NationStates Jolt Archive

Palestinians 'routinely tortured' in Israeli jails (http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2074067,00.html)

Conal Urquhart in Tel Aviv
Monday May 7, 2007
The Guardian

Palestinians detained by Israeli security forces are routinely tortured and ill-treated, according to a new report published by Israeli human rights groups yesterday. The ill-treatment, which includes beatings, sensory deprivation, back-bending, back-stretching and other forms of physical abuse, contravenes international law and Israeli law, the report says.

The Centre for the Defence of the Individual and B'Tselem, an Israeli human rights group, compiled the report after interviewing 73 Palestinians who had been arrested in 2005 and 2006.

The report found that almost 50% of detainees who were arrested in raids or at random were beaten by the army or police before they were handed over to the Shin Bet security agency for interrogation. The prisoners were interrogated for an average of 35 days and spent most of their time in tiny cells in solitary confinement. They were interrogated from five to 10 hours a day. More than half did not see a lawyer or representative of the Red Cross for the whole period of interrogation.

The report found that prisoners were effectively starved by being offered food designed to appear rotten or unappetising. Their only exercise was the walk from the cell to the interrogation room during which they were shackled, handcuffed and blindfolded. In some cases more extreme treatment was used. One in five detainees were deprived of sleep for up to three days and a quarter were beaten by their interrogators.

Out of more than 500 complaints against Shin Bet since 2001, not a single one has been upheld. Israel's justice ministry said Shin Bet interrogations were carried out in accordance with the law, although it declined to comment on the "interrogation techniques" detailed in the report.

In 1999, the supreme court banned the torture of suspects but left several loopholes which allowed it to continue

Israel really need to clear up their act here. You can't claim to hold the moral high ground when you're engaged in institutionalised torture, as the US and UK have found out to their cost.

Who could doubt that Hamas has a peace partner in Israel?


;)

Who could doubt that Hamas has a peace partner in Israel?


;)

That'll teach em. :D

;) ;)

Oh but you see, it doesn't matter. Israel is a democracy as far a America is concerned, so it makes any argument that the terrorists have null and void because terrorists hate democracy and will try and bring it to its knees with such wild allegations... ;)

Who could doubt that Hamas has a peace partner in Israel?


;)

I walked into that one didn't I? :D

As opposed to the Palestinians, who straight out behead people.

As opposed to the Palestinians, who straight out behead people.

As opposed to the Israelis, who shoot out your legs and pump you full of lead at point blank range. And then pretend nothing happened.

As opposed to the Israelis, who shoot out your legs and pump you full of lead at point blank range. And then pretend nothing happened.


As opposed to the Palestinians, who straight out behead people.

And people find it strange that peace between these two regimes hasn't broken out yet.

A flame war starting on the sixth post, is this a record? If so, what do I win?

A flame war starting on the sixth post, is this a record? If so, what do I win?

Probably not, I'm sure there's been flame wars in OPs before, but you can the ashes and a little plaque in your sig if you like.

A flame war starting on the sixth post, is this a record? If so, what do I win?

You need flames for there to be a flame war. So far no flames have materialised.

Israeli be the Zionists Jewish devils, and the Palestinians are the poor victims who have done nothing to teh evil Jews.

Israeli be the Zionists Jewish devils, and the Palestinians are the poor victims who have done nothing to teh evil Jews.

was this sarcasm?

as to the OP, I agree that Israel needs to clean up its act if it wants to maintain the moral high ground.

Israeli be the Zionists Jewish devils, and the Palestinians are the poor victims who have done nothing to teh evil Jews.

Or, conversely, Israelis are innocent little angels, and Palestinians are child-eating monsters.

You need flames for there to be a flame war. So far no flames have materialised.

Yeah. Those posts barely rank at sparks.

was this sarcasm?

as to the OP, I agree that Israel needs to clean up its act if it wants to maintain the moral high ground.

Maintain?

A flame war starting on the sixth post, is this a record? If so, what do I win?

Don't be a flamer.

Israel really need to clear up their act here. You can't claim to hold the moral high ground when you're engaged in institutionalised torture, as the US and UK have found out to their cost.

Israel doesn't have any clear incentive to clean up anything. People who hate Israel, hate Israel no matter what they do.

Israel doesn't have any clear incentive to clean up anything. People who hate Israel, hate Israel no matter what they do.

There is truth to that.

Maintain?

Yes I said it. They have the high ground over those that want to use suicide bombers on civilian populations.

was this sarcasm?

as to the OP, I agree that Israel needs to clean up its act if it wants to maintain the moral high ground.Very much so.

Yes I said it. They have the high ground over those that want to use suicide bombers on civilian populations.

Because using your army on civilian populations is so much nobler. If only the Palestinians were so cunning as to have uniforms...

Because using your army on civilian populations is so much nobler. If only the Palestinians were so cunning as to have uniforms...

If the Palestinians fought conventionally, with conventional weapons, in uniform... I'm sure there would be fewer civilian casualties.

If you hide in amongst civilians and shoot rockets at Israelis, you are the war criminal, not the Israelis, according to the Fourth Geneva Convention.

If the Palestinians fought conventionally, with conventional weapons, in uniform... I'm sure there would be fewer civilian casualties.

If you hide in amongst civilians and shoot rockets at Israelis, you are the war criminal, not the Israelis, according to the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Indeed.

Israel doesn't have any clear incentive to clean up anything. People who hate Israel, hate Israel no matter what they do.

So in other words, when Israel says "We want peace", we know it has no real intentions for peace.

If the Palestinians fought conventionally, with conventional weapons, in uniform... I'm sure there would be fewer civilian casualties.

If you hide in amongst civilians and shoot rockets at Israelis, you are the war criminal, not the Israelis, according to the Fourth Geneva Convention.

So what about Israeli soldiers who use Palestinians as human shields hmm? I don't see them being prosecuted for war crimes.

The short story of it is that Israel is as big a hypocrite as any other bully boy out there. In fact, bigger than Hamas. At least Hamas is honest with it's douchebaggery.

So what about Israeli soldiers who use Palestinians as human shields hmm? I don't see them being prosecuted for war crimes.

Yes, that's a crime. But being prosecuted for war crimes means you have to lose the war first, then you get prosecuted by the winner...

It's the way it works out in most wars.

However, I believe that instead of sending captured Palestinians into booby-trapped homes, the Israelis should merely bring up a tank, and shell the home into rubble - it's perfectly legal, and a perfectly acceptable tactic to use in areas where you feel that mines and boobytraps are present.

So what about Israeli soldiers who use Palestinians as human shields hmm? I don't see them being prosecuted for war crimes.

And they should just like the terrorists that hide behind civilians should be prosecuted for war crimes as well.

The short story of it is that Israel is as big a hypocrite as any other bully boy out there. In fact, bigger than Hamas. At least Hamas is honest with it's douchebaggery.

At least Israel does not want to wipe an entire nation off the map as Hamas does.

So in other words, when Israel says "We want peace", we know it has no real intentions for peace.

Sure, they want peace. But they know that the Palestinians want every Jew on the face of the Earth dead. Kinda hard to accept that in order to get peace, you have to commit suicide.

Yes, that's a crime. But being prosecuted for war crimes means you have to lose the war first, then you get prosecuted by the winner...

A war crime is a war crime regardless of winning or losing.

It's the way it works out in most wars.

Most being the key word.

However, I believe that instead of sending captured Palestinians into booby-trapped homes, the Israelis should merely bring up a tank, and shell the home into rubble - it's perfectly legal, and a perfectly acceptable tactic to use in areas where you feel that mines and boobytraps are present.

And you will have people here claiming that is a war crime.

So what about Israeli soldiers who use Palestinians as human shields hmm? I don't see them being prosecuted for war crimes.

The short story of it is that Israel is as big a hypocrite as any other bully boy out there. In fact, bigger than Hamas. At least Hamas is honest with it's douchebaggery.

Exactly. At least Hamas are honest about being terrorists, while Israel and its supporters would like to pretend that its poo doesn't stink and that everything they do is the fault of Palestinians, because the Palestinians emit powerful mind-controlling radiation that just forces the oh, so poor Isralis to commit atrocities time and time and time again. Such victims they are.

Exactly. At least Hamas are honest about being terrorists, while Israel and its supporters would like to pretend that its poo doesn't stink and that everything they do is the fault of Palestinians, because the Palestinians emit powerful mind-controlling radiation that just forces the oh, so poor Isralis to commit atrocities time and time and time again. Such victims they are.

Funny - the Israelis don't have the death penalty.

So the typical captured Palestinian terrorist knows he isn't going to be shot for his crimes.

However, I believe that instead of sending captured Palestinians into booby-trapped homes, the Israelis should merely bring up a tank, and shell the home into rubble - it's perfectly legal, and a perfectly acceptable tactic to use in areas where you feel that mines and boobytraps are present.

That's not a human shield. That's called human sacrifice. It's just as bad.

Human shields are when you stand behind them and use them as bullet stoppers while you fire over their shoulders....which the IDF have been noted for doing.

I still see a lack of outrage over these actions that most of the rabid folk are willing to use when the Palestinians do the same.

In fact, those that do acknowledge it happens are often all too willing to 'pooh-pooh' the matter.

That's not a human shield. That's called human sacrifice. It's just as bad.

Human shields are when you stand behind them and use them as bullet stoppers while you fire over their shoulders....which the IDF have been noted for doing.

I still see a lack of outrage over these actions that most of the rabid folk are willing to use when the Palestinians do the same.

In fact, those that do acknowledge it happens are often all too willing to 'pooh-pooh' the matter.

The most common use of human shield is sending Palestinians into boobytrapped buildings.

Considering that Palestinians have used their own children as human shields, I would think they're OK with using them during gunfights.

Funny - the Israelis don't have the death penalty.

So the typical captured Palestinian terrorist knows he isn't going to be shot for his crimes.

Not legally. But since the court doesn't complain about abuses in detention centers which aren't supposed to happen, I don't imagine they'd balk at prisoner executions. Not having a death penalty doesn't mean you aren't going to get shot by douchebags in the IDF or your jailers.

And the Israeli's do have the death penalty. It's random, heavy handed and given by any yahoo wearing IDF uniforms. Since the IDF are never prosecuted for murders of non-Israelites, they can play Judge Dredd as much as they want without fear of being busted.

The most common use of human shield is sending Palestinians into boobytrapped buildings.

Considering that Palestinians have used their own children as human shields, I would think they're OK with using them during gunfights.

And this makes the IDF using them any less of a war criminal how?

Shall we proscribe to the might makes right rule now?

The most common use of human shield is sending Palestinians into boobytrapped buildings.

Considering that Palestinians have used their own children as human shields, I would think they're OK with using them during gunfights.

I do not think that it is ok to do the samething as the Palestinians are doing. That is degrading yourself to their level.

And this makes the IDF using them any less of a war criminal how?

Shall we proscribe to the might makes right rule now?

Might does make right. Winners write the history.

Sure, it's a crime. But, in the heat of battle, if you see the Palestinians using their own children as human shields... it's more of a do as they do kind of thing.

Hey! I thought it was OK because they were doing it - I said to myself, "they don't give a shit about their own kids..."

I guess what rankles you right now is that the Palestinians have been spending more time over the past year killing each other's children than killing Israelis.

Killing their own kids ('http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070507/NATIONWORLD/705070407/-1/ZONES04')

Israel doesn't have any clear incentive to clean up anything. People who hate Israel, hate Israel no matter what they do.

So it gives them a right to do anything they want to? People hate me, therefore, do I have the right to just go postal? Blind support of an oppressive regime. only in the fawking USA.

So it gives them a right to do anything they want to? People hate me, therefore, do I have the right to just go postal? Blind support of an oppressive regime. only in the fawking USA.

When the hate involves the idea that they want to kill every last man, woman, and child on your side, yes.

Might does make right. Winners write the history.


No, it doesn't make anything right. It just means you have the strength to cover up your crimes and make it stick. You're still no less guilty than a mafia mobster who uses his connections to make those murder charges go away.

And since you proscribe to that thinking anyway, I assume there is no such thing as a wrongful death in your vocabulary. After all, the murders were done by those in power. So what is their foul. In fact, if I shot you dead, and had the influence to remain uncharged, I am thereby, not guilty of shooting you dead. Despite the fact my finger was the one that pulled the trigger.


Sure, it's a crime. But, in the heat of battle, if you see the Palestinians using their own children as human shields... it's more of a do as they do kind of thing.

Here we go again. "Bob robbed his neighbor. So it's ok for me to rob him."

Can I kill you? I'll plead that at least I wasn't as bad as Timothy McVeigh.


I guess what rankles you right now is that the Palestinians have been spending more time over the past year killing each other's children than killing Israelis.


What rankles me is people of both side of the fence pretending that their favored side isn't a collection of shitbaggery.

Hypocrisy annoys me to no end.

In fact, I'll bet you recycle your argument.

When the hate involves the idea that they want to kill every last man, woman, and child on your side, yes.


Bull shit. There is a thing called moral decency. Do you think they are making the situation any better by doing these violent acts? No! It only encourages the groups like PLO and Hizbullah. Israel seems to be hypocritical, "We want peace, but we don't" kind of mentality.

No, it doesn't make anything right. It just means you have the strength to cover up your crimes and make it stick. You're still no less guilty than a mafia mobster who uses his connections to make those murder charges go away.

And since you proscribe to that thinking anyway, I assume there is no such thing as a wrongful death in your vocabulary. After all, the murders were done by those in power. So what is their foul. In fact, if I shot you dead, and had the influence to remain uncharged, I am thereby, not guilty of shooting you dead. Despite the fact my finger was the one that pulled the trigger.

Are you saying that police NEVER have the legal right to kill people?

It's not murder if it's legal.

Are you saying that police NEVER have the legal right to kill people?

It's not murder if it's legal.

:rolleyes:


Murder is the act of taking another human life.

Seriously, are you really that stupid?

:rolleyes:


Murder is the act of taking another human life.

Seriously, are you really that stupid?
Actually...
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source mur·der (mûr'dər) Pronunciation Key
n.
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

Actually...



Fuck what the dictionary says. One life is the same as another, just because you have a law protecting the the right to take a life, doesn't make it right and just.

Fuck what the dictionary says. One life is the same as another, just because you have a law protecting the the right to take a life, doesn't make it right and just.

Even if that person is shooting at you with intent to kill you? Are you seriously saying that we do not have the right to defend ourselves by shooting back and killing said person?

Israel Supporters
When Palestinians do it it's murder and terrorism.
When Israelis do it it's keeping the peace/self-defence.

Palestine Supporters
When Israelis do it it's murder and oppression.
When Palestinians do it it's freedom fighting/self-defence.

The debate over which side is worse has lost all meaning. I've noticed Israel's... goodness... has degraded considerably over the past six months or so, but they're still not significantly better or worse than Palestine. The difference for me is essentially that the Israeli government treats their people reasonably well, at least for the Middle East, but the Palestinian government couldn't care less.

Not too surprised at the OP, sadly.

Non Aligned, murder is an illegal killing. Legal killings are perfectly fine.

And who makes the law? It depends on who is running the place.

Out of interest, are there any Palestinian human rights groups condemning the behaviour of Hamas and the use of terrorism? Just wondering.

Out of interest, are there any Palestinian human rights groups condemning the behaviour of Hamas and the use of terrorism? Just wondering.

http://www.phrmg.org/

Yes, there are. But they have no power in the Palestinian areas.

There are also small groups like this that protest Israeli abuses (within Israel).

Once again, they have no power.

It's not conducive right now, to a person's longevity, to criticize the more radical elements of the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, or the internal militias.

It's a good way to end up dead, unless you can post to your website from outside the Palestinian areas.

http://www.phrmg.org/

Yes, there are. But they have no power in the Palestinian areas.

There are also small groups like this that protest Israeli abuses (within Israel).

Once again, they have no power.

It's not conducive right now, to a person's longevity, to criticize the more radical elements of the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, or the internal militias.

It's a good way to end up dead, unless you can post to your website from outside the Palestinian areas.

Thanks.

Are you saying that police NEVER have the legal right to kill people?

It's not murder if it's legal.

You are saying that since the IDF is in power, it is right, despite the illegality of what it does.

You are saying might makes right. Thereby, if I have the might to splatter your thinking parts all over the wall and escape conviction in your mentality, I'm right.

You can't have your cake and eat it.

As opposed to the Palestinians, who straight out behead people.

Odd that Hamas etc condemned beheading as unislamic then, isn't it?

Could you give an example of a palestinian group carrying out a beheading, by the way, or will you just scuttlle back under your rock?


If the Palestinians fought conventionally, with conventional weapons, in uniform... I'm sure there would be fewer civilian casualties..

Seeing as theres an armed Israeli presence there designed to mainatin an occupation and protect its colonists, I'm sure you're wrong. Its not about self defence, its about making the natives lie down while their "masters" do what they will.


However, I believe that instead of sending captured Palestinians into booby-trapped homes,..

"captured" in a "dragged off from the dinner table" way. And then not sent into booby trapped homes, but marched up the street in front of a patrol, or tied and placed on the stairs and in access points to houses they are occupying.

Thats the noble IDF - surrounded by 'savages', so we're told. So they have to go and build suburbs amongst them.


At least Israel does not want to wipe an entire nation off the map as Hamas does.,..

Tell that to the Palestinians.


Funny - the Israelis don't have the death penalty.,..

So when they decided to get rid of the old guy in the wheelchair that founded Hamas, that wasn't a death penalty that was ........?



The most common use of human shield is sending Palestinians into boobytrapped buildings..,..

As I seem to recall most accounts of the bold and noble IDF standing behind Arab civillians, I call "bollocks" on that one for starters.

HAHAHA I love that. Way to go israel, thats the way to deal with them, I've been saying it for a long time...but ofcouse I've been saying we don't need prisons for a long time just kill them...you break the law you pay for it with you life:sniper: , or tourcher. anyhoo thats just what the terrist and thoughs kind of people need.

YAY!!! YAY for israel!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are saying that since the IDF is in power, it is right, despite the illegality of what it does.

You are saying might makes right. Thereby, if I have the might to splatter your thinking parts all over the wall and escape conviction in your mentality, I'm right.

You can't have your cake and eat it.

You are correct. However, I live in the US, and it's unlikely, that short of firing hundreds of nuclear weapons, the US will ever be in that position.

HAHAHA I love that. Way to go israel, thats the way to deal with them, I've been saying it for a long time...but ofcouse I've been saying we don't need prisons for a long time just kill them...you break the law you pay for it with you life:sniper: , or tourcher. anyhoo thats just what the terrist and thoughs kind of people need.

YAY!!! YAY for israel!!!!!!!!!!!!

6/10

You've got potential, but if you want to be a really good troll you should include at least one :gundge: in your post, and probably a :mp5:. References to nuking Mecca or force feeding bacon to the prisoners would help too.

6/10

You've got potential, but if you want to be a really good troll you should include at least one :gundge: in your post, and probably a :mp5:. References to nuking Mecca or force feeding bacon to the prisoners would help too.

Darn it, I'll make sure to put more smilies in next time.

6/10

You've got potential, but if you want to be a really good troll you should include at least one :gundge: in your post, and probably a :mp5:. References to nuking Mecca or force feeding bacon to the prisoners would help too.

I don't have a gruge aginst them, its just thats the way all prisoners should be treated, but on top of that...Why take prisoners to start off with? onless you need info, but then by all means tourcher them.:sniper: :mp5: :gundge:

Well, long ago I crossed the line-of-thinking toture was ALWAYS morally wrong. Define "worng". These terrorists don't mind blowing-themselves-up and crossing the door to Allah, but the prospect of having to visit hell first might deter them. If they dilibertly kill innocents, and and then expect to be protected as other humans, then they can forget it. They may still be technically human, but they lose all the benifits attained from it's membership, due to their actions. This is a war for survival, and I'm not rooting for the faction that murdered 1500 Americans, and thinks Hitler is "teh pwn!" I won't support the faction that wants to use nukes to kill 2/3 of the world, to purge it. I'm going to root for Israel, and if they can get these protected murders to fear hell-on-earth, since they obviously don't fear hell away from it, then good for Israel.

I used to back Israel, sincec they were a democratic country and the palestinian terrorists struck indiscrminately with their terrorist acts.

Then I started looking closer on Israel... I did not like what I found. The policies in the occupied territories, the extrajudicial killings, the opression, the indiscriminate use of force, the stories of the israeli soldiers themselves, the "accidents" and "bad apples" - I cannot support nor condone the actions the state of Israel has undertaken in this conflict, I will not support their flagrant disregard of human rights.

So the question is, do I support the palestinian acts? No. Just because I've lost faith in one side does not mean I condone the wrongful acts of the other.

I hope for peace, but when things like this abuse is still going on, it's very difficult to hold on to that hope.

In my eyes, the state of Israel and the Palestinian authority deserve each other.
The Israeli and palestinian civilians both, however, deserve better than those two regimes.

When the hate involves the idea that they want to kill every last man, woman, and child on your side, yes.
Kinda like some posters who advocate genocide of all muslims, eh?

So when they decided to get rid of the old guy in the wheelchair that founded Hamas, that wasn't a death penalty that was ........?
"Extrajudicial killings". It's one of the specialities of Israel.

I always wonder when people talk about Palestinians, why suicide bombings are taken as worse than bombings (difference between killing lots of people, and killing lots of people including the bomber?) and that they are said to have done it for religious reasons. People always seem to get more outraged at someone blowing themselves and others up for Allah than blowing others up for politics.

. If they dilibertly kill innocents, and and then expect to be protected as other humans, then they can forget it.
.

Does that apply to the Israelis?

.
They may still be technically human, but they lose all the benifits attained from it's membership, due to their actions. .

Ditto

.
This is a war for survival, and I'm not rooting for the faction that murdered 1500 Americans,
.

We are discussing Palestinians and Israel etc, not Saudi "terrorists"

.
I won't support the faction that wants to use nukes to kill 2/3 of the world, to purge it..

Would you care to name who it is that "wants to use nukes to kill 2/3 of the world", as I'm not aware of any "faction" with that on its wish list.
.
I'm going to root for Israel, ..

...because rooting on a first world power kicking the crap out of third world farmers is the American way?

I always wonder when people talk about Palestinians, why suicide bombings are taken as worse than bombings (difference between killing lots of people, and killing lots of people including the bomber?) and that they are said to have done it for religious reasons. People always seem to get more outraged at someone blowing themselves and others up for Allah than blowing others up for politics.You forget that Israel is the West's darling, while Palestinians like all other Arabs are not.

You are correct. However, I live in the US, and it's unlikely, that short of firing hundreds of nuclear weapons, the US will ever be in that position.

Of course not. The luxury of money is getting somebody to rape the nuns for you, as Ron would have put it.

You forget that Israel is the West's darling, while Palestinians like all other Arabs are not.

Funny thing is, alot of people make a distinction between Hamas's military wing and political wing. They support the political wing but condemn the militant wing of Hamas. Same with Fatah.

Good. Try blowing up Israelis again you mofosobs. :upyours: @ "Palestinians"

Good. Try blowing up Israelis again you mofosobs. :upyours: @ "Palestinians"

Yay for the dehumanisation and torture of random people who have never tried to blow up israelis, eh?

Yay for Israel violating human rights and international law?

Yay for Israel becoming the monster they're fighting?

Quite distasteful of you, really.

Yes, torturing and stealing their land has worked so well at quietening them for the last three decades, after all.

Good.

Leaving out the remainder of your post - so, you're pro-torture then? Nice.

Does that apply to the Israelis?

Sir, show me proof that the Israeli military dilibertly targets civilions over enemy terrorists and soldiers, and I'll see if I can't see things better.

Ditto

Kay.

We are discussing Palestinians and Israel etc, not Saudi "terrorists"
There really isn't any difference. They may have different causes, but I'm sure they agree with eachother 100% and would be willing to help one-another.

Would you care to name who it is that "wants to use nukes to kill 2/3 of the world", as I'm not aware of any "faction" with that on its wish list.

The President of Iran who supports these people expressed this. He also stated that he would happiliy kill half his population to eliminate all the Jews in the world.


...because rooting on a first world power kicking the crap out of third world farmers is the American way

Well, you got me there...

Yay for the dehumanisation and torture of random people who have never tried to blow up israelis, eh?

Yay for Israel violating human rights and international law?

Yay for Israel becoming the monster they're fighting?

Quite distasteful of you, really.

Remember, all Muslims are hive-linked to Osama Bin-Ladin.[/sarcasm]

That's how you fight a war, idiots. I can't believe you people are so fucking stupid as to actually believe there are laws of war.
You fight a war to win, at all costs.

Now, the question is not wether this is a good "moral" way to fight a war (it really is, but that's not the point.) but wether the war is moral. That's the question.

That's how you fight a war, idiots. I can't believe you people are so fucking stupid as to actually believe there are laws of war.
You fight a war to win, at all costs.

Now, the question is not wether this is a good "moral" way to fight a war (it really is, but that's not the point.) but wether the war is moral. That's the question.

Here, here! Too bad you're not running America's military!

You are correct. However, I live in the US, and it's unlikely, that short of firing hundreds of nuclear weapons, the US will ever be in that position.

It's the US. All I need is evidence of the prosecutions and judge's deviant sexual activities, or some other ruinous charge to avoid being prosecuted.

That's how you fight a war, idiots. I can't believe you people are so fucking stupid as to actually believe there are laws of war.
You fight a war to win, at all costs.

Someone obviously forgot to tell the Americans that when they prosecuted the Gestapo eh Mr Flip Flop?

Someone obviously forgot to tell the Americans that when they prosecuted the Gestapo eh Mr Flip Flop?

*AHEM* I don't recall the Germans and the Jews being in an official war...

Someone obviously forgot to tell the Americans that when they prosecuted the Gestapo eh Mr Flip Flop?

What the hell are you talking about?
When the hell did I flip flop?

The way to fight a war is to fight quickly, and destroy your opponent beyond his ability to recover, then leave.

The Liberals and Conservatives both aren't willing to fight a war.

The Liberals and Conservatives both aren't willing to fight a war.

And you are, I suppose? And just what political flavour are you, then sonny?

That's how you fight a war, idiots. I can't believe you people are so fucking stupid as to actually believe there are laws of war.
You fight a war to win, at all costs.

Yes there are laws of war. It is called the Geneva Conventions. Thank you for playing though.

Now, the question is not wether this is a good "moral" way to fight a war (it really is, but that's not the point.) but wether the war is moral. That's the question.

They are both questions that must be answered.

*AHEM* I don't recall the Germans and the Jews being in an official war...

It was called creating international Law for the purpose of the Nuremburg War Crimes Trial. OOPS!!! I see people do not understand history anymore :(

*AHEM* I don't recall the Germans and the Jews being in an official war...

Sure they did. The Jews just didn't fight back. The same with the Gypsies. Except the Gypsies did fight back in some cases, limited as they were in arms.

And as LC pointed out, those laws were created to specially prosecute the Nazis. So there are no laws in war eh?


What the hell are you talking about?
When the hell did I flip flop?


Where anything goes in war, yet I'll bet you'll balk at the idea of Jews or some racial group being gassed if they were the losers.


The way to fight a war is to fight quickly, and destroy your opponent beyond his ability to recover, then leave.

And somehow, you know how to do this with an insurgency. Let me guess. It involves turning every living being in Iraq into a corpse.

Israelis mistreat, torture, and murder Palestinians. I'm shocked.....or not so much.

Cue IDF in 4... 3... 2...

Sir, show me proof that the Israeli military dilibertly targets civilions over enemy terrorists and soldiers, and I'll see if I can't see things better....

Unfortunately thats not a problem. Should these not suffice there are many more
British UN worker unlawfully shot
A British UN project manager shot by an Israeli sniper was unlawfully killed, a UK inquest has concluded.
Iain Hook, 54, of Felixstowe, Suffolk, was in a UN compound in Jenin when he was shot in November 2002.

On Friday, jurors unanimously agreed Mr Hook, who was born in Essex, had been the victim of a "deliberate" killing.

Coroner Dr Peter Dean said he was so concerned by the case and the fact 13 UN workers have died in Jenin, he will write to Prime Minister Tony Blair. (my bold)

Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/suffolk/4534620.stm)


Noran Iyad Deeb, a pupil at the Rafah Elementary Co-Ed “B” School run by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), was shot and killed today while lining up in the school yard for afternoon assembly. She was ten years old. A second girl, Aysha Isam El-Khatib was injured in the hand by a second bullet fired at the same time. At the time of the incident, firing had been heard from the direction of the Israeli-controlled border area. The school’s teaching staff were attempting to clear the children from the school yard when Noran was hit. The bullet hit her in the face. This is the fifth incident in the last two years in which children have been killed or seriously injured inside UNRWA school premises in the Gaza Strip.

Two girls were killed in separate incidents in Rafah and Khan Younis last year and a little girl was permanently blinded in Khan Younis in March 2003. UNRWA has repeatedly protested the Israeli military’s indiscriminate firing into civilian areas in the occupied Palestinian territory. Rafah Elementary Co-Ed “B” School, which is 800 metres from the border, has been hit on numerous occasions since the start of the conflict.(My bold)
PDF link (http://www.un.org/unrwa/news/releases/pr-2005/hqg01-05.pdf)


There really isn't any difference. They may have different causes, but I'm sure they agree with eachother 100% and would be willing to help one-another.....


You'll find that Palestinian groups have condemned al qaeda actions in Iraq. Secondly they are fighting to end a (widely acknowledged to be) illegal occupation and the colonisation of their land


The President of Iran who supports these people expressed this. He also stated that he would happiliy kill half his population to eliminate all the Jews in the world......

What were his exact words and a link to the translation please.

And the fact that he supports the Palistineans is hardly a reason to dismiss their cause out of hand.

Sure they did. The Jews just didn't fight back..

Actually they did. There were Jewish partisan groups in the East, Jewish members of partisan groups in the west, and there were various acts of sabotage in Auschwitz etc. Plus the Warsaw ghetto uprising.

Actually they did. There were Jewish partisan groups in the East, Jewish members of partisan groups in the west, and there were various acts of sabotage in Auschwitz etc. Plus the Warsaw ghetto uprising.

Ahh, so there we go. There was a war between the Nazi's and the Jews. On a technicality, but still....

Ahh, so there we go. There was a war between the Nazi's and the Jews. On a technicality, but still....


Not in the conventional sense, but to say that "they didn't resist" as a blanket statement gives a rather false impression.

Sir, show me proof that the Israeli military dilibertly targets civilions over enemy terrorists and soldiers, and I'll see if I can't see things better.
How about checking out reports of Amnesty International, the International Red Cross, B'Tselem, Human Rights Watch, or the US State Department (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2006/78854.htm#ot)?

Here's one clear example:
In 2004 IDF soldiers shot and killed Iman al-Hams, a 13-year-old schoolgirl, as she approached an IDF outpost in southern Gaza carrying a bag of schoolbooks that troops suspected contained explosives. After the girl had been shot from a distance, the IDF company commander allegedly repeatedly fired his automatic weapon into her at close range. In February 2005 a military court released the company commander after soldiers who witnessed the incident recanted testimony. On December 14, the High Court accepted the petition of the girl's parents and PCATI and ordered an investigation to determine whether illegal open fire orders were given in the area of the military post which led to the killing.
And what about Israeli civilians deliberately targeting civilians?
There were numerous credible reports of violence by settlers against Palestinians, particularly by residents of the Ma'on settlement in the southern Hebron Hills. On May 9, more than 30 Israeli artists and intellectuals sent a letter to the Israeli prime minister urging IDF protection for Palestinian children in the area. According to Ha'aretz, on May 10, the defense minister reportedly instructed IDF and police to increase the security for these Palestinian children on their way to and from school. However, settler harassment of the children continued without police response. On May 31, the Ma'on farm settlers reportedly were ordered to evacuate due to their attacks on schoolchildren; however, at year's end the Ma'on settlement remained.

On April 1, four settlers reportedly attacked and severely beat 72-year-old Palestinian Saber Shtiyeh as he was working in his field near the West Bank village of Salem, near Nablus. On April 7, representatives from Rabbis for Human Rights and the Kibbutz Movement requested IDF protection for the Palestinian farmers; however, the request reportedly was refused.

A June report by the Israeli human rights organization Yesh Din stated there was a "general phenomenon of absence of adequate law enforcement by the authorities upon settlers who commit offenses against Palestinians." For example, on November 19, settlers attacked a group of escorts for Palestinian school children in Hebron, seriously injuring a Western woman. At year's end, none of the attackers was charged (see section 2.d.).


There really isn't any difference. They may have different causes, but I'm sure they agree with eachother 100% and would be willing to help one-another.
Ah, so you have little or no knowledge of militant islamic movements then...


The President of Iran who supports these people expressed this. He also stated that he would happiliy kill half his population to eliminate all the Jews in the world.
Completely irrelevant.

If the british say that they support the italians against the germans, and the british say that they ought to nuke germany - is Italy to blame for this?

And you are, I suppose? And just what political flavour are you, then sonny?

I am my own. I'm pretty close to being Capitalist, but I'm too warlike for that, so I don't really know.

Yes there are laws of war. It is called the Geneva Conventions. Thank you for playing though.


Artificial piece of crap document that limits a countries ability to successfully fight a war, while minimizing their own casualties.

They are both questions that must be answered.

Only the second most be answered. The only moral way to fight a war is to go in and complete your objectives, while minimizing your own casualties and not caring about the casualties of the enemy. HOWEVER, stupid, petty murders like the ones the marines may have commited should be punished with death. This is because

And somehow, you know how to do this with an insurgency. Let me guess. It involves turning every living being in Iraq into a corpse.

Fight a war right, there is no insurgency. You go into it with a clearly defined objective. You do not turn a military force into a peace-keeping force. Although, your idea does have some merit......

Where anything goes in war, yet I'll bet you'll balk at the idea of Jews or some racial group being gassed if they were the losers.


Nope. If they aren't strong enough to fight the other group off, or smart enough to move to another area with a friendly(er) group, then, well, I'm sorry to say, it's a law of nature. The weak die, the strong survive and procreate.

Palestinians 'routinely tortured' in Israeli jails (http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,2074067,00.html)

Conal Urquhart in Tel Aviv
Monday May 7, 2007
The Guardian

Palestinians detained by Israeli security forces are routinely tortured and ill-treated, according to a new report published by Israeli human rights groups yesterday. The ill-treatment, which includes beatings, sensory deprivation, back-bending, back-stretching and other forms of physical abuse, contravenes international law and Israeli law, the report says.

The Centre for the Defence of the Individual and B'Tselem, an Israeli human rights group, compiled the report after interviewing 73 Palestinians who had been arrested in 2005 and 2006.

The report found that almost 50% of detainees who were arrested in raids or at random were beaten by the army or police before they were handed over to the Shin Bet security agency for interrogation. The prisoners were interrogated for an average of 35 days and spent most of their time in tiny cells in solitary confinement. They were interrogated from five to 10 hours a day. More than half did not see a lawyer or representative of the Red Cross for the whole period of interrogation.

The report found that prisoners were effectively starved by being offered food designed to appear rotten or unappetising. Their only exercise was the walk from the cell to the interrogation room during which they were shackled, handcuffed and blindfolded. In some cases more extreme treatment was used. One in five detainees were deprived of sleep for up to three days and a quarter were beaten by their interrogators.

Out of more than 500 complaints against Shin Bet since 2001, not a single one has been upheld. Israel's justice ministry said Shin Bet interrogations were carried out in accordance with the law, although it declined to comment on the "interrogation techniques" detailed in the report.

In 1999, the supreme court banned the torture of suspects but left several loopholes which allowed it to continue

Israel really need to clear up their act here. You can't claim to hold the moral high ground when you're engaged in institutionalised torture, as the US and UK have found out to their cost.

So?

So?

http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/laughoutloud.gif My feelings exactly.

Fight a war right, there is no insurgency. You go into it with a clearly defined objective. You do not turn a military force into a peace-keeping force.

Huh. So basically, your objective is go in, break things and run away. Sounds like a vandal to me.


Although, your idea does have some merit......

That you consider this as a viable idea means you have declared yourself inhuman. Congratulations. Killing you now is no longer murder.


Nope. If they aren't strong enough to fight the other group off, or smart enough to move to another area with a friendly(er) group, then, well, I'm sorry to say, it's a law of nature. The weak die, the strong survive and procreate.

So you won't complain if I shoot out your kneecaps and elbows and torture you day and night till you die of trauma?

Obviously if I can do that, I am in the right.

Who cares what happens in the middle east?

Not me

http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/laughoutloud.gif My feelings exactly.

Unless its your lot on the receiving end....

Who cares what happens in the middle east?

Not me

Who cares about what happens in your brain ?

Not me

So?

So there are some people who still retain their ethics and morals, and want peace in the middle east but see this as the step in the wrong direction that it is.

Don't feel bad though. I'm sure you can grow a conscience and learn all about humanity and morality given time :)

Huh. So basically, your objective is go in, break things and run away. Sounds like a vandal to me.

Seems to work pretty well.

That you consider this as a viable idea means you have declared yourself inhuman. Congratulations. Killing you now is no longer murder.

I'm sorry, I'm sort of new at this, but how do I convey sarcasm?


So you won't complain if I shoot out your kneecaps and elbows and torture you day and night till you die of trauma?

Obviously if I can do that, I am in the right.

Okay, you got me there. I wouldn't like myself or those around me to be tortured and killed, so, yeah, you got me.

My point still stands though, that is how you fight a war. Of course, if the country is smart, it will never get into a war it can't handle.

Unless its your lot on the receiving end....

You mean like the Israeli's were on the recieving end of the Palistinians? http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/rolleyes.gif

Don't you remember? The Mickey Mouse the Palistinian Goverment BROADCASED?

I'm sorry, I'm sort of new at this, but how do I convey sarcasm?


Like this :rolleyes:.

My point still stands though, that is how you fight a war. Of course, if the country is smart, it will never get into a war it can't handle.

Yes, but as you know until after WWII, the Jews has no country, and thus, no standing military or weapons. Now that they do, it appears they can fight wars quite well.

Yes, but as you know until after WWII, the Jews has no country, and thus, no standing military or weapons. Now that they do, it appears they can fight wars quite well.

Quite well. Although, I wonder, did the Jewish Partisan groups have an effectiveness? (During WWII).

Yes, but as you know until after WWII, the Jews has no country, and thus, no standing military or weapons. Now that they do, it appears they can fight wars quite well.

This remains to be seen. As of this moment, the IDF is geared to fighting an insurrection. If Russia, EU or US, or heck, even China decided it wanted to pancake Israel, it's unlikely to last.

Seems to work pretty well.
Only if you want to be a vandal. That's not the doctrine of someone who wants to 'bring democracy and freedom' and definitely sucks as an operation motto for occupation.


I'm sorry, I'm sort of new at this, but how do I convey sarcasm?


With sarcasm tags.


Okay, you got me there. I wouldn't like myself or those around me to be tortured and killed, so, yeah, you got me.

That's the problem with all you 'might makes right' people. You like the idea it until it's applied to you.

Hypocrite.


My point still stands though, that is how you fight a war. Of course, if the country is smart, it will never get into a war it can't handle.

If American educational standards are any benchmark, on average, it's not smart.

Only if you want to be a vandal. That's not the doctrine of someone who wants to 'bring democracy and freedom' and definitely sucks as an operation motto for occupation.

I said I wanted to bring democracy and freedom to somewhere? When did I say that? Don't put words in my mouth. And, when did I say occupation was good? Ever?

That's the problem with all you 'might makes right' people. You like the idea it until it's applied to you.

Hypocrite.

Actually, ***hole, I actually hadn't really thought about that part. I can be pretty forgetful. But I apologise that you made a good point that I hadn't really thought of.

f American educational standards are any benchmark, on average, it's not smart. Wrong. Bad work ethic. I live there, I would know.

This remains to be seen. As of this moment, the IDF is geared to fighting an insurrection. If Russia, EU or US, or heck, even China decided it wanted to pancake Israel, it's unlikely to last.


I would disagree with that.

Russia: Far too poor. They lost 20 million agaisnt Germany. Israel would kick kick the living Communism outta them.

EU: Too pacifistic. They can't get their ass in gear. They're caught-up in Red-Tape from the U.N., and they couldn't do Iraq (before they pulled-out that is).

U.S.: It's not WWII anymore, the U.S. Is having trouble with terrorists. It's been 5 years in Iraq, and STILL the U.S. having trouble. After the Korean War the U.S. went downhill, and I doubt they'll ever be the same. They could only wina war on their home-turf. Their troops rock, but they can't fight a war due to the goverment.

China: They could send in a lot of troops, but that's about it.. And it's true they have a LOT of money. But eventually, Israel would mobilize the entire populance, and it would become a war of attrition. Israel would be relentless, using the cities and assassins to their advantage. Eventually, it wouldn't be worth it to China, and they would leave Israel alone for the same reasons Britain left America alone. It might come-out like the "War of 1812" at best, but I highly doubt China would "pancake" Israel.

Now, after naming the reasons above, after the Holocaust, the Jews would be extremely reluctant to lose their nation, and on top of that, except for the U.S., Israeli troops are FAR superior to those of the organizations you named.

I said I wanted to bring democracy and freedom to somewhere? When did I say that? Don't put words in my mouth. And, when did I say occupation was good? Ever?

You implied it. My bad if you didn't mean it.


Actually, ***hole, I actually hadn't really thought about that part. I can be pretty forgetful. But I apologise that you made a good point that I hadn't really thought of.

So you're retracting your 'might makes right' statement?


Wrong. Bad work ethic. I live there, I would know.

Like how quite a few complain about foreigners stealing jobs that they refuse to do?

Russia: Far too poor. They lost 20 million agaisnt Germany. Israel would kick kick the living Communism outta them.

Have you been living in the 1940s? They may have lost 20 million against Germany, but they still flattened it. And Russia isn't communist anymore.

Also, Russia has enough conventional weapons to literally flatten Israel. They've got enough tanks and aircraft of sufficient quality to overrun it. And even if they didn't, Russia certainly hasn't any qualms about flattening a city or two with carpet bombing if it's troublesome to invade.

Hell, they don't even need to invade. Just use all those missiles they've been stockpiling, load conventional warheads, and turn Israel's cities and armies into scrap and ruin.


EU: Too pacifistic. They can't get their ass in gear. They're caught-up in Red-Tape from the U.N., and they couldn't do Iraq (before they pulled-out that is).

France, Germany and Italy seem to have made quite a few contributions to peacekeeping corps. And it's not like they couldn't do Iraq. They didn't want to. The bullshit war had nothing in it for them.


U.S.: It's not WWII anymore, the U.S. Is having trouble with terrorists. It's been 5 years in Iraq, and STILL the U.S. having trouble. After the Korean War the U.S. went downhill, and I doubt they'll ever be the same. They could only wina war on their home-turf. Their troops rock, but they can't fight a war due to the goverment.

Newsflash. The US army is geared towards Cold War era fighting. That means big armies against big armies. It sucks at peacekeeping and anti-insurgency operations. But against the IDF's army, there's no way Israel has even a snowballs chance in a volcano.


China: They could send in a lot of troops, but that's about it.. And it's true they have a LOT of money. But eventually, Israel would mobilize the entire populance, and it would become a war of attrition. Israel would be relentless, using the cities and assassins to their advantage. Eventually, it wouldn't be worth it to China, and they would leave Israel alone for the same reasons Britain left America alone. It might come-out like the "War of 1812" at best, but I highly doubt China would "pancake" Israel.

China has more than just infantry. They do have tanks, aircraft, artillery and more importantly, a hell of a lot of missiles currently pointed at Taiwan. If they think Israel is more important, they'll redirect those missiles at Tel Aviv and turn it into a burning hell.

As for Israeli assassins, lol! The Mossad may be effective at low level ops, but you're crazy if you think they can affect high level staff.

If China wants occupation, it can effectively round up all Israeli's and put them into camps. Or cordon off the cities and slap them under martial law. China has the numbers to lock them down like a drum.

China has no qualms about quashing revolts ruthlessly.


Now, after naming the reasons above, after the Holocaust, the Jews would be extremely reluctant to lose their nation, and on top of that, except for the U.S., Israeli troops are FAR superior to those of the organizations you named.

Far superior in what sense? Did Israel start a super soldier program when I wasn't looking? IDF troops are all versed in policing and generally fighting against poorer equipped soldiers.

Against equally equipped troops, superior numbers and a motivated force, they're likely to lose badly.

Of all the nations listed, perhaps only the EU won't start with massive bombing and missile strikes. The initial losses to the IDF would be massive.

Have you been living in the 1940s? They may have lost 20 million against Germany, but they still flattened it. And Russia isn't communist anymore.

It's true Russia flattened Germany. But they did for the same reason they flattened Napoleon. If they weren't fighting in Russia itself, they'd lose. Oh, sure they have lots of populance, and plenty of weapons, but unless you are saying they would NUKE Israel, they'd most likely lose.
Although they're not Communist anymore, they still need to repair internally.

Also, Russia has enough conventional weapons to literally flatten Israel. They've got enough tanks and aircraft of sufficient quality to overrun it. And even if they didn't, Russia certainly hasn't any qualms about flattening a city or two with carpet bombing if it's troublesome to invade.

Israel doesn't have problems with carpet bombing either. And I would say that as good as Russian equipment is, Israeli is better.

Hell, they don't even need to invade. Just use all those missiles they've been stockpiling, load conventional warheads, and turn Israel's cities and armies into scrap and ruin.

I doubt Russia would do that. They would end up in a ranged missle war with Israel, and Israel has much more experiance in that department.

France, Germany and Italy seem to have made quite a few contributions to peacekeeping corps. And it's not like they couldn't do Iraq. They didn't want to. The bullshit war had nothing in it for them.

Agreed that the war had noting for Italy and Germany. However, I don't see how "peackeeping corps" has anything to do with a real all-out war.

Newsflash. The US army is geared towards Cold War era fighting. That means big armies against big armies. It sucks at peacekeeping and anti-insurgency operations. But against the IDF's army, there's no way Israel has even a snowballs chance in a volcano.

Wrong. Israel would almost certainly use guerrilla tactic against them, which have been proven from Vietnam and Iraq they can't overcome. Remember Japan? The only reason the U.S. won (well, sorry they already had won, Japan just wouldn't agree to it. I would say got their enemy to capitulate) is because they Nuked Japan. I honestly don't think the U.S. would Nuke Israel.

China has more than just infantry. They do have tanks, aircraft, artillery and more importantly, a hell of a lot of missiles currently pointed at Taiwan. If they think Israel is more important, they'll redirect those missiles at Tel Aviv and turn it into a burning hell.

So boom-boom? I already explained about that above in Russia's case.

As for Israeli assassins, lol! The Mossad may be effective at low level ops, but you're crazy if you think they can affect high level staff.

Perhaps.... But why do you think they couldn't? Surely you must admit they have the best Secret Service in the world (at present that is).

If China wants occupation, it can effectively round up all Israeli's and put them into camps. Or cordon off the cities and slap them under martial law. China has the numbers to lock them down like a drum.
China has no qualms about quashing revolts ruthlessly.

It would be like Vietnam meets the Roman occupation of Israel. Sure, China could "lock-down" Israel, but just like the Romans, they would suffer a fully-flledged rebillion every year, despite their ruthlessness.

Far superior in what sense? Did Israel start a super soldier program when I wasn't looking? IDF troops are all versed in policing and generally fighting against poorer equipped soldiers.

Wrong. Next to the U.S., their training is the best on the planet. Their troops are highly efficient against all forms of enemies. Also, they stand equiped with some excellent weapons. Also remember: THEIR WILL TO FIGHT these days is stronger then China, the EU, the U.S. (Goverment and populance wise, not troop-wise), and Russia all put-together.

Against equally equipped troops, superior numbers and a motivated force, they're likely to lose badly.

Once agian they would their mobilize their nation, and NO-ONE is more motivated then the IDF.

Of all the nations listed, perhaps only the EU won't start with massive bombing and missile strikes. The initial losses to the IDF would be massive.

The U.S. proved that they don't "massive bomb" with the invasion of Iraq. If they did they would have won by now. As for initial Israeli losses, I totally agree with you there. But the Isrealis would, once agian: etrench themselves EVERYWHERE, and fire missle back like crazy, and would fight-like-Hell. Of all your points, I don't see any of them EXCEPT the missle/bomb one, which is highly viable.

It's true Russia flattened Germany. But they did for the same reason they flattened Napoleon. If they weren't fighting in Russia itself, they'd lose. Oh, sure they have lots of populance, and plenty of weapons, but unless you are saying they would NUKE Israel, they'd most likely lose.
Although they're not Communist anymore, they still need to repair internally.


Funny. I don't remember Berlin being in Russia when Soviet troops waved the flag above the Reichstag. And let's not use 60 year old examples. It's retarded.


Israel doesn't have problems with carpet bombing either. And I would say that as good as Russian equipment is, Israeli is better.

Russia has the numbers in both manpower and resources to overwhelm Israeli advantage. If Russia gears for a war economy, you can bet they'd thump the IDF down and hard.

Besides, Russia is logistically capable of reaching into Israel. The same cannot be said of the converse unless we take ICBMs and nuclear warheads, in which case, Israel loses.


I doubt Russia would do that. They would end up in a ranged missle war with Israel, and Israel has much more experiance in that department.


Russian Topol-Ms beat the pants off any existing ICBM defense platform and they're cheap to make compared to other ICBMs.


Agreed that the war had noting for Italy and Germany. However, I don't see how "peackeeping corps" has anything to do with a real all-out war.


No, you just pulled in Iraq, so I figured I'd point out there was no reason for them to invade.


Wrong. Israel would almost certainly use guerrilla tactic against them, which have been proven from Vietnam and Iraq they can't overcome. Remember Japan? The only reason the U.S. won (well, sorry they already had won, Japan just wouldn't agree to it. I would say got their enemy to capitulate) is because they Nuked Japan. I honestly don't think the U.S. would Nuke Israel.


No, but if the US wanted to go in and break stuff, the IDF hasn't got a chance of stopping them. They simply have too much gear. And let's not forget that the US controls the current GPS network. With that advantage, the US can easily strike key IDF assets. With the loss of munitions dumps, military bases and airfields, they'd be crippled.


So boom-boom? I already explained about that above in Russia's case.


Israel is suspected of having what, one or two nuclear warheads? How many ICBMs have they got with the range to hit China? Again, not many. China on the other hand, has hundreds of the damn things.


Perhaps.... But why do you think they couldn't? Surely you must admit they have the best Secret Service in the world (at present that is).


A secret service isn't going to change the course of a war single handedly. Unless you can somehow replace the entire leadership of the opposing government.


It would be like Vietnam meets the Roman occupation of Israel. Sure, China could "lock-down" Israel, but just like the Romans, they would suffer a fully-flledged rebillion every year, despite their ruthlessness.


A rebellion is easily quashed when they don't have the assets to stop incendiary bombing.


Wrong. Next to the U.S., their training is the best on the planet. Their troops are highly efficient against all forms of enemies.

This has yet to be proven short of a wargame involving the nations listed. And that just hasn't happened to date.


Also, they stand equiped with some excellent weapons. Also remember: THEIR WILL TO FIGHT these days is stronger then China, the EU, the U.S. (Goverment and populance wise, not troop-wise), and Russia all put-together.

Once agian they would their mobilize their nation, and NO-ONE is more motivated then the IDF.


This is an unproven statement. And there is no effective way to measure motivation.


The U.S. proved that they don't "massive bomb" with the invasion of Iraq. If they did they would have won by now. As for initial Israeli losses, I totally agree with you there.

The US didn't "massively bomb" Iraq because there wasn't much left to bomb. Strikes during the first gulf war, as well as subsequent air raids by America has pretty much rendered any infrastructure worth bombing minimal at best.


But the Isrealis would, once agian: etrench themselves EVERYWHERE, and fire missle back like crazy, and would fight-like-Hell. Of all your points, I don't see any of them EXCEPT the missle/bomb one, which is highly viable.

Israel has a population of roughly 7 million. An initial strike on a superpower's level would turn that 7 million into a fraction of what it is. After that, the remaining survivors can be swept up by the ground forces. Also, you are grossly overestimating the resistance factor.

Some will resist and start guerrilla groups, certainly. These will most likely come from the remaining IDF units and assorted individuals. Most of the surviving citizenry won't, especially if the war is not one of extinction but occupation. And then there will be the collaborators.

Lastly, Israel doesn't have that many long range missiles with the range to strike any of the listed countries. They aren't cheap you know. Use of nuclear arms, even defensively, will mean an utter loss to Israel due to their small landmass. A handful of retaliatory nuclear strikes will render Israel a wasteland.

Funny. I don't remember Berlin being in Russia when Soviet troops waved the flag above the Reichstag. And let's not use 60 year old examples. It's retarded.



Russia has the numbers in both manpower and resources to overwhelm Israeli advantage. If Russia gears for a war economy, you can bet they'd thump the IDF down and hard.

Besides, Russia is logistically capable of reaching into Israel. The same cannot be said of the converse unless we take ICBMs and nuclear warheads, in which case, Israel loses.



Russian Topol-Ms beat the pants off any existing ICBM defense platform and they're cheap to make compared to other ICBMs.



No, you just pulled in Iraq, so I figured I'd point out there was no reason for them to invade.



No, but if the US wanted to go in and break stuff, the IDF hasn't got a chance of stopping them. They simply have too much gear. And let's not forget that the US controls the current GPS network. With that advantage, the US can easily strike key IDF assets. With the loss of munitions dumps, military bases and airfields, they'd be crippled.



Israel is suspected of having what, one or two nuclear warheads? How many ICBMs have they got with the range to hit China? Again, not many. China on the other hand, has hundreds of the damn things.



A secret service isn't going to change the course of a war single handedly. Unless you can somehow replace the entire leadership of the opposing government.



A rebellion is easily quashed when they don't have the assets to stop incendiary bombing.



This has yet to be proven short of a wargame involving the nations listed. And that just hasn't happened to date.



This is an unproven statement. And there is no effective way to measure motivation.



The US didn't "massively bomb" Iraq because there wasn't much left to bomb. Strikes during the first gulf war, as well as subsequent air raids by America has pretty much rendered any infrastructure worth bombing minimal at best.



Israel has a population of roughly 7 million. An initial strike on a superpower's level would turn that 7 million into a fraction of what it is. After that, the remaining survivors can be swept up by the ground forces. Also, you are grossly overestimating the resistance factor.

Some will resist and start guerrilla groups, certainly. These will most likely come from the remaining IDF units and assorted individuals. Most of the surviving citizenry won't, especially if the war is not one of extinction but occupation. And then there will be the collaborators.

Lastly, Israel doesn't have that many long range missiles with the range to strike any of the listed countries. They aren't cheap you know. Use of nuclear arms, even defensively, will mean an utter loss to Israel due to their small landmass. A handful of retaliatory nuclear strikes will render Israel a wasteland.


Allright, you win IF it comes to nukes. You keep bringing-up nukes like they're used regularly...they aren't used at-all. And Israel WOULD have more land-mass if they'd quick giving it back after winning....:(

Allright, you win IF it comes to nukes. You keep bringing-up nukes like they're used regularly...they aren't used at-all. And Israel WOULD have more land-mass if they'd quick giving it back after winning....:(

Nukes are the only effective way Israel has to damage the infrastructure of any of the major nations listed. Without that, it loses a war of attrition. It just doesn't have the manpower.

And why the heck would they have more land mass? Who said they'd be getting it back?

Nukes are the only effective way Israel has to damage the infrastructure of any of the major nations listed. Without that, it loses a war of attrition. It just doesn't have the manpower.

We're assuming an invaision of Israel.

And why the heck would they have more land mass? Who said they'd be getting it back?

Eh? You do understand that Israel gave back a considerable amount of land over the years to nations it had wars with, don't you?

We're assuming an invaision of Israel.


And if Israel cannot damage the war infrastructure of the invading nation, who has numerical superiority, it loses.


Eh? You do understand that Israel gave back a considerable amount of land over the years to nations it had wars with, don't you?

You're assuming Israel would not only win, but take land in the countries that invade it. A laughable scenario at least.

You mean like the Israeli's were on the recieving end of the Palistinians? http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/rolleyes.gif

Don't you remember? The Mickey Mouse the Palistinian Goverment BROADCASED?

O NOESSS!!111!!!1 NOT TEH ISLAMIK MOUSESEZ!!!

Just to point out also that its the Israelis who are occupying the West Bank, Arab East Jerusalem and controlling Gaza. Its also the Israelis attempting to colonise Arab East Jerusalem and the West Bank. That makes them the aggressor.


Wrong. Next to the U.S., their training is the best on the planet. Their troops are highly efficient against all forms of enemies.?

Indeed. Years of picking off skittish school girls has made their snipers very formidable....

And if Israel cannot damage the war infrastructure of the invading nation, who has numerical superiority, it loses.

Just like Vietnam did with the U.S. :rolleyes:

You're assuming Israel would not only win, but take land in the countries that invade it. A laughable scenario at least.

Hmm? OH NO! Not THESE nations, surely NOT. I'm refering to the other Middle-East nations that attacked her. You said Israel was small, and I simply said she wouldn't be if she didn't give-back so much land.

Just like Vietnam did with the U.S. :rolleyes:

I do not have the exact number of available Vietnamese fighters and US soldiers at the time of the conflict. Besides, in this case, Russia and China would haul off all the people it could find to camps until the area was pacified. Neither have an image of "protector of liberty and justice" to uphold and prevent their brutality.


Hmm? OH NO! Not THESE nations, surely NOT. I'm refering to the other Middle-East nations that attacked her. You said Israel was small, and I simply said she wouldn't be if she didn't give-back so much land.

Ah, in that case, Israel would still lose. The land it gained is certainly not enough to make even a handful of nuclear strikes so utterly devastating as to make it a barren wasteland.

It is to be noted that Israeli citizens are abused in these prisons as well.

It is to be noted that Israeli citizens are abused in these prisons as well.

Not to the same extent. There are 'special' methods and rules applying to Arabs from the occupied territories that do not apply to Israelis.

I am a warhawk and think that any enemy of the Jews or of Israel should be killed. However, I am no fan of torture. It makes me sad that these folks are being tortured. I think that torture is not a Jewish thing to do.

I rejoice at the death of the enemies of Israel yet I am saddened when any person or animal suffers fear or pain.

Not to the same extent. There are 'special' methods and rules applying to Arabs from the occupied territories that do not apply to Israelis.


At least that's what the .gov.il wants us to think.

At least that's what the .gov.il wants us to think.

Its entirely possible that a certain 'brutalising' effect takes place and seeps through into internal civillian policing within Israel...but its not something I can profess a knowledge of.

Its entirely possible that a certain 'brutalising' effect takes place and seeps through into internal civillian policing within Israel...but its not something I can profess a knowledge of.


The very people who patrol the borders and beat on Palestinians also serve as paramilitary police inside the country itself. What do you think that does?

You implied it. My bad if you didn't mean it.
How did I imply it? I simply said that they were fighting a war in a way a war should be fought.


So you're retracting your 'might makes right' statement?

Yes. Thank you for pointing out the fallacy of my notion.

Like how quite a few complain about foreigners stealing jobs that they refuse to do?

Yes.