But then here we have this "god-vs.-god" contest in which militant Muslims try to wipe out the Jews as a sort of microcosm of the battle of Islam's God against Judaism's God.

This sets up a contradiction.  Is the Muslim God the same as the Jewish God, or isn't he?  It seems that for the above to be true, not only do we have a schizophrenic God, but he's not even on his own side.

hehe, maybe you should read the Bible and Quran, it would make things a little clearer.

[Goober5000]

Originally posted by Sandwich
Muslims do not trace their lineage to Abraham - Muslims are of the religion of Islam, which is not nationality/racially oriented. Arabs, however, are decendants of Abraham's son through Hagar, Ishmael.

Whoops, sorry, I should have said Arabs trace their lineage to Abraham.  Thanks for the correction.

Originally posted by Drew
hehe, maybe you should read the Bible and Quran, it would make things a little clearer.

I have read the Bible - every word of the NIV and a significant part of the KJV. I'd like to read the Koran too, just for comparison, but I haven't gotten around to it yet.

[Grey Wolf]

Originally posted by Sandwich
Many, many of those promises say, in paraphrase, that the Jews shall never cease to be a nation before God. This is stated with the same breath as statements about the sun and moon passing away, and God makes these promises by swearing on His holy namesake.

Ergo, if Satan had succeeded in wiping out the Jews at any point in history, he would have basically won.

Of course, your statement rests on two things.
1. That the modern Israel bears any true relation to the ancient Israel, which it does not. You're not ruled by priests and kings, are you? The final destruction of ancient Israel would have to be traced to either the invasion by Rome, or possibly the Roman destruction of the Zealots. Hence, by your statement, Satan won.
2. You're also basing your statement on the existence of Satan. In Judaism, AFAIK, the Satan mentioned in the Book of Job is not considered to be the devil, but rather an angel sent by God to test mankind.

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Grey Wolf 2009
Of course, your statement rests on two things.
1. That the modern Israel bears any true relation to the ancient Israel, which it does not. You're not ruled by priests and kings, are you? The final destruction of ancient Israel would have to be traced to either the invasion by Rome, or possibly the Roman destruction of the Zealots. Hence, by your statement, Satan won.
2. You're also basing your statement on the existence of Satan. In Judaism, AFAIK, the Satan mentioned in the Book of Job is not considered to be the devil, but rather an angel sent by God to test mankind.

1. Where does it say that Israel must be ruled by a priest or king? The promise was made to Abraham's decendants through Isaac, forever. The Jews were scattered, but never destroyed. And now ("now" being the last 50-odd years) we're back. And boy, is Satan pissed.

2. Yeah, ok. Judaism can think that way if it wants. But to me, a believer in both the Old and New Covenants, the existance of Satan is not really a questionable thing.