Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less

Bosnian_fan said:
You are not only implying that a) all Zionists are Jews, and b) all Jews are Zionists, you are also implying I said it. Which I didn't.

But to clarify things further, yes, I am anti-Zionist, and I see absolutely no issues with that. Conflating anti-zionism with anti-semitism is ridiculous and you can push that as far as you want, I don't care.

As for the other thing, I see that you are avoiding answering simple questions.

Why do you think powerful world governements are standing by Israel? Why do you think US government is allowing Israel to act the way Israel is acting? Do you think it would be equally open to Iran, Russia, China or any other country doing the same? Would it support it with weapons, intelligence, finances etc? Since we know it wouldn't, where do you think such support comes from?

And most important question of all right now.

Do you think Israel is commiting genocide?

Feel free to avoid answering these questions, but you will say more about yourself than you said about me by accusing me of anti-semitism.
Click to expand...

for what it's worth. I don't agree with Israeli policy and I think Netanyahu is deplorable.

A Zionist is someone who strives for a Jewish state and that the Jewish people should have the right to self-determination.

So by being a self-declared "Anti Zionist" you admit that you do not believe Jews are entitled to a state for themselves. Even though every single other major religion can self determine in a country of their own.
 
gfactor86 said:
for what it's worth. I don't agree with Israeli policy and I think Netanyahu is deplorable.

A Zionist is someone who strives for a Jewish state and that the Jewish people should have the right to self-determination.

So by being a self-declared "Anti Zionist" you admit that you do not believe Jews are entitled to a state for themselves. Even though every single other major religion can self determine in a country of their own.
Click to expand...

Sikhs can't.
 
Giggsy PO said:
Imagine pretending to be an expert (and broken record) on international law on football forum who knows better than all judges of ICJ.

I cannot comprehend why you havent already replaced all those judges.

Oh, wait. I know. Because judges decide on merit. You decide on your feelings and hatred.
Click to expand...
Imagine at this point still pretending this is not genocide.
 
gfactor86 said:
for what it's worth. I don't agree with Israeli policy and I think Netanyahu is deplorable.

A Zionist is someone who strives for a Jewish state and that the Jewish people should have the right to self-determination.

So by being a self-declared "Anti Zionist" you admit that you do not believe Jews are entitled to a state for themselves. Even though every single other major religion can self determine in a country of their own.
Click to expand...

It would be a great argument if zionists wanted to determine the borders of said state. But they don't because it allows them to deny palestinians rights to a state.
 
JPRouve said:
It would be a great argument if zionists wanted to determine the borders of said state. But they don't because it allows them to deny palestinians rights to a state.
Click to expand...

despite being the only country in the Middle East to offer the Palestinians a state. 7x times. All rejected
 
gfactor86 said:
despite being the only country in the Middle East to offer the Palestinians a state. 7x times. All rejected
Click to expand...

False, and you still did not answer my question I asked you 3 months ago, where is the command center under alshifa hospital?
 
Idxomer said:


See the whole thread. All of this is documented by the IOF, same as a lot of the savagery committed in Gaza. They are proud of their conduct and know there's no repercussion to their actions.
Click to expand...

Just imagine what they HAVEN'T documented. Scary though that is.
 
Giggsy PO said:
Technically you are right. The same applies Vice versa.

However there is a reason why it didnt rule in favor of ceasefire proposition.
Click to expand...

They were never going to rule either way. It will take years for them to reach a conclusion on the matter of genocide, and even then I wouldn't need the ICJ to tell me.
 
maniak said:
I guess discussing semantics is all you have left. If I was supporting genocide I'd also clutch to all available straws.
Click to expand...

If you have a problem with the rule of law concept, be my guest.

Repeating the same lies again and again only makes you look insecure. But please continue, hand out accusations, you the jury.
 
gfactor86 said:
Better than any offer they would get now or likely ever get. A missed opportunity
Click to expand...

You didn't answer. Is it because you don't know what the actual offers are or is it because the offers are close to shameful?

Do you think that any accord that includes executive powers being given(remaining) to IDF in a foreign territory including the control of water and power infrastructures but also settlements remaining in your country while giving unilateral policing powers to IDF when it comes to israelis and settlements that are in your country, is an acceptable accord?

Something like the Oslo Accord is disgraceful, the fact that people are championing it is shameful. As an example this is what the (not actual) withdrawal of IDF was legally planned, only a fool would agree to this:

It is understood that, subsequent to the Israeli withdrawal, Israel will continue to be responsible for external security, and for internal security and public order of settlements and Israelis. Israeli military forces and civilians may continue to use roads freely within the Gaza Strip and the Jericho area.
Click to expand...

In other word the legal plan was for IDF to not withdraw but also keep policing and border powers. The other thing is that the things IDF would give up were education and culture, health, social welfare, direct taxation and tourism. As you can see it didn't include things like power and water infrastructures, it doesn't actually include policing(of palestinians) or industries those were supposed to be negotiated by future committees and that was only true for palestinian territories, palestinian would obviously have no say on how and whom should manage Israeli territories.
 
Mike Smalling said:
They were never going to rule either way. It will take years for them to reach a conclusion on the matter of genocide, and even then I wouldn't need the ICJ to tell me.
Click to expand...
And there is a reason it will take years. Think about why.

Of course, you are entitled to your opinion to think whatever you want. But to use it in discussion as you are the judge, this is the truth and nothing else…and who has different opinion…you label him genocide supporter. That is just wrong. (This is not aimed at you personally, I dont remember if you did so).
 
Giggsy PO said:
Of course, you are entitled to your opinion to think whatever you want. But to use it in discussion as you are the judge, this is the truth and nothing else…and who has different opinion…you label him genocide supporter. That is just wrong. (This is not aimed at you personally, I dont remember if you did so).
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
Giggsy PO said:
And there is a reason it will take years. Think about why.

Of course, you are entitled to your opinion to think whatever you want. But to use it in discussion as you are the judge, this is the truth and nothing else…and who has different opinion…you label him genocide supporter. That is just wrong. (This is not aimed at you personally, I dont remember if you did so).
Click to expand...

Of course. I also don't really think the genocide label is all-important. It's not like the ICJ will come back in three years and say "No genocide", and everyone will go "Alright, fair enough. Let's move on". The important thing is that Israel is clearly (in my opinion) killing indiscriminately and exhibiting absolutely abhorrent, despicable, disgusting behavior, and they are backing it up with their vile rhetoric. The evidence is sadly plentiful. They are also lying and propagandizing publicly. Just earlier today I saw an interview, where Netanyahu said that the Hamas fighter to civilian death ratio was 1:1. Absolute horseshit. Meanwhile the US and European nations are either supporting it or looking on impotently.
 
Giggsy PO said:
Technically you are right. The same applies Vice versa.

However there is a reason why it didnt rule in favor of ceasefire proposition.
Click to expand...


The ruling on a cease-fire is unlikely as the initiation of the conflict falls within Israel's rights. However, the conduct of the war is another question and under investigation.

Comparisons of this situation to Russia's are not accurate; Russia invaded a sovereign country without provocation. (Not saying you are comparing it to it, but many are)
 
Giggsy PO said:
Did you miss the following posts, or are you just lying?
Click to expand...

No, I didn't miss the following posts, I know that you said it's "technically right" that it hasn't been a ruling, which is a weird way to say that there hasn't been a ruling.

You said that there is an ICJ ruling, which is wrong. Did you think that at the time, and attempt to correct yourself later, or did you know there had been no ruling when you said it had?

The ICJ said, in the interim ruling, that the genocide case is plausible. That is why it's continuing, rather than being thrown out. They did not rule on the matter, which is why the case is going on as planned.
 
NotThatSoph said:
No, I didn't miss the following posts, I know that you said it's "technically right" that it hasn't been a ruling, which is a weird way to say that there hasn't been a ruling.

You said that there is an ICJ ruling, which is wrong. Did you think that at the time, and attempt to correct yourself later, or did you know there had been no ruling when you said it had?

The ICJ said, in the interim ruling, that the genocide case is plausible. That is why it's continuing, rather than being thrown out. They did not rule on the matter, which is why the case is going on as planned.
Click to expand...
The most important provisional measure was not granted. Why?
 
gfactor86 said:
for what it's worth. I don't agree with Israeli policy and I think Netanyahu is deplorable.
Click to expand...
Yet all you do is defend the indiscriminate murder of civilians and find new, inventive ways to accuse critics of Israel of being anti-semites.

gfactor86 said:
You used an offensive antisemitic trope to suggest that "Zionists" (e.g. Jews) run the world. That they control the media and politics.
Click to expand...
I agree one should be careful not to fall into the trap of suggesting Jews rund the world, but @Bosnian_fan specifically avoided that by referring to Zionists, who famously don't have to be Jewish. Or is Joe Biden not a huge Zionist? Are the majority of Democrats and Republicans not Zionists? Are the majority of Labour and Tory politicians not Zionists? Have the big media outlets in the West (BBC, CNN, NYT, WaPo etc) not been pushing a narrative that favors Israel, effectively a Zionist narrative?
 
Giggsy PO said:
The most important provisional measure was not granted. Why?
Click to expand...

What a deflection, almost like you've practiced! If they didn't think the case had merit, they had the opportunity to throw it out. They didn't.

You also tried to use the fact that the court case is going to take years to insinuate what the decision will be. I know that you think Serbia committed genocide. Bosnia and Herzegovina took their case to the ICJ in 1993. In 1996 they decided that they had jurisdiction, and they ruled it a genocide in 2007.

How on earth have you ended up as someone lying about the ICJ, someone claiming that OJ Simpson is innocent, and by accident sowing doubts about the Bosnian genocide? You're so bad at this.
 
NotThatSoph said:
What a deflection, almost like you've practiced! If they didn't think the case had merit, they had the opportunity to throw it out. They didn't.

You also tried to use the fact that the court case is going to take years to insinuate what the decision will be. I know that you think Serbia committed genocide. Bosnia and Herzegovina took their case to the ICJ in 1993. In 1996 they decided that they had jurisdiction, and they ruled it a genocide in 2007.

How on earth have you ended up as someone lying about the ICJ, someone claiming that OJ Simpson is innocent, and by accident sowing doubts about the Bosnian genocide? You're so bad at this.
Click to expand...
You are not worth the effort if your conclusion is someone claimed OJ is innocent. Or completely missed the point why ICJ rulling take years. Or completely deflected Simple question About provisional measure. Or make your points without petty personal remarks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.