Israeli

Author
Discussion

Countdown

39,690 posts

195 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
jonnydm said:
There isn't a wall through the heart of Jerusalem.
I think that's because Israel wants the whole of Jerusalem.

Mr Snap

2,364 posts

156 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Mrr T said:
Mr Snap said:
Mrr T said:
Stuff
You've merely proved that you can't provide evidence.

But I can see your logic; if you were an Israeli, it would present reason enough to bomb a few innocent children.

Calling allnighter a bigot suggests limited self-knowledge.
You diminish my research into allnighter revisionist history of the Arab/Israeli conflicts into "STUFF".

Not sure what I am supported to prove but these are the 2 books I have read on the conflict. Both are fully researched with references and take a very different view on events to those posted by allnighter in his history.

Take your choice who you believe.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Six-Day-War-1967/dp/18...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Six-Days-War-Making-Modern...

Saying I have "limited self knowledge" shows you are.............(fill in as applicable).
Saying you have limited self-knowledge is unfair, you have limited knowledge full-stop.

Let's look at one of the other works of the acclaimed author Simon Dunstan. How about the one where he claims that there's 'overwhelming evidence' that Adolph Hitler escaped to and died in Argentina….? Now there's a chap whose opinions I would value highly.

As for Michael B Oren, the author of the second book. He was the Israeli Ambassador to the US, a member of the IDF and an extremely active zionist since before the 1980's.

Only an ultra-zealous bigot with extremely poor research skills would cite bigots and fantasists.

How's that for QED?




allnighter

6,663 posts

221 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Mr Snap said:
Mrr T said:
Stuff
You've merely proved that you can't provide evidence.

But I can see your logic; if you were an Israeli, it would present reason enough to bomb a few innocent children.

Calling allnighter a bigot suggests limited self-knowledge.



If anything Mrr T has proved to be totally incapable of making a rational judgement of any kind.He wears his blinkers with pride and he is in denial of any evidence put through to him which shakes his blind belief in his narrow minded view of the world. He has made some silly comments asking people to provide evidence of non existence of evidence (that takes a biscuit), accused some of us of being 'pro-Hamas' where there is no evidence to support his claim, and finally accused me of being a bigot for criticising Israel's politics and direction. I have to admit that if criticising a state makes me a bigot then I'am proud to be one! thumbup

s1962a

5,263 posts

161 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28437626

Possible war crimes.

Obviously the UN is wrong/biased in this regard. Obviously. Did I mention the UN is biased?


Mrr T

12,152 posts

264 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
allnighter said:
am familiar with the second book by Michael Oren and I have to say you cannot get any more biased viewpoint coming from such a vocal right wing author.Impartial, he is NOT. Researched? hardly!

A critical review of the book by Norman Finkelstein reveals exactly what I am trying to convey.

"Oren claims that the IDF, unable to handle the throngs of Egyptian prisoners, dispatched them toward the Canal and was at pains not to harm them, and "no evidence was found" that Israel executed Egyptian POWs (SDW: pp. 259, 270-1). He is apparently unaware of the national debate that erupted in Israel a few years ago after the publication of unimpeachable eyewitness testimonies of Israeli soldiers as well as the testimony of an Israeli military historian that the IDF executed scores of Egyptian POWs during the June war. Oren also claims that only a "few" of the Palestinians who fled during the June war sought repatriation after it ended (SDW: 306), whereas a conservative Israeli scholarly source reports that fully 120,000 of these Palestinian refugees (half the total number) applied to return but only 21,000 were allowed to do so. Finally, in his survey of developments since the June war, Oren recalls that in the post-Oslo period "Palestinian terrorists killed dozens of Israeli civilians" (SDW: p. 313), but neglects to mention that Israeli forces killed a far greater number of Palestinians and that the "vast majority" of these killings were "unlawful" (Amnesty International)."

Full review here http://www.ussliberty.org/orenbook.htm
I had not read the review but I would suggest Norman Finkelstein is not exactly an impartial critic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein

allnighter said:
So that's it ? You read two books, one of them proved extremely biased and all of a sudden you have complete knowledge on the history of the conflict? FAIL! Try and read everything you can lay your hands on whether it agrees with you or not, then make up your mind afterwards.
Did I ever claim to be an expert?

Nor do I write posts which contain alleged factual references which I cannot then support.

Edited by Mrr T on Wednesday 23 July 12:10

s1962a

5,263 posts

161 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Guam said:
s1962a said:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-28437626

Possible war crimes.

Obviously the UN is wrong/biased in this regard. Obviously. Did I mention the UN is biased?
Apparently the UN have found Rockets in an Empty school between two of its refugee shelters, so it seems neither side is playing by the rules and neither side gives a toss about Civilians. One could argue if this report is true and supportive of the Claims made by Israel that they have been placed deliberately in civilian locations to increase casualties, then both sides are equally culpable and should be hauled before the Hague.
I agree with that. I am in no way suggesting Hamas is playing by the rules at all.

What is happening though is that innocent people, especially children, are being bombed, and it could be indiscriminate bombing that constitutes war crimes.

UN said:
Referring to a 16 July Israeli air strike that killed children playing on a beach in Gaza, Ms Pillay said "the disregard for international humanitarian law and for the right to life was shockingly evident".

She also condemned rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel.

"The principles of distinction and precaution are clearly not being observed during such indiscriminate attacks on civilian areas by Hamas and other armed Palestinian groups," she told the UN Human Rights Council.
Edited by s1962a on Wednesday 23 July 12:23

allnighter

6,663 posts

221 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Mrr T, I have read a lot of literature on the subject, some of it good and some not so good. I try to see both sides' point of view and reach a balanced and informed conclusion. There is some crap I have read over the years coming from pro-zionists, and some other st I read coming from Islamists full of self-induced glory.

My analysis of the Palestino-Israeli conflict is based on the chronology of events that took place. Now you can deny said events took place, but history cannot be rewritten. Both sides of the conflict acknowledge those events, and both give different interpretations to them.

My opinion on those events recorded by history is my opinion, and I am entitled to my opinion and I expressed it freely on here, and I am sure you have yours too.To deny or gloss over events which took place smacks of intellectual dishonesty.I will respect you more if you acknowledge that 'st happened' but this is your take on it.

s1962a

5,263 posts

161 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Guam said:
s1962a said:
I agree with that. I am in no way suggesting Hamas is playing by the rules at all.

What is happening though is that innocent people, especially children, are being bombed, and it could be indiscriminate bombing that constitutes war crimes.
Agreed but if its not indiscriminate and is targeted at weapons stores then what?
Then evidence can be provided by each side to support this. There are examples, such as the beach bombs that killed those children that really need to be explained.

JuniorD

8,616 posts

222 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
The Israelis have the ability to give you a call to say here comes the bombs. Then they send a missle through your letter box. All the while it's monitored by aircraft in the sky. Unfortunately Gazan beaches don't appear to have telephones. Yup, bad luck all round rolleyes

Oh, and werent the children shelled after the container was hit? Hardly a ranging shot in that case. Unless the container shot was the ranging one...

Edited by JuniorD on Wednesday 23 July 12:42

Mrr T

12,152 posts

264 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Mr Snap said:
Saying you have limited self-knowledge is unfair, you have limited knowledge full-stop.
Should I be concerned about your views on me?

Mr Snap said:
Let's look at one of the other works of the acclaimed author Simon Dunstan. How about the one where he claims that there's 'overwhelming evidence' that Adolph Hitler escaped to and died in Argentina….? Now there's a chap whose opinions I would value highly.
Not seen or read the book so will not comment.

The Amazon description of the author.

Simon Dunstan is a well-established author, film-maker and photographer in the field of military history, with several titles already published with Osprey. He specializes in armored warfare, and has written on this subject for two decades. His books have covered topics such as helicopter and armored warfare in Vietnam, the Challenger main battle tank, the British Guards and armored warfare in Korea. Simon lives and works in London. The author lives in London, England.


Mr Snap said:
As for Michael B Oren, the author of the second book. He was the Israeli Ambassador to the US, a member of the IDF and an extremely active zionist since before the 1980's.
Despite your views the book does appear to be have been well received by others.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/books/review/Rod...

Mr Snap said:
Only an ultra-zealous bigot with extremely poor research skills would cite bigots and fantasists.

How's that for QED?
Are you suggesting Simon Dunstan and/or Michael B Oren are "bigots and fantasists"?


s1962a

5,263 posts

161 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Guam said:
s1962a said:
Then evidence can be provided by each side to support this. There are examples, such as the beach bombs that killed those children that really need to be explained.
As I understood that, it was naval gunfire, shells have a tendency to fall short from time to time as anyone who has served in any naval or ground arm of the military will tell you. I would doubt that anyone on the vessel even clocked the kids on that beach, plus from a tactical perspective the task is to take the target out (Container I believe) also the kids may have been taken out accidentally by a ranging shot (not sure if Navies still need to do that these days so stand to be corrected). When I first became aware of that my initial feeling was that (horrible though it was) it was likely no more than bad luck all round.
Since neither of us know the facts (and this is just one example), we probably don't know the truth, but there are plenty of eyewitness accounts that suggest it was targeting the children. There wasn't just one bomb - it was several, and some targeted the children specifically. Google it if you're interested.

There are also other examples of houses being bombed with families in there - whether the intended target is present or not. Not all of them receive the 15 min warning or knock on the roof which allows people to get out. If a suspected militant is inside a house, along with his whole family, is it a right of war to take them all out? What does international law say about this?


SR7492

Original Poster:

495 posts

149 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Mrr T . . . . I'd stop if I was you, the hole is getting deeper and deeper! getmecoatgetmecoatgetmecoat



Edited by SR7492 on Wednesday 23 July 12:51

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
War crimes?


So it appears the Israelis have allowed themselves to be dragged down to Hamas' level.
It is not acceptable for Hamas to hide their weaponry amongst the Gazan population. It is not acceptable for Israel to bomb these installations in the full knowledge they'll be taking out the adjoining school and to then shrug their shoulders and say the weapons shouldn't have been there. To stop this is a matter of decency and humanity AND is to help the Israelis themselves by preventing them from going down this self-destructive conflagrative path.

One question, are Israeli political and military figures being threatened with sanctions for these actions?

s1962a

5,263 posts

161 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Guam said:
JuniorD said:
The Israelis have the ability to give you a call to say here comes the bombs. Then they send a missle through your letter box. All the while it's monitored by aircraft in the sky. Unfortunately Gazan beaches don't appear to have telephones. Yup, bad luck all round rolleyes
Not sure if serious, one is an aircraft or a drone (remotely controlled), the other is a naval vessel offshore (no Idea how far) with the guys pulling the trigger normally in the turret directed by an observer somewhere else on the ship. Not saying it wasn't a screw up (it clearly was) but to infer without the facts that it may have been a deliberate act is thin on this one imho.

My Time in the military was tanks, we certainly had rounds fall short, maybe we were just unlucky or sucked at firing that 120mm big stick smile
Here is a journalists eye witness account of the same incident. No doubt there are plenty of others.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/...

and another

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-22/bloody-sc...

It was broad daylight

Mr Snap

2,364 posts

156 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Guam said:
As I understood that, it was naval gunfire, shells have a tendency to fall short from time to time as anyone who has served in any naval or ground arm of the military will tell you. I would doubt that anyone on the vessel even clocked the kids on that beach, plus from a tactical perspective the task is to take the target out (Container I believe) also the kids may have been taken out accidentally by a ranging shot (not sure if Navies still need to do that these days so stand to be corrected). When I first became aware of that my initial feeling was that (horrible though it was) it was likely no more than bad luck all round.
Agree with the above. However, the Israelis have a far greater arsenal than naval guns (which I don't think require 'ranging shots' these days) and they also have time on their side - Hamas can't move materiel easily with Israeli drones etc. The precise coordinates should have been ascertained and more accurate weaponry should also have been brought to bear. The use of naval gunnery can, perhaps, be better interpreted as an attempt to terrorise rather than being a clinical strike (as are often claimed by the IDF).

If it was the UK Navy, the Rules of Engagement would have meant any gunning was delayed until better evidence was available.

allnighter

6,663 posts

221 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Mrr T said:
allnighter said:
am familiar with the second book by Michael Oren and I have to say you cannot get any more biased viewpoint coming from such a vocal right wing author.Impartial, he is NOT. Researched? hardly!

A critical review of the book by Norman Finkelstein reveals exactly what I am trying to convey.

"Oren claims that the IDF, unable to handle the throngs of Egyptian prisoners, dispatched them toward the Canal and was at pains not to harm them, and "no evidence was found" that Israel executed Egyptian POWs (SDW: pp. 259, 270-1). He is apparently unaware of the national debate that erupted in Israel a few years ago after the publication of unimpeachable eyewitness testimonies of Israeli soldiers as well as the testimony of an Israeli military historian that the IDF executed scores of Egyptian POWs during the June war. Oren also claims that only a "few" of the Palestinians who fled during the June war sought repatriation after it ended (SDW: 306), whereas a conservative Israeli scholarly source reports that fully 120,000 of these Palestinian refugees (half the total number) applied to return but only 21,000 were allowed to do so. Finally, in his survey of developments since the June war, Oren recalls that in the post-Oslo period "Palestinian terrorists killed dozens of Israeli civilians" (SDW: p. 313), but neglects to mention that Israeli forces killed a far greater number of Palestinians and that the "vast majority" of these killings were "unlawful" (Amnesty International)."

Full review here http://www.ussliberty.org/orenbook.htm
I had not read the review but I would suggest Norman Finkelstein is not exactly an impartial critic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Finkelstein
A bit rich don't you think?

Mrr T said:
allnighter said:
So that's it ? You read two books, one of them proved extremely biased and all of a sudden you have complete knowledge on the history of the conflict? FAIL! Try and read everything you can lay your hands on whether it agrees with you or not, then make up your mind afterwards.
Did I ever claim to be an expert?

Nor do I write posts which contain alleged factual references which I cannot then support.
Well you did 'act' like you're the expert, but turned out you don't know that much, nor were you capable up to the present minute of refuting everything I said. you did not like my take on events because it did not fit with your pro-Zionist/Israel agenda.I respect that, but at least have a decency to be honest about it instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting lalala every time one of us gives a different perspective on the present conflict and the events that preceded it.

SR7492

Original Poster:

495 posts

149 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
Mr Snap said:
If it was the UK Navy, the Rules of Engagement would have meant any gunning was delayed until better evidence was available.
This is the IDF we are talking about: shoot first, ask questions later! Trigger happy loonies!

allnighter

6,663 posts

221 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
SR7492 said:
Mrr T . . . . I'd stop if I was you, the hole is getting deeper and deeper! getmecoatgetmecoatgetmecoat



Edited by SR7492 on Wednesday 23 July 12:51
Indeed, I will stop responding to him now for fear Australia will end up being lumbered with him.

s1962a

5,263 posts

161 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
SR7492 said:
Mr Snap said:
If it was the UK Navy, the Rules of Engagement would have meant any gunning was delayed until better evidence was available.
This is the IDF we are talking about: shoot first, ask questions later! Trigger happy loonies!
With views like this, it might help trying to understand the mindset.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/israe...


allnighter

6,663 posts

221 months

Wednesday 23rd July 2014
quotequote all
s1962a said:
SR7492 said:
Mr Snap said:
If it was the UK Navy, the Rules of Engagement would have meant any gunning was delayed until better evidence was available.
This is the IDF we are talking about: shoot first, ask questions later! Trigger happy loonies!
With views like this, it might help trying to understand the mindset.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/israe...
Yep the mindset of people who stone little children going to school just because they are Arabs.