Israeli ground forces enter southern Gaza - CNN

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian
I meant specifically the idea that "the World" would view Israeli undermining/deposing of Hamas as a good thing. That's laugh-out-loud funny.

-Arrian

at this point i think egypt and Jordan might so view it. If the leading arab moderates so view it, and the US does, are the EU states really going to be upset? Or China?

The non-aligned movement probably wont so view it. I dont think any Israeli takes them seriously as "the World".

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride


I cant think of other words but bat**** crazy to qualify what Israel did flying over the Syria, and I generally support Israel.


wtf was that?

Meshal has been doing everything in his power to stop moves toward peace, and may have given the direct orders for the kidnapping. Syria provides a haven to Meshal. Lets Assad know that Israel hasnt forgotten about him. Lets him know that if hes going to try to make Israel look weak by sponsoring the seizure of an Israeli soldier, Israel can make him look weak, too. Maybe given internal ferment in Syria, he doesnt want to look weak. Maybe he should start restraining Hamas.

[lord of the mark]

interesting factoid


"Apropos, since 2003 the Israel Air Force has improved its ordnance and attack tactics: for the past two years only one-twelfth as many civilians were killed in the course of targeted assassinations of terrorist leaders and operatives. The recent higher level of Palestinian casualties is apparently an indication that terrorists in Gaza increasingly confine their activities to heavily populated areas, precisely in order to thwart the Israeli tactics."


Yossi Alpher, former director of the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University and a former senior adviser to PM Ehud Barak.

[Vesayen]

[QUOTE]
a state standing or not has nothing to do with whether there is war or not. If Israel is not at war with palestine then what are its soldiers and tanks doing in Gaza? you still havnt answered that question. Did they get lost?
[/QUOTE}

So a war is only legal if the U.N. authorizes it? How can you declare an illegal war on a country which does not exist according to the U.N.?

International law is enforced - see Gulf War 1991.

See rowanda, darfur, china today, etc, etc etc. One instance where it was enforced does not mean the overwhelming majority of the time, it is not.

International law is not enforced, thus(and for other reasons) it is not legitimate.

youre right every country has the right to self defence, but only until they have informed the UN and the UN has taken appropriate steps, which Israel has not done. Israel thus cannot plead self defense in this case.

Every country has a right to self defence for immediate actions which have occured and the actions have to be in immediate response for an action on the other side. There is no actual part which says the U.N. has to be informed immediatly after, just that you have to respond to it immediatly, it must be something of a threatening nature which warrants response and it has to be done in response to an actual action.

Beyond the U.N. even every country has a right to self defence and if the U.N., the most corrupt international organization on the planet on par with the Arab League has a problem with that, the U.N. can go #### off.

Have you ever actually *READ* the U.N. charter or are you just quoting what you've heard third hand?

how ignorant are you? the palestinians have been recognized by the UN as a people and have observer status in the UN general assembly, as I stated earlier. this means that they are a 'stateless' people who should be given a state.

How ignorant are you? The PLO has a chair in the U.N. as a non state observer. The state of Palestine has no representation in the U.N.

Again, have you ever actually looked at a primary source for what your talking about, or is this all third and fourth hand?

The accusation if ignorance is incredibly ironic because really, your the one who is ignorant-not that I made that accusation before. Before I said you were just wrong, now I am saying you are wrong and ignorant of the facts.

how ignorant are you? israel has recognized international obligations by signing treaties and joining the UN. furthermore, blowing up hotels and murdering the citizens of another country is NOT an automatic act of war, just as the overflight of the syrian president's house does not mean that syria can legally invade israel.

Lets see what that quote was in response to. I said they had no international obligation in response to THIS:

but thats no justification for war. palestine is not in breach of its international obligations because of what it believes. you can only be in breach through an action.

Israel has no obligation to not respond in a manner which is self defence. An obligation to what, sit and take it? What obligation specifically are you reffering to? The goverment kidnapping the citizen of another country FROM THEIR OWN COUNTRY is an act of war. Kidnapping citizens of any country wherever they are is an act of war, for more on that, see international laws on piracy.

I did not mention Syria.

Originally posted by Geronimo


I guess illegal isn't necessarily bad then when it comes to international law.


Illegal by international law

I forgot the obvious, of course.

**** international law.

If it means what you say it means... even though it is not legitimate anyway, **** it, because it is blatantly immoral and morality overides all concerns of legality.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Every country has a right to self defence for immediate actions which have occured and the actions have to be in immediate response for an action on the other side. There is no actual part which says the U.N. has to be informed immediatly after, just that you have to respond to it immediatly, it must be something of a threatening nature which warrants response and it has to be done in response to an actual action.

UN Charter, Art 51:

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Have you ever actually *READ* the U.N. charter or are you just quoting what you've heard third hand?

uh oh, looks like YOU didnt read it.

How ignorant are you? The PLO has a chair in the U.N. as a non state observer. The state of Palestine has no representation in the U.N.

Again, have you ever actually looked at a primary source for what your talking about, or is this all third and fourth hand?

On 10 December 1969, the General Assembly adopted resolution 2535 B (XXIV), which reaffirmed the inalienable rights of the people of Palestine. On 8 December 1970, the General Assembly adopted resolution 2672 C (XXV), which recognized that the people of Palestine are entitled to equal rights and self-determination in accordance with the Charter of the U.N.

On 14 October 1974, the General Assembly, through resolution 3210 (XXIX) recognized the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people

That same year, in resolution 43/177 of 15 December 1988, the General Assembly acknowledged the proclamation of the State of Palestine by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988 and decided, inter alia, that the designation "Palestine" should be used in place of the designation "Palestine Liberation Organization" in the United Nations system.

http://www.palestine-un.org/mission/5_g.html

Have you ever actually *READ* the U.N. charter or are you just quoting what you've heard third hand?

uh oh, looks like YOU didnt read it.

The goverment kidnapping the citizen of another country FROM THEIR OWN COUNTRY is an act of war. Kidnapping citizens of any country wherever they are is an act of war, for more on that, see international laws on piracy.

1. It cannot be kidnapping since the citizen in question is an agent of a government acting in official capacity
2. whether its an act of war or not is for the UN to decide, under Chapter 7, Art 39

The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.

I did not mention Syria.

of course not, since you believe that israel should be exempt from all international law while being allowed to run its tanks and soldiers wherever it wants without remorse.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

I forgot the obvious, of course.

**** international law.

If it means what you say it means... even though it is not legitimate anyway, **** it, because it is blatantly immoral and morality overides all concerns of legality.

why? cuz you think youre above the law? cuz you want to act like savages without regard and without consequences?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

dont **** with me and international law, im gonna make you look so ridiculous.

[Arrian]

I PITY THE FOOL![/Mr.T.]

Wrong libby to **** wit.



-Arrian

[Wezil]

General Assembly resolutions - Now there's something we should all take seriously

[Vesayen]

1. It cannot be kidnapping since the citizen in question is an agent of a government acting in official capacity

It is kidnapping. He was not in Palestine, nor is it not a judicial detention because he has not been charged with a crime.

2. whether its an act of war or not is for the UN to decide, under Chapter 7, Art 39

See other comments as to the illegitimacy of international law the "**** the UN and if they don't like it, **** em again" argument and you continuing to ignore my comments questioning the legitimacy of international law.

I admit when I am wrong and I adress the arguments of others which disprove mine.

The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.

The U.N. has had temporary members as such bastions of freedom as Lybia and Syria. China is a permanent member. **** the U.N. security council, which is a sub-****tion of the **** the U.N. in general.

It is a delegated ****.

of course not, since you believe that israel should be exempt from all international law while being allowed to run its tanks and soldiers wherever it wants without remorse.

No, I didn't mention Syria because... I didn't mention Syria.

I suppose you did not take your umbrella outside with you last week, not because you did not know if it would rain or not, but because you support a flat tax?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

See other comments as to the illegitimacy of international law the "**** the UN and if they don't like it, **** em again" argument and you continuing to ignore my comments questioning the legitimacy of international law.

what the hell do you want me to say? thats like saying the sky isnt blue. I cant say anything other than "no its not, look at it." every nation in the world is a believer in international law. you can pull a bush and shut your eyes to it, but it dont change a thing

The U.N. has had temporary members as such bastions of freedom as Lybia and Syria. China is a permanent member. **** the U.N. security council, which is a sub-****tion of the **** the U.N. in general.

It is a delegated ****.

intellectually and factually beaten, you resort to talking about the UNs failings instead of addressing the fact that Israel is acting illegally under the very treaties it has signed and agreed to respect, including the UN Charter.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Thats it. Red line crossed. Going on the ignore list.

This seems quite out of character for you LotM.

Is it that hard to imagine reasonable people being unmoved by the deaths of strangers? Even praiseworthy strangers? Surely you can also see that the polarizing sensitive political nature of decisions that the israeli leadership must make could make them collectively deeply unpopular with some reasonable people?

For the record I find the israeli leadership vastly more palatable than the palestinian leadership but even so I'm not sure if there is any leadership anywhere I would get much worked up about on hearing that they had died. I'm far more deeply effected when it's ordinary civilians who have perished.

[Vesayen]

what the hell do you want me to say? thats like saying the sky isnt blue. I cant say anything other than "no its not, look at it." every nation in the world is a believer in international law.

You are accepting an article of faith, something open to intepretation, as fact.

The sky is blue.

Is truth beauty and vice versa
Is a flat tax just?
What makes a law and what makes a legitimate law?

No nation in the world believes in international law. Every nation in the world believes in its own interests. I don't see France championing the cause of barrier free trading on agriculture, or China championing human rights, or the Sudan championing religious freedom, now do you?

Countries believe in their own interests.

you can pull a bush and shut your eyes to it, but it dont change a thing

The United States invaded two countries in six years without the permission of the U.N. Where is the reprisals, where is the club? International law has no regular enforcement, it has no sparce enforcment. It does not have moral authority. It is not law.

"You can pull a bush and shut your eyes to (pick one)JESUS/ALAH/BUDDAH/THE GIANT FLYING SPAGHETE MONSTER but it dont change a thing!"

intellectually and factually beaten, you resort to talking about the UNs failings instead of addressing the fact that Israel is acting illegally under the very treaties it has signed and agreed to respect, including the UN Charter.

Factually beaten... the U.N. is ignored on a daily basis by most of the planet, its decisions mean nothing.

I am staying entirley on topic, you are the one avoiding the issue.. Your response to my questioning the legitimacy of the U.N. is basically the same thing as a Christian telling me I have to have faith in Jesus because G-D can not be empirically explained, you don't even make an argument, you just genuflex.

Compliance or non compliance with the U.N. and international law is irrelevant because international law has no morality and no legitimacy. Violation of international law does not have the stigma of immorality or illegality because it does not posses the qualities of morality or legality to be violated.

If I violated the laws of the Koran/Christian Bible/Torah it would be moraly bad because ALAH/JESUS/THAT JEWISH GUY are the source of all moral authority, but if it turns out none of them are real... well then violations of those law means nothing.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Geronimo


This seems quite out of character for you LotM.

Is it that hard to imagine reasonable people being unmoved by the deaths of strangers? Even praiseworthy strangers? Surely you can also see that the polarizing sensitive political nature of decisions that the israeli leadership must make could make them collectively deeply unpopular with some reasonable people?

For the record I find the israeli leadership vastly more palatable than the palestinian leadership but even so I'm not sure if there is any leadership anywhere I would get much worked up about on hearing that they had died. I'm far more deeply effected when it's ordinary civilians who have perished.

Its one thing to not be moved by death of stranger X. Its quite another thing to bring up in conversation "if X were to die, I wouldnt care" Its obnoxious, and its a perverse why of arguing - if you have a point to make, make it, dont tell me about your psychological reaction to it. the poster in question has a tendency to do that, to say "well I dont care about X" Normally its just childish and annoying, but in this context it was worse.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride


I cant think of other words but bat**** crazy to qualify what Israel did flying over the Syria, and I generally support Israel.


wtf was that?

Either you misunderstood my post or you agree with me completely.