Fox News analyst compares Israelis to Nazis

[virtuoso]

On the contray I was not taking your words out of context, you must be completely insane if you think this massacre is what you describe as keeping absurdity at a minimum. No lets not twist things here if you call Hezbollah and Hamas terrorists then you can not be a hypocrite and call Irgun a "defence force" Irgun were terrorists. In fact the commander then went onto become a future prime minister. You can not have it both ways either they are both terror units or they are both defence forces. You can not pick and choose

[I TO DA GEEZY]

If you wanna call the Irgun terrorists, please do so. Though fact is the two groups are incomparable morally. Irgun was created to defend the Jewish population in Palestine from Arab aggression that started after WW1. The Irgun wasn't about harming Jews, it was about defending Jews. Does Hamas or Hezbollah care for any Palestinian\Arab lives at all?- had they cared they would either do something to make the Palestinians\Arabs feel it[: 1. Either by refraining from attacking an adversary much stronger 2. Or by managing to somehow destroy their adversary.] or they would at least stop encouraging Arabs\Palestinians to commit acts such as suicide bombings. In addition, Israel had never expressed intents of belligerence, even though it responded harshly to attacks, unlike the Arab groups from which the Irgun had to protect the Jewish population.

Israel has proven many times it can't be simply wiped off the map. They also know it. Question is why they keep going what they do?- Because Hamas cares for the Palestinians? Because Hezbollah cares for the Lebanese?.....gimme a break man.


P.S Absurdity would be leting terrorists have their way with Israeli citizens. Absurdity is being a sovereign state that allowes terrorists to undermine its sovereignty and declare war on other countries on behalf of the sovereign. That's the kind of absurdity I was talking about.

[virtuoso]

What do you expect them to do? live in squalor just watch the israelis impose yet more 24 hr curfews, IDF soldiers firing rockets from helicopters into a crowd of demonstrators, the IDF said they would investigate but no one ever replied. Are they meant to sit idly by as IDF soldiers shoot civilians with live rounds when the demonstrators throw stones? are they meant to just accept that their land is stolen? are they meant to accept that the israelis refuse to recognise them? are they just to accept tyranny? are they just to accept that despite being there for 10.000 years, despite being ethnically cleansed, the UN resolutions call it "deported" that they have no right to return? are they just to accept that Israel can incarcerate civilians indefinitely without trial?
Come on

[virtuoso]

And dont try something cheap like calling me a racist  i have no hatred towards any race. Also do not talk about the deal that Arafat walked away from, I keep hearing this crap on tv and lo and behold when I look into it THERE WERE SOME QUITE BIG STUMBLING BLOCKS
Namely
1) It did not give palestinians the right of self defence
2) It did not recognise palestinians
3) It barred the palestinians from having any kind of a military
4) It did not create a soversign area, meaning the Israelis were still free to violate the apportioned area at will
5) It did not give the right of return for 2 million refugees

I am just so sick and tired of the deceit and lies and misinformation, and yes I know that other arab countries are complicit in this also, namely Egypt and Jordan. You strike me sometimes as being intelligent to which is ironic, even if you support this completely immoral attacking of the entire Lebanon you should be smart enough to see the bigger agenda. If they keep trying to provoke Iran and Syria then we will have World War 3 they meaning the western powers not just Israel.

[I TO DA GEEZY]

These conditions of combat are being imposed by the Palestinian leadership when the IDF responds to Kassam missiles.. They don't care for Palestinian lives...how much proof do u need...why don't you condemn their brainwash of children....they tell children they gonna go to heaven if they go out like Shahids.  Hezbollah is hiding weapons in populated ereas knowing they are going to be bombed. They are  playing a media war, and you so easily fall into their trap. They want you to see every Lebanese dead they want you to see every Palestinian dead but one thing you guys never understand- Terrorists look at their casualties and FEEL nothing. Their casualties are just a token in their Media war against Israel. So far they're succeeding, terror has legitimacy.

[virtuoso]

Look, I have already said that I condemn the targeting of civilians but these are terror tactics being used by Israel also. Kidnappings indiscriminate bombings, admitted indiscriminate bombings, destruction of basic vital infirastructure, you can not say I am brainwashed when I recognise the terror of missiles. However you can't talk about the terror of missiles which you say yourself you have experienced (which by the way I am sorry you have had to) without then recognising just how many missiles and shells are flattening out Lebanon right now.

[I TO DA GEEZY]

There is no doubt shells hit Lebanon just like there is no doubt missiles hit north-Israel. There is not doubt shells hit Gaza just like there is not doubt missiles hit Shderot. We all know things are fucked up. You also probably know, Hezbollah would like Israel to be removed from the world's map just like Hamas would like Israel to be removed from the world's map. You understand Israel will not aid these groups in their cause. Im not even talking about history (Land disputes), or about the Hamas Charter (Which by the way doesn't even stand for a Palestinian State). I want you to understand Israel is not going to help these people destroy it, and more importantly harm its citizens. Israel, no matter how immoral you reckon it to be, has never encouraged the death of its own citizens (lol...we dont even have a death penalty). In fact, Israel is known to react harshly to death and assaults on its citizenry (I think you'd agree to this assessment). Now I would like you to ask yourself whether this important notion, life preservation of the citizenry, could be attributed to either Hamas or Hezbollah? I understand innocent people are dieing on both sides. It's dreadful, today a 15 year old died and god knowes how many people in Lebanon. But I assure you MORE people will die on their side, this is something you know. Question is why then, knowingly their government allowes Hezbollah to provoke such reactions from Israel?

[virtuoso]

This goes back further than that, most recently Israels refusal to recognise the democratically elected government, despite what you think of them withholding aid was totally immoral and this once again lit the anger inside of palestinians and gives these groups you talk about a reason a provocation. It's not Israels right to self defence which I am calling into question its their savage response that I am. When Israel is talking about prolonging the indiscriminate bombing and shelling of Lebanon indefinitely. We both know that things are not as black and white as the media would have you believe like I said your a smart person, you know as well I do that Israel has always rejected a deal when it comes to Hamas disarming. What makes this situation worse of course, is that if Israel does not pull back from the brink does not stop violating international law then the situation will get much much worse.

We should all be calling for peace, none of us should be shrugging our shoulders the ramifications like I said are just unimaginable. I don't want to see anymore lebanese die or be maimed any less or anymore than I want to see jewish people/christian people die.

[I TO DA GEEZY]

I know of millions of dollars that have been transferred to the Palestinian Authority shortly after the begining of Olmert's cadence. That is even though Kassams were being launched at the time into Israeli territory. As far as indiscriminate bombings go, I can tell you Israel's bombings are more discriminate than the Kassam rocket launches and Hezbollah's Katiushas altogether. Problem is, Israeli bombings in Lebanon hit weaponry amassments to prevent Hezbollah from using them, a thing which causes the power of explosion to increase.
As far as International Law goes it's largely a question of interpretation. Once I have been presented with a report of Israel's, so called, violations of Intenrational Law- close to a hundred I think, maybe even more, while the Palestinian Authority DIDN'T EVEN HAVE ONE. I have dealt with the subject of International Law before when I was asked whether Israel could be held as legally responsible:

Question is whether you view the terms "cause of death" and "responsibility for death" as perpetual equivalents?

I agree that in a single legal system, under a single convention, resulting in a single sovereign assigned to maintain the safety of his subordinates (BTW this is the only political environment in which TRUE law can exist), both concepts should be, and are, equivalent.
However, when we are debating about clashes of two, or more, sovereign entities, these concepts deviate from each other in meaning.
In a war, what responsibility does one side hold toward the casualties of another?- None, the legal responsibility is laid upon the sovereign to which the casualty pertains.That is because the fundamental reason for the existence of a sovereign is his capacity to provide the safety and protection of his subordinates- by failing to do so he undermines the convention with his subordinates, hence the reason for his political power and existence.

There are no actual legal obligations between two sides at war- that's what war means by definition. Law exists only as part of a convention. War means absence of convention between the sides. Hence, "cause of death" and "responsibility for death" mean different things when we're not discussing a situation within the boundaries of a single set of laws under a single sovereign.

War means absence of convention between the sides, war means absence of agreement between the sides. Absence of agreement between the sides means absence of unitary law applicable to both sides, hence the absence of legal responsibility between the sides.

This is why the concept of International Law is hollow of meaning, because this is the only law originating in a non-existent sovereign. A law does not exist without a sovereign. A sovereign is a product of convention as much as a convention is a product of a sovereign (Chicken and egg type of thing especially in democracies). An International Law can not exist without an international sovereign. That is unless you truly believe we're living in a global state or that the UN is a substantial international sovereign.


P.S
Me personally, Im all for peace, Im for one global democratical state man. I believe nationality by definition is harmful. But the status quo is a world with borders and states. A world in which the state is there to protect ME from anarchy.

[virtuoso]

Problem is your doing it again your saying that international law becomes obsolete when two nations are at war and yet even if such a notion was true you say the reason it becomes null and void is because in this case Israel is defending its people. That statement does not hold up when you look at the complete annhilation of Lebanon, who is that protecting? lets put aside the niceties of international law for a moment and reflect on the actions themselves they are morally abhorrent you know yourself that what Israel is doing is morally abhorrent but instead people like you who support israel in other words jews and non jews alike make yourselves look very extreme by instead choosing not to comment on the actions. There is nothing selective about the targeting of an entire country and they arent accidentally incinerating convoys that is just cold blooded murder.

[I TO DA GEEZY]

The statement would be valid in regard to any country, Israel or any other country. Killing per se could be classified as morally abhorrent, true. Morals as you know are a derivative of culture. I'm telling you this to show you it's often a local thing- Aztecs sacrificed thousands of people to their gods without considering their killing as abhorrent but as normative. Western Culture views killing per se as morally abhorrent, agreed. Although even Western Culture representatives, under certain circumstances, will overlook this principle (Death penalty, War, Self-Defense etc). Israel, a representative of western culture, is confronted with such circumstances. Israel is facing an enemy who doesn't view killing per se as abhorrent. This is a cultural war. This is not to claim one culture is better than another, god forbid. I'm a Social Studies student, the first thing they teach us is there are no GOOD or BAD cultures, there are only different cultures ( ). All Im trying to say is that you can't even apply a single cultural scale of morals in such a conflict. Just like you can't apply a single legal scale.

[virtuoso]

You can try and define and analyse who thinks what is morally abhorrent, but the fact is these actions are totally criminal, you can not massacre a nation and expect to get away with it but Israel thinks it can. You can not justify the deliberate destruction and murder of convoys but israel thinks it can, you can not flatten an entire country and expect to get away with it but again Israel thinks it can. Anyway in the midst of what is going on at the moment stay safe.

[I TO DA GEEZY]

That's a common mistake. People think there is something to "justify". Justice and criminality are derivatives of conventions. A sovereign is obliged to protect his citizenry, that's the only convention we're dealing here with. The rest is just demagogy.


I'm all for peace.

[virtuoso]

Then by the same token you are saying the Nuremberg trials were a travesty?, after all a lot of those that got tried were on charges of indiscriminate bombing, they were just protecting their soverign nation after all

P.S While Israel continues to treat the palestinians like a piece of shit then there will never be peace.

[I TO DA GEEZY]

Then by the same token you are saying the Nuremberg trials were a travesty?

Largely yes. I think by definition these were display trials . They were a travesty because they have contributed to the feeble idea of International Law (With the absence of International convention) most likely in an initial attempt to achieve global domination by the big winners of WW2. There's this saying " In a war there's no right or wrong". Just like Germany was blamed for everything after WW1, it was blamed after WW2. Only that this time it seemed to make more sense because of all the "Jew-killing" that went on.

I don't treat Palestinians like shit. I have many friends who don't. I have even Palestinian buddies. The reason there's no peace has more to do with the conduct of the Palestinian leadership.