Genocide in Gaza. Shame

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by chopeth, Jul 12, 2014.

  1. Overtone

    Overtone SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,308
    Likes Received:
    205
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2008
    Location:
    USA
  2. Crabface

    Crabface SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    33
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    Location:
    Birmingham, England
    I cant for the life of me understand the rationale behind this. So stupid.
    While i may be Pro-Israel to a certain extent about the Gaza conflict, i am absolutely against these settlements in the west bank. I my opinion any settlement taken that is not part of the 1967 armistice lines needs to be given back.
     
  3. aaaaaaaa

    aaaaaaaa SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    nowhere
    The problem is with brainwashed people like you who can't realize that any land will be given to terrorists(aka any "Palestinian" organization) will fuel to to attack Israel

    There were about 900K Jews all over the middle east,Arabs were slaughtering and burning them and in fact pushed them into Israel

    They never occupied anything before the Arabs launched a war against them

    Some more facts:
    This area Gush Etzion ( Gush Etzion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) is Jewish owned. It was bought in the pre-WW1 era and the 1920s long before Israel existed from its Turkish and Palestinian owners, sold fair and square for good prices, the land transactions registerd with the Turkish land titles office in Istanbul. Hundreds of Jews living there were massacred and ethnically cleansed in the 1948 War of Israeli Independence, and these Jewish villages bulldozed by the illegal Arab occupiers.
    Jews returned and rebuilt their destroyed villages after they were liberated from the illegal Arab occupation in the 1967 6-Day War Israel fought in self defense against yet another Arab attempt to genocide the Jews.


    [​IMG]
     
  4. Overtone

    Overtone SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,308
    Likes Received:
    205
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    Oh look who showed up again...
     
  5. shneakypete

    shneakypete SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    May 15, 2012
    Location:
    Maine
    Personal attacks are completely unnecessary and add nothing of value to this discussion.


    Regardless, this land grab is poorly timed. Obviously this would be frowned upon by the international community. It's an unnecessary act of aggression and doesn't stir any sympathy for the Israeli cause.
     
  6. sevenstringj

    sevenstringj Banned

    Messages:
    3,061
    Likes Received:
    231
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Location:
    ny
  7. aaaaaaaa

    aaaaaaaa SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    nowhere
    There won't be peace with the Hamas anyway, the PLO is not a legitimate anyway, most Arabs (in the west bank and Gaza)voted for the Hamas(terrorists), yet the Fatah's(also terrorists) still in control of the west bank

    So how can you make peace with Arabs that only want every bit of Israel or nothing?
     
  8. Overtone

    Overtone SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,308
    Likes Received:
    205
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    Why are you talking about giving Palestinians land? This story is about taking it away, not giving it to them.

    And if you want to talk massacres, here are a few for you to consider, carried out by Israelis against Palestinians... Safsaf, Abu Shusha, Al Dawayima, Eliabun, Lydda/Ramle, Saliha, Kafr Qasim, Deir Yassin, Rafah, Khan Yunis, and Qibya, where none other than Ariel Sharon's troops slaughtered women and children in 1953. Plus 460 killings of Arabs by the Irgun during the 1930s (vs 119 Jews killed during the same decade), plus 90 more Arabs killed by Jews during 1945-1947 up until a day BEFORE the Arab Legion showed up. We should also remember that the Zionist fighters were the first to use terrorist bombings, about a dozen times, long before any Palestinian groups used similar tactics.

    Tl;dr - :nono:
     
  9. Skyblue

    Skyblue SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,334
    Likes Received:
    72
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Location:
    Israel
    I guess for once we'll be on the same side in this discussion.

    That's a truly idiotic move by our government, even if you don't take the latest events into account. They're acting like little children, and pushing us further away from any peace talks that were thought to be possible. Like it was said a few posts ago, it's an unnecessary, aggressive step.

    Don't be "Just", be smart.
     
  10. Randy

    Randy Ooh, Degrasse Tyson-son Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,838
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
  11. Overtone

    Overtone SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,308
    Likes Received:
    205
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2008
    Location:
    USA
    Good for them! A few gave a very interesting interview.
    Israel Unit 8200 refuseniks transcript interview

     
  12. Skyblue

    Skyblue SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,334
    Likes Received:
    72
    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Location:
    Israel
    I have mixed feelings towards this. I'm a bit tired so I hope I'll be able to make myself clear.

    First of all, I can say I feel lucky to have avoided such conflicts during my service. As an investigator almost all of my work was involving IDF soldiers, so no real conflicts there.

    From several articles I read on the subject, I understand how many things done in the unit can feel morally wrong for the soldiers in it. I'd completely understand if they'd have problem working in such areas. But why not simply ask for a transfer? It can be done. Fact. Why not talk to your commanding officers and talk with them? Their action of making the letter public does 2 things- alienate Israel, which I did not get the feeling they wanted to do, and probably get the majority of Israel, rightfully or not, turn against them, which serves no purpose. Something bothers you? Act to change it. But we're talking about intelligence units here. No one's going to change what they do because of bunch of soldiers said they don't feel ok with it.

    They also claimed they monitor civilians who are not linked to terror- sounds strange to me, why target them then? But even if they do, ok. That's wrong. But I've never heard anyone crying about it when it's done (and although I'm guessing, it's probably safe to assume) anywhere else in the world? Intelligence unit in every country listen to EVERYONE. Just to remind you guys, the US was caught listening to the German Kanzler.

    An interesting point to think about, regardless- Let's say an intelligence soldiers discovers information about a certain house where a known enemy of his country lives, but so do 3 more people who are, as far as we know, innocent. He knows that by passing the information, one of the higher commanders might decide to bomb the house, and might injure or kill said innocent people.
    Should the soldiers pass the information on?
    Feel free to answer, I'd like to hear opinions.

    Personally I believe he should. He should express his concerns about the matter to his commander, with all the relevant information, but in the end of the day, it's the commanders job to decide on the needed military actions. Not the soldier's.
     
  13. Overtone

    Overtone SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,308
    Likes Received:
    205
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2008
    Location:
    USA

    I think the interview that I posted a lot of those questions. What I gathered from it I will summarize below:

    Q: Why write the letter? Why refuse to serve? Why not just ask for a transfer?
    A: To start a dialog within Israel. To highlight how different their experience of the service was from what they initially thought it would be, because it took them time to really understand it. Because asking for a transfer removes them from the problem, but doesn't stop the problem from occurring, or stop other soldiers from having the same experience as them. They feel that more change will occur if they engage the public on the issue than if they simply raise it to their superiors.
    Q: Why monitor non-terrorist civilians?
    A: They explain that it helps them to find collaborators/informants and also in situations where the Palestinians have done something and the Israel gov't is pushing for a large number of retaliatory arrests of Palestinians.
    Q: Why only care when Israel monitors regular civilians?
    A: The other countries are (presumably) only making arrests of people using intelligence data when there is a warrant allowing them to spy on that specific person. The rest of the spying is just "listening in." Israel on the other hand, arrests hundreds of Palestinians and holds them without trial. These soldiers have explained that often times some intelligence is being used to decide to arrest them, but there isn't any sufficient evidence to try them in court, so they just keep them locked up indefinitely. They explain that because there is a blanket policy enabling them to spy on just about anybody, and because these arrests without trial are so common, there is a lot happening outside the framework of a conventional and ethical justice system.
    Q: Hypothetical scenario involving intel on a location where civilians may get killed
    A: They agree, it's not the intel unit's fault how the intel gets used. But they see a problem at the top, where the generals are continually ignoring (or even possibly encouraging) civilian deaths... in their view it's not the intel unit's fault, and it's not the soldier's fault, it's the generals' fault. After seeing a repeated pattern of such behavior from the generals, certain intel officers felt that they could not in good conscience pass information up the chain, but that is only when they knew how it would be used. So I think the point they are making here is that the top brass have to be more ethical in order for the intel units (and soldiers) to be confident that they are not involved in something they are against. I think they want the generals to be held more accountable for how intel is used, and what kind of orders soldiers are receiving, so that both the intel and the soldiers can know that they can do their jobs without having to worry about whether or not they are unwittingly doing something they morally disagree with.
     
  14. Crabface

    Crabface SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    33
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    Location:
    Birmingham, England
    I'll have to add my say in the matter as well.
    The way I see it, your points are logical and valid but I'm not very convinced that these people are opposing the system for the same reasons you are pointing out.

    First and foremost, there is NO chance that these people came into the intelligence units without knowing that this stuff happened. Its beyond any doubt that this happens, at least to a certain extent, almost everywhere in the world, in every intelligence agency. I they wanted a perfect, 100% righteous environment to work in then they shouldnt have gone to work in intelligence.

    On top of that, they have admitted on radio interviews that had these methods been used against Iran or Syria, for example, then they would have complied without opposition. This negates the idea that they are fighting for human rights because they would happily "breach human rights" in another country which they consider more worthy of attention. This makes their arguments almost completely based on an arguable political standpoint, which is obviously not a strong ground for an argument.

    That being said, i do agree that some of the methods used by intelligence are not ideal, although i cant really see any way around it. Its not as if they are suddenly going to have a change of heart and decide to stop spying on innocent people. Also, I get the feeling that israel would not be doing this unless it significantly benifited israels safety. I dont think its pointless. That is certainly not to say it is correct. I certainly wouldnt go as far as saying i support israel in this situation, because at the end of the day what they are doing it wrong.
    But i do disagree with these soldiers who have released an open letter based on what seems to be a political standpoint.
     
  15. Randy

    Randy Ooh, Degrasse Tyson-son Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,838
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    Your whole post refers to the data harvesting angle, exclusively.

    You mentioned the same techniques of wholesale surveillance being used by Israel against other counties. Show me examples of Israel using that intelligence to capture and imprison people indefinitely without trial, and them using that information to knowingly bomb civilian populated buildings in either Syria or Iran.
     
  16. Crabface

    Crabface SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    33
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    Location:
    Birmingham, England
    I think you misunderstood my what I was saying.
    What I meant was that the Spies/Soldiers in question here have stated that had they been doing the same job in Iran/Syria, they wouldn't have had a problem with it. I did not say that these operations actually are being carried out in Iran/Syria. I wouldn't know.

    To be clear, this whole story is new information to me and I was unaware of this beforehand. I don't know any more than you or anyone else about the matter, I'm just taking what I have learned about it so far and trying to understand it a little better. The conclusion that I have reached, at this point in time, is that there is a difference in understanding between what most people consider to be the problem here and what the soldiers consider to be the problem.
    As far as I can tell, there is a clear line between the soldiers' politically motivated actions and the obvious breach of humans rights which should be the problem at hand. In fact, I think it is the problem at hand for everyone except for the soldiers.
    And I personally think that the soldiers conduct was wrong. That's not to say that Israel's conduct has been correct by any means - simply that the soldiers seem to be contradicting themselves and protesting for all the wrong reasons and by the wrong means.

    I repeat, I think that there is a clear problem here. I also think that the soldiers in question handled the situation incorrectly. They didn't even consider taking their complaints to management, and instead immediately released an open letter.
    If you had a problem with at school you wouldn't immediately go to the newspapers and talk about how awful the school is, you would talk to the headmaster first, and then if nothing changes you can go to the news.
    I'm not suggesting that something would have changed, in fact it's very unlikely, but there is a code of conduct and certain steps that should be followed before you begin to release your complaint to the public.
     
  17. Randy

    Randy Ooh, Degrasse Tyson-son Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,838
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    So you can type in very certain words what you think is wrong about the soldier's conduct but you cannot type in any certain words what's wrong with Israel's conduct?
     
  18. Crabface

    Crabface SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    33
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    Location:
    Birmingham, England
    Of course I can. But isnt it more than obvious what the problem with Israels conduct is? Didn't think I needed to expand upon it seeing as its pretty much the point behind the whole debate. I have actually repeated that a few times. Israel ARE breaching human rights. I said that.

    I get the feeling that when you see my username next to a post you automatically regard it as "biased/contradictory/stupid" before reading it, and then -even subconsciously- go on to develop a prejudiced opinion about about my posts. That is regardless of the fact that as far as I can tell im not even in disagreement with you here. Im simply pointing out something else.
    It is simply trying to split hairs on a bald man.

    You'll definitely disagree with that point, and im sure you'll be correct and explain where you're coming from in more detail, but I'd prefer to get that detail in your original replies to me rather than have to ask for it. Otherwise it very much feels like being simple prejudice.
    Again, im not saying that you are being prejudiced, im simply requesting that you explain your oppositions to my opinions in your posts, otherwise it goes on to feel like a needlessly hostile environment, wherein i dont really understand where you are coming from.
     
  19. Randy

    Randy Ooh, Degrasse Tyson-son Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,838
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    The Electric City, NY
    Actually, it's been so long since this thread was alive that I forgot what your base positions were on things. My comments have been based entirely on the posts you've made directly preceding mine.

    I consider what the Israeli intelligence soliders did to be 'whistleblowing'. The most common approach to denouncing military whistleblowers in this country is to attack the fact they 1.) chose to serve in the first place 2.) chose to go to the press with their complaints, as opposed to bringing their complaints to their bosses. Both of those facts have been debated in the US media at length, none of those debates having changed my opinion.

    In most cases, you're talking about people who've either made a(n) (in)formal complaint before or saw the person they're supposed to be answering to carry out the crime in question. At that point, your only choices are to ignore it or to bring those issues into the daylight. The next thing that happens is questioning somebody's patriotism for the fact they "betrayed" their nation (somehow?) by pledging to uphold what's morally right as opposed to upholding the integrity of some bullshit pecking order. I personally think blowing the whistle (with the understanding you could be crucified) is one of the most patriotic things you can do. YMMV

    So yeah, I take exception to the fact both of the responses (to some pretty damning accusations) from pro-Israeli posters in this thread has been "well, it's not right that they made this stuff public". I hear so much of that shit here in the US from the warhawks and conservatives that it makes my blood boil. There's some catastrophic, world up-ending accusations made in what those men said and the only significant formative argument to be made is about whether or not exposing this stuff is appropriate? Either we have an incredibly different opinion on 'right and wrong' or that argument wreaks of unapologetic bias. :2c:
     
  20. Crabface

    Crabface SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    33
    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2013
    Location:
    Birmingham, England
    Understood, so let me address the statements at hand.

    I agree with you so I dont know where any argument is coming from. Im perfectly fine with "whistleblowing", as long as they have tried to change the system from the inside first. It isn't right to complain if you have made your bosses aware that you have a problem in the 1st place. My understanding is that these people never made any sort of formal complaint, that is why I disagree with their conduct.

    Exluding that, these matters need to be taken seriously and solved and any wrongdoing that I might see in their conduct doesnt change that. Human rights are being breached and a group of soldier's conduct does not change that. I dont see how the two are related and I certainly do not think that I am letting Israel off the hook or playing down the severity of the matter by criticising the soldiers in question.

    I dont see how these two opinions of mine negate each other so Im not really sure where any argument is coming from.
    Chances are that even if they had put in any formal complaint it wouldnt have sufficed and they would have gone to the press anyway. The result would most likely have been the same. But they didnt put in a formal conplaint and their criticisms do seem to be politically motivated rather than righteously motivated and that is what gets on my nerves.
    That does not change the fact that Palestinians are on the receiving end of a lot of wrong-doing fron Israel and this needs to be solved.

    I am not even in support of Israel here, i dont see how you can consider this biased and I really think that you have nust misunderstood what i am trying to say.
     

Share This Page