Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
The U.N., after almost a year released their report on war crimes committed by both Palestinians and Israeli's during the most recent conflict between the two.
The biggest problem I can spot with the report is how it states facts in the report but then if you read the article you notice this.
"The investigators were not granted entry to Israel or the conflict area, and relied instead on more than 280 confidential interviews and some 500 written submissions for their findings."
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying either side was innocent of war crimes but historically we have seen that Hamas has no reservations whatsoever or lying openly about casualties both incurred and dealt.
I do know that the Israeli system for launching air strikes/artillery against civilian buildings involved Warnings including Phone calls, Text messages, loud speakers hailing residents and finally a knock on the door as its called which is basically a mortar landing in front of the building which is the last warning before the destruction of the building.
Now, whether or not Israel followed that system all the way is another matter entirely.
I do think it a bit telling that Israel has called this investigation an attack against them from the very start while Hamas has largely supported it, and yet we now learn that the investigation wasn't even in the countries in question.......
I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you mess with me, I'll kill you all
Marine General James Mattis, to Iraqi tribal leaders
Kilkrazy wrote: You have to assume that all Palestinians are mind controlled by Hamas to dismiss witness testimony as worthless.
There is also evidence in the form of photos and video, hospital admissions records and so on. Of course it is possible that Hamas faked all of that.
Perhaps they even faked Israeli forces press releases about strikes launched, and so on.
im not saying they are all brainwashed, but the fact that Israel found weapons Cache's inside UN compounds worries me, especially since the UN didn't bother to mention that to anyone prior to the war.
I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you mess with me, I'll kill you all
Marine General James Mattis, to Iraqi tribal leaders
Kilkrazy wrote: Perhaps they didn't know it was there. Even if they did, how does that affect the evidence?
Unless the implication is that all of the UN people are lying about stuff.
How would the U.N. not know that palestinians were caching weapons in UN buildings/compounds? The problem is that the UN turned a blind eye to many violations such as this and then after the war ended they try to blame Israel with war crimes.
I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you mess with me, I'll kill you all
Marine General James Mattis, to Iraqi tribal leaders
Kilkrazy wrote: Perhaps they didn't know it was there. Even if they did, how does that affect the evidence?
Unless the implication is that all of the UN people are lying about stuff.
The UN has a history of aiding terrorist organizations. Hezbollah used to routinely do command and control in Southern Lebanon from UN posts, after the IDF's withdrawal.
How is it that these UN personnel don't know that terrorist organizations are storing weapons in their staffed and allegedly secure facilities? It takes a special kind of person to believe that such a thing is possible, and that the UN are unbiased angels.
I don't think there are any "good" or "bad" guys down there.
I'm pretty sire the middle east cares more about destroying Israel than looking like bad guys, and I'm pretty sure Israel cares more about not being destroyed than about looking like good guys.
I am the Hammer. I am the right hand of my Emperor. I am the tip of His spear, I am the gauntlet about His fist. I am the woes of daemonkind. I am the Hammer.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: So the UN is a biased organization but Benjamin Netanyahu isn't?
This is going to be one of those threads, isn't it?
Of course he's biased - toward protecting the 8-million+ citizens of Israel, just as any elected representative has a responsibility to work to protect their constituents.
The UN is supposed to be, yet fails miserably in actually being, an impartial international body that can effect change.
Kilkrazy wrote: Perhaps they didn't know it was there. Even if they did, how does that affect the evidence?
Unless the implication is that all of the UN people are lying about stuff.
The UN has a history of aiding terrorist organizations. Hezbollah used to routinely do command and control in Southern Lebanon from UN posts, after the IDF's withdrawal.
How is it that these UN personnel don't know that terrorist organizations are storing weapons in their staffed and allegedly secure facilities? It takes a special kind of person to believe that such a thing is possible, and that the UN are unbiased angels.
A special kind of person? Now you've put that Sam Elliot meme in my mind!
I’ll just say one quick thing on this whole issue - I believe in the importance of a Jewish state because they have a long history of persecution at the hands of other groups. It would be nice if we didn’t need ethnic homelands, but this world isn’t a nice place in a whole lot of ways.
But everything I just said also applies to the Palestinians. The whole issue, therefore, has to be seen in the context of delivering to both sides viable nations. Unfortunately very few people actually get that, and missing that understanding they instead pick one side and spend their time arguing that it’s the other side who’s the real problem in this whole issue. After years of trying to engage with people on this I’ve ultimately got nothing but contempt for the tribal cheerleaders on both sides, and no expectation that anything I said could ever make any of them take a more reasonable view.
And that includes almost all the conversation I’ve seen around this UN report, here on Dakka and elsewhere. Bickering about whether one side or the other is really more responsible, whether the UN is more biased to one side or the other – it’s so small minded it’s just hateful.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
The tragedy is that nothing will happen, Israel is a too big ally in the middle east for the US of A, so the extermination of the Palestine people will continue, The UN is a joke.
And blame? i Blame the English government who did not comply to the promise made to the Berbers after the Arab revolt was over, The Arabs, Christians and Jews were living in peace during those days and the Balfour Declaration was the beginning of the crap storm we are in today.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: So the UN is a biased organization but Benjamin Netanyahu isn't?
Who made that claim?
Implicitly, by condoning one biased actor (Netanyahu) telling another (the UN) to stuff it.
In the interest of full disclosure, I tent to lean towards what could be described as pro-Palestinian, but the entire situation is fethed up and isn't going to be solved while both sides want each other dead.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: So the UN is a biased organization but Benjamin Netanyahu isn't?
Who made that claim?
Implicitly, by condoning one biased actor (Netanyahu) telling another (the UN) to stuff it.
In the interest of full disclosure, I tent to lean towards what could be described as pro-Palestinian, but the entire situation is fethed up and isn't going to be solved while both sides want each other dead.
So would it be fair to say that no one said it, but you inferred it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/24 10:26:30
Jehan-reznor wrote: The tragedy is that nothing will happen, Israel is a too big ally in the middle east for the US of A, so the extermination of the Palestine people will continue, The UN is a joke.
And blame? i Blame the English government who did not comply to the promise made to the Berbers after the Arab revolt was over, The Arabs, Christians and Jews were living in peace during those days and the Balfour Declaration was the beginning of the crap storm we are in today.
Extermination...
Hard to have serious discussion when words like that are being thrown around.
Jehan-reznor wrote: The tragedy is that nothing will happen, Israel is a too big ally in the middle east for the US of A, so the extermination of the Palestine people will continue, The UN is a joke.
Interestingly enough, that extermination has led UNRWA refugees to grow in population more than 5 times their original number. That growth is not due to new refugees. It is due to population growth and how UNRWA considers folks married into refugee families (and their decedents) as refugees. Even if they have lived in UNRWA run cities for generations at this point.
I guess it is a good thing the Israelis are so incompetent at this extermination...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/24 12:03:29
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: So the UN is a biased organization but Benjamin Netanyahu isn't?
Who made that claim?
Implicitly, by condoning one biased actor (Netanyahu) telling another (the UN) to stuff it.
In the interest of full disclosure, I tent to lean towards what could be described as pro-Palestinian, but the entire situation is fethed up and isn't going to be solved while both sides want each other dead.
So would it be fair to say that no one said it, but you inferred it.
Well, either people are assuming that Netanyahu isn't biased, or people know that Netanyahu is biased but are letting him get away with it while attacking the UN. I simply assumed the least damning one of the two. If I cited Putin while claiming that there were no Russian soldiers in Ukraine I'd be (righly) laughed out of the thread, yet apparently Netanyahu categorically denying any war crimes whatsoever on part of the Israelis is credible enough that people approve of his message.
Further, there's a metric crap-ton of "oh, they're just biased against Israel as usual" and "bad people are on the human rights council, so they don't matter" in this thread. If those were directed against people they'd be ad hominem attacks. No one's actually criticizing the contents of the report, you're all just assuming that it's wrong because of who wrote it.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
Jehan-reznor wrote: The tragedy is that nothing will happen, Israel is a too big ally in the middle east for the US of A, so the extermination of the Palestine people will continue, The UN is a joke.
And blame? i Blame the English government who did not comply to the promise made to the Berbers after the Arab revolt was over, The Arabs, Christians and Jews were living in peace during those days and the Balfour Declaration was the beginning of the crap storm we are in today.
The US isn't what keeps Israel as a country, at this point its the US that keeps Israel from taking over the rest of the Arab peninsula. If the 6 day war and the Yom Kippur war are anything to go by they are more then capable of carrying out that mission if provoked....again.
I come in peace. I didn't bring artillery. But I'm pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you mess with me, I'll kill you all
Marine General James Mattis, to Iraqi tribal leaders
Jehan-reznor wrote: The tragedy is that nothing will happen, Israel is a too big ally in the middle east for the US of A, so the extermination of the Palestine people will continue, The UN is a joke.
And blame? i Blame the English government who did not comply to the promise made to the Berbers after the Arab revolt was over, The Arabs, Christians and Jews were living in peace during those days and the Balfour Declaration was the beginning of the crap storm we are in today.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: So the UN is a biased organization but Benjamin Netanyahu isn't?
Who made that claim?
Implicitly, by condoning one biased actor (Netanyahu) telling another (the UN) to stuff it.
In the interest of full disclosure, I tent to lean towards what could be described as pro-Palestinian, but the entire situation is fethed up and isn't going to be solved while both sides want each other dead.
So would it be fair to say that no one said it, but you inferred it.
Well, either people are assuming that Netanyahu isn't biased, or people know that Netanyahu is biased but are letting him get away with it while attacking the UN. I simply assumed the least damning one of the two. If I cited Putin while claiming that there were no Russian soldiers in Ukraine I'd be (righly) laughed out of the thread, yet apparently Netanyahu categorically denying any war crimes whatsoever on part of the Israelis is credible enough that people approve of his message.
Further, there's a metric crap-ton of "oh, they're just biased against Israel as usual" and "bad people are on the human rights council, so they don't matter" in this thread. If those were directed against people they'd be ad hominem attacks. No one's actually criticizing the contents of the report, you're all just assuming that it's wrong because of who wrote it.
...and the fact that the report contains no substantive objective data. All of their information was derived from interviews, mostly conducted remotely IIRC.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/06/24 13:43:29
And Israel, in turn, came about as a result of a terror campaign in what was then the British Mandate of Palestine. The right of conquest really shouldn't have any bearing in a modern setting.
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
AlmightyWalrus wrote: And Israel, in turn, came about as a result of a terror campaign in what was then the British Mandate of Palestine. The right of conquest really shouldn't have any bearing in a modern setting.
Sooo... then what? The Isreali should pack up and leave?
AlmightyWalrus wrote: And Israel, in turn, came about as a result of a terror campaign in what was then the British Mandate of Palestine. The right of conquest really shouldn't have any bearing in a modern setting.
Sooo... then what? The Isreali should pack up and leave?
It is too late for that but the systematic land grab should stop, and look with all that land lost, what happened to the people?
For millenia the Jews have been oppressed but now the oppressed have become the Oppressor.
