Dozens of 12th graders tell Netanyahu: We refuse to serve in

fuck · October 2009

IDF.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1120421.html

Byrnzie · October 2009

Whoops!

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=114485

Pepe Silvia · October 2009

haha no problem

i had an argument today over this, i was told they should just shut up, stop their whining and do their duty to their country but if you think something is wrong don't you have a moral obligation to not take part?

catefrances · October 2009

I heart Scout Niblett wrote:

haha no problem

i had an argument today over this, i was told they should just shut up, stop their whining and do their duty to their country but if you think something is wrong don't you have a moral obligation to not take part?

who told you that??? did you call bullshit on that steaming pile??? cause i certainly would have.(but im a tad exciteable when it comes to such crap and probably wouldnt have been quite so polite) i cant stand blind allegiance and expected duty. it makes no sense. and yes if you disagree it is your moral obligation to stand up and say so. otherwise people will just walk all over you. and nothing will change.

gimmesometruth27 · October 2009

good for them. someone is at least trying to make sense of this and admitting that there is no military solution to the problems they have over there.

Commy · October 2009

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

good for them. someone is at least trying to make sense of this and admitting that there is no military solution to the problems they have over there.

right, no military solution for Israel, despite them certainly provoking a military response.

gimmesometruth27 · October 2009

Commy wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

good for them. someone is at least trying to make sense of this and admitting that there is no military solution to the problems they have over there.

right, no military solution for Israel, despite them certainly provoking a military response.

no military solution exists for either side. it is beyond that now.

rebornFixer · October 2009

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

no military solution exists for either side. it is beyond that now.

+1

mrvedderson · October 2009

Of course there is a military solution, there just isnt a half assed military solution. i say if you are gonna drop bombs, destroy the entire enemy.

Pepe Silvia · October 2009

mrvedderson wrote:

Of course there is a military solution, there just isnt a half assed military solution. i say if you are gonna drop bombs, destroy the entire enemy.

and who is the enemy?

catefrances · October 2009

I heart Scout Niblett wrote:

mrvedderson wrote:

Of course there is a military solution, there just isnt a half assed military solution. i say if you are gonna drop bombs, destroy the entire enemy.

and who is the enemy?

them.

heres my question:
for those who do, why do you see the jews as the ones in 'the right'?

rebornFixer · October 2009

catefrances wrote:

heres my question:
for those who do, why do you see the jews as the ones in 'the right'?

"The Jews?" Hmmm ... Anyhow, I feel that both sides are in the wrong. The Isrealis are wrong for bombing civilian areas in recent wars, continued expansion of settlements into Arab territory (since we are using ethnic descriptors), failure to properly investigate alledged instances of war crimes, and for refusing to work constructively towards a 2-state solution, which I believe is the only tenable arrangement. The Palestinians are wrong for using terrorism as a means of winning statehood (or for "driving the Jews into the sea", depending on whose ideology you buy), for choosing extremist ideologies rather than making more reasoned appeals for people to understand their plight, for commiting the very war crimes that they accuse the Isrealis of commiting (targeting civilian areas), and for giving the Isrealis a reason to hide behind walls. The hawks in Israel gain power with every bombing and every kidnapping, and the possibility of a peaceful solution gets weaker as groups like Hamas get stronger. Its not a one-sided problem anymore, assuming it ever really was.

catefrances · October 2009

rebornFixer wrote:

catefrances wrote:

heres my question:
for those who do, why do you see the jews as the ones in 'the right'?

"The Jews?" Hmmm ... Anyhow, I feel that both sides are in the wrong. The Isrealis are wrong for bombing civilian areas in recent wars, continued expansion of settlements into Arab territory (since we are using ethnic descriptors), failure to properly investigate alledged instances of war crimes, and for refusing to work constructively towards a 2-state solution, which I believe is the only tenable arrangement. The Palestinians are wrong for using terrorism as a means of winning statehood (or for "driving the Jews into the sea", depending on whose ideology you buy), for choosing extremist ideologies rather than making more reasoned appeals for people to understand their plight, for commiting the very war crimes that they accuse the Isrealis of commiting (targeting civilian areas), and for giving the Isrealis a reason to hide behind walls. The hawks in Israel gain power with every bombing and every kidnapping, and the possibility of a peaceful solution gets weaker as groups like Hamas get stronger. Its not a one-sided problem anymore, assuming it ever really was.

problem???

Commy · October 2009

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Commy wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

good for them. someone is at least trying to make sense of this and admitting that there is no military solution to the problems they have over there.

right, no military solution for Israel, despite them certainly provoking a military response.

no military solution exists for either side. it is beyond that now.

i agree

Byrnzie · October 2009

rebornFixer wrote:

catefrances wrote:

heres my question:
for those who do, why do you see the jews as the ones in 'the right'?

"The Jews?" Hmmm ... Anyhow, I feel that both sides are in the wrong. The Isrealis are wrong for bombing civilian areas in recent wars, continued expansion of settlements into Arab territory (since we are using ethnic descriptors), failure to properly investigate alledged instances of war crimes, and for refusing to work constructively towards a 2-state solution, which I believe is the only tenable arrangement. The Palestinians are wrong for using terrorism as a means of winning statehood (or for "driving the Jews into the sea", depending on whose ideology you buy), for choosing extremist ideologies rather than making more reasoned appeals for people to understand their plight, for commiting the very war crimes that they accuse the Isrealis of commiting (targeting civilian areas), and for giving the Isrealis a reason to hide behind walls. The hawks in Israel gain power with every bombing and every kidnapping, and the possibility of a peaceful solution gets weaker as groups like Hamas get stronger. Its not a one-sided problem anymore, assuming it ever really was.

It comes down to a burden of responsibility. Let's take just the latest example - Operation Cast Lead. 1600 Palestinians killed, including an estimated 800 civilians and 400 policemen. 13 Israelis were killed, including four soldiers in two separate friendly fire incidents and three civilians.

Israel has been engaged in a 40 year brutal occupation, and is also currently imposing a criminal blockade against the population of Gaza which has been described by numerous human rights organizations and the U.N as a crime against humanity.

But you see this as a level playing field due to the sporadic firing of homemade rockets into 'Israel' by Hamas? (Though actually, most of the rockets were fired into Sderot, which is actually Palestinian land under the U.N partition plan and stolen by Israel in 1948).

Byrnzie · October 2009

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oc ... bama-abbas

Palestinian faith in Obama 'evaporates'

Leaked memo from President Mahmoud Abbas accuses White House of buckling under pressure from Israel

Guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 13 October 2009

'Palestinian political leaders have expressed acute disappointment in the Obama administration, saying their hopes that it could bring peace to the Middle East have "evaporated" and accusing the White House of giving in to Israeli pressure.

The unusually frank comments come in an internal memo from the Fatah party, led by the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, but reflect a broader frustration among Palestinian politicians that Washington's very public push for peace in the Middle East has yet to produce even a restarting of peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians.

"All hopes placed in the new US administration and President Obama have evaporated," said the document, which was leaked to the Associated Press news agency.

It said Barack Obama "couldn't withstand the pressure of the Zionist lobby, which led to a retreat from his previous positions on halting settlement construction and defining an agenda for the negotiations and peace".

The document, dated Monday, came from an office led by Mohammed Ghneim, a Fatah hardliner and the party's number two, who returned to the West Bank only this year after many years in exile. He was long a critic of the Oslo accords of the mid-1990s, arguing they gave too much to the Israelis.

Other Palestinian figures share the frustrations. Mohammad Dahlan was reported as saying this week that he felt "very disappointed and worried by the US administration retreat".

For many months now, the Palestinians have kept to their position that talks cannot restart without an end to construction in Israeli settlements and a guarantee that a full agreement is on the table, based on the borders before the 1967 war, in which Israel captured east Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza.

"The Israelis need to acknowledge that the 1967 borders are the borders between the two states, and this is the foundation of any negotiations," said Yasser Abed Rabbo, a senior aide to Abbas.

George Mitchell, the US envoy to the Middle East, was in Jerusalem again at the weekend for another round of apparently fruitless talks between the two sides.

After Obama met with Abbas and Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, in New York last month he said he wanted negotiations to restart soon. But even with the president's newly awarded Noble peace prize, that still seems harder than first expected.

Washington has notably toned down its language on Israeli settlement-building, and no longer calls for a full freeze to construction, talking instead of "restraint."

But this Palestinian disenchantment also comes at a time when Abbas has seen his personal credibility badly damaged among his own people, and it may be partly an effort to deflect criticism. There was disquiet when he agreed at the last minute to go to New York last month for the Netanyahu meeting, even though the Israelis had not agreed to the full halt to settlement building that Abbas had demanded.

The criticism worsened dramatically when 10 days ago he decided against supporting a vote at the UN human rights council to endorse a critical UN report on the Gaza war, written by the South African judge Richard Goldstone.

The report, hailed by human rights groups, accused both Israel and Hamas of war crimes and recommended that international prosecutions be considered.

Although it appeared that the Palestinians had enough support at the council to endorse the report, Abbas backed away at the last minute, apparently under intense US diplomatic pressure. He faced bitter criticism from his political rival, Hamas. It said he was unfit to lead and pulled out of a crucial reconciliation agreement due to have been signed later this month.

Abbas has since reversed his decision. Now the report will once again be considered at the human rights council in Geneva at a special session starting on Thursday. In New York tomorrow the UN security council will hold a debate on the Middle East, brought forward after Libya, a current council member, said the Goldstone report should be discussed.

It is not only the Palestinians who see little chance of peace: last week, Israel's often outspoken foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, said there was no chance of a full peace deal with the Palestinians until a "much later stage."

"There are many conflicts in the world that haven't reached a comprehensive solution, and people learned to live with it," he said.

Pepe Silvia · October 2009

Byrnzie wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

catefrances wrote:

heres my question:
for those who do, why do you see the jews as the ones in 'the right'?

"The Jews?" Hmmm ... Anyhow, I feel that both sides are in the wrong. The Isrealis are wrong for bombing civilian areas in recent wars, continued expansion of settlements into Arab territory (since we are using ethnic descriptors), failure to properly investigate alledged instances of war crimes, and for refusing to work constructively towards a 2-state solution, which I believe is the only tenable arrangement. The Palestinians are wrong for using terrorism as a means of winning statehood (or for "driving the Jews into the sea", depending on whose ideology you buy), for choosing extremist ideologies rather than making more reasoned appeals for people to understand their plight, for commiting the very war crimes that they accuse the Isrealis of commiting (targeting civilian areas), and for giving the Isrealis a reason to hide behind walls. The hawks in Israel gain power with every bombing and every kidnapping, and the possibility of a peaceful solution gets weaker as groups like Hamas get stronger. Its not a one-sided problem anymore, assuming it ever really was.

It comes down to a burden of responsibility. Let's take just the latest example - Operation Cast Lead. 1600 Palestinians killed, including an estimated 800 civilians and 400 policemen. 13 Israelis were killed, including four soldiers in two separate friendly fire incidents and three civilians.

Israel has been engaged in a 40 year brutal occupation, and is also currently imposing a criminal blockade against the population of Gaza which has been described by numerous human rights organizations and the U.N as a crime against humanity.

But you see this as a level playing field due to the sporadic firing of homemade rockets into 'Israel' by Hamas? (Though actually, most of the rockets were fired into Sderot, which is actually Palestinian land under the U.N partition plan and stolen by Israel in 1948).

and 10 of the 13 Israeli's killed were soldiers....

let's also not forget 16 WHO health personnel, 14 medics, 5 UN personnel, 4 journalists and 1 World Food Programme contractor were also killed

rebornFixer · October 2009

No, I do not see the military playing field as level ... I was referring to responsibility for the ongoing conflict. Although the ultimate solution to the problem is probably Israel's card to play, launching these admittedly pretty ineffective rockets into populated areas of Israel or Palestine does little to help the situation, no? Its basically giving someone a rope to hang you with, after first provoking him into do it. How is this an effective strategy?

Byrnzie · October 2009

rebornFixer wrote:

No, I do not see the military playing field as level ... I was referring to responsibility for the ongoing conflict. Although the ultimate solution to the problem is probably Israel's card to play, launching these admittedly pretty ineffective rockets into populated areas of Israel or Palestine does little to help the situation, no? Its basically giving someone a rope to hang you with, after first provoking him into do it. How is this an effective strategy?

This just sounds like excuses to me. It's no different from saying that the Jewish partisan groups and French resistance in WWII were partly responsible for the crimes of the Nazis and the occupation of Europe.

As for provocation, Israel needs no provocation. The Israeli leadership had planned the attack on Gaza about one year before the IDF broke the ceasefire on November 5th 2008 by carrying out an incursion deep inside Gaza and murdering 6 Palestinians.
It also needs no provocation in continuing to build illegal Jewish-only settlements.

fuck · October 2009

Byrnzie wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

No, I do not see the military playing field as level ... I was referring to responsibility for the ongoing conflict. Although the ultimate solution to the problem is probably Israel's card to play, launching these admittedly pretty ineffective rockets into populated areas of Israel or Palestine does little to help the situation, no? Its basically giving someone a rope to hang you with, after first provoking him into do it. How is this an effective strategy?

This just sounds like excuses to me. It's no different from saying that the Jewish partisan groups and French resistance in WWII were partly responsible for the crimes of the Nazis and the occupation of Europe.

As for provocation, Israel needs no provocation. The Israeli leadership had planned the attack on Gaza about one year before the IDF broke the ceasefire on November 5th 2008 by carrying out an incursion deep inside Gaza and murdering 6 Palestinians.
It also needs no provocation in continuing to build illegal Jewish-only settlements.

I would also like to remind everyone that the Oslo years (1993-2000) which were supposed to be years of work to achieve "peace" saw a huge escalation in settlement building ( I think it doubled or even tripled), and what ever was left of the Palestinian economy was almost destroyed during those years. That is what led to the second intifada in 2000. Sharon's visit to the Dome of the Rock was just the straw that broke the camel's back.

Pepe Silvia · October 2009

_outlaw wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

No, I do not see the military playing field as level ... I was referring to responsibility for the ongoing conflict. Although the ultimate solution to the problem is probably Israel's card to play, launching these admittedly pretty ineffective rockets into populated areas of Israel or Palestine does little to help the situation, no? Its basically giving someone a rope to hang you with, after first provoking him into do it. How is this an effective strategy?

This just sounds like excuses to me. It's no different from saying that the Jewish partisan groups and French resistance in WWII were partly responsible for the crimes of the Nazis and the occupation of Europe.

As for provocation, Israel needs no provocation. The Israeli leadership had planned the attack on Gaza about one year before the IDF broke the ceasefire on November 5th 2008 by carrying out an incursion deep inside Gaza and murdering 6 Palestinians.
It also needs no provocation in continuing to build illegal Jewish-only settlements.

I would also like to remind everyone that the Oslo years (1993-2000) which were supposed to be years of work to achieve "peace" saw a huge escalation in settlement building ( I think it doubled or even tripled), and what ever was left of the Palestinian economy was almost destroyed during those years. That is what led to the second intifada in 2000. Sharon's visit to the Dome of the Rock was just the straw that broke the camel's back.

2 things:

reborn, the town that takes the most rocket attacks is sderot but ask yourself how sderot was founded. it used to be called najd, Palestinians lived there....until the Israeli's drove them out, bulldozed down their homes and built sderot there. in fact

According to UN Resolution 194 and also the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 13, Section 2, the villagers of Najd have a right to return home to their personal property and to their native village.

so, while rocket attacks is bad you can't say it's directed at innocent people when those 'innocent' people are living on stolen land

also, not sure about the numbers for all the settlements but during the Oslo years just in the West Bank Israeli settlements doubled adding 250,000 new homes.

and it wasn't just that Sharon visited that set it off, it was the fact that he 'visited' with a 100 or so heavily armed IDF and if i recall correctly, wasn't it during some holy day for muslims?

Dozens of 12th graders tell Netanyahu: We refuse to serve in

Comments

Categories