'karine A'

Also, where did you get this data? From the Palestinians? There were much more Israeli civilians killed then Palestinians civilians.

So where did you get your data?

The attack against the USS cole was an accident

So then it was an accidental attack? What?

I believe war is an official regime taking military steps against civilians and army, while terror is individual and grouped civilians using non-conventional and conventional weapons against civilians and army.

Terror and war aren't two seperate concepts. Terrorizing civilians is a tactic that has been adopted and repeatedly used by many powers during times of war. "Official regimes" have used terrorist tactics in the past just as unofficial/unauthorized groups of civilians have.

What is taking "military steps against civilians" and how does it differ from instilling fear, suffering and death on a group of innocent people? Does deeming something "official" justify anything on moral or practical grounds?

-Maj
 
Military Steps is weapon used against other countries civilians and army (and facilities) in order to reach the interests of the regime's ambitions/targets. (IMO)
 
Arms ship captain says he was working for Palestinian Authority


JERUSALEM (CNN) --The captain of an arms ship intercepted by Israel told reporters that he worked for the Palestinian Authority and took his orders from a man he identified as Adel Awadala, a Palestinian Authority official in Greece.

Speaking with four news organizations who were allowed to interview him in prison, the captain, Omar Akawi, said Monday he knew his ship was carrying arms and thought the mission would fail.

Akawi said the plan involved picking up arms from a boat off the coast of Iran, traveling through the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea and the Suez Canal and anchoring off Alexandria, Egypt.

The boat was then to unload its cargo onto a smaller vessel that would drop the arms in floating packages off the Gaza coast.

Akawi said he picked up the cargo as instructed but was intercepted 500 kilometers south of the Israeli port of Eilat last Thursday.

The Israeli government has said it had "iron-clad" evidence the ship, carrying 50 tons of weapons, was linked to the Palestinian Authority. Israeli officials said the ship was carrying Katyusha rockets, rifles, mortar shells, mines and a variety of anti-tank missiles. Over the weekend, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon accused Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat of ordering the mission.

"By his own behavior, Arafat has made himself irrelevant and a bitter enemy of Israel," Sharon said. "Arafat has taken another step by linking himself with the center of world terror -- Iran. (Arafat) is behaving like an enemy in every way. Anyone who is preparing these sorts of destructive weapons understands that their sole intention was to put Israel in an insufferable position."

The Palestinian Authority had no immediate comment, but earlier denied any connection with the vessel, saying Israel is trying to use the incident to thwart efforts by U.S. envoy Anthony Zinni to move forward on a cease-fire.

U.S. envoy to return to region in a week
The revelation from the ship captain came a day after Zinni headed home after four days of intensive talks with Israelis and Palestinians aimed at negotiating a cease-fire.

A U.S. State Department statement said that "while serious challenges remain, there are real opportunities for progress." Zinni is due back in the Middle East in a little over a week.

Zinni broke off his first Mideast mission in early December after a series of suicide bombing attacks on Israeli civilians by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the assassination of an Israeli Cabinet minister.

Amid increasing pressure from Israel, Europe and the United States, Arafat then called for a halt to attacks in a televised address on December 16. Afterward, Hamas said it would suspend strikes inside Israel. Islamic Jihad said it would do nothing to disrupt Palestinian unity, believed to be a signal its attacks would stop.

Hamas runs mosques, schools and clinics for Palestinians but has a military wing that conducts military and terror strikes. Palestinian Islamic Jihad is a militant group dedicated to the creation of an Islamic Palestinian state and the destruction of Israel.

Since Arafat's call for a halt, violent incidents have dropped by about 50 percent, Israeli officials have said.

Captain doubts Palestinian Authority leaders knew of mission
The ship's captain, Akawi, is being held in a prison in Ashkelon. He was interviewed by Israeli television Channels One and Two. Later he spoke with the Reuters Television and the Fox network.

Akawi said he believed his mission would fail because he thought he would be caught in the Persian Gulf by American forces or in the Suez Canal by Egyptian forces.

He said he told Awadala, whom he referred to as Adel, of his concerns but Awadala told him to "leave it for God" and go ahead with the mission.

"I'm a soldier. I have to obey orders," he said, explaining why he went ahead.

Akawi said he left Aden, Yemen, and traveled to what he described as a "fixed point" near the coast of Iran.

Akawi said his ship, the Karine-A, was met there by a vessel "without any name, without anything. They gave me these things. They were boxes, only closed boxes. I took it as a cargo, but I know that inside there is some weapons."

Akawi added, "There was one guy from Hezbollah there" referring to the Lebanese guerrilla group. He said the man spoke with a Syrian or Lebanese accent.

During the interviews, Akawi identified himself as an employee of the Palestinian Navy and the Palestinian Transportation Ministry.

"I'm an officer in the Palestinian Authority. I'm taking my salary and I'm an employee of the Palestinian Authority," said Akawi. "My boss is Fatki Razzi, he's a deputy commander of the Palestinian Navy. His boss is Jamal Rai. He's the leader of the navy."

Asked if he thought the leaders of the Palestinian Authority knew of his mission, Akawi said he did not think they knew. He said Awadala may have told them but added, "from my side, I don't think that they know."
 
Should the US concentrate on Iran as it's next target in it's war against terror?
- If not, should the US atleast bomb Iran's nuclear reactors before they're complited?

What an earth gives the United States the right to do this????
If they did it would just prove how arrogant, ignorant and up themselves they really are.

As for Arafat, well seeing how Sharon is accused of various war crimes (that refugee camp massacre and whatever) you have to think to your self 'would you really want to negotiate with someone who did that to your country men???'
 
ComradeDavo, do you even know what happened in Sabra & Shatila by posting that?

Sabra and Shatila was a massacre of muslim arabs by christian arabs... Sharon did not go there and started shooting muslim arabs for his self enjoyment, and so didnt the IDF.
I hate when people post bull**** they know **** about :)
 
Originally posted by ComradeDavo


What an earth gives the United States the right to do this????
Nothing. And it won't happen. What gives the Palestinians the right to kill Isreali civilians? Nothing. What gives the Isrealis the right to retaliate? Nothing. You're just being rhetorical, you can do better...

If they did it would just prove how arrogant, ignorant and up themselves they really are.

Well, now YOUR ignorance and arrogance are showing. Not to mention your immense prejudices. But a lot of prapaganized leftist Euros feel this way, so I won't hold it against you personally.

As for Arafat, well seeing how Sharon is accused of various war crimes (that refugee camp massacre and whatever) you have to think to your self 'would you really want to negotiate with someone who did that to your country men???' [/B]

Right, some bigoted sympathizers trump up some charges that will never be proven and all of a sudden it's gospel words. Why aren't Arafats crimes to be tried as well? Stick to the reality of the situation, otherwise I'm gonna demand a pony next holiday season...
Look at what Arafat supports (passive support or not) men under his control doing to Jews. However, the Isrealis are still willing to talk peace. Strange huh? Remember, what's good for one is good for the other.
 
Originally posted by ComradeDavo


What an earth gives the United States the right to do this????
If they did it would just prove how arrogant, ignorant and up themselves they really are.'

Yeah, preventing the nuclear ability from a country with an unstable religious regime, that does anything to bring the situation in the Middle East to total war, keeps talking about the destruction of Israel and the will to drop a nuclear bomb on Israel to do so.

Yup, what on earth indeed :rolleyes:
 
now, right, sorted, lets end the personal insults, my post was not directed at any one person so I do not see why you fell the need to resort to them.

Basically, both Arafat and Sharon aren't very nice and I wouldn't want to deal with either of them, I dislike the American government and way of life becuase of what I know of it, not because I am prejudice or any crap like that but because I have a serious distaste for it and I am fed up with this double standards system which American symphathisers employ, the 'We can insult your belifs but if you insult ours theres hell to pay' system in fact.

I leave now, goodbye, cya later, please don't hate me because my belifs don't match up with yours, bye.
 
Fact is the Israelis can have an army and the PA cannot. That way, the only way they have to fight back is through terrorism, and this helps

And, please, I think somebody was questioning that Sharon is a butcher. Please. He's and Arafat are exactly the same, except Sharon is leant legitimacy that Arafat is not.

Neither of these men give a flying f*ck about their people other than to ensure that they are witness to the utter destruction of the other side.
 
Originally posted by ComradeDavo
now, right, sorted, lets end the personal insults, my post was not directed at any one person so I do not see why you fell the need to resort to them.

I assume you mean me? Sorry if it came across that way. I really wasn't trying to insult you, seriously. I guess I'm a little abrasive :(

Basically, both Arafat and Sharon aren't very nice and I wouldn't want to deal with either of them, I dislike the American government and way of life becuase of what I know of it, not because I am prejudice or any crap like that but because I have a serious distaste for it and I am fed up with this double standards system which American symphathisers employ, the 'We can insult your belifs but if you insult ours theres hell to pay' system in fact.

This would probably be a long debate :p

I leave now, goodbye, cya later, please don't hate me because my belifs don't match up with yours, bye.

Whoa, I don't dislike anyone because they disagree with me :confused: Again, I'm sorry I was like that.

Peace :D
 
Comrade: No your insults were not directed at any one person, they were directed at an entire people. This hardly excuses you. I would say it is to cyclore's credit that he did not judge an entire group of people based upon his dislike for your comments. Perhaps it would have been more palatable had he insulted all people from Bath, or all English, or even all Revolutionaries.

I dislike the American government and way of life becuase of what I know of it, not because I am prejudice or any crap like that but because I have a serious distaste for it and I am fed up with this double standards system which American symphathisers employ, the 'We can insult your belifs but if you insult ours theres hell to pay' system in fact.

You aren't prejudiced? You just dislike an entire way of life based on your personal observances. And if I dislike the Muslim way of life (I don't) I supose I am not prejudiced either? Please.:rolleyes:
 
ComradeDavo's contradictionary (not to use another word) posts are well replied by knowltok3 :rolleyes:
 
First of all I would like to appologize... I confused the USS cole with another USS ship... Sorry...

Originally posted by Maj


So where did you get your data?


I get my data from these sources
Here
Here
Here (I got the numbers from this one. There was an arab talking in another discussion on the subject. Perhaps he can find it in the arab version of the site)
Here
and Here

as well as from history books I own (too many to count...) and Israeli newspapers.

What is taking "military steps against civilians" and how does it differ from instilling fear, suffering and death on a group of innocent people? Does deeming something "official" justify anything on moral or practical grounds?

I don't remember anyone in Israel taking about "military steps against civilians"

Fact is the Israelis can have an army and the PA cannot. That way, the only way they have to fight back is through terrorism, and this helps

And, please, I think somebody was questioning that Sharon is a butcher. Please. He's and Arafat are exactly the same, except Sharon is leant legitimacy that Arafat is not.

- The Palestinians have an army
- Terrorism don't help
- Sharon and Arafat are alike, except that: Sharon doesn't target civilians, Sharon declared two one sided cease fires, Sharon is a democratic leader, Sharon said he's willing to give up things in negotiations and Sharon was never a terrorist.


What an earth gives the United States the right to do this????

The fact that Iran is a terror-supporting country, that their parlament opens every day by shouting "death to the US", the fact that they develop missiles that can reach the US and the fact that they're extremely religious and believe the US is satan.
 
(I got the numbers from this one. There was an arab talking in another discussion on the subject. Perhaps he can find it in the arab version of the site)
as well as from history books I own (too many to count...) and Israeli newspapers
Also, where did you get this data? From the Palestinians?

Now I ask, what makes you believe that the information provided by the Israelis is more credible than that provided by the Palestinians?

To get straight to the point: both sides in this conflict may be reporting some of the truths or half-truths, but do neglect important facts that may bear great impact on some of facts (therefore interpretation) that are being fed to the general public.

-Maj
 
Both press partys might be sobjective, but while the palestinien press is completely controlled and recruited the Israeli press is still democratic.
In news papers like Haaretz, which is more leftish, there are many articles about what the palestiniens are going through and I think its articles are very objective about the situation... as objective as something can get...

And of course getting info from Israeli newspapers is much more reliable than getting info from Hamas Anti-Zionist propaganda...
And G-Man did mention cnn and bbcnews, which are 'objective' sources.
So instead of questioning our sources, why dont you show us yours?
 
Meanwhile, 2 Palestinians attack a guard post near an Israel Kibutz in Israel proper. Killing 3-4 Israelis and themselves.

But of course, when Israel destroys a few empty buildings again, it will be blamed for escalating the situation.
 
Originally posted by Maj
Now I ask, what makes you believe that the information provided by the Israelis is more credible than that provided by the Palestinians?

The fact that Israel has the freedom of speech and the freedom of press.
Also, CNN, BBC and 'Times atlas of 20th century history' aren't Israeli.
 
In light of further developments and study of various matters, one has altered one's position vis a vis Iran. Take em down, and do the job properly. We must destroy all potential havens for and supporters of terrorism in this world in order for full victory, and bleating of the deliberately ignorant must be ignored for what it is: bulldust
(By deliberately ignorant, I mean those who automatically protest an event that they do not understand just for the sake of protest, and those who automatically condemn what they do not understand.)
 
Originally posted by G-Man

(...)
- Sharon and Arafat are alike, except that: Sharon doesn't target civilians
(...)

G-Man, obviously you know a lot more of the whole Palestinian-Israeli conflict than I do, but this is rubbish and you know it. If you do not agree please give me your definition of civilians....
 
civilian - a person who isn't trying to kill other people
 
Back
Top Bottom