In fairness, they were a small force there to observe I think?
Israeli - Palestinian Conflict
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
In fairness, they were a small force there to observe I think?
Yes they were. Small, and very sensitive for human lives. Their own. Which is why they fled to the apartheid state next door.
At the time, he was the head if the UN, evidence now shows that he knew that thousands were dying EVERYDAY in the final phase of the war and then the UN intentionally downplayed the numbers, guess what buildings were being bombed? UN schools and Hospitals. Something cruelly ironic about that absolute piece of shit coming out and condemning Israel isn't there?
He also then met and shook hands with the very men behind those war crimes less than a week after the war ended. It took a channel 4 documentary called "Sri lanka's killing fields", to get anything to happen.
Ironicly 5 years on, after the departure of Ban Ki Moon, an independent inquiry is now taking place. An estimated 40,000-70,000 people died in those last few months.
Telll me again, how anything this vile human being says has any credibility?
We had an interesting thread on this topic several years ago (https://www.redcafe.net/threads/sri-lanka.233624/), with an excellent contribution from an otherwise PITA yet funny Yid (https://www.redcafe.net/threads/sri-lanka.233624/page-3#post-6350575).
I miss Plech. Excellent poster. I've kept this quote. Regards Plech if your viewing but restraining yourself as you promised you would.
"It seems to me that complaining about this is a bit like complaining that a home for battered women is sexist because it doesn't admit men. The place exists because Europeans (and later Arabs) couldn't stop themselves massacring their Jewish populations. If it's therefore racist in conception, so be it - better to live in a racist state than not to live at all"
Yep, that might be fair enough justification for Israelis to live in Israel. Still, it doesn't tackle the killing of innocent men, women and children which is the issue.
I would argue with Plech though, as history tells, that being massacred and persecutred does not generally get you a nation state. There must have been something else at play.
If Israel is going to take that position then it shouldn't extol themselves as the upholders of democracy. It is one or the other. Racist and undemocratic for a very good reason is still racist and undemocratic.
Of course, the conversation is always on Israel and Palestine with a very anti-Israel bias. Yet you don't hear the same disgust and condemnation coming from the same people when Assyrian Christians are rounded up and massacred on failure to convert to Islam. A friend of mine, a fellow Christian, has family living in Assyria and has told stories of how members of the family have had to lie about their religion to avoid death. They have historically been persecuted (as have so many Christian communities in the middle east) for hundreds of years and also under the Ottoman Turks who we previously heard in this thread treated other religious groups in an "OK" manner.
Why no "Free the Assyrians" marches?
Why no "Free the Assyrians" marches?
Look at that, none of those who are in uproar about this conflict, we're saying anything to between 40,000-70,000 innocent civilians being slaughtered in a matter of months. Surprise fecking surprise but no @holyland red @Fearless , it's definitely not because the people dying in this conflict are muslims, or that the aggressors are Jewish, that's got nothing to do with it.
To put this into perspective, the Sri Lankan government's war crimes and crimes against humanity took more lives in a FEW months than Israel has in the whole duration of this long drawn conflict.
I made this exact point a few pages back in this thread.
1) because this is the Israel thread
2) because no one is defending that persecution
3) are you sure you want to compare Israel to other oppressors?
Take your Christian pity party somewhere else.
See, look at the double standard. "Christian pity party". Pretty disgusting when you consider the atrocities that have been committed against a truly innocent Assyrian people.
A quick google search can inform you of the basics: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...secuted-Assyrian-Christians-are-in-limbo.html
TIm Stanley writes: The religious persecution in Iraq has seen one of the most vibrant Middle East Christian communities almost wiped out – forced to convert, driven from their homes or murdered. Conditions deteriorated after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, improved a little with the US-led surge in 2007 and now, with the advance of Isis, has descended to what might be described as genocide.
However, Romsin McQuade, a university student in America and a descendent of Assyrian Christians, argues that his particular community has always been subject to terror. The Assyrian Church of the East gained official recognition in the 4th century AD. It faced repression under the Ottoman Turks and shuffled around the region as a diaspora for much of the 20th century: moving between Iran and Iraq, while a large contingent found refuge in America. In this article charting the historical challenges facing his people, McQuade offers a solution: the creation of an autonomous safe haven.
Where's the outrage, Eboue? Where are the marches demanding action?
Start a thread. I'll register my disgust in the appropriate place. You want to know why there is no massive thread about it? Because everyone agrees, there is nothing to this. A conversation would go "gosh it's horrible what is happening" "yeah, it's tragic
" "my heart goes out to them". Contrast that with the defenses of Israeli policy in this thread.There's your smoking gun.
Start a thread. I'll register my disgust in the appropriate place. You want to know why there is no massive thread about it? Because everyone agrees, there is nothing to this. A conversation would go "gosh it's horrible what is happening" "yeah, it's tragic
There's your smoking gun.
Of course, I am aware the thread on here would be full of that sentiment, but my question concerns the media, the politicians, and the people who frequently march for the "freedom of Palestine". Why is there so much focus and energy poured into the one and yet these people who complain of genocide (something which is actually happening to the Assyrians) say and do nothing to motivate political action on behalf of the Assyrians. Apathy and silence is all we hear.
Also, you should really retract your comment about a "Christian pity party". That's a disgraceful thing for you to have said.
In a lot of these western countries, Israel has overt support. People want their governments to listen and change their policy. I'm not aware of British or American support for ISIS. Perhaps you can enlighten me.
You're hiding from the obvious. The emotional energy spent on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is totally disproportionate to that spent in instances where other minorities are persecuted in the Middle East. The whole point of the marches and outcry is to stand with the innocent Palestinians who have been killed in the Israeli-Palestian conflict and to effect some kind of political action. Why is this same determination not there for the Assyrians? Where is the visceral disgust for what is happening to them, such that our politicians must take greater action to relieve them? It's not there. And that's my point. This isn't simply about the murder of innocents or persecution; it comes from an ideological commitment that refuses to acknowledge Israel as a sovereign nation in the same way we would any other.
I've already explained why several posts up. You haven't even tried to refute my points, you just posted on in hopes that someone skim reading this will have missed that I made them. It doesn't reflect well on the strength of your argument.
Your point is that overt support for Israel in western nations is what causes ordinary people to decry what's happening in Gaza? So, hypothetically, if there was no such overt support for Israel, then there wouldn't be a media frenzy as a result of what Israel's currently doing in Gaza and people wouldn't take to the streets chanting: "Free Palestine?" It wouldn't be the focus of a political storm? It's all about who supports Israel and who doesn't?
You know it's a load of rubbish and it should be noted you still haven't retracted, or apologised for, your "Christian pity party" comment.
Do you have short term memory loss? We literally just had this discussion. Post #6212
I am not asking you why there isn't a thread on it here on red cafe, I am asking why there isn't the same national outcry about it and why it isn't the constant subject of media coverage? You really can't grasp the point, can you?
Also, post 6212 reads: "Because everyone agrees, there is nothing to this." That sentence means something other than what you intended to write/say.
His argument is absolutely sound.
I wonder how'd you react if it were ISIS chucking rockets at Israel?
Because there is a debate about it! Why do you think more people are fired up about the US's immigration policies than their Not Killing Kittens policy?
I would condemn it, just as I condemn Hamas shooting rockets at Israel. What is the point of your post?
That begs the question.
Why is there a debate about it? You're avoiding the point so you don't have to think about it.
why is there any debate about politics in a democracy?
There doesn't seem to be much of a debate on it on the sky news coverage I've seen. It is totally one sided, in much the same way the other broadcasters are. The point about it being a debate is pretty meh because there will be a debate over any issue that is thrust into the spotlight and where it's not exactly clear how the situation is to be resolved. My point is, people are incredibly motivated by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a way they simply aren't when it comes to the mass persecution and massacre of Assyrian Christians, as an example.
Why is there a debate? Let's ask this guy.
How can I be avoiding a question that literally no one has asked until just now? You are losing whatever small ground you had to stand on. You are flopping all over the place and I haven't even gotten into the implications of you comparing the murder of one group with the murder of Palestinian civilians. YOU placed the Palestinian dead on a level with the massacres Christians and in doing so placed the IDF on a level with ISIS.
I wonder if more logical posters like holyland red cringe to read your posts that are supposedly in support of them.
Again. Why is there any public debate about politics in a democracy?
First I wasn't answering your points, presumably repeating myself, and now I am flopping all over the place. The second conclusion you make that I have placed the IDF on the same level as ISIS just demonstrates that you still don't understand my central point (one which I certainly haven't flopped one way or another on).
The passions incited by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are totally disproportionate to those incited by other narratives of persecution in the middle east that don't involve Israel. Now, of course I am not saying that Israel's "persecution" of the Palestinians is anything like that of ISIS. It is the other side of the argument that mentions "genocide" and Israel's "war crimes" but when these things are really being carried out on Assyrian Christians, nobody expresses moral outrage or organises mass marches to the chant of "free the Assyrians".
I am sorry to say it, Eboue, but you're the illogical one here. I don't know how you can talk of others cringing when they read my thoughts when you post such veritable crap.
How do you still not understand why this conflict gets more attention? How do you not get that? It is astounding to me.
I understand exactly "how" it gets more attention, I am just astounded you can't see the difference between "how" and "should". The Israeli-Palestinian conflict should not generate more moral outrage (on either side) than the massacre of the Assyrians. Are you defending the position that it should? Are you so stubborn that you cannot acknowledge the point still?
What's the price of tea in China?
I find that being right often makes me stubborn.
You really are the worst poster to engage with in this thread. You can be corrected on any number of things, from your poor understanding and use of grammar to your silly misrepresentations of another's thoughts and yet you just claim yourself right, and that it's the simpletons you're having to engage with who just don't understand. You never demonstrate why they're wrong or the error in their thinking, you just state it.
There are a few words for it, none of them flattering.
I could easily answer your "question"/refute your argument. If you really think about it, you might come up with many different reasons, why the israel-palestine conflict gets much more attention than other conflicts. Its not that hard.
On the other side, you are not able to answer a very simple question.
I'm not against Israel or the state of Israel. (Although, it is highly debatable to say that Israel exists because of the massacre of Jewish populations. On the other hand, the establishment of Israel was fuelled by the holocaust.)
What I am against, as are many who have been posting in this thread over the past few weeks, is the indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians including many women & children. And what's more, because of this there is less hope than ever of finding a long term solution to the conflict. So in my opinion not only is it wrong, it's extremely foolish as well.
You are the only person I consider to be a simpleton. Fearless is a racist but has twice the debating skills you do. I quite like holyland and Amir. Anyway, I have made my points and see no value in engaging you further so I will leave it at that.
And then comes the: "Not worth my time," crescendo as he flounces from the room.
It would be more of a decrescendo actually. Which makes this, I don't know, the coda?