Israel vs ...

highwayman said:
So, you think it is wrong for a person or a country to defend itself? I am glad that you are not next to me in a fox hole...
Click to expand...

Answered that earlier, BOTH sides can defend themselves.
 
Answered that earlier, BOTH sides can defend themselves.
Click to expand...

So why did you say this...

It could even be applied when people refuse to believe that a country like Israel can do any wrong when there is sooo much evidence to the contrary.
Click to expand...

Provide the evidence.....
 
spike said:
"In operative paragraph 1 of its 19 October 2000 Resolution, the U.N. Human Rights Commission
Click to expand...

spike said:
"The U.N. has passed more resolutions condemning Israel than it has all other nations combined, including Iraq."
Click to expand...

The United Nations is a contradiction in terms. Most if any of the resolutions produced is largly not enforced if not ignored... The UN is not a sovereign country nor is it autonomous... In short it is a group of tin pot dictators on a power trip without the gonads for a stand up fight...

Show me any resolutions that were enforced...
 
highwayman said:
The United Nations is a contradiction in terms. Most if any of the resolutions produced is largly not enforced if not ignored... The UN is not a sovereign country nor is it autonomous... In short it is a group of tin pot dictators on a power trip without the gonads for a stand up fight...

Show me any resolutions that were enforced...
Click to expand...

Why would it matter if the UN were a country or autonomous?

Israel is a member of the UN and therefore agreed to abide by international laws of the UN. If they do not intend to follow those laws they should resign membership.

Do you have some basis for considering their actions legal besides your own personal bias. They certainly aren't considered legal by the UN or Geneva convention.
 
Israel was willing to withdraw from illegally occupied territories
Click to expand...
The problem is, he's wrong from the git-go. Illegally occupied territories?

The ones that the UN resolution grants them?

How about the spoils of war they garnered after defending themselves from several Arab neighbor attacks.

Perhaps we're discussing southern Lebanon, where Lebanon agreed to defend the border from THEIR people & failed to live up to its end of the treaty?

Or maybe its the land that Israel gave up in Gaza. The area they are now being attacked from, nightly.

Perhaps it's the peace treaty in which the now dead yessir had more than he could have ever wished for, agreed to terms them backed out at the last minute because he couldn't see past his terrorist roots.(Camp David Accords)

Israel has done everything but move to Florida to appease these people & they have done nothing but create madness & mayhem, destroying lives, businesses & dreams.

When should Israel be given the break they deserve (from th eworld body, as well as the left? They're only trying to survive. They learned a lesson that seems to fail the left - YOU CANNOT BARGAIN WITH TERRORISTS.
 
spike said:
Why would it matter if the UN were a country or autonomous?
Click to expand...

It makes a big diference if it is a governing body of a sovereign country or a wantabe, take a look at the majorety of the members of the UN and a closer look at their GNP.. There is no crear definitive leadership of ununited nations only noise makers...

Check this out....

http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/modules/economic/gnp/index.html
Of the world’s 6 billion people, more than 1.2 billion live on less than $1 a day. Two billion more people are only marginally better off.

About 60 percent of the people living on less than $1 a day live in South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

In high-income countries, farmers—men and women—make up less than 6 percent of the workforce, while in low- and middle-income countries combined, they represent nearly 60 percent of all workers.

Developing countries account for almost $1 out of every $4 that industrial countries earn from their exports.
Click to expand...

This a prime example of the countries being represented in the UN..From what I have been seeing the UN is trying to drag down the countries that make more then this...

Acording to this websight...

http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/gnp.html

The US is the richest, were does the UN show on the list?

spike said:
Israel is a member of the UN and therefore agreed to abide by international laws of the UN. If they do not intend to follow those laws they should resign membership.
Click to expand...

As far as Isreal goes the country has every right to defend itself against it's enemies and should not have permission from an organisation that has no governing powers outside it's borders, since the UN is not a sovereign country it has not authorety over an independant and sovereign contry...
 
One thing that some people don't understand is the israeli mentality:

Better 100 of theirs than one of ours, and as a country ideal, it works for them.
 
Gonz said:
Perhaps it's the peace treaty in which the now dead yessir had more than he could have ever wished for, agreed to terms them backed out at the last minute because he couldn't see past his terrorist roots.(Camp David Accords)
Click to expand...

Holy shit. Did Gonz just approve of something that Carter did?
 
highwayman said:
It makes a big diference if it is a governing body of a sovereign country or a wantabe, take a look at the majorety of the members of the UN and a closer look at their GNP.. There is no crear definitive leadership of ununited nations only noise makers...

Check this out....

http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/modules/economic/gnp/index.html


This a prime example of the countries being represented in the UN..From what I have been seeing the UN is trying to drag down the countries that make more then this...

Acording to this websight...

http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/gnp.html

The US is the richest, were does the UN show on the list?



As far as Isreal goes the country has every right to defend itself against it's enemies and should not have permission from an organisation that has no governing powers outside it's borders, since the UN is not a sovereign country it has not authorety over an independant and sovereign contry...
Click to expand...

You're arguement makes no sense. If the UN were a soveriegn country it wouldn't have authority over a different country.

As it is it's international law that Israel agreed to abide by when it became a member. Israel and any other country that joins grants them authority.
 
Gonz said:
The problem is, he's wrong from the git-go. Illegally occupied territories?

The ones that the UN resolution grants them?
Click to expand...

No, the ones the UN resolutions have ordered them to vacate.
 
Gonz said:
When should Israel be given the break they deserve
Click to expand...

They won't deserve it until they stop acting like criminals. We shouldn't be funding them until they stop either. There should be no tolerance. We sanction and invade some countries that don't comply with international law. Maybe we should consider doing the same to Israel.
 
Israel occupied land after the 67 war, they offered glan heights etc back, for the deal it becomes a DMZ for their own protection. Eqypt said yes, and got it's land back.

In the end, they are protecting their own citizens, and the rest of the world can go screw itself.
 
spike said:
They won't deserve it until they stop acting like criminals. We shouldn't be funding them until they stop either. There should be no tolerance. We sanction and invade some countries that don't comply with international law. Maybe we should consider doing the same to Israel.
Click to expand...

Some more pacifist rigamorole...
Before we stop supporting our alias America should stop supporting the UN...
 
1. Resolutions are not recognized by any country as law.
2. International law, in order to be valid, must be approved by all countries involved with said law (Geneva Convention is international law).
3. In order for international laws to be prosecuted, the country pressing for grievance must be innocent of breaking any laws themselves.

Now, spike...let's here some more BS from you. It's starting to become comedic in it's intent and its value.
 
Gato_Solo said:
2. International law, in order to be valid, must be approved by all countries involved with said law (Geneva Convention is international law).
Click to expand...

Pay attention:

Belligerent occupation is governed by The Hague Regulations of 1907, as well as by the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and the customary laws of belligerent occupation. Security Council Resolution 1322 (2000), paragraph 3 continued: "Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in a Time of War of 12 August 1949;..." Again, the Security Council vote was 14 to 0, becoming obligatory international law.

The Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the West Bank, to the Gaza Strip, and to the entire City of Jerusalem, in order to protect the Palestinians living there. The Palestinian People living in this Palestinian Land are "protected persons" within the meaning of the Fourth Geneva Convention. All of their rights are sacred under international law.

There are 149 substantive articles of the Fourth Geneva Convention that protect the rights of every one of these Palestinians living in occupied Palestine. The Israeli Government is currently violating, and has since 1967 been violating, almost each and every one of these sacred rights of the Palestinian People recognized by the Fourth Geneva Convention. Indeed, violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention are war crimes.

"Look kids, it's Big Ben!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top