Operation Iraqi Freedom, Liberty Shield.... what name would you have given to the last operation?

Operation God bless USA, Operation Shock and awe, Operation we are the number 1, Operation Kill em all.................?

Either "Operation Coruscant Rising" or "Operation Sith Lord". Enduring Whatnot is fine with me. We know what whatnot's worth to an American.

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

Operation save the Yiddishe mammie from the unkosher hands of the scary Commie-Arabs .

But the Yiddishe mammie is not safe yet , all sorts of scary Arabs ready to include the goyeh bitch to their harem .

Hey , we aint into tziganna bibkalach baby

Ei! Ei!

:cool:

Operation (Global Dominance). For the overall "operation".

Operation "we got your infidel" right here ::lewd jesture::"
Operation "no more sadistic genocidal dictators"
Operation "baghdad bob needs a spanking"

Operation Unite The Arabs

Operation Probing Penis
Operation Desert Sheep
Operation Holy Shitstorm
Operation Booty Peep

Operation Mass Distraction
Operazion Judenstraum
Operation Satisfaction
Operation GetItOn

Operation HalliBechtel
Operation Texaco
Operation Re-Election
Operation I dunno

Operation Endless Conflict
Operation NeoCon
Operation Acquisition
Operation Mother Bomb

Operation Deficitter
Operation Pissumoff
Operation SinkOrSwimmer
Operation Molotov

Operation Duck & Cover
Operation Diggahole
Operation OuttaFunding
Operation BeggarBowl

"Operation Iraqi Liberation" :rolleyes:

"Operation Dismal Future"

I would call it OPERATION IN THE AMERICANS BEST INTEREST BUT HAVE TO LIE TO THEM ABOUT IT OR THEY WILL NOT SUPPORT IT NAIVE LITTLE FUCKS THEY ARE BUT IT IS NO PROBLEM AS LONG AS WAL-MART STAYS OPEN AND CHURCHES STILL HAVE PICNICS.

Operation I hate Americans because they actually have the balls to do something instead of waiting on their asses and selling WMD equipment to UN sanctioned countries.......

Carnuth - would that include Rumsfeld's company building nuclear plants for North Korea? :rolleyes:

nukes for peace i always say, though i believe that nuclear powerplants are a cheap, reliable, and efficient producer of electricity, something we all need? I see nothing wrong with helping countries bring light to their streets and power to their hospitals.... Can you afford to bring in hundreds of tons of coal and wood and oil daily?

Operation Allahs Mathematics :D

Operation Allahs Mathematics

:D . bow to allah's maths, greatest hero of islam since UBL and Saladin., first crusader of islam on the web.

I would call it 'Operation', Oil for the americas.

Carnuth,
I have no problem whatsoever with giving electrical power to developing countries. That's what copper cable was invented for.

Giving nuclear plants that can be altered to produce weapons-grade material (or just nuclear waste for "dirty bombs") - well, that's something to think twice about, and for the US and Israel, a reason to bomb Iraq, DPRK, Iran, Syria, and so on and so forth.

"can you afford to bring in hundreds of tons of coal and wood and oil daily"
__________________________________________________ __
Apparently we can.

50% of the electricity in America is produced by coal burning power plants.

Nukes are clean until it comes time to dispose of the radio active waste and the outdated brittle reaction chambers.

Operation Loop

Operation National Suicide

Operation Destroy America

Operation SAM

S- Spend

A- Americas

M- Money

Operation Gonzo.

Operation Iraqi Freedom, Liberty Shield.... what name would you have given to the last operation?

Operation God bless USA, Operation Shock and awe, Operation we are the number 1, Operation Kill em all.................?
Clearly the only acceptable name is The Inutile Crusadeİ

Get with the Program.
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/4427/v4victoryhu5.png

http://www.crestock.com/uploads/blog/2008/propagandaposters/25.jpg
The People and the Army are One! (Operation Support-Our-Troops)

`
http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/4984/crusade02.gif

Operation Jesustan?

Operation "In God We Trust"

Operation "OOps I did it again!"

Remember the good old days? Back when everyone was afraid of the Russian Bear and needed defending? 1989 and before?

We need another superpower, one for everyone to fear. Our economy would improve, along with general opinions of the US.

I say we attack China. Not like they have a strong navy to get here, so why not?

Not a good idea

http://theinspirationroom.com/daily/design/2009/5/what-goes-around-rifle-poster.jpg

America has grown complacent. They've been harvesting such an abundant bounty of crops for so long, they've forgotten that they still need to plant the seeds. I think lack of quality education for the average Joe is America's biggest problem. You don't even need to look at standardized test results and whatnot- just the nature of the discourse in American society, the lack of information and understanding when it comes to politics and science... It's easy to disdain the advantages of education when you're provided with these advantages by a previous and more enlightened generation, but there are long-term consequences for doing so.

there is nothing wrong with america because that would be like saying god is wrong.

SAM- We can't be attacked if we take over the world!

Bork-Education is one of a few things America should be paying more attention to. The problem is that we want all these services free. Are you ready for a 50% income tax or higher to do all that we wish for?

there is nothing wrong with america because that would be like saying god is wrong.

:roflmao: Nice one!

i believe that the income tax in social welfare states that have free education is less than 50%.

they are probably sponsored by communists.

SAM- We can't be attacked if we take over the world!

Bork-Education is one of a few things America should be paying more attention to. The problem is that we want all these services free. Are you ready for a 50% income tax or higher to do all that we wish for?

It takes only two airplanes to bring down a country these days, suicide by terrorism, its called.

Bork-Education is one of a few things America should be paying more attention to. The problem is that we want all these services free. Are you ready for a 50% income tax or higher to do all that we wish for?

Obviously when you put it that way to the voters, it sounds really bad. The key is instead of the traditional politics of promising smiles and candy, a wise politician must find a way to make their constituents aware of the consequences from making a bad choice. It's too bad they can't just be honest with the voters and tell them "Yes you'll be paying 5% more on your income tax to cover this plan, and if we don't do this, you'll be paying 50% more in 20 years' time to make up for the shortfall." But to be able to do this and not become a national disgrace, you need educated voters of course. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Bork-I don't know, too bad our citizens enjoy being lied to. I'd vote for a man that was just honest about what had to be done.

SAM-There's always a group of militants hitting a major city. That's always good too. Both are examples of the same thing, no?

SAM-There's always a group of militants hitting a major city. That's always good too. Both are examples of the same thing, no?

I read something interesting in another thread today: terrorism is the war of the poor, war is the terrorism of the rich.

That about sums it up

Perhaps it's time people consider that a great deal of what is "wrong" with America is the fact they spend so much time fixating on that and not on the problems of their own countries, to say nothing of their own personal problems.

Republicans and dittoism is what is wrong with The United States. Republicans have successfully used fear to enslave a substancial number of Americans. And Ruppert Murdock has provided them with the vehicle to widely distribute the message of fear.

It maybe something those outside the USA do not understand. Be thankful, but it may someday be headed your way as well.

Be thankful, but it may someday be headed your way as well

Already has. First thing I did when I came home I switched on the news. And saw a replica of the same type of faux snooze which was customary in the States.

We're already under the influence :(

Ok Now I am scared!

The entire world is under US influence, Sam. Deal with it.

Blaming something on one party, Joe, is pretty shortsighted.

There is nothing shortsighted about calling a spade a spade Count.

I say it's Joe's fault.

I say we attack China.

We can't because they and fascism is the model that Obama favors most. He cannot attack what he admires.

Remember the good old days? Back when everyone was afraid of the Russian Bear and needed defending? 1989 and before?

We need another superpower, one for everyone to fear. Our economy would improve, along with general opinions of the US.

I say we attack China. Not like they have a strong navy to get here, so why not?No, a better suggestion would be another civil war. Soemthing to toughen up people. We could do coastal US against the Midwest. Set a date 6 months ahead so people could build up arms and defense and then let loose.

We can't because they and fascism is the model that Obama favors most. He cannot attack what he admires.How odd that he is following Cheney's foreign policy plans to the letter, as Cheney set out a few years BEFORE 9/11 where he said we should first go into Iraq and then pacify and take over Afghanistan so a pipeline can be run through the region. You guys all fall for the smoke and mirrors. We have one party, with two faces, good cop and bad cop, though each half of the country has their own way of viewing those labels.

Remember the good old days? Back when everyone was afraid of the Russian Bear and needed defending? 1989 and before?
Truly the Golden Age... ...Us & Them... ...The Free World vs The Communist Bloc... ...The Godless Reds vs God's own Red, White and Blue... ...Twenty thousand Swords of Damocles apiece pulsating with precious plutonoium... ...dazzling deuterium... ...titilating tritium... ... missiles massed within their subterranean silos... ...battle-ready bombs aloft in aircraft orbiting at fail-safe... ...silent submarines at sentinel stations across the seas...

:cool:

Now look at our enemies... ...ululating stone-age zipperheads quoting a book of fairy tales and commandeering airplanes with box cutters.

Degenerate times, I tells ya.




I say we attack China. Not like they have a strong navy to get here, so why not?
Too late.

We're joined at the hip with the sons of bitches.

There is nothing shortsighted about calling a spade a spade Count.

Well, it's not a spade then -- if you want to make analogies that don't work. One party did not screw America up. Both parties pretty much routinely do dumb things, it's only the partisans that recognize one set and not the other.

Too late.

We're joined at the hip with the sons of bitches.

We could apply some precision surgery with tactical strikes.

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." - Henry Louis Mencken

Remember the good old days? Back when everyone was afraid of the Russian Bear and needed defending? 1989 and before?

We need another superpower, one for everyone to fear. Our economy would improve, along with general opinions of the US.

I say we attack China. Not like they have a strong navy to get here, so why not?

Anyone er. Remember the chinese civil war ? And the subsequent Japanese invasion ?

Perhaps not.
maybe the Chinese will say this, and given their perchant for propaganda..
我们在法国在海和海洋在海滩在
着陆地面在领域在天空中将继续
末端，我们将战斗，我们将战斗，我们将战斗以增长的信心和增长的力量，我们
将保卫我们的海岛，什么费用
也许是，我们将战斗，我们
将战斗，我们将战斗，并且在街道，
我们在小山将战斗;
我们不会投降

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." - Henry Louis Mencken

isnt that what he is doing?:shrug:

SAM- We can't be attacked if we take over the world!
That, my friend, is closer to the truth than you may imagine.

SAM- We can't be attacked if we take over the world!

Bork-Education is one of a few things America should be paying more attention to. The problem is that we want all these services free. Are you ready for a 50% income tax or higher to do all that we wish for?

Our taxes are already over 50%, there are between 22% and 30% hidden taxes in the price of everything we buy that are passed along by the companies, add to that state income and and property taxes, on top of the Federal Income, Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare Taxes and we are really behind the 8 ball.

Democrtas and liberalisism is what is wrong with The United States. Democrats have successfully used fear to enslave a substancial number of Americans. And Ruppert Murdock has provided them with the vehicle to widely distribute the message of fear.

It maybe something those outside the USA do not understand. Be thankful, but it may someday be headed your way as well.

What is the problem with America?

Well most Americans have trouble understanding that people from other nations love their country more then America!

The American government thinks it can do whatever it wants, and the majority of Americans seem to be proud of this arrogant and ignorant behaviour.

The system is getting worse - the middle class is getting closer to the lower class while the relatively few elite make all the decisions. Very corrupted indeed.

Americans generally think they are free while they live their controlled lives. (Democracy is not freedom folks, even if it does look best compared to the other faulty systems!)

A lot of Americans don't try to educate themselves about other cultures and/or other countries - many are happy only knowing their small version of the world which to them is America and nothing else matters. Ignorance is bliss, but it is getting old!

What is the problem with America?

Well most Americans have trouble understanding that people from other nations love their country more then America!

The American government thinks it can do whatever it wants, and the majority of Americans seem to be proud of this arrogant and ignorant behaviour.

The system is getting worse - the middle class is getting closer to the lower class while the relatively few elite make all the decisions. Very corrupted indeed.

Americans generally think they are free while they live their controlled lives. (Democracy is not freedom folks, even if it does look best compared to the other faulty systems!)

A lot of Americans don't try to educate themselves about other cultures and/or other countries - many are happy only knowing their small version of the world which to them is America and nothing else matters. Ignorance is bliss, but it is getting old!


And most of the rest of the world, is have trouble understanding that the majority of Americans love their country more then the rest of the world!

The liberal point of view that America is the problem, is not as wide spread as the Liberals and News organs would have you believe, the silent majority is silent no more, it started with 9/11, and Amnesty for illegals, and now UHC Obama care, has given full voice to the Silent Majority of America.

And most of the rest of the world, is have trouble understanding that the majority of Americans love their country more then the rest of the world! not really they get we love are country what they don't get is why we act like it can do no wrong.

The long awaited UN report on the war crime allegations during the Gaza offensive headed by Richard Goldstone has been released. The 574 page report suggests a thorough investigation around war crimes:

Calling for the probes to be set up within three months, the report also recommends that international bodies launch prosecutions if Israel does not do so within six months. It makes similar recommendations about Hamas.
Israeli reaction has been predictable, wailing about bigotry and morality, and pointing the finger outwards, the tried and tested method for deflecting ugly truths. A segue bringing an innocent Iran into the issue by Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin below:

"The same U.N. that allows the president of a country to announce on a podium its aspiration to destroy the State of Israel has no right to teach us about morality," Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin said, referring to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
This is of course, is a known and proven falsification and attempt at disinformation. The moral arrogance is especially disingenuous, coming from of a nation that slaughtered 252 children let alone 912 civilians, in an attack on a caged people with nowhere to escape to.
A predictable piece of spin from the ADL.

"This is a report born of bias," Abraham Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, said in describing the report released Tuesday by the U.N. Human Rights Council. "What do you do with an initiative born of bigotry?"
The report was written and compiled by a respected war crimes judge, who, not that it should matter, is himself Jewish, and his experienced judgment is that an independent investigation is required.

The report, written by a fact-finding mission headed by Richard Goldstone, a respected war crimes judge from South Africa who is Jewish, urges Israel to set up independent investigations into what it calls Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity.
In a pro active and credible gesture of fairness, Goldstone,

Goldstone obtained the council's permission to broaden his mandate and consider Hamas war crimes. The report released Tuesday considers the years of rocket attacks on Israel that preceded the war and concludes that Hamas committed war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The attempt at distorting and hiding the truth is apparent. If there is nothing to hide, the investigations should be a formality no?


Nonetheless, Israel refused to deal with Goldstone or the council, despite Goldstone’s Jewish credentials and longstanding ties to Israel -- he’s a trustee of Jerusalem’s Hebrew University, among other things. Foxman suggested that the United Nations was using Goldstone's credibility to disguise an inherently biased report.
Further,

None of the charges in the report's executive summary are new; the summary appears to compile and replicate many of the charges that were made by some international and Israeli human rights groups.
So, we have the same predictable outcry at anyone pointing fingers at Israeli excesses, they must be a bigot, in bed with Iran, or an anti Semite.
The obvious injustices and crimes are clearly outlined in the report.

Among other allegations, the report accuses Israel of having created an "emergency situation" in Gaza through its blockade prior, during and after the war; describes as excessive Israel's use of white phosphorous, a chemical irritant used as an obscurant during the war; dismisses as unfounded Israel's claims that all of the approximately 240 policemen slain during the war were combatants; and chronicles about a dozen allegations of Israel shooting unarmed Palestinians without provocation.
(http://jta.org/news/article/2009/09/15/1007893/israel-groups-target-the-source-in-countering-goldstone-report)

Its time for injustices to be heard, investigated, and tried.

Any comments?

Update from Haaretz.

Israel readies for diplomatic war over 'biased' UN Gaza report -
By Haaretz Correspondents and Agencies , By Barak Ravid, Anshel Pfeffer, Jack Khoury and Avi Issacharoff

Israel began fighting the diplomatic battle yesterday to prevent the Goldstone Commission report on Israel's Cast Lead Operation in the Gaza Strip from being brought before the United Nations Security Council and from there to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where charges could be brought against Israeli officials involved in the military campaign. The report, compiled by a commission headed by former war crimes prosecutor Richard Goldstone, accuses both Israel and the Palestinians of actions amounting to war crimes during the December 27 to January 18 battle in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1114920.html)

Lets see if justice prevails.

Nothing is going to happen.

It's interesting that we don't get a thread on the report itself, or the reactions of any other parties to it. Instead, we skip directly to the Jewish World Conspiracy, packaged with the usual moral posturing and sneering derision.

It's interesting that we don't get a thread on the report itself, or the reactions of any other parties to it. Instead, we skip directly to the Jewish World Conspiracy, packaged with the usual moral posturing and sneering derision.
And your outburst above would be what? The predictable response alluded to in the OP?
Feel free to discuss or debate any points.

Nothing is going to happen.


Last night a team lead by Foreign Ministry legal advisor Ehud Keinan, and which included representatives from the Justice Ministry and the military prosecutor's office, delivered a preliminary analysis of the Goldstone Commission report to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avidgor Lieberman. Netanyahu also held consultations last night on the commission's findings. "The goal is to avoid a slippery slope which would lead Israel to the International Criminal Court in The Hague," a senior Israeli staffer said.

On the day after Yom Kippur, the UN Human Rights Council, which appointed Goldstone, will be convening in Geneva for a special session on the report. Foreign Ministry sources said yesterday that they expect Arab states will begin to prepare a draft resolution which will call for the report to be transferred to the UN Security Council. In a worst-case scenario, the Security Council could decide to transfer the matter to the International Criminal Court. Under such circumstances, the ICC could issue international arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials who were involved in Cast Lead

I tend to share your view, that somehow, Israel will manage to get out of this. But the process is as above.

Nothing is going to happen.

:D Well if its a UN report you can be sure that nothing will happen. They are simply keeping themselves busy, earning that fat paycheck with yet another report :rolleyes:.

Reports and suggestions mean if there is no institution to act upon the information. No sanctions will be given and the US will ignore the report or wag its finger towards Israel saying 'bad boy' and then turn around and give them the yearly 6 billion.

It's interesting that we don't get a thread on the report itself, or the reactions of any other parties to it. Instead, we skip directly to the Jewish World Conspiracy, packaged with the usual moral posturing and sneering derision.

Remember this?

"United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday said a damning UN report on Israel's conduct in its recent offensive against Hamas in the Gaza Strip was not legally binding."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1083191.html

The UN do not honor their own reports so this one won't be any different.

And your outburst above would be what?

"Outburst?"

Have you ever considered that you might get better responses to your posts if you'd stop going to such lengths to lard them with invective?



The predictable response alluded to in the OP?

It was a comment on how predictable - and counterproductive - your response was.



Feel free to discuss or debate any points.

That's exactly what I already did.

I know it gets under your skin when people go off of your list of approved talking points, but you're going to have to do a lot better than bare condescension if you hope to control the discourse like that.

The problem will be this:

"the UN Human Rights Council, which appointed Goldstone, will be convening in Geneva for a special session on the report. Foreign Ministry sources said Tuesday that they expect Arab states will begin to prepare a draft resolution which will call for the report to be transferred to the UN Security Council. In a worst-case scenario, the Security Council could decide to transfer the matter to the International Criminal Court. Under such circumstances, the ICC could issue international arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials who were involved in Cast Lead." http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1114807.html

It will go to the security council where England and the US will veto the resolution and that will be the end of that. What France will do is not certain but they will probably follow the British. China and Russia could very well abstain for their own reasons which has no affect if any member casts a veto. If they have to concur then this report is simply procedural.


Article 27 of the United Nations Charter states:

1) Each member of the Security Council shall have one vote.

2) Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members.

3) Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VI, and under paragraph 3 of Article 52, a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting.

Although the 'power of veto' is not explicitly mentioned in the UN Charter, the fact that 'substantive' decisions by the UNSC require "the concurring votes of the permanent members", means that any of those permanent members can prevent the adoption, by the Council, of any draft resolutions on 'substantive' matters. For this reason, the 'power of veto' is also referred to as the principle of 'great Power unanimity'."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_veto_power

Funny how even Hamas doesn't approve of the report:

"Hamas Tuesday rejected the Goldstone report, which accused both Israel and Hamas of war crimes during Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip. Hamas spokesmen said the report was not fair. A representative of the extremist organization, Ismail Radwan, told Haaretz Tuesday night that the report was unbalanced and completely misrepresented reality." (quote from the first link in this post)

The problem will be this

The interesting thing here is that the Arab States want to use this to get at Hamas as much as Israel (which is why the PA has been so supportive of the report). Likewise, it may be that certain UNSC members are more interested in getting at Hamas than in shielding Israel. So some sort of curve-ball outcome is possible here; possibly Israel would play along, if they were given some assurances about avoiding the ICC, etc. Doubtful, but the situation is no longer as it was for a long time...

"Outburst?"

Have you ever considered that you might get better responses to your posts if you'd stop going to such lengths to lard them with invective?



It was a comment on how predictable - and counterproductive - your response was.



That's exactly what I already did.

I know it gets under your skin when people go off of your list of approved talking points, but you're going to have to do a lot better than bare condescension if you hope to control the discourse like that.

Get over yourself and debate.

Get over yourself and debate.

The debate has already passed you by, despite your attempts to pre-empt it with canned talking points.

The interesting thing here is that the Arab States want to use this to get at Hamas as much as Israel (which is why the PA has been so supportive of the report). Likewise, it may be that certain UNSC members are more interested in getting at Hamas than in shielding Israel. So some sort of curve-ball outcome is possible here; possibly Israel would play along, if they were given some assurances about avoiding the ICC, etc. Doubtful, but the situation is no longer as it was for a long time...

Which UNSC members would want to get back at Hamas? The Russians were the first to invite and accept Hamas after they were democratically voted in and sanctions were placed on them, who knows what China would do. The US and UK get back at Hamas all the time through the arms they give to Israel. The problem is that there are no benefits in the US condemning Israel to the ICC especially when the US has a problem with Americans being brought before the international courts.

The problem will be this:

"the UN Human Rights Council, which appointed Goldstone, will be convening in Geneva for a special session on the report. Foreign Ministry sources said Tuesday that they expect Arab states will begin to prepare a draft resolution which will call for the report to be transferred to the UN Security Council. In a worst-case scenario, the Security Council could decide to transfer the matter to the International Criminal Court. Under such circumstances, the ICC could issue international arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials who were involved in Cast Lead." http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1114807.html

It will go to the security council where England and the US will veto the resolution and that will be the end of that. What France will do is not certain but they will probably follow the British. China and Russia could very well abstain for their own reasons which has no affect if any member casts a veto. If they have to concur then this report is simply procedural.


Article 27 of the United Nations Charter states:

1) Each member of the Security Council shall have one vote.

2) Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members.

3) Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VI, and under paragraph 3 of Article 52, a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting.

Although the 'power of veto' is not explicitly mentioned in the UN Charter, the fact that 'substantive' decisions by the UNSC require "the concurring votes of the permanent members", means that any of those permanent members can prevent the adoption, by the Council, of any draft resolutions on 'substantive' matters. For this reason, the 'power of veto' is also referred to as the principle of 'great Power unanimity'."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_veto_power
Yes, sadly this is the most likely outcome. However, this creates a bargaining chip for the US to apply pressure on Israel. Importantly, the fact remains, that for the process to get this far, there is an indication of definitive guilt, now exposed in the public domain.


Funny how even Hamas doesn't approve of the report:

"Hamas Tuesday rejected the Goldstone report, which accused both Israel and Hamas of war crimes during Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip. Hamas spokesmen said the report was not fair. A representative of the extremist organization, Ismail Radwan, told Haaretz Tuesday night that the report was unbalanced and completely misrepresented reality." (quote from the first link in this post)
Yes, this is the usual political to and froing. There is little doubt that HAMAS is guilty of war crimes as well. Thus for the good of all, and in the name of justice, let all the dirty washing come out and be exposed. This is the only way to (try) prevent such occurrences in the future.

I think the only way to prevent such occurrences in the future is for the United States to distance itself militarily and financially from Israel. Remember that even if the ICC finds someone guilty they cannot go into the nation and arrest them. The Sudanese president was charged with genocide and he is still the president of sudan and still continues with the same behaviour and is still supported by China. Sudan simply ignored the ICC.

This report is all hot air.

The debate has already passed you by, despite your attempts to pre-empt it with canned talking points.
Lets attempt this.
1. Ethically speaking, having reached this point of war crime verification, should this process go forward to the ICC?
2. If it is vetoed, what does that imply?

I think the only way to prevent such occurrences in the future is for the United States to distance itself militarily and financially from Israel. Remember that even if the ICC finds someone guilty they cannot go into the nation and arrest them. The Sudanese president was charged with genocide and he is still the president of sudan and still continues with the same behaviour and is still supported by China. Sudan simply ignored the ICC.

This report is all hot air.
But if it is acted upon, that would be extremely bad press for Israel. And that would further swing political and public perception against Israel and its racist regime.

But if it is acted upon, that would be extremely bad press for Israel. And that would further swing political and public perception against Israel and its racist regime.

What makes you think that Israel has good press internationally? The Vatican has spoken out against them. The French ambassador to the UK Daniel Bernard insulted Israel with these remarks "All the current troubles in the world are because of that shitty little country Israel." Why should the world be in danger of World War III because of those people?" There is ample criticism of israel outside of the US.

If you look at the UN resolutions there is overwhelming bad press towards Israel but the problem isn't in the international community but the US and to a lesser degree the UK. As long as active american politicians, which includes every president, find more of a reason to support the state than condemn it there will be no change. Look at how H. Clinton said that the US would support Israel 'forever and ever'. Well I think forever is too long but I would bet that the US remains supportive for a very long time to come.

What makes you think that Israel has good press internationally? The Vatican has spoken out against them. The French ambassador to the UK Daniel Bernard insulted Israel with these remarks "All the current troubles in the world are because of that shitty little country Israel." Why should the world be in danger of World War III because of those people?" There is ample criticism of israel outside of the US.

If you look at the UN resolutions there is overwhelming bad press towards Israel but the problem isn't in the international community but the US and to a lesser degree the UK. As long as active american politicians, which includes every president, find more of a reason to support the state than condemn it there will be no change. Look at how H. Clinton said that the US would support Israel 'forever and ever'. Well I think forever is too long but I would bet that the US remains supportive for a very long time to come.
You have that exactly right. Clinton et al, is happy to lambaste all and sundry for human rights abuses, but Israel, a major offender, receives little or no condemnation. That fits nicely with the "astonishing hypocrisy" paradigm.

Israel could well be right about the investigative team having a bias, if it's true that members of this team have issued condemnations of Israel in the past. If you've gotten politically involved in related issues and chosen sides in the past, you're not an objective observer, period, even if your points are entirely truthful. It's disappointing the UN couldn't have gone out of its way to appease Israel's concerns just to eliminate the question of neutrality, and that will probably undermine the report's credibility in the long run. On the other hand, Israel didn't help itself by refusing to cooperate, they could have at least insisted on having their own observers join the committee to monitor its work and bring up their own charges. The blanket denials they're throwing out right now are stupid, but Netanyahu announced he was going to thoroughly study the report before beginning his rebuttal, so we'll see what happens.

Frankly, what the UN needs to do is come up with a scheme that will punish whoever initiates the next round of violence, whether it's Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, some Syrian rebels, whatever. The UN should make it clear violence will not be allowed as a tool for any side to make any political gains, this includes Palestinians seeking to change facts on the ground by fighting, and settlers seeking to expand their existing territories. I don't think this will happen. I think the UN will effectively rule that in the future, Israel will be restricted to extremely limited means of defending itself, and Hamas will be taking advantage. Israel will ignore UN restrictions in order to effectively protect its citizens and restore the sort of calm that's been seen for the last several months, they will get massively sanctioned for it, and Hamas will continue to take full advantage, knowing the international community won't impose anything on it without its full consent, as all the voluntary trade sanctions have already been imposed.

1. Ethically speaking, having reached this point of war crime verification, should this process go forward to the ICC?

I have various issues, both theoretical and practical, with the ICC.

If the question is simply whether war criminals should face some kind of justice, then sure.

The question of who, if anyone, should enforce that, is a much thornier one.



2. If it is vetoed, what does that imply?

Any number of things, possibly. It could end up having as much to do with general US objections to the ICC as anything else. Right now there isn't even a general resolution to refer this to the UNSC, let alone a Security Council resolution to be vetoed. Until there is such a thing, it's fairly idle to speculate about the implications of a veto.

Now how about this:

Has any sitting government ever not sought to discredit UN reports critical of them?

What, then, does the predictability of such an outcome (the stated topic of this thread) bear on?

Israel could well be right about the investigative team having a bias, if it's true that members of this team have issued condemnations of Israel in the past. If you've gotten politically involved in related issues and chosen sides in the past, you're not an objective observer, period, even if your points are entirely truthful. It's disappointing the UN couldn't have gone out of its way to appease Israel's concerns just to eliminate the question of neutrality, and that will probably undermine the report's credibility in the long run. On the other hand, Israel didn't help itself by refusing to cooperate, they could have at least insisted on having their own observers join the committee to monitor its work and bring up their own charges. The blanket denials they're throwing out right now are stupid, but Netanyahu announced he was going to thoroughly study the report before beginning his rebuttal, so we'll see what happens.

Frankly, what the UN needs to do is come up with a scheme that will punish whoever initiates the next round of violence, whether it's Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, some Syrian rebels, whatever. The UN should make it clear violence will not be allowed as a tool for any side to make any political gains, this includes Palestinians seeking to change facts on the ground by fighting, and settlers seeking to expand their existing territories. I don't think this will happen. I think the UN will effectively rule that in the future, Israel will be restricted to extremely limited means of defending itself, and Hamas will be taking advantage. Israel will ignore UN restrictions in order to effectively protect its citizens and restore the sort of calm that's been seen for the last several months, they will get massively sanctioned for it, and Hamas will continue to take full advantage, knowing the international community won't impose anything on it without its full consent, as all the voluntary trade sanctions have already been imposed.
You raise some very valid points Cpt. I think any government will have concerns of bias, and of course this can be used to deflect the real issue. The Goldstone Commission was specifically unbiased in that he has an impeccable track record and further, he pro actively asked to include investigating HAMAS as well. There is no reason this attention to neutrality cannot be maintained in going forward.

I think anyone can see that after all this time, violence is not the answer to the Israel/Palestinian issue. A war crimes trail/commission will publicly bring ALL guilty parties to the table, and could actually be used as an inroad for initiating meaningful talks between the two. Of course the Palestinians would have to get their act together and find a unified voice.

I have various issues, both theoretical and practical, with the ICC.
Can you expand?

If the question is simply whether war criminals should face some kind of justice, then sure.
Yes, agreed.

The question of who, if anyone, should enforce that, is a much thornier one.
Is that not what the ICC was set up to do? Apply the law, impartially? Should those, already convicted and incarcerated by the ICC then be released? :m:

Any number of things, possibly. It could end up having as much to do with general US objections to the ICC as anything else. Right now there isn't even a general resolution to refer this to the UNSC, let alone a Security Council resolution to be vetoed. Until there is such a thing, it's fairly idle to speculate about the implications of a veto.
OK.

Now how about this:

Has any sitting government ever not sought to discredit UN reports critical of them?
There are UN reports that are critical, and there are UN reports of crimes against humanity. Surely these should be taken seriously? Furthermore, few sitting governments are accused of war crimes.

What, then, does the predictability of such an outcome (the stated topic of this thread) bear on?
The predictability bears on the Israeli response to the report. Instant attempts to discredit the report via accusations of bigotry, bias and Antisemitism. How about some moral outrage that, as happened to themselves, another people may have suffered, and the will to investigate?

If it hasn't been posted yet, here is the text of the actual report:
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/specialsession/9/docs/UNFFMGC_Report.pdf

Can you expand?


I don't really want to go off on a tangent about the ICC at this point, given that we're months away from even knowing whether there's any chance of ICC involvement.


Should those, already convicted and incarcerated by the ICC then be released? :m:

There are no such people.


There are UN reports that are critical, and there are UN reports of crimes against humanity. Surely these should be taken seriously? Furthermore, few sitting governments are accused of war crimes.

Not what I asked. Can you give an example of a sitting government not seeking to discredit a UN report - war crimes or otherwise - critical of their country?



The predictability bears on the Israeli response to the report.

Unless you can provide some examples of other states behaving differently in similar situations, this doesn't tell us anything about Israel in particular.

From the report:


The Mission finds that, while a great number of the Gaza policemen were recruited among Hamas supporters or members of Palestinian armed groups, the Gaza police were a civilian law-enforcement agency...

The Mission accepts that there may be individual members of the Gaza police that were at the same time members of Palestinian armed groups and thus combatants.

I don't know about that. If they were recruited by Hamas from Palestinian armed groups, and are themselves armed, they are arguably legitimate targets. If some individuals are members of militias, that indicates to me there is a culture of militancy present. We can't expect Israel to sort out the "good ones" if there even were any. They made up a sixth of the total casualties.


On the basis of the information gathered, the Mission found that Palestinian armed groups were present in urban areas during the military operations and launched rockets from urban areas.

...The Mission cannot, however, discount the possibility that Palestinian armed groups were active in the vicinity of such UN facilities and hospitals. While the conduct of hostilities in built-up areas does not, of itself, constitute a violation of international law, Palestinian armed groups, where they launched attacks close to civilian or protected buildings, unnecessarily exposed the civilian population of Gaza to danger.

Is that not what the ICC was set up to do? Apply the law, impartially? Should those, already convicted and incarcerated by the ICC then be released? :m:


Yes they are set up as a court and can grant warrants but who will enforce it? In other words if this went to court and there were people who are issued warrants and the Israeli government ignores it there is little the ICC can do.

Here is a good example:

The International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for Sudan's president on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur.

Speaking on Tuesday ahead of the announcement, Mr Bashir said the Hague tribunal could "eat" the arrest warrant.
He said it would "not be worth the ink it is written on" and then danced for thousands of cheering supporters who burned an effigy of the ICC chief prosecutor.

Sudan expert Alex de Waal told the BBC the indictment is "pretty toothless" as the ICC does not have a police force.

The war crimes court has already issued two arrest warrants - in 2007 - for Sudanese Humanitarian Affairs Minister Ahmed Haroun and the Janjaweed militia leader Ali Abdul Rahman.

Sudan has refused to hand them over.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7923102.stm

The UN needs to send it's own troops in there and occupy a buffer zone between these two parties.

The UN needs to send it's own troops in there and occupy a buffer zone between these two parties.


They suck when it comes to peacekeeping.

Wow, this report is long, but no one looks good. I'll have to print it out to read.

Remember this?

"United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday said a damning UN report on Israel's conduct in its recent offensive against Hamas in the Gaza Strip was not legally binding."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1083191.html

The UN do not honor their own reports so this one won't be any different.

The UN and the security council are a a real joke and they need vital reforms .

You raise some very valid points Cpt. I think any government will have concerns of bias, and of course this can be used to deflect the real issue. The Goldstone Commission was specifically unbiased in that he has an impeccable track record and further, he pro actively asked to include investigating HAMAS as well. There is no reason this attention to neutrality cannot be maintained in going forward.

I think anyone can see that after all this time, violence is not the answer to the Israel/Palestinian issue. A war crimes trail/commission will publicly bring ALL guilty parties to the table, and could actually be used as an inroad for initiating meaningful talks between the two. Of course the Palestinians would have to get their act together and find a unified voice.

Yeah, I'm not saying Israel should have the right to lock down its borders and that's the end of the story. I think the basic principle should be that whoever makes a claim against another, there is only one place to settle it, and that's in a clear and transparent court of international law, where all evidence, facts, references etc. can be laid down and debated properly. No nation should be forced to cede land or give up a claim to land on the grounds that they will face violence if they refuse. With the way Israel and the Palestinians have been boxed by the rest of the world into this tiny little plot of trash, while everyone else lives on vast, resourceful, safe and secure lands that were themselves mostly stolen from other peoples, I personally feel the world owes both parties some assurance of security and relief, and the guarantee that when the dust settles, we will all chip in to make sure both sides have abundant and sovereign territories in which to settle their people.

With Israel, the world is going needlessly far in scaring them shitless that they will soon have no home and will be living as an unwanted minority scattered in other peoples' lands, much like it was before the Holocaust and throughout the middle ages. If the countries that want to question Israel's basic right of existence were to offer up territory in exchange, on which the jews can build a sovereign state to their own liking just like every other sovereign nation, it wouldn't solve the problem but it would make things 100 times easier, and if I were Israeli I'd at least be interested in what's being offered. With Hamas, I don't think particularly highly of them, but I do think they've been showing enough restraint and maturity that it's high time the world starts seriously pressing for the opening of Gaza's borders. If Hamas begins firing rockets again, what will Israel take away this time? Allowing basic humanitarian goods into Gaza won't stop the IDF from pounding the place whenever it chooses anyhow. The current sanctions are a clear act of collective punishment, which doesn't do Israel any favours in the long term, and this callous behaviour needs to be stopped.

I haven't spent much time researching the various statements and quotes attributed to Goldstone's team. If Israel's claims are true that some of them have demonstrated substantial bias in the past, it's a serious allegation and it needs to be taken into account when considering the committee's work and who did what. That having been said, I haven't personally seen any reasons to question Mr. Goldstone's own past performances, although obviously it doesn't mean he's spotless, and his being jewish doesn't in itself guarantee neutrality towards Israel when he levels his charges. What will matter most is whether Israel takes this opportunity seriously and addresses the actual issues in the report, cooperates with the UN in future investigations, and stops with the outdated blanket denials and smear tactics which people once blindly accepted 30 years ago. I'm sure there are many Israeli soldiers and officers whose motives go well beyond the mere protection of their own people, and these folks need to be held accountable both for Israel's sake and for the sake of peace.

Still cynical in the end that this whole episode will play into the hands of Hamas and will possibly even encourage further acts of violence, but I also realize that Israel can't be given a carte blanche indefinitely, or else they'll simply reduce themselves to the same sorts of vicious behaviours.

...I also realize that Israel can't be given a carte blanche indefinitely, or else they'll simply reduce themselves to the same sorts of vicious behaviours.

They already have apparently.

They already have apparently.

I have no doubt that some of them have already, my only questions are on what scale are these behaviours being practised, to what extent do the higher echelons of Israel's government know about it, tolerate it and approve of it, and to what extent do the Israeli government and the people who elected it have control over these activities? The issue of self-defense is a touchy one, I get pretty emotional about it myself at times, but even if somehow it could be shown that 99% of Israel's actions were in the legitimate interest of self-defense, that wouldn't give any excuse to the 1% (or likely much, much more) who consider the Palestinians little more than animals that deserve a good beating.

That's not what Bill Clinton thinks.

After Lebanon, they seemed to have officially adopted the strategy of attacking the entire area where terrorist attacks are coming from.

Come to think of it though, I do have to wonder when countries like Russia and America get their day in court. If Israel gets a whole investigation for killing 1000 people in a war where Israeli soil was under direct attack, what happens in a place like Iraq where more than a million have died, hundreds of thousands at American hands (if not more), the whole war was based on a completely fake premise and there was no physical threat to America or its allies? I know it's convenient to pick on little countries like Israel, but justice ain't justice unless the same rules apply to everyone in all parts of the world, as hard as that may be.

After Lebanon, they seemed to have officially adopted the strategy of attacking the entire area where terrorist attacks are coming from.



I disagree. With all the anti-Israeli bluster aside, Israel has been far less harsh and far more carefull to avoid civilian collateral than its western counterparts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hell, in Fallujah, a town 10 times smaller then Gaza, the US killed 10 times more civilians in a few weeks. Yet somehow, as usual, Israel is still being singled out.

That seems like nonsense when you read the report. In no way were they "careful" to avoid civilian collateral. This was deliberate collective punishment. I'm on Israel's side, for the most part. How do you fight a war nicely? Hamas is no better and in many cases worse.

That seems like nonsense when you read the report. In no way were they "careful" to avoid civilian collateral. This was deliberate collective punishment. I'm on Israel's side, for the most part. How do you fight a war nicely? Hamas is no better and in many cases worse.



I didn't call Israel 'carefull', I said it was more carefull than its western counterparts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The problem with the report is that, not only was it created by the UNHRC, a blatently anti-Israeli organization supervised by a large Muslim block, but that same UNHRC set the mandate and parameters for the commision. In addition, the commision's investigation was held in Gaza, where the 'crime scene' was controlled by Hamas, who allowed or prevented specific people from being interviewed to the commision. Lastly, the commision did not take into account the Israeli side of the story, which allso included intelligence, photographs, witness accounts, and a whole lot of evidence. Criticise Israel all you want regarding cast lead, but I wouldnt base it on that report.

And, by the way, the war against Hamas, despite the huge amount of ordenence used by Israel, created far less civilian casualties than any modern Urban war since WWII. It definately says something, doesnt it..

Israel refused to cooperate with the report, which was extensive. It's obvious they were not only not careful, but deliberately targeted civilians and civilian infrastructure that had no military purpose, such as a waste treatment plant and an egg farm. I'm not comparing it to anything else.

Israel refused to cooperate with the report, which was extensive.


Just as the US would have refused to cooperate with a report instigated by North Korea, so as not to give a farce more credibility. Yet, under the table, Israel sent the commision numerous files, including 400 pages of information and evidence drafted by the foreign office, the Israeli High Courts ruling on the Gaza conflict during the conflict, and the IDF's internal investigation. None were used in the report, only Palestinian info. Thus, a one sided report can seem very informative and true when presented in a well written manner. The point still stands that this report received its mandate from a blatently anti-Israeli organization, it refused to listen to the Israeli side of the story, and its investigations in Gaza were compromised by Hamas's controll of the 'crime scene', witnesses, and areas in which they investigated.





It's obvious they were not only not careful, but deliberately targeted civilians and civilian infrastructure that had no military purpose, such as a waste treatment plant and an egg farm. I'm not comparing it to anything else.



If that is the case, then there hasnt been an urban battle in history that was much different. What you fail to understand is that war is organized chaos, and even if you accidentally hit the wrong target 1% of the time, then there will be enough damage to damn you to hell in a report, if that report is biased enough. The IDF can hit 99% of its military targets, but considering the fact that it initiated thousands of strikes, then dozens of incidents of totally non-military installations attacked is not only understandible, its impossible to think of an alternative without such a result. Allso, do not equate between Hamas and the IDF, because if the IDF is as immoral than Hamas, then the US is worse than the Taliban.

They never refused to listen to Israel's side of the story, Israel refused to cooperate. They did tell the other side of the conflict, to the extent that they could. They sited specific incidences of Hamas violence and torture. I do not accept that the UN is an inherently anti-Israeli institution. You have obviously not read the report. They systematically targeted food production with repeated and precise strikes. This wasn't complete chaos, it was planned. Let's at least deal with reality here.

Yet somehow, as usual, Israel is still being singled out.

Israel is being singled out because of the deliberate manner in which they targetted civilians and civilian areas, as well as civilian infrastructure.


Hell, in Fallujah, a town 10 times smaller then Gaza, the US killed 10 times more civilians in a few weeks

Does not make what Israel did and what Hamas did any more acceptable. Your argument is basically along the line of 'well if they did it, I can do it too'. That is not acceptable.

You also need to realise that during the incursion into Gaza, Israel also banned all media from entering or reporting on the war from Gaza. They also prevented aid workers from entering and investigating reports of war crimes during the incursion.

They never refused to listen to Israel's side of the story, Israel refused to cooperate.


You are mixing two things up. Israel refused to officially cooperate with the commision, since it was sent by the UNHRC and was allready biased. But under the table, Israel sent it numerous reports (Israeli high court rulings, evidence, aerial photo's, testimonies), none of which were used by the commision.



They did tell the other side of the conflict, to the extent that they could.


Based only on partiall information, only from one side, and that information was allready tainted by Hamas's controll of the scene and access to
witnesses.




I do not accept that the UN is an inherently anti-Israeli institution. You have obviously not read the report.




I did read the report, and as I said before, a well written biased report can seem very true, but just because it sounds proffesional, doesnt mean it reports the truth. By the way, I wasnt speaking of the UN, but rather the UNHRC, the body which sent the commision and set its onvestigative parameters and mandate. Allso, even Ban Kai Moon and Kofi Annan severely criticised the UNHRC for its anti-Israeli bias.




They systematically targeted food production with repeated and precise strikes.


Do you know what went on in the areas attacked by the IDF? Naturally not, and neither does the commision, since Hamas had 6 months to clear out any evidence of using civilian targets as military installations. On the other hand, there is enough evidence of Hamas's use of schools, hospitals, mosqs, and even zoo's as launching pads.

Israel is being singled out because of the deliberate manner in which they targetted civilians and civilian areas, as well as civilian infrastructure.



Israel is being singled out due to the large Muslim block in the UNHRC, which uses the council both to bash Israel (85% of their resolutions dealt with it), and to veto sanctions and investigations dealing with some of the worst human rights violators on earth... who sit in the council.




Does not make what Israel did and what Hamas did any more acceptable. Your argument is basically along the line of 'well if they did it, I can do it too'. That is not acceptable.



That's not my argument. My argument is that even the most moral armies in the world, in an urban environment, tend to hit alot of civilian infastructure because basically it is impossible to prevent it. Thus, it is hypocritical that something taken as a given for every country in the world, causes outrage when Israel tries to protect itself.




You also need to realise that during the incursion into Gaza, Israel also banned all media from entering or reporting on the war from Gaza. They also prevented aid workers from entering and investigating reports of war crimes during the incursion.



Yes, Im sure you would have loved for us to allow reporters and civilians to run along infront our front lines inside a battlefield, where many would probably have been killed and Israel would have been blamed. As it happens, every army engaging in offensive warfare restricts access to the battle-zone while fighting. It was evident in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.. The only instance where civilians or reporters are allowed in, is to accompany specifically prepared combat units.

Israel is being singled out because of the deliberate manner in which they targetted civilians and civilian areas, as well as civilian infrastructure.

I should point out these claims have yet to be proven, at this stage they're still charges waiting to be laid at the UN. Let's not get so trigger happy 'til all the facts are laid out and the presumedly innocent are proven guilty.


Does not make what Israel did and what Hamas did any more acceptable. Your argument is basically along the line of 'well if they did it, I can do it too'. That is not acceptable.

That doesn't address the issue being raised. I don't see many people saying the level of suffering in Gaza is acceptable. The point is how does the US escape war crimes trials for a crime of 10X the magnitude in Fallujah alone? How does Pakistan escape war crimes trials for the massacre of its own civilians in the Swat valley and the displacement of a million? What about Sri Lanka, fighting a people who sought independence and autonomy rather than to drive the Sinhalese out? I could go on and on. Why is Israel the first to be singled out when half the world is guilty of even more vicious activities? There's no excuse for a rational, mature person to ignore and dismiss these very legitimate questions. Why are they the only country in the world facing this level of international scrutiny and pending charges?

Israel is being singled out because of the deliberate manner in which they targetted civilians and civilian areas, as well as civilian infrastructure.



Does not make what Israel did and what Hamas did any more acceptable. Your argument is basically along the line of 'well if they did it, I can do it too'. That is not acceptable.

You also need to realise that during the incursion into Gaza, Israel also banned all media from entering or reporting on the war from Gaza. They also prevented aid workers from entering and investigating reports of war crimes during the incursion.

When Hamas so much as shots a pistol from a "civilian" area at the Israelis, it becomes legally under practically every law of warfare in existance, a "military" area.

So long as there is a smidgen of evidence that Hamas used a civilian area for ANY military purposes, Israel has every legal right to fire back with whatever amount of ordnance as they please.

I should point out these claims have yet to be proven, at this stage they're still charges waiting to be laid at the UN. Let's not get so trigger happy 'til all the facts are laid out and the presumedly innocent are proven guilty.



That doesn't address the issue being raised. I don't see many people saying the level of suffering in Gaza is acceptable. The point is how does the US escape war crimes trials for a crime of 10X the magnitude in Fallujah alone? How does Pakistan escape war crimes trials for the massacre of its own civilians in the Swat valley and the displacement of a million? What about Sri Lanka, fighting a people who sought independence and autonomy rather than to drive the Sinhalese out? I could go on and on. Why is Israel the first to be singled out when half the world is guilty of even more vicious activities? There's no excuse for a rational, mature person to ignore and dismiss these very legitimate questions. Why are they the only country in the world facing this level of international scrutiny and pending charges?

Because the palestinians are sore losers, and would shoot themselves just to make Israel look guilty.

Personally, I think every country bashing Israel is disgusting, not cause its bashing Israel, but because Its bashing Israel while choosing nott o help the Palestinians. If the Arabs truly considered the Palestinians their brtohers, theyd attack Israel asap, send troops to Palestine, evacuate the civilians. Etc, but instead, they are throwing insults at a country immune to them.

Post Link (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2369198#post2369198)

Shamelessly extracted from PZ Myers' pharyngula blog. For the full thing, click the link.

---

Print the pledge and ask all your teabagger/libertarian friends and family to sign it!

The Teabagger Socialist-Free Purity Pledge

I, ________________________________, do solemnly swear to uphold the principles of a socialism-free society and heretofore pledge my word that I shall strictly adhere to the following:

I will complain about the destruction of 1st Amendment Rights in this country, while I am duly being allowed to exercise my 1st Amendment Rights.

I will complain about the destruction of my 2nd Amendment Rights in this country, while I am duly being allowed to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights by legally but brazenly brandishing unconcealed firearms in public.

I will foreswear the time-honored principles of fairness, decency, and respect by screaming unintelligible platitudes regarding tyranny, Nazi-ism, and socialism at public town halls. Also.

I pledge to eliminate all government intervention in my life. I will abstain from the use of and participation in any socialist goods and services including but not limited to the following:

* Social Security
* Medicare/Medicaid
* Police, Fire, and Emergency Services
* US Postal Service
* Roads and Highways
* Air Travel (regulated by the socialist FAA)
...
* Sidewalks
* Public Water and Sewer Services (goodbye socialist toilet, shower, dishwasher, kitchen sink, outdoor hose!)
* Public and State Universities and Colleges
* Public Primary and Secondary Schools
...
* Libraries
* State and National Parks
...
* Medical Services and Medications That Were Created or Derived From Any Government Grant or Research Funding (again, pretty much all of them)
* Socialist Byproducts of Government Investment Such as Duct Tape and Velcro (Nazi-NASA Inventions)
* Use of the Internets, email, and networked computers, as the DoD's ARPANET was the basis for subsequent computer networking
...

...
I will not tour socialist government buildings like the Capitol in Washington, D.C.

I pledge to never take myself, my family, or my children on a tour of the following types of socialist locations, including but not limited to:

* Smithsonian Museums such as the Air and Space Museum or Museum of American History
* The socialist Washington, Lincoln, and Jefferson Monuments
* The government-operated Statue of Liberty
* The Grand Canyon
...
* All other public-funded socialist sites, whether it be in my state or in Washington, DC


I will urge my Member of Congress and Senators to forego their government salary and government-provided healthcare.

I will oppose and condemn the government-funded and therefore socialist military of the United States of America.

...

I will protest socialist security departments such as the Pentagon, FBI, CIA, Department of Homeland Security, TSA, Department of Justice and their socialist employees.

Upon reaching eligible retirement age, I will tear up my socialist Social Security checks.

Upon reaching age 65, I will forego Medicare and pay for my own private health insurance until I die.

SWORN ON A BIBLE AND SIGNED THIS DAY OF ____________ IN THE YEAR ______________.

___________________________ ___________________________

Signed Printed Name/Town and State

---

Mod Note: This is a thread OP redeemed from the cesspool

hype, what the hell is going on here?

Just play along and nobody gets hurt.

modnote: I made a merging error. I'm going to fix it, as soon as I learn how (sorry).

you cesspooled the administrators thread and now you are moving the posts wherever you feel like?

modnote:

Yep, that's what I've done. But we need not talk about it here (off topic). Silence. Discuss my clumsiness here (WE&Ping and Changing) (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2369081#post2369081) or here (thread merge proposal) (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=95950) or here (PM) (http://www.sciforums.com/private.php?do=newpm&u=8749) please.

but why?

Things are going wrong because we're always looking for an exemplary culprit, instead of becoming a caring community. In the USA I mean (returning to topic).

:confused:

what was wrong with that thread that you cesspooled and then moved only the op?

you are forum doctoring. but for what purpose?

Modnote:

I'll discuss it with you, but not exactly here. You can start a new thread in Site Feedback (http://www.sciforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=12), or (better yet) use an appropriate pre-existent thread there in Site Feedback. See you there- I'll delete (but still respond to) any further posts here (in this thread) from you, about any errors or recklessness on my part. All I know how to do at this point is make a merge expire in less than an hour. That's when I'm hoping to fix the merge error. As for JamesR's thread, no harm no foul, no error- His thread was fair moderator game, and you can still read, comment, revise, extend, on his OP or any elements of the cesspooled thread right here (just scroll compliantly up to Post # 84) where I think it fits in fine. If you find the insertion distracting, then I am sorry. Please ignore it.

But the OP was the whole problem. It was not accurate and we pointed out to that.

In hope that it helps, here's your post from the cesspooled thread, John99:


There are facets of government that will never be entirely privatized. Fire, sanitation and police are just a few. Of course this doesnt mean they are socialist. (http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2368786&postcount=4)

"But the OP was the whole problem. It was not accurate and we pointed out to that."

The OP from JamesR was quoted satire, intended to stimulate serious discussion. But you can have the last laugh, unless someone else wants to discuss sociophobia from a "what's wrong with the USA" standpoint.

Modnote:

I regret to inform the membership that I have merged threads incorrectly here, while learning moderation. I am working on/learning the process of restoring Cpt.Bork's excellent thread, What's wrong with America?, which was accidentally merged here by myself, commencing at present Post # 31 (http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2354496&postcount=31).

The Teabagger Socialist Purity Pledge Original Post and comments have been merged (and I expect will stay) here in a thread entitled Tea Party Activists (http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2368642&postcount=92)

Sorry for the confusion, everyone. I'm calling on more experienced moderators to help me sort my mistake out.