&quot;aid&quot; ships

4 Jun 2010

Quote by brucie
why are some here so willing to believe the "activists" side so easily?

I dunno if the 'some' there would include me, but why does it have to be about 'sides' Brucie? As far as I'm concerned Israel were in the wrong on this as far as the course of action they chose to take goes. That doesn't necessarily put me on the side of the activists, does it? confused

N x x x ;)

4 Jun 2010

Quote by Plimboy
the international waters thing is a red herring. so fucking what.

I am inclined to agree. It didn't stop us sinking the Argentine cruiser "General Belgrano" during the Falklands war when it was outside the official war zone. It was heading towards the zone just as these ships were heading towards Gaza and it was felt necessary to deal with the threat sooner rather than later.
Consequently, I don't have a problem with the interception as such - rather what happened during the action and the way it happened - so many civilan fatalities is not acceptable against heavily armed professional solders/marines.
Plim :sad:
As I remember it the fuss about the Belgrano was because it was headed away from the exclusion zone....sorry to digress...I'll be back

4 Jun 2010

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
the international waters thing is a red herring. so fucking what.

I am inclined to agree. It didn't stop us sinking the Argentine cruiser "General Belgrano" during the Falklands war when it was outside the official war zone. It was heading towards the zone just as these ships were heading towards Gaza and it was felt necessary to deal with the threat sooner rather than later.
Consequently, I don't have a problem with the interception as such - rather what happened during the action and the way it happened - so many civilan fatalities is not acceptable against heavily armed professional solders/marines.
Plim :sad:
As I remember it the fuss about the Belgrano was because it was headed away from the exclusion zone....sorry to digress...I'll be back
It was heading away at the time, however it had been heading towards, then away, then towards, then away, etc.............it is a strategic manouever by a warship so that anybody watching does not know its intentions. They went to sea for a reason.......it was fully armed and it wasn't for sea trials. We will never know its true intentions.
Dave_Notts

5 Jun 2010

Quote by Dave__Notts
the international waters thing is a red herring. so fucking what.

I am inclined to agree. It didn't stop us sinking the Argentine cruiser "General Belgrano" during the Falklands war when it was outside the official war zone. It was heading towards the zone just as these ships were heading towards Gaza and it was felt necessary to deal with the threat sooner rather than later.
Consequently, I don't have a problem with the interception as such - rather what happened during the action and the way it happened - so many civilan fatalities is not acceptable against heavily armed professional solders/marines.
Plim :sad:
As I remember it the fuss about the Belgrano was because it was headed away from the exclusion zone....sorry to digress...I'll be back
It was heading away at the time, however it had been heading towards, then away, then towards, then away, etc.............it is a strategic manouever by a warship so that anybody watching does not know its intentions. They went to sea for a reason.......it was fully armed and it wasn't for sea trials. We will never know its true intentions.
Dave_Notts
Thank's Dave. I had forgotten that (advancing years and all that) should have chosen my words more carefully re reference to current conflict! The point re the Belgrano was when your Country is at war you don't send a warship out to the area by co-incidence to do sightseeing, so surely it was a legitimate target - it's not like a game of football where the goalkeeper has to wait till the ball is in his area before he can handle it - you defending people's lives. Another point raised by the Royal Navy as I now recall was that as the Belgrano was a traditional warship she had bigger guns that the modern missile and aircraft carriers in our fleet and in the nature of that particular conflict presented an abnormal threat.
However, this (international waters) is probably not the main point in the Gaza situation, so will reply separately to another issue raised by a poster.
Plim

5 Jun 2010

Quote by foxylady2209
Isn't the point that the blockade is simply wrong (I don't know if it has been banned by teh UN and therefore illegal) and breaking it is a good thing, and stopping people breaking it is a bad thing?

Mmm, there is right and wrong on both sides, but the blockade is one of two points that tips this in favour of Gaza/Palestine - the other to me appears to be the continual pushing of the land boundaries by force by Israel.
Plim

5 Jun 2010

One thing that no-one has mentioned is that until this incident, Egypt also had an embargo on Gaza. It's not just the Israelis who want Hamas kept under control - Egypt has fought a long battle against its own Islamic militants and the last thing it wants is an aggressively fundamentalist statelet on its border.

6 Jun 2010

Quote by brucie
One thing that no-one has mentioned is that until this incident, Egypt also had an embargo on Gaza. It's not just the Israelis who want Hamas kept under control - Egypt has fought a long battle against its own Islamic militants and the last thing it wants is an aggressively fundamentalist statelet on its border.

ssshhhhhh! the palestinians are peace loving and tolerant.
bad bad israel.
Is every Palestinian bad then?
Dave_Notts

6 Jun 2010

There is only one way this conflict we come to an end, and that is when both sides sit around a table and start to talk, will this ever happen, I am not sure.

6 Jun 2010

Quote by brucie
One thing that no-one has mentioned is that until this incident, Egypt also had an embargo on Gaza. It's not just the Israelis who want Hamas kept under control - Egypt has fought a long battle against its own Islamic militants and the last thing it wants is an aggressively fundamentalist statelet on its border.

ssshhhhhh! the palestinians are peace loving and tolerant.
bad bad israel.
I have found there are two sides to this.
After what Israel along with America and Britain included have done to Palestine, is it really any wonder they are angry?
Check the history Brucie of Palestine and how Israel got the land.
If you think that is ok how would you feel if I came along and stole your car? Be happy about it would you?

7 Jun 2010

i read this twice and still no the wiser as to who is the rightfull owner of the land

7 Jun 2010

Quote by brucie

Check the history

kenty, history is written by the victors. the books i read all say that teh jews were promised the land of israel by god thousands of years ago. ;-)
seriously, as you say both sides have legitimate arguments and both sides commited atrocities against the other over the years. history shmistory basically.
you now have a situation where there is only one solution, peaceful co existance. that cant happen whilst one side say that they will not rest until teh otehr is destroyed. and unfortunately in this instance its not just rhetoric.
forget your car kenty, *if i came round to kill you, your wife and your children would you just offer me half your house and garden or would you do everything you could to stop me being in the position of doing it?
**the day the palestinians realise that the choice is theirs and that maybe they will have to settle for less than they believe they deserve will be the day their fortunes start to turn.
they need to start being smart, not just "right". or they can carry on as they are becaus eno one of any real consequence gives a toss about them. trust me, what teh british governement or teh EU think about teh whole mess doesnt even make the front page in israel. teh british dont like it but their opinion has become totally irrelevant on teh world stage.
that may not sound very "fair" but life isnt always "fair", if it was "fair" it would be called "fair " and not "life"...
*Is this analogy not equally applicable to both sides ?
**The problem is that Israel has put the Palestinian people in a position where they have nothing to lose...if you face/see death every day life tends to lose it's allure, life on the other side of the wall must look a very attractive proposition and if you have nothing to lose what reason would you have for not trying to get a bit of that life for yourself....the Israeli's have to give something the Palestinians want to keep and until that happens volunteer suicide bombers will still be easy to find.

7 Jun 2010

8 Jun 2010

Quote by brucie

**The problem is that Israel has put the Palestinian people in a position where they have nothing to lose...if you face/see death every day life tends to lose it's allure, life on the other side of the wall must look a very attractive proposition and if you have nothing to lose what reason would you have for not trying to get a bit of that life for yourself....the Israeli's have to give something the Palestinians want to keep and until that happens volunteer suicide bombers will still be easy to find.

1 firstly the palestinians position is not just the fault of israel. to understand why the palestinians are where they are now you need to also look at their treatment in jordan (black september) and Lebanon amongst other arab countries. and also more importantly at some of the choices they have made as a people. had their arab brothers chosen, gaza could have been the new dubai. and then no one would allow a minority to provoke israel.
2 secondly, whilst i sympathise with their plight, they still havea choice. they can choose to compromise, work hard and reach economic parity with their neighbours. or they can choose to become suicide bombers. ofcourse you will say that they are desperate. but i dont recall the majority of black americans choosing suicide bombings over social change in the 60s. and their conditions were desperate.
3 finally, i dont believe the suicide bombiers do so because of the dire economic circumstances. it is religious doctrine. and i dont accept that the blockade drives them to that religious doctrine because the 9/11 bombers were not driven to their acts because of economic desperation. they were driven by hate and intolerence.
1I understand that The Israeli's are not not soley responsible for the position the Palestinians are in,they are however largely responsible for keeping them in penury,they are responsible for building illegal settlements on prime agricultural land all over Gaza and the west Bank, displacing Palestinian farmers in the can't in all honesty deny the major role played by Israel in the impoverishment of the Palestinian people.
2 They do indeed have a choice..so does Israel it can choose to comply with all UN seems your idea of Palestinian compromise is much akin to capitulation to Israeli occupation of Palestinian land....negotiation and compromise HAVE to come from both sides,would you expect any other country or people to give up their land ? should the invasion of Kuwait for example have been ignored by the world and the Kuwaiti people in the name of compromise ? Should The Allies have reached a compromise with nazi Germany over their invasion of Czechoslovakia and Poland ?
3I agree that fundamentalist doctrine is the method used to recruit mujahideen of all types from suicide bombers to foot-soldiers,I don't agree with the idea that poverty has nothing to do with their recruitment,poverty breeds extremes religious and nationalist,the most fertile ground for any revolution is in the slums.I don't agree that it is Islamic doctrine that creates suicide bombers any more than I believe that the crusades where a result of christian doctrine,both are examples of the political misinterpretation of religious texts...as I always say religion is a political tool nothing more or less

8 Jun 2010

Quote by brucie
israel would win both the "we were here first" and the "its our holiest place and your 3rd holiest place" arguments.

Neither muslim or jewish would win the "we were here first"...both Canaanites and Philistines beat them to it.
It's important to note that Palestinians and the original jewish settlers of Israel (12th/13th century B.C.) are essentially the same ethnic problems of Judea (for the sake of neutrality) are purely religious and religion is bollocks.
I found this enlightening

8 Jun 2010

israel would win . . . the "we were here first" argument

Unfortunately Brucie, that's a bit of a shaky claim, ain't it? I seem to recall bits of the Old Testament banging on and on about Canaanites, and tent pegs in skulls, and the jaw of an ass and what have you in the early days of the promised land? Unless you're talking about Pre-Mosaic times before bondage in Egypt, at which point the Jews as a people didn't really exist, and were still pretty much just nomadic tribe of semitic people? confused

Brucie, some people would say that the reason Israel is now dealing with a militant organisation like Hamas in Gaza is because the less miltant Fatah, quite deliberately, were allowed to get nowhere. It seems the people of Gaza looked to Hamas, not because the majority are militant Islamists desperate for a bit of Sharia law, or because they really want to see Israel wiped off the face of the map, but because they're tired of waiting for political solutions that are going nowhere.
Fatah are still ostensibly in charge of the West Bank, where Israel really do have goals, Hamas is in charge of the bits they don't want. Some people would argue that a near civil war between them suits Israel fine, and serves their purpose. A permanent state of so-called 'war' to the west of them is a useful tool, as is a massively weakened Fatah to the east, and negotiations re: one / two state solutions now have to deal with two organisations that are at each other's throats. It does look a bit like classic divide and rule?
What are your thoughts on that? I'm not a conspiracy theorist, trust me. I'm genuinely interested in your take on it?
N x x x ;)

9 Jun 2010

Quote by brucie
please please please you lot, stop being so fucking naive about the middle east.
the only people who really care about the welfare of the civilians of gaza live in highgate!
ill ask you a question or two.
do you believe that if israel dropped the blockade, gaza would flourish in 5 years? would the aid be used for the "right" purposes? would the aid not end up in swiss bank accounts like it has over the last 10 years (see arafat)? would hamas or whatever leadership acknowledge israel's right to peaceful existance in the pre 1967 borders?
if israel withdrew from the west bank (including abandoning ALL the settlements) and east jerusalem would the palastinians drop their armed struggle and concentrate on their economies?
or is it not really about self determination but really about jihad?
you tell me. but base your opinion on something not just because you in your rational western mind cant understand how anyone could think differently.
yes all people are equal, but that doesnt mean their mentallity and values are the same. you cannot understand how a man can murder his daughter because she falls in love with a man of another faith. they cannot understand how you can live with the shame of a daughter who dishonours her family. how do you suggest israel reaches a compromise with a group who have such different beliefs?
i dont think they would. shame because the region would flourish economically with such a friendly market and the savings on teh defense budgets.

I doubt we'll ever find out what would happen if Israel dropped the blockade...The problem is (and I have to say you do epitomize it)that both sides are so entrenched in their views that neither are prepared to give an inch, and BOTH sides have to give for any solution to be found.
As for the Jihad...the muslim faith was founded in the early 5th century and for many centuries existed with little or no sign of holy war...Jihad is a relatively recent development,what is the common factor in the countries where jihad is most prevalent ?(muslims aside obviously) I'd suggest the answer is you suggest political expedience is a factor,but you have to remove the ability to point the finger at Israel..Hamas points at the israeli blockade ...the people say what blockade.
I'm not naive, I care about the plight of the people in Gaza but no more than I care about the victims of Palestinian rockets....it is naive to think that the problem can be solved by pointing and shouting 'it's their fault,they've got to change'.Both sides of the wall are ruled by 'governments' who believe that the only solution is bigger better guns,they are fools and until they're gone the Palestinian and Israeli people will both suffer.

9 Jun 2010

Quote by Staggerlee_BB

please please please you lot, stop being so fucking naive about the middle east.
the only people who really care about the welfare of the civilians of gaza live in highgate!
ill ask you a question or two.
do you believe that if israel dropped the blockade, gaza would flourish in 5 years? would the aid be used for the "right" purposes? would the aid not end up in swiss bank accounts like it has over the last 10 years (see arafat)? would hamas or whatever leadership acknowledge israel's right to peaceful existance in the pre 1967 borders?
if israel withdrew from the west bank (including abandoning ALL the settlements) and east jerusalem would the palastinians drop their armed struggle and concentrate on their economies?
or is it not really about self determination but really about jihad?
you tell me. but base your opinion on something not just because you in your rational western mind cant understand how anyone could think differently.
yes all people are equal, but that doesnt mean their mentallity and values are the same. you cannot understand how a man can murder his daughter because she falls in love with a man of another faith. they cannot understand how you can live with the shame of a daughter who dishonours her family. how do you suggest israel reaches a compromise with a group who have such different beliefs?
i dont think they would. shame because the region would flourish economically with such a friendly market and the savings on teh defense budgets.

I doubt we'll ever find out what would happen if Israel dropped the blockade...The problem is (and I have to say you do epitomize it)that both sides are so entrenched in their views that neither are prepared to give an inch, and BOTH sides have to give for any solution to be found.
As for the Jihad...the muslim faith was founded in the early 5th century and for many centuries existed with little or no sign of holy war...Jihad is a relatively recent development,what is the common factor in the countries where jihad is most prevalent ?(muslims aside obviously) I'd suggest the answer is you suggest political expedience is a factor,but you have to remove the ability to point the finger at Israel..Hamas points at the israeli blockade ...the people say what blockade.
I'm not naive, I care about the plight of the people in Gaza but no more than I care about the victims of Palestinian rockets....it is naive to think that the problem can be solved by pointing and shouting 'it's their fault,they've got to change'.Both sides of the wall are ruled by 'governments' who believe that the only solution is bigger better guns,they are fools and until they're gone the Palestinian and Israeli people will both suffer.
:thumbup:

9 Jun 2010

And Israel are in a better position to change things or even be magnanimous .....as I said entrenched

11 Jun 2010

That's all very well Brucie but we weren't asked about most of the things covered above,my responses were to questions/points about the relationship between Israel and Palestine.
I agree with the point of the article there is a lack of protest about many of the things she points out,there is a concentration on the conflict between Israel and Palestine in the press...but Israel makes it so sexy all those commandos and raids, what do you expect the press to do?

12 Jun 2010

So we're all agreed them I'm right lol

13 Jun 2010

I hope not Kaz ...the very thought sends a shiver down my spine :scared:

13 Jun 2010

Now now don't pout

13 Jun 2010

" shudders "

14 Jun 2010

Quote by Kaznkev
I hope not Kaz ...the very thought sends a shiver down my spine :scared:

i dont know , the idea might be the one and only thing on this planet that could cause me to switch
you can only be talking gas suppliers bolt

14 Jun 2010

Quote by Lizaleanrob
I hope not Kaz ...the very thought sends a shiver down my spine :scared:

i dont know , the idea might be the one and only thing on this planet that could cause me to switch
you can only be talking gas suppliers bolt

:laughabove:

16 Jun 2010

Do people still read the Guardian?
I thought their circulation was about half of the Beano, but much less entertaining. lol

16 Jun 2010

Quote by kentswingers777
Do people still read the Guardian?
I thought their circulation was about half of the Beano, but much less entertaining.

Given that brucie posted it, perhaps The Guardian is now bundled free with the Beano dunno

16 Jun 2010

No GNV....Guardian readers would not be able to understand the Beano. wink

16 Jun 2010

Quote by brucie

Can't deny they've got a point