The Doctor Posted 1 August 2014 Share Posted 1 August 2014 .... and yet Israel is not cut off like South Africa even though it mirrors much of white apartheid policy. I don't think having a gun pointed at your head and told to negotiate is the basis for productive talks. Except that's not the case - the negotiations are headed up by other countries, not Israel. So why are Israel ok to sit down and try to find peace, but Hamas won't even contemplate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 2 August 2014 Share Posted 2 August 2014 Why are people comparing this to the IRA or apartheid South Africa? Completely different situations. Hamas are not a terrorist group they are the elected government of an independent state. They have a state controlled military and are being instructed by the government. It is a warzone, there are 2 countries fighting each other in a territory despute, it is irrelevant that Israel is more powerful or better armed, in this current despute they are defending what is theirs. As many have said they aren't blameless in all of this, but making pointless comparisons with the IRA and South Africa doesn't help matters. Ultimately there is one goal that everyone can agree on, and it is not 'free Palestine' or 'Save Gaza' or anything pro Israel it is 'Peace in the middle east'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxyPV Posted 2 August 2014 Share Posted 2 August 2014 SA didn't have the backing of the US, which makes all the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 2 August 2014 Share Posted 2 August 2014 So if my neighbours annoy me with the smell of their barbecue, as they do frequently, it is ok to go round and spray a few rounds of an M16 after all they were pretty much asking for it. If you do make sure you kill them all otherwise their children or relatives will put a barbecue up your ass and light it. If a job's worth doing it's worth doing properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADK Posted 2 August 2014 Share Posted 2 August 2014 Why are people comparing this to the IRA or apartheid South Africa? Completely different situations. Hamas are not a terrorist group they are the elected government of an independent state. They have a state controlled military and are being instructed by the government. It is a warzone, there are 2 countries fighting each other in a territory despute, it is irrelevant that Israel is more powerful or better armed, in this current despute they are defending what is theirs. As many have said they aren't blameless in all of this, but making pointless comparisons with the IRA and South Africa doesn't help matters. Ultimately there is one goal that everyone can agree on, and it is not 'free Palestine' or 'Save Gaza' or anything pro Israel it is 'Peace in the middle east'. And Israel is not interested in peace. Hence it is time the west got tougher on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rincewind Posted 2 August 2014 Share Posted 2 August 2014 Maybe time to send the CIA hit squad in. Take both leaders out. Their supporters may be upset but at least they may get new leaders that will talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr The Singh Posted 2 August 2014 Share Posted 2 August 2014 Where's my post gone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 2 August 2014 Share Posted 2 August 2014 And Israel is not interested in peace. Hence it is time the west got tougher on them. Do you think we should send the army in and occupy them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 2 August 2014 Share Posted 2 August 2014 And Israel is not interested in peace. Hence it is time the west got tougher on them. If whenever you'd tried to sit down with people to negotiate peace they responded by upping their attacks, would you be trying to sit down and secure peace? Nevertheless, Israel have sat down and tried to organise ceasefires - hamas have then broken them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midland_red Posted 2 August 2014 Share Posted 2 August 2014 Why are people comparing this to the IRA or apartheid South Africa? Completely different situations. Hamas are not a terrorist group they are the elected government of an independent state. They have a state controlled military and are being instructed by the government. It is a warzone, there are 2 countries fighting each other in a territory despute, it is irrelevant that Israel is more powerful or better armed, in this current despute they are defending what is theirs. As many have said they aren't blameless in all of this, but making pointless comparisons with the IRA and South Africa doesn't help matters. Ultimately there is one goal that everyone can agree on, and it is not 'free Palestine' or 'Save Gaza' or anything pro Israel it is 'Peace in the middle east'. Israel was a very good friend of aparthied south africa (tell me who your friends are and I will tell you what you are etc...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 4 August 2014 Share Posted 4 August 2014 Israel was a very good friend of aparthied south africa (tell me who your friends are and I will tell you what you are etc...) Ridiculous argument: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bovril Posted 4 August 2014 Share Posted 4 August 2014 Ridiculous argument: Ridiculous argument: I think those photos prove his point!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 4 August 2014 Share Posted 4 August 2014 but then again every worldleader has hand shake photos with every other world leader even if they are discussing a divisive point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain... Posted 4 August 2014 Share Posted 4 August 2014 but then again every worldleader has hand shake photos with every other world leader even if they are discussing a divisive point. I didn't just pick "some hand shake photos", Thatcher was a supporter of Pinochet's regime (brutal dictatorship/mass murderer), Blair openly supported Gaddafi (the same), doesn't mean that we are a brutal dictatorship. The idea that Israel supporting Apartheid SA, presumably in the 80s, which we also did for a long while, proves that they are evil, is ridiculous, we have supported some very dubious regimes in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 4 August 2014 Share Posted 4 August 2014 I didn't just pick "some hand shake photos", Thatcher was a supporter of Pinochet's regime (brutal dictatorship/mass murderer), Blair openly supported Gaddafi (the same), doesn't mean that we are a brutal dictatorship. The idea that Israel supporting Apartheid SA, presumably in the 80s, which we also did for a long while, proves that they are evil, is ridiculous, we have supported some very dubious regimes in the past. I'm not disagreeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Guiza Posted 4 August 2014 Share Posted 4 August 2014 Blair had very strong ties with Libya didn't he? I'm sure he said something about Gaddafi joining him to help fight terror. I understand the point of shaking hands for the sake of gentlemanly conduct etc, but in some cases it goes beyond the ridiculous. Che Guevara, for example, traveled to New York to give a speech to the UN, in the country that would later sanction his killing. Mugabee and Prince Charles being another example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 4 August 2014 Share Posted 4 August 2014 When you see what's happened to Libya and Iraq and other such places since they've been freed from these dictators maybe just keeping normal relationships and minding our own business isn't such a bad idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr The Singh Posted 4 August 2014 Share Posted 4 August 2014 Blair had very strong ties with Libya didn't he? I'm sure he said something about Gaddafi joining him to help fight terror. I understand the point of shaking hands for the sake of gentlemanly conduct etc, but in some cases it goes beyond the ridiculous. Che Guevara, for example, traveled to New York to give a speech to the UN, in the country that would later sanction his killing. Mugabee and Prince Charles being another example. Libya were a ally to the UK on the fight against terrorism. This is all politics, Saddam was allie one day, the next day with the permission of the US, was allowed to or some will say invited to invade Kuwait, and became a tyrant......all in the name of US corp and UK corp interests, $$$$$, ££££££ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 4 August 2014 Share Posted 4 August 2014 Gaddaffi wasn't always an ally, he financed the IRA and other anti western terror groups. He only changed sides when it was in his interest. As BP already held the oil concession in a stable country it would have been in our corporate interests to keep him in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADK Posted 5 August 2014 Share Posted 5 August 2014 I actually think Gaddaffi wasn't that bad. He put a nation together out of a bunch of ragtag tribes and they had a decent standard of living compared to other African nations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 5 August 2014 Share Posted 5 August 2014 I actually think Gaddaffi wasn't that bad. He put a nation together out of a bunch of ragtag tribes and they had a decent standard of living compared to other African nations. He was a bad bastard by anyone's standard, but was he any worse than what's gone after? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parafox Posted 5 August 2014 Share Posted 5 August 2014 And why does it need a defence shield? Because Hamas keep lobbing rockets at it. But still, if you've got neighbours calling for your extinction and launching rockets at you day and night - would you honestly not retaliate? This is the problem people have with the pro-Palestine people, they gloss over, ignore, or in some cases even endorse what Hamas are doing and saying. Israel are responding with more force than necessary, but Hamas are pretty much bringing it on themselves. It was invaded - all it's neighbours have started a war against it - hell, just after it's formation, pretty much all the Middle East tried to wipe it out. Or does it only count if the us/uk declare war on them? If my neighbours blockaded my house, restricting and controlling supplies of utilities, of food, fuel and medicines, controlled my communications network and started building sheds in my back yard in complete disregard of what the rest of the street had agreed was reasonable, I'd be pretty pissed off and might consider chucking some rocks over the fence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parafox Posted 5 August 2014 Share Posted 5 August 2014 If whenever you'd tried to sit down with people to negotiate peace they responded by upping their attacks, would you be trying to sit down and secure peace? Nevertheless, Israel have sat down and tried to organise ceasefires - hamas have then broken them. Why are you ignoring the provocation by Israel in it's blockading, it's violation of international law by building in Palestine as I have alluded to above? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finnegan Posted 5 August 2014 Share Posted 5 August 2014 If my neighbours blockaded my house, restricting and controlling supplies of utilities, of food, fuel and medicines, controlled my communications network and started building sheds in my back yard in complete disregard of what the rest of the street had agreed was reasonable, I'd be pretty pissed off and might consider chucking some rocks over the fence. Just be careful a stray rock doesn't go through their greenhouse window, or they'll be internationally justified to napalm your entire plot, killing your kids, missus, pets and ****ing up your house. Balanced and reasoned response that. Even large Al thinks so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Doctor Posted 5 August 2014 Share Posted 5 August 2014 If my neighbours blockaded my house, restricting and controlling supplies of utilities, of food, fuel and medicines, controlled my communications network and started building sheds in my back yard in complete disregard of what the rest of the street had agreed was reasonable, I'd be pretty pissed off and might consider chucking some rocks over the fence. But that's not the order it took. If you're taking the role of the palestinians then the metaphor would be: You're renting a flat and new neighbours move into a flat you want. Every neighbour hates them and starts lobbing rocks at them - everyone starts arguing about who should have the house that these new neighbours have moved into. Eventually, the council settle it, by merging your house into theirs, then giving your house away to two existing neighbours. You then blame the new neighbours rather than the neighbours that actually took your home and start lobbing rocks at them. They get rather annoyed at that and build a wall around the bit of the house you're living in. You then start throwing more rocks at them, they get fed up and start lobbing rocks back - and then are blamed universally for being the antagonists in this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.