Israel excluded from Counter-terrorism International convention

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Link: http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000755761&fid=1725

The US blocked Israel's participation in the Global Counterterrorism Forum's (GCTF) first meeting in Istanbul on Friday, even though Israel has one of the most extensive experiences in counterterrorism in the world. A pro-Israeli source in Washington told "Globes" that Israel was excluded from the meeting because of fierce objections by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
Israel tried hard to obtain an invitation to the meeting, and its exclusion, despite the tight US-Israeli intelligence ties, has greatly disappointed officials in Jerusalem.
The GCTF, one of the pillars of President Barack Obama's antiterrorism campaign, was established in September 2011. The White House calls the forum as a wise use of force against terrorism, and chose Turkey as the forum's joint chair, together with the US.

29 countries are participating in the GCTF, ten of which are Arab and/or Muslim countries: Algeria, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Morocco, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates. Other members include China, Russia, India, and Western European countries.
"The GCTF sought from the outset to bridge old and deep divides in the international community between Western donor nations and Muslim majority nations. And it has, I think, done that quite effectively," said a top US official at the press briefing before the opening session.

Republican politicians claim that, since one third of the GCTF's members are Muslim countries, the Obama administration is trying to deepen ties with the Muslim world at Israel's expense.
In response to numerous questions about Israel's exclusion from the GCTF session in Istanbul raised at a press conference yesterday, the State Department opted to focus on the questions: Has Israel requested membership to the Global Counterterrorism Forum? Has the United States, as a co-host of the forum, sought to get Israel involved?

A State Department spokesman replied, "Our idea with the GCTF was to bring together a limited number of traditional donors, front line states, and emerging powers develop a more robust, yet representative, counterterrorism capacity-building platform. A number of our close partners with considerable experience countering and preventing terrorism are not included among the GCTF's founding members.

"We have discussed the GCTF and ways to involve Israel in its activities on a number of occasions, and are committed to making this happen."

Pro-Israeli sources say that the Obama administration decided to ignore the fact that Turkey, which has a key role in the GCTF, opposes calling Hamas a terrorist organization, even though Hamas is included on the State Department's list of terrorist organizations. In an interview with the US media last May, Erdogan said that he did not consider Hamas a terrorist organization, but as a resistance movement trying to protect its country from occupation. He said that Hamas won elections in the Gaza Strip in 2006, and that, therefore, calling it a terrorist organization was an insult to the Palestinian people.

For its part, Turkey calls the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), which is seeking to establish a Kurdish state in southeast Turkey and northern Iraq, as a terrorist organization, and the US supports this position.

.
The USA bargaining for the support of Turkey (With the second largest military in NATO) and Israel, and it looks like it went for appeasing Turkey this time around. What boggles my mind is that Israel has nothing to do in a counter-terrorism international convention, when it had been one of the few countries in the world to have experienced great instances of terrorism on its soil, paired with Russia, Turkey, Sri Lanka, and I'm sure you'll find other good examples that don't come to mind at the moment.

What is also interesting is that by Turkey's standards, the PKK is a terrorist organization while Israel does not hold the same opinion. Hamas and the PLO could also be called a terrorist organization (Nowadays the PLO is not a terror organization) but also one of freedom fighters. Turkey does not currently call Hamas a terrorist organization.
This shows that terrorists for one side might be freedom fighters for the other.

Yeah, this doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either. There's a good reason El Al is the safest airline in the world.

Rustlin' Jimmies:
Yeah, this doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either. There's a good reason El Al is the safest airline in the world.

Are you joking? Israel has horrible counter-terrorism policies. They invaded Lebanon to get rid of the PLO attacking them, they succeeded but they were so horrible and indiscriminate that militia groups such as Hezbollah which were pro-Israel were so outraged at the carnage against civilians that they filled the void left by the PLO. That's not to mention their policies towards Palestine have made it more violent, the old Infitada just consisted of mostly peaceful protests and the most violent action being stone throwing. Now it's full scale fighting. Israel was so bad at handling its own problems that it made them even worse as a consequence.

Besides the "terrorism" El Al encountered wasn't even that bad, all it consisted of was PLO agents boarding them, landing them, evacuating the passengers then blowing the planes up to bring attention to their cause. That's hardly terrorism at all.

Warforger:

Rustlin' Jimmies:
Yeah, this doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either. There's a good reason El Al is the safest airline in the world.

Are you joking? Israel has horrible counter-terrorism policies. They invaded Lebanon to get rid of the PLO attacking them, they succeeded but they were so horrible and indiscriminate that militia groups such as Hezbollah which were pro-Israel were so outraged at the carnage against civilians that they filled the void left by the PLO. That's not to mention their policies towards Palestine have made it more violent, the old Infitada just consisted of mostly peaceful protests and the most violent action being stone throwing. Now it's full scale fighting. Israel was so bad at handling its own problems that it made them even worse as a consequence.

Besides the "terrorism" El Al encountered wasn't even that bad, all it consisted of was PLO agents boarding them, landing them, evacuating the passengers then blowing the planes up to bring attention to their cause. That's hardly terrorism at all.

yeah i mean those 16 killed and 99 wounded were injured and shot by other guys during the same day then right? not the PLO gunmen they're innocent. Also no counter terrorism organization is perfect they all fuck up and usually leave things worse then before.

Yes let's discuss how to stop terrorists while excluding perhaps the single most experienced country. U.S., this should be about stopping terrorists, not kissing up to other countries.

Xan Krieger:
Yes let's discuss how to stop terrorists while excluding perhaps the single most experienced country. U.S., this should be about stopping terrorists, not kissing up to other countries.

]

They have experience with terrorism because they terrorize people.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/16/un_inquiry_finds_israel_punished_and

http://www.btselem.org/

To be honest, I think that Israel's presence would have been disruptive. It makes sense to me to not include them considering the antagonistic nature of the relationships between Israel and the other countries of the Middle East (which goes both ways) I think that their presence would have caused undue tension that wouldn't have been conducive to a productive convention.

GrimTuesday:
To be honest, I think that Israel's presence would have been disruptive. It makes sense to me to not include them considering the antagonistic nature of the relationships between Israel and the other countries of the Middle East (which goes both ways) I think that their presence would have caused undue tension that wouldn't have been conducive to a productive convention.

.
Uhhh.... You do realize that what you just said made no sense. Do you understand what was the committee they were excluded from, and that it was one major meeting in Istanbul?
.

Dinoflagellate:

Xan Krieger:
Yes let's discuss how to stop terrorists while excluding perhaps the single most experienced country. U.S., this should be about stopping terrorists, not kissing up to other countries.

]

They have experience with terrorism because they terrorize people.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/16/un_inquiry_finds_israel_punished_and

http://www.btselem.org/

.
You're so clever, you and your clever puns and absolute lack of anything productive to say. So clever. There's a topic, read he opening post.
.

Xan Krieger:
Yes let's discuss how to stop terrorists while excluding perhaps the single most experienced country. U.S., this should be about stopping terrorists, not kissing up to other countries.

.
They are gearing up for a confrontation with Iran and/or Syria, Turkey is a much better military ally in the region than Israel.
.

Probably a clever move...how much is the conference actually going to achieve? As a political gesture, not a bad idea.

Actual progress being made would likely not be done at a nice shiny forum full of soundbites.

thaluikhain:
Probably a clever move...how much is the conference actually going to achieve? As a political gesture, not a bad idea.

Actual progress being made would likely not be done at a nice shiny forum full of soundbites.

.
These were my exact thoughts.

TheIronRuler:

GrimTuesday:
To be honest, I think that Israel's presence would have been disruptive. It makes sense to me to not include them considering the antagonistic nature of the relationships between Israel and the other countries of the Middle East (which goes both ways) I think that their presence would have caused undue tension that wouldn't have been conducive to a productive convention.

.
Uhhh.... You do realize that what you just said made no sense. Do you understand what was the committee they were excluded from, and that it was one major meeting in Istanbul?
.

Dinoflagellate:

Xan Krieger:
Yes let's discuss how to stop terrorists while excluding perhaps the single most experienced country. U.S., this should be about stopping terrorists, not kissing up to other countries.

]

They have experience with terrorism because they terrorize people.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/16/un_inquiry_finds_israel_punished_and

http://www.btselem.org/

.
You're so clever, you and your clever puns and absolute lack of anything productive to say. So clever. There's a topic, read he opening post.
.

Xan Krieger:
Yes let's discuss how to stop terrorists while excluding perhaps the single most experienced country. U.S., this should be about stopping terrorists, not kissing up to other countries.

.
They are gearing up for a confrontation with Iran and/or Syria, Turkey is a much better military ally in the region than Israel.
.

I am witty thankyou and I didn't say anything productive because there is nothing productive to say about warcrimes. I don't like Israel because the government is generally antagonistic, you know being an occupying force and doing some of the nasty things that are related to being an occupying force.

p.s sorry for quoting entire thing which seems like a waste of space.

Dinoflagellate:

-snip-
I am witty thankyou and I didn't say anything productive because there is nothing productive to say about warcrimes. I don't like Israel because the government is generally antagonistic, you know being an occupying force and doing some of the nasty things that are related to being an occupying force.

p.s sorry for quoting entire thing which seems like a waste of space.

.
They are occupying... what, exactly? the nonexistent state of Palestine? The Palestinian Authority was agreed upon in proper negotiations in Oslo, it became an autonomy under Israel. Palestinians were given the right for self governance. The PA disengaged and broke the Oslo Accords, starting with violent protests and later full blown terror actions. They were supposed to have proper negotiations in camp David and sort out that mess, agree on conditions for peace and release the PA as a sovereign nation. THe negotiations failed, and the PA began with its violent uprising.

keiskay:
Also no counter terrorism organization is perfect they all fuck up and usually leave things worse then before.

So Israel annihilating an entire city to kill one guy ,and with probably some knowledge that there were you know civilians in those buildings, is just " not perfect"? That's hardly even trying. That's just responding to terrorism with more terrorism. Although considering Israel was founded on terrorism who would expect any different? Israel's actions in South Lebanon alone is perfect reason to say that they have shitty counter-terrorism alone ignoring say regional policy no need to bring up any other area.

I'm not saying Israel shouldn't go to this conference on those grounds alone, I'm just saying their counter-terrorism is shit.

A smart move, since any benifits gained from Israel's experience would be negated by people hating them being there. Last time I checked Israel still boarded a Turkish ship in international waters and recieved no punishment for it. Nor did they apologise for using the identities of British and Australian nationals without their conscent to perform an assassination. Nor any of the other morally questionable and legally objectionable actions they've carried out over the years in the name of counter-terrorism.

While I would think Israel does have some useful information to share, the fact that the government is willing to extra-legally assassinate Iranian scientists on the mere off-chance that those scientists might be working on a nuclear weapon is a pretty good reason to keep them out of the talk. That is, in essence, a form of terrorism. If Israel's tactics can be ignored, we may as well invite Al Qaeda to join.

Shaoken:
A smart move, since any benifits gained from Israel's experience would be negated by people hating them being there. Last time I checked Israel still boarded a Turkish ship in international waters and recieved no punishment for it. Nor did they apologise for using the identities of British and Australian nationals without their conscent to perform an assassination. Nor any of the other morally questionable and legally objectionable actions they've carried out over the years in the name of counter-terrorism.

.
A shitload of international incidents occurred because Israel had its agents use foreign passports. Hell, it happened ever since its founding and the nazi hunting days.
.

Warforger:

keiskay:
Also no counter terrorism organization is perfect they all fuck up and usually leave things worse then before.

So Israel annihilating an entire city to kill one guy ,and with probably some knowledge that there were you know civilians in those buildings, is just " not perfect"? That's hardly even trying. That's just responding to terrorism with more terrorism. Although considering Israel was founded on terrorism who would expect any different? Israel's actions in South Lebanon alone is perfect reason to say that they have shitty counter-terrorism alone ignoring say regional policy no need to bring up any other area.

I'm not saying Israel shouldn't go to this conference on those grounds alone, I'm just saying their counter-terrorism is shit.

.
I wouldn't classify what happened in Lebanon as counter terrorism. Indeed it was the initial goal, but in the end a terrible civil war took place and Israel wanted to assist the side which will not shoot rockets at it after it wins. Remember the Syrian intervention, and how local militias slaughtered people in refugee camps. The war in South Lebanon wasn't counter-terrorism after it went past its assumed end date and turned a short operation to a full scale long and bloody war.

Katatori-kun:
While I would think Israel does have some useful information to share, the fact that the government is willing to extra-legally assassinate Iranian scientists on the mere off-chance that those scientists might be working on a nuclear weapon is a pretty good reason to keep them out of the talk. That is, in essence, a form of terrorism. If Israel's tactics can be ignored, we may as well invite Al Qaeda to join.

.
Do the operations made by the USA of a similar nature in other countries also exclude it? The UK? France? Russia? Assassination, coup de-tats... The cold war hadn't ended, the blocks were merely swapped.

Warforger:

Rustlin' Jimmies:
Yeah, this doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either. There's a good reason El Al is the safest airline in the world.

Are you joking? Israel has horrible counter-terrorism policies. They invaded Lebanon to get rid of the PLO attacking them, they succeeded but they were so horrible and indiscriminate that militia groups such as Hezbollah which were pro-Israel were so outraged at the carnage against civilians that they filled the void left by the PLO. That's not to mention their policies towards Palestine have made it more violent, the old Infitada just consisted of mostly peaceful protests and the most violent action being stone throwing. Now it's full scale fighting. Israel was so bad at handling its own problems that it made them even worse as a consequence.

Besides the "terrorism" El Al encountered wasn't even that bad, all it consisted of was PLO agents boarding them, landing them, evacuating the passengers then blowing the planes up to bring attention to their cause. That's hardly terrorism at all.

you are mistaking government policy for counter terrorism. boots on the ground the israeli's have some of the best, most experienced and most highly trained counter terrorist operatives and teams in the world.

its negligent to exclude a country thats had the most experience with counter terrorism and counter insurgency

TheIronRuler:

I wouldn't classify what happened in Lebanon as counter terrorism. Indeed it was the initial goal, but in the end a terrible civil war took place and Israel wanted to assist the side which will not shoot rockets at it after it wins. Remember the Syrian intervention, and how local militias slaughtered people in refugee camps.

You do realize Syria and Israel supported the same side right? In fact Israel did the same thing letting the Christian militia to slaughter Palestinian refugee's at camps that the Israeli's themselves controlled. There was a huge commotion that eventually led up to the Begin himself.

nikki191:

you are mistaking government policy for counter terrorism. boots on the ground the israeli's have some of the best, most experienced and most highly trained counter terrorist operatives and teams in the world.

its negligent to exclude a country thats had the most experience with counter terrorism and counter insurgency

Except that's probably the same thing, counter-terrorism is supposed to end terrorism right? If the main problem is government policy then I don't see the difference. If it's not producing results, it's not working basically.

Warforger:

TheIronRuler:

I wouldn't classify what happened in Lebanon as counter terrorism. Indeed it was the initial goal, but in the end a terrible civil war took place and Israel wanted to assist the side which will not shoot rockets at it after it wins. Remember the Syrian intervention, and how local militias slaughtered people in refugee camps.

You do realize Syria and Israel supported the same side right? In fact Israel did the same thing letting the Christian militia to slaughter Palestinian refugee's at camps that the Israeli's themselves controlled. There was a huge commotion that eventually led up to the Begin himself.

nikki191:

you are mistaking government policy for counter terrorism. boots on the ground the israeli's have some of the best, most experienced and most highly trained counter terrorist operatives and teams in the world.

its negligent to exclude a country thats had the most experience with counter terrorism and counter insurgency

Except that's probably the same thing, counter-terrorism is supposed to end terrorism right? If the main problem is government policy then I don't see the difference. If it's not producing results, it's not working basically.

.
I know, though now that the block on military information was lifted (More than 30 years had passed since the start of the Lebanon war) it looks like that military of Israel bloody lied to its government when stating its goals and that Ariel Sharon (Head of IDF at the time) worked on his own accord and under Begin's nose (going as far as lying to him).
.
No, no... Do you consider the '67 war a war of aggression by Israel or a defensive war? I know this sounds a bit unimportant at the moment but I'm getting somewhere with it.
Israel was aware of Syria and Egypt positioning their armor and infantry at the border and preparing for war. They struck first as to try and take away the Arab's perceived advantage of surprise.
I don't think these are counter-terror acts, the same way operation molten lead wasn't.
There are special military units designed to infiltrate enemy civil ranks and Israel's intelligence community is pretty capable.

Considering about half the convention is muslim and that half might have left or might not have attended in the future with one wrong word from the Isreali representative (Which, judging by UN forum. Happends an awfull lot considering they are diplomats) I think it was a good call.

Putting the whole convention in jeopardy to make one country attend would be a bad idea both theoretically and practically. And Israel has shown no evidence that gives us any reason to believe that it will act like a civilized western country when in the company of its.... not too friendly neighbors.

That and the whole recent 'assasination of Iranian scientists' thing probably threw out the support of the last muslim countries that might have wanted Israel to attend. And since we are talking about an intelligence network, well. I sorta doubt Israel would share any of theirs with the muslims, and I also doubt the muslims would wanna share any with Israel. Israel getting its information through the US like usual will achieve the exact same thing as being a part of this unit as a whole. With much less chance of political fallout. (If Israel tries to whinge on the international scene it 'is' just one small country that can easily be ignored. The whole of the Arab league would shout quite a bit louder, and there is no reason to strain our relations with them any more than they already)

Nikolaz72:
Considering about half the convention is muslim and that half might have left or might not have attended in the future with one wrong word from the Isreali representative (Which, judging by UN forum. Happends an awfull lot considering they are diplomats) I think it was a good call.

Putting the whole convention in jeopardy to make one country attend would be a bad idea both theoretically and practically. And Israel has shown no evidence that gives us any reason to believe that it will act like a civilized western country when in the company of its.... not too friendly neighbors.

That and the whole recent 'assasination of Iranian scientists' thing probably threw out the support of the last muslim countries that might have wanted Israel to attend. And since we are talking about an intelligence network, well. I sorta doubt Israel would share any of theirs with the muslims, and I also doubt the muslims would wanna share any with Israel. Israel getting its information through the US like usual will achieve the exact same thing as being a part of this unit as a whole. With much less chance of political fallout. (If Israel tries to whinge on the international scene it 'is' just one small country that can easily be ignored. The whole of the Arab league would shout quite a bit louder, and there is no reason to strain our relations with them any more than they already)

.
Not too friendly neighbors? There are at least 4 official enemies on the list there. Indonesia doesn't recognize Israel in its current state.
That's an understatement!

It's less about actually sharing intelligence and more about having ties between the intelligence community and sharing different tactics and ways to deal with terrorism... I think.

The global forum seems to be more interested in international co-operation and strategic anti-terrorism measures. Israel, for all its experience in tactics for apprehending and executing terrorists on the ground, perhaps does not have that much to offer in terms of the above, and could be readily excluded.

Or to put it another way, I as a Westerner want to discuss with mostly Muslim countries ways to prevent terrorists from their lands being recruited and operating, and facilitate suppression of them wherever they are. Thus I rather think therefore I would be best dealing with Muslim countries, not a country that pisses them off.

Why the US right supports Israel like it is their own child is beyond me. Israel is the least cooperative and most hated country in the world. Do you know how many UN Resolutions they have broken? Sixty fuckin Five. Do you know how many Iraq broke before the US invaded...two.

Anytime Israel is excluded and ignored the world becomes a better place. If they want a seat at the party then they should play by the same rules everyone else does.

pyrate:
Anytime Israel is excluded and ignored the world becomes a better place. If they want a seat at the party then they should play by the same rules everyone else does.

I find it very hard to disagree with this.

In a democracy, the representative goverment dictates policy to the armed forces and the armed forces does what it's told, and if they don't act with the required professionalism then government accepts responsibility for bringing it into line. Even the US at least manages to acknowledge (most of the time) when serious proof emerges that its military has fucked up.

You cannot have a democratic country where the military does whatever it likes and the government simply commits itself to burying the evidence and crying persecution whenever international observers or Israeli activists point out that they're using human shields or dropping white phosphorous on civilians.

I don't think Israel has anything to teach the world. It has never learned from its mistakes, primarily because noone has never acknowledged any of those mistakes were ever made or drawn up any real strategy for improving. Learning from mistakes is how you develop an effective policy, and the wall of denial surrounding the conduct of the IDF and counter terrorism services in Israel precludes this.

At least, that's my non-expert assessment of a situation in which I'm well aware ignorance abounds. I could be wrong, but I don't see much evidence that I am because I don't see any improvement.

TheIronRuler:

Dinoflagellate:

-snip-
I am witty thankyou and I didn't say anything productive because there is nothing productive to say about warcrimes. I don't like Israel because the government is generally antagonistic, you know being an occupying force and doing some of the nasty things that are related to being an occupying force.

p.s sorry for quoting entire thing which seems like a waste of space.

.
They are occupying... what, exactly? the nonexistent state of Palestine? The Palestinian Authority was agreed upon in proper negotiations in Oslo, it became an autonomy under Israel. Palestinians were given the right for self governance. The PA disengaged and broke the Oslo Accords, starting with violent protests and later full blown terror actions. They were supposed to have proper negotiations in camp David and sort out that mess, agree on conditions for peace and release the PA as a sovereign nation. THe negotiations failed, and the PA began with its violent uprising.

Let me get this straight, palestine was given the status of being "under israel" and they weren't happy with it? What would happen if the suddenly decided that the Canada was not its own nation but under the US and you said the "nonexistent state of palestine" if that's the case then israel is an invented state, which just happens to be on an area of land usually occupied by arabs, it didn't exist until a bunch of jewish people from europe moved into palestine talking about the jewish state of israel and just maybe the people who lived there before weren't exactly happy about suddenly living in a patch of land "under israel" or the jewish state of israel.

Another point, saying "well they did something wrong means we can do something wrong" isn't exactly a valid argument for setting fire to a hospital with incendiary munitions or occupying a patch of land technically not yours or setting up an illegal blockade that prevents medical aid from getting into a patch of land that's supposed to be self governing.

pyrate:
Anytime Israel is excluded and ignored the world becomes a better place. If they want a seat at the party then they should play by the same rules everyone else does.

100% agree, Israel has alot to answer for, USS Liberty, Lebanon, building of illegal settlements on occupied lands, Flotilla raid, use of white phosphorus during the Gaza war, failure to prevent attacks on Palestinians by settler extremists, need I go on.

And their actions can really impact on the country's tourism, in fact anyone entering Israel is forced to open their email accounts, that is an invasion of privacy and shows Israel is coming more and more paranoid

pyrate:

Anytime Israel is excluded and ignored the world becomes a better place. If they want a seat at the party then they should play by the same rules everyone else does.

That is very amusing. What consequences has America suffered for invading Iraq and causing the deaths of probably around a million people? What consequences has Turkey suffered for the Armenian Genocide? What consequences has China suffered for the brutal repression of its people?

What consequences is Bashir Assad suffering for the atrocities he is inflicting right now while we discuss this very issue?

In international affairs there are no "rules." Countries do what they want and the only want to stop them is through force. To complain about "rules" now is a sign of hopelessly naivete or simple double standards: expecting this one country called Israel to "play by the rules" to justify bigotry against them.

pyrate:
Why the US right supports Israel like it is their own child is beyond me. Israel is the least cooperative and most hated country in the world. Do you know how many UN Resolutions they have broken? Sixty fuckin Five. Do you know how many Iraq broke before the US invaded...two.

Funny thing about those sanctions against Israel, and the motivation for their creation.....

pyrate:
Anytime Israel is excluded and ignored the world becomes a better place. If they want a seat at the party then they should play by the same rules everyone else does.

lol, the same rules that everybody else does? Really? Like Western Europe and the US? Should Israel follow their example? Perhaps Israel should be like Europe and enslave half of Africa, dominate and oppress all of India, be a drug pusher in China(and ignore Chinese government officials demands that said drugs stop entering their country), invade Japan and force them to trade with Israel, use imperialism to take over South-East Asia, take Native American land and put native Americans in ghettos, and finally....go to an Island people, remove them from their native land and test nuclear bombs on the homeland of the natives.

Europe and the US can't say with a straight face, that they have followed the rules.

Zach of Fables:

pyrate:

Anytime Israel is excluded and ignored the world becomes a better place. If they want a seat at the party then they should play by the same rules everyone else does.

That is very amusing. What consequences has America suffered for invading Iraq and causing the deaths of probably around a million people? What consequences has Turkey suffered for the Armenian Genocide? What consequences has China suffered for the brutal repression of its people?

What consequences is Bashir Assad suffering for the atrocities he is inflicting right now while we discuss this very issue?

In international affairs there are no "rules." Countries do what they want and the only want to stop them is through force. To complain about "rules" now is a sign of hopelessly naivete or simple double standards: expecting this one country called Israel to "play by the rules" to justify bigotry against them.

image

Zach of Fables:
That is very amusing. What consequences has America suffered for invading Iraq and causing the deaths of probably around a million people? What consequences has Turkey suffered for the Armenian Genocide? What consequences has China suffered for the brutal repression of its people?

A large hit to relations with the rest of the west. It being as good as it was it didnt mean as much as it could have, but Bush still ruined a whole lot. And Obama has yet to make America fully regain its former relations. That being said Bush didnt get punished far enough for his warcrimes. He build his election on fear, and he build his war on false information (That he was well informed of the falsehoods of)

Zach of Fables:
What consequences is Bashir Assad suffering for the atrocities he is inflicting right now while we discuss this very issue?

Tradesanctions and having foreign countries send weapons to people fighting against him, loosing power. Having an execution to look forward to, being declared a war criminal so on the offchance he wont get executed by his own people he will go to jail. That being said I was pro-intervention in terms of Syria.

Zach of Fables:
In international affairs there are no "rules." Countries do what they want and the only want to stop them is through force. To complain about "rules" now is a sign of hopelessly naivete or simple double standards: expecting this one country called Israel to "play by the rules" to justify bigotry against them.

There are rules, and if we didnt follow them todays life in the west would not be unlike that of the middle-east. As I have talked to you before I do not expect an intelligent debate to be struck with you but I felt your points had to be addressed anyway. We expect 'everyone' to play by the rules. They arent biased against anyone. Except for perhaps powerhungry dictators and bloodthirsty theocracies. Then again, your knowledge in foreign relations ammounts to nill and most of your arguements is build up on suspiciones and affectus, you are making everything far more simpler than it is. Each country is not somekind of hivemind. And the international laws are build around people, and they work. We can see with Syria and Libya they did, we can even see on the US to a lesser extend that they work. Some people are too stupid to see it though.

Helmholtz Watson:

pyrate:
Why the US right supports Israel like it is their own child is beyond me. Israel is the least cooperative and most hated country in the world. Do you know how many UN Resolutions they have broken? Sixty fuckin Five. Do you know how many Iraq broke before the US invaded...two.

Funny thing about those sanctions against Israel, and the motivation for their creation.....

pyrate:
Anytime Israel is excluded and ignored the world becomes a better place. If they want a seat at the party then they should play by the same rules everyone else does.

lol, the same rules that everybody else does? Really? Like Western Europe and the US? Should Israel follow their example? Perhaps Israel should be like Europe and enslave half of Africa, dominate and oppress all of India, be a drug pusher in China(and ignore Chinese government officials demands that said drugs stop entering their country), invade Japan and force them to trade with Israel, use imperialism to take over South-East Asia, take Native American land and put native Americans in ghettos, and finally....go to an Island people, remove them from their native land and test nuclear bombs on the homeland of the natives.

Europe and the US can't say with a straight face, that they have followed the rules.

Zach of Fables:

pyrate:

Anytime Israel is excluded and ignored the world becomes a better place. If they want a seat at the party then they should play by the same rules everyone else does.

That is very amusing. What consequences has America suffered for invading Iraq and causing the deaths of probably around a million people? What consequences has Turkey suffered for the Armenian Genocide? What consequences has China suffered for the brutal repression of its people?

What consequences is Bashir Assad suffering for the atrocities he is inflicting right now while we discuss this very issue?

In international affairs there are no "rules." Countries do what they want and the only want to stop them is through force. To complain about "rules" now is a sign of hopelessly naivete or simple double standards: expecting this one country called Israel to "play by the rules" to justify bigotry against them.

image

Hey, youknow.. Since you obviously dont know your history let me enlighten you. Most of theese rules came because, and therefor after WW2. Africa was not subdued by Europe in the 80's... I know. Its easy to confuse the 1800's with the 1980's. Sounds almost the same when you say it.

Nikolaz72:

A large hit to relations with the rest of the west. It being as good as it was it didnt mean as much as it could have, but Bush still ruined a whole lot. And Obama has yet to make America fully regain its former relations. That being said Bush didnt get punished far enough for his warcrimes. He build his election on fear, and he build his war on false information (That he was well informed of the falsehoods of)

Please. Americans have not suffered any consequences from our military adventure in Iraq, besides the economic recessions and of course lost soldiers and resources. Neither of which were caused by our breaking of any "rules."

Bush didn't get punished at all. Because he was the leader of the most powerful country in the world. If countries are powerful, or if they are buddies with the powerful, they can get away with anything they want. And damn the "rules."

Nikolaz72:
Tradesanctions and having foreign countries send weapons to people fighting against him, loosing power. Having an execution to look forward to, being declared a war criminal so on the offchance he wont get executed by his own people he will go to jail. That being said I was pro-intervention in terms of Syria.

I don't see any significant sanctions, and if there are any they don't appear to be having an effect. Syria and Libya before them only get Western intervention because they are on the news. Places like Sudan, Somalia and Yemen get screwed over. It's not about the "rules," it's about how well connected you are and how much attention you get.

And by the way: Assad will only be executed and declared a war criminal if he loses. If he wins, he gets away scot free.

Nikolaz72:

There are rules, and if we didnt follow them todays life in the west would not be unlike that of the middle-east. As I have talked to you before I do not expect an intelligent debate to be struck with you but I felt your points had to be addressed anyway. We expect 'everyone' to play by the rules. They arent biased against anyone. Except for perhaps powerhungry dictators and bloodthirsty theocracies. Then again, your knowledge in foreign relations ammounts to nill and most of your arguements is build up on suspiciones and affectus, you are making everything far more simpler than it is. Each country is not somekind of hivemind. And the international laws are build around people, and they work. We can see with Syria and Libya they did, we can even see on the US to a lesser extend that they work. Some people are too stupid to see it though.

There's no need to be insulting.

There are no "rules," only what can be enforced. There is no "World Police" except in movies involving puppets. Just read some recent history. How many "rules" have been broken in Darfur the past few years? Who came in to help those people? Nobody!

The "international laws" you refer to are a bunch of meaningless words that we all agreed to so that we could pretend that war is civilized. And then we ignore them as soon as they become inconvenient for us.

Name any country on earth who has been at war and I can tell you something they did that "breaks the rules." America, Britain, Canada, Russia, China, Iran, the Arabs, Israel. Nobody is exempt from this. Anyone who claims otherwise is just fooling themselves.

Chalk another one up for racism.

Nikolaz72:

Hey, youknow.. Since you obviously dont know your history let me enlighten you. Most of theese rules came because, and therefor after WW2. Africa was not subdued by Europe in the 80's... I know. Its easy to confuse the 1800's with the 1980's. Sounds almost the same when you say it.

I never said that any of this happened in the 1980's, just that the West telling other how to act is the pot calling the kettle black.

I see your not above insulting people in lieu of debate.

Helmholtz Watson:

Nikolaz72:

Hey, youknow.. Since you obviously dont know your history let me enlighten you. Most of theese rules came because, and therefor after WW2. Africa was not subdued by Europe in the 80's... I know. Its easy to confuse the 1800's with the 1980's. Sounds almost the same when you say it.

I never said that any of this happened in the 1980's, just that the West telling other how to act is the pot calling the kettle black.

I see your not above insulting people in lieu of debate.

If the pot had changed colour since 200 years ago I dont see the whole issue with calling the kettle black. Saying that we cant make new rules and should only follow the way it has been most of history is like saying we should follow the words of a thousands years old book or a 300 year old law... Ohwait.

Nikolaz72:

If the pot had changed colour since 200 years ago I dont see the whole issue with calling the kettle black.

200 years ago? LMAO! Perhaps it is you that needs to look at history, specifically the history of India, and when they first gained back sovereignty of their own homeland(that would be 1947). If Indian history isn't interesting for you, perhaps you should look at the history of Ireland and how they were treated by the English. Of course there is China and how it wasn't until 1997 that they got back their own city(Hong Kong) from the British.
Then there is the whole issue with the West testing nuclear weapons in foreign countries. There is the history of Bikini Island and how the native people were taken off their land and the West had it nuked in 1946, and there is the issue of how France was testing nuclear weapon in Algeria in the 1960's.

lol, 200 years ago. Maybe if you read some revisionist history book you could say that the West changed their colors 200 years ago, but the rest of the world would never agree to such a willfully dishonest comment.

Nikolaz72:

Saying that we cant make new rules and should only follow the way it has been most of history is like saying we should follow the words of a thousands years old book or a 300 year old law... Ohwait.

Cute.
Also, that is a nice strawman you have there. Nobody said that their shouldn't be new rules, just that the West is in no place to act holier-that-thou to the rest of the world. That's it.

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked