Israel - Palestine Conflict. **Mod note in OP - updated 1st August**

bumper234 wrote: »

The deliberate targeting of innocent civilians is murder, why do you think the Israelis are ****ting it and begging the US to stop them being investigated for war crimes?

Ahhhhh, so its gone from genocide to murder. Two related, but very different crimes. I think the propaganda lie is unraveling now, and I think you will acknowledge that genocide is the more serious of the two accusations.

Oh, and the Palestinian fighters don't target civilians I suppose.

Ho hum.

dav3 wrote: »

"any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

I'm pro-IDF and pro-Israel because I will support any liberal modern democracy over a terror state.

Aha... so, in that case, Britain, America and France must have been guilty of genocide during World War Two? Surely the carpet bombing of Dresden must have killed a few German civilians? Where do you draw the line? The IRA planted bombs which killed British civilians. Was that genocide too?

Genocide is the systematic attempt to destroy a people. As I keep saying, if after 64 years Israel hasn't made a dent in the population you say it is trying to commit genocide against then its either exceptionally poor at it or the pro-Palestinian propaganda is an elaborate lie. Also, some of your friends on here have already dropped down from accusing genocide to accusing murder. Murder isn't to be condoned either, but its not as serious as genocide.

Also, what are Hamas trying to send to Israel? Interflora deliveries?

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

Genocide is the systematic attempt to destroy a people.

As much as you would probably like to redefine genocide, I think it would be better if we stick to the legal definition set out by the UN.

Are you ashamed of your Israeli connections? I don't blame you, I would be too with the war crimes, genocide and a total disregard for human life displayed by them over the past few weeks.

dav3 wrote: »

As much as you would probably like to redefine genocide, I think it would be better if we stick to the legal definition set out by the UN.

Are you ashamed of your Israeli connections? I don't blame you, I would be too with the war crimes, genocide and a total disregard for human life displayed by them over the past few weeks.

LOL, this is getting ridiculous now. I'm from the UK, I'm Roman Catholic, I have no family relations to Israel, nor do I have Jewish relations. I have no friends from Israel and I have no Jewish friends. More is the pity, because I would be extremely proud to have friends or family from a progressive, modern, liberal, forward-thinking country. I do own an Israeli flag, an Israel tshirt and I do give money to Friends of the IDF if that helps you feel better. I am interested in Jewish culture, Israel and I would love to go there some time.

However, you don't have to have ties to anywhere to feel for the people there. Why do you assume I must be Israeli to support Israel? Isn't that rather a foolish assumption? I didn't assume that you were Palestinian.

However, I prefer to deal with facts. You still haven't explained to me, how, if Israel has been conducting a genocide against Palestine, that since the formation of Israel in 1948, Israel hasn't made the slightest dent in the population of Palestine? Explain that and I will give your argument some credence. Until you do, I will assume it is an elaborate hoax.

Tuisceanch wrote: »

We haven't debated any issues as you were more insistent on labeling and ad homimen attacks. I asked if you were interestedin debating the issue of anti-semitism attacks in Europe and you ignored it so I presume you have no real interest in the subject and are just feigning interest because really you just wish to be provocative. Not interested in that game.Sorry!

As soon as anyone mentions anything remotely pro-Israeli then they are turned on in this thread. If you think that is what makes for good debate then its no wonder this thread is so poor.

Tuisceanch wrote: »

Why say the UK if you are so particular about where you are born. I'm not particularly interested in where you were born but I was just expressing an interest but you just start fights over any little thing so there's no point in considering you as somebody that one could talk with reasonably.

I'm not, but as you told me you were Irish, would you not think it a little daft if I assumed you were from Leitrim when you could be from 31 other counties?

Tuisceanch wrote: »

I haven't said anything on the subject. You're debating that with other people.I think it's that sort of absent mindedness that makes you amusing.Good luck with your endeavours.

So as a pro-Palestinian you don't agree with the pro-Palestinian stance that there is a genocide in Palestine? Its kind of implicit with being pro-Palestinian.

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

As soon as anyone mentions anything remotely pro-Israeli then they are turned on in this thread. If you think that is what makes for good debate then its no wonder this thread is so poor..

I provided a link to a survey of anti-semitism attacks in Europe.How exactly is debating that issue Pro-Palestinian as you term it?

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

I'm not, but as you told me you were Irish, would you not think it a little daft if I assumed you were from Leitrim when you could be from 31 other counties?

I wondered if you were from England as you use phrases which are common in England.Nothing more and nothing less.Is this a big issue or are you over it now?

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

So as a pro-Palestinian you don't agree with the pro-Palestinian stance that there is a genocide in Palestine? Its kind of implicit with being pro-Palestinian.

Your logic is simplistic and just stifles any meaningful debate. We are all just humans with imperfect understandings and so you should adopt some humility and forego the aggression and refrain from projecting your own bias and prejudice onto other people. It's not an unreasonable request and it shouldn't be difficult for you to modify your behaviour.Don't you want a civil discourse?

Tuisceanch wrote: »

I provided a link to a survey of anti-semitism attacks in Europe.How exactly is debating that issue Pro-Palestinian as you term it?



I wondered if you were from England as you use phrases which are common in England.Nothing more and nothing less.Is this a big issue or are you over it now?




Your logic is simplistic and just stifles any meaningful debate. We are all just humans with imperfect understandings and so you should adopt some humility and forego the aggression and refrain from projecting your own bias and prejudice onto other people. It's not an unreasonable request and it shouldn't be difficult for you to modify your behaviour.Don't you want a civil discourse?

I've nothing to get over. You didn't offend me by saying I was from England. I just thought it was a silly assumption to make.

Why do you keep saying you can't be bothered to talk to me but you always respond to my posts? If my views mattered so little to you why would you bother?

To answer your question about whether I would like a civil discourse. Yes, of course I would. But as the overwhelming majority of pro-Palestinians are absolutely firebrand, that's impossible on this topic. I have never heard one word of acknowledgement for anything good Israel has ever done from a pro-Palestinian. I have never heard one word of criticism for Palestine from a pro-Palestinian. Ye tend to see everything in black and white. Palestine good, Israel bad. Most pro-Israelis, apart from right-wing or orthodox zealouts will admit that the settlements are not a good thing. That it is not right that a people have to live in squalour. That the trade restrictions are unjust. That the wall creates more problems for the Palestinians than it solves. That the curfews on the entire Palestinian population are a problem. That the Yesha council is a bad extremist group. That this conflict will not be resolved until both parties engage in dialogue, and that Fatah offers the best possibility for such dialogue.

However, the pro-Palestinian argument is a soapbox one which contains nothing other than absolute criticism and condemnation of Israel. Yes, Israel has committed acts it shouldn't have, but this tendency to go hysterical about "genocide" caused by Israel does not help anything. This absolutely blinkered approach to Israel, that Israel and Israelis are all bad and that they have never done any good is not helpful. This absolutely blinkered approach to Palestine, that Palestine and Palestinians are all angels and that they have never done anything bad doesn't help.

Surely to God, in Ireland people could be expected to understand that in a vicious conflict cycle, no party has a monopoly on good or bad. The IRA committed wrongs, but it was wronged too, so too the INLA, so too Sinn Féin, so too the nationalist/republican community, so too the UFF, so too the UDA, so too the UVF, so too the unionist/loyalist community, so too the RUC, so too the British Army and so too the politicians in the six counties, in London and in Dublin. Nobody comes out of a conflict of this style smelling of roses, and the Troubles should have taught us that. But pro-Palestinians want to present a Disney version of the conflict in the Middle East with Palestine as Peter Pan and Israel as Captain Hook.

That's why dialogue and discussion on Palestine and Israel is impossible.

One thing I would suggest to anyone with even the slightest interest in this topic is to get hold of a copy of the game PeaceMaker. Its based on the conflict between Israel and Palestine and you play the role of either the Israeli Prime Minister or the Palestinian President. Your goal is to keep the violence down and to eventually lead the situation to a two-state solution. Its a huge eye-opener, both playing it as "your" side of the struggle and as the "other" side. I more than expect I will get abused again even for putting this message up.

Ignorant etc. wrote: »

I've nothing to get over. You didn't offend me by saying I was from England. I just thought it was a silly assumption to make.

Why do you keep saying you can't be bothered to talk to me but you always respond to my posts? If my views mattered so little to you why would you bother?

To answer your question about whether I would like a civil discourse. Yes, of course I would. But as the overwhelming majority of pro-Palestinians are absolutely firebrand, that's impossible on this topic. I have never heard one word of acknowledgement for anything good Israel has ever done from a pro-Palestinian. I have never heard one word of criticism for Palestine from a pro-Palestinian. Ye tend to see everything in black and white. Palestine good, Israel bad. Most pro-Israelis, apart from right-wing or orthodox zealouts will admit that the settlements are not a good thing. That it is not right that a people have to live in squalour. That the trade restrictions are unjust. That the wall creates more problems for the Palestinians than it solves. That the curfews on the entire Palestinian population are a problem. That the Yesha council is a bad extremist group. That this conflict will not be resolved until both parties engage in dialogue, and that Fatah offers the best possibility for such dialogue.

However, the pro-Palestinian argument is a soapbox one which contains nothing other than absolute criticism and condemnation of Israel. Yes, Israel has committed acts it shouldn't have, but this tendency to go hysterical about "genocide" caused by Israel does not help anything. This absolutely blinkered approach to Israel, that Israel and Israelis are all bad and that they have never done any good is not helpful. This absolutely blinkered approach to Palestine, that Palestine and Palestinians are all angels and that they have never done anything bad doesn't help.

Surely to God, in Ireland people could be expected to understand that in a vicious conflict cycle, no party has a monopoly on good or bad. The IRA committed wrongs, but it was wronged too, so too the INLA, so too Sinn Féin, so too the nationalist/republican community, so too the UFF, so too the UDA, so too the UVF, so too the unionist/loyalist community, so too the RUC, so too the British Army and so too the politicians in the six counties, in London and in Dublin. Nobody comes out of a conflict of this style smelling of roses, and the Troubles should have taught us that. But pro-Palestinians want to present a Disney version of the conflict in the Middle East with Palestine as Peter Pan and Israel as Captain Hook.

That's why dialogue and discussion on Palestine and Israel is impossible.

Well your initial lenghty post aside from the "Up the IDF" was interesting in that you provided an account of your own background hence my curiosity as to where you had grown up. This post is not something I find contentious but the only reason I had no interest in what you then chose to discuss was because the manner in which you conducted yourself was,in my opinion,offensive and evasive. I was,however,interested to know why you would behave in such a manner since you seem capable of so much more. I can see the merits of the issues you raise here but since I'm loathe to tarnish everybody with the same brush and prefer to treat people on an individual basis I don't know why you don't do the same. If you were honest you're would see that you're looking for the things in this thread which you say you abhor

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

There is a quite a bit of truth in this, I mean I've not been shy of accusing Israel of war crimes, incompetence, needless slaughter and an unwillingness to pursue the peace process. And for this some posters have intimated that I'm some kind of suspicious agent with multiple accounts or a paid interest in this discussion. Heaven forfend that an Irishman should look at our own history of violent compromise and concessions to the UK and come up with something other than uncritical hatred of Israel.

I think the problem is that there are quite a few Irish people, and British too, who have an absolutely black and white view of the Troubles. As much as you get "Republicans" banging on about f**king H*ns, you get "Loyalists" banging on about f**king T**gs, and neither helps. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence looking at the Troubles has to accept that whilst Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness were massive players in bringing peace from one side of the divide, so were David Ervine and Gusty Spence on the other. That should be proof enough that in vicious conflict cycles like the one in Israel, a simplistic view of one side good, the other side bad, is ridiculous, and worse than ridiculous, is downright destructive.