Journalist Robert Fisk about criticising Israel

[Edan]

242 has no mandate attached to it, since it was not passed under Chapter 7. The withdrawl from territory was also supposed to be in the context of a land-for-peace exchange (if you read the entire resolution, you might realize that) - not unilatirally in a vaccum.

It's also odd how no one ever mentions Jordan's, Egypt's and Syria's "acquisition of territory by war" in 1948.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


thats UNSC 242.

...sophisms following.

I could make similar points about Iraq. But the French will do that for me in the SC.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
So, what´s the problem with him, again?

You dress him up as a journalist.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by DinoDoc

You dress him up as a journalist.

Yes. The term 'journalist' includes everybody writing for a journal, including those who write editorials.











...

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


I could make similar points about Iraq. But the French will do that for me in the SC.

In fact you cant. Too summarize - UNSC 242 was based on both Israel and its neighbors doing something. And it stated no consequences for non-compliance -how could it, when it was directed at both sides? UNSC 1441 by contrast is a directive to Iraq - and explicitly promises consequences to Iraq.

The resolutions are in fact very different, which is why, if you have noticed, the French have NOT raised Israeli behavior as a rationale for their position on 1441. If they did no one would take the rest of their position seriously. Its far easier to argue that inspections might yet work than to argue that the Iraqi situation is legally analogous to the Israeli situation.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
UNSC 1441 by contrast is a directive to Iraq - and explicitly promises consequences to Iraq.

So, what? Where´s the physical proof that Iraq is in violation?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
Your ignorance knows no bounds.

For example:
1967 "Emphasizing the inadmissability of acquisition of territory by war", demands "withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territory occupied".

I stand by my previous assertion. There have been no orders only requests from the UNSC.

[Panag]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


Your ignorance knows no bounds.

For example:
1967 "Emphasizing the inadmissability of acquisition of territory by war", demands "withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territory occupied".

hi ,

and we did withdraw from "occupied territory" , .....

have a nice day

[Panag]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


So, what? Where´s the physical proof that Iraq is in violation?

hi ,

read the news on cnn , ..... they have a great website , ....

have a nice day