|
overlord
Aug 11, 2006, 7:54 AM
Post #51 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
In reply to: In reply to: the roman empire crubmbled quite miserably in the end. as did the soviet union (who was also pretty much on the offence). The revived Roman Empire (read: EEU), however, is alive and well! Also, don't discount Russia...never discount Russia. Their role in this mess is far from over.
have you been watching omen??
and i didnt discount russia. i was talking about soviet union.
|
|
|
|
|
phazed
Aug 11, 2006, 1:49 PM
Post #52 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2005
Posts: 49
|
In reply to: the roman empire crubmbled quite miserably in the end. as did the soviet union (who was also pretty much on the offence). and prepare for war and fight a war is not the same thing (not to mention that you cant really root out terrorism with military force).
The crumbling economies of these empires attributed greatly to their collapse. Israel's economy is doing just fine.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 11, 2006, 3:12 PM
Post #53 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: In reply to: the roman empire crubmbled quite miserably in the end. as did the soviet union (who was also pretty much on the offence). and prepare for war and fight a war is not the same thing (not to mention that you cant really root out terrorism with military force). The crumbling economies of these empires attributed greatly to their collapse. Israel's economy is doing just fine.
With a little help from her friends!
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...ael/foreign_aid.html
Cheers!
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 11, 2006, 3:15 PM
Post #54 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: In reply to: the roman empire crubmbled quite miserably in the end. as did the soviet union (who was also pretty much on the offence). and prepare for war and fight a war is not the same thing (not to mention that you cant really root out terrorism with military force). The crumbling economies of these empires attributed greatly to their collapse. Israel's economy is doing just fine.
The roman empire economy was built on the concept of 'ever expanding economic possibilities' fueled by slave labor. They fought basically an endless series of wars that eventually curtailed their expansion and they ran into fuel supply problems (slaves don't like being fuel). Yes, economic problems and the friggin parallels to the US right now are scary.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Aug 11, 2006, 4:46 PM
Post #55 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
In reply to: In reply to: the roman empire crubmbled quite miserably in the end. as did the soviet union (who was also pretty much on the offence). and prepare for war and fight a war is not the same thing (not to mention that you cant really root out terrorism with military force). The crumbling economies of these empires attributed greatly to their collapse. Israel's economy is doing just fine.
it was a contributing factor (and one could argue that it was crumbling because of their agressive policy, along with some other things), along with others (like many differenc ppl, wast distances etc). and israeli economy is doing just fine for now. a prolonged war could change that.
but the rise and fall of roman empire is not the case here. i was just refuting the claim that "offence is the best defence". especially in the case were debating.
|
|
|
|
|
feanor007
Aug 12, 2006, 6:49 PM
Post #56 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2004
Posts: 377
|
In reply to: but a government is NOT responsible for the actions of its citizens, unless they are under orders from it. if they were, any criminal act could be a reason for war; try blaming turkey for the attack on the pope (also a terrorist act, but nobody said turkey was responsible for it), blaming italy/russia for the acts of their crime sydicates etc.
wrong. gov'ts are responsible, esp when their inabilty to control an organized group of criminals i.e. Hezbollah causes damage to another state, i.e. isreal. read Aquians' treatis on law, morality and politics, he articulates one of the first just war theories in western thought and this type situation is covered (can't cite exact passage, i'm in alabama my book is in kentucky). in your examples the gov't under whom the crimes were commited attempted to punish the criminals
In reply to: in 1930 hitlers agressive campaing was not yet evident and offcourse other countries didnt want to start a war. who would? if they did, im pretty sure they wouldve taken him out of the picture (no need to start a war then, just eliminate him). but they didnt know.
In reply to: who is the genocidal madman youre talking about? |
|
|
|
|
bigga
Aug 13, 2006, 1:34 PM
Post #57 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2002
Posts: 365
|
Firstly, with all due respect overlord, If you do not consider Israeli intelegence or the army as being a trustworthy source then we are going to go around in circles. Israeli Intelegence and the army has been the only PROVEN reliable source in any of these conflicts. I can name many many examples where the world listened to other versions of stories only to be finaly proven wrong. CONSISTENTLY. If you want me to list examples I shall.
" israeli army has a histrory of mistaking things for something theyre not." What in G-ds name are you refering to? What history are you talking about?
If those source are to you not respectable (then show president that they are not), they are to me and I haven't looked for further sources, but I have been told that diferent blogs have taken it upon themselves to find proof in released photography and have shown it. If you feel the need then knock yourself out, I dont.
And you don't need to put Intelegence in inverted comma's. Our intellegence as you probably already know, is one of the most respected in the world and has achieved things that have surpised the world completely.
I have diceded, overlord, that you have a huge prejudice which seems to be based on fact not at all. You choses your source of who to believe and who not based on facts you can not prove. You believe you get an unbiased view of the knews regarding Israel from Slovenia? Ya right, they're not biased at all. lol.
Anyway, I feel like I am talking to a wall. Please base yourself on fact
|
|
|
|
|
rainwolf
Aug 13, 2006, 2:16 PM
Post #58 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2002
Posts: 45
|
In reply to: Firstly, with all due respect overlord, If you do not consider Israeli intelegence or the army as being a trustworthy source then we are going to go around in circles. Israeli Intelegence and the army has been the only PROVEN reliable source in any of these conflicts. I can name many many examples where the world listened to other versions of stories only to be finaly proven wrong. CONSISTENTLY. If you want me to list examples I shall. " israeli army has a histrory of mistaking things for something theyre not." What in G-ds name are you refering to? What history are you talking about?
USS Liberty, or was that not a mistake?
James Miller, but that would go in the we thought he was palestinian-mistakes section.
This should do for now.
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Aug 13, 2006, 2:24 PM
Post #59 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
i do not consider ANY army as a credible source when it comes to reporting/investigating its own actions. you dont have to look far to see why; iraquis beating US army (or so they claimed), WMDs in iraq (or so US claimed), then theres the shelling of a family on a palestinian beach a few months ago (that was supposedly an accident, but we only have the word of your army for it; as for the credibility of such 'investigations', you only have to look as far as iraq and the 'non-existant' (or so they claimed) prisoner abuse). its called propaganda; its always better to say that you killed 2 terrorists and 2 innocents than to say that you killed 4 innocents that were just sitting in a car and NO army will ever willingly admit its own mistakes (or crimes for that matter). and you still havent provided ANY sources to back your stories (especially the one about named lists of terrorists).
as for israeli army mistaking things... they supposedly 'mistaked' USS liberty for an egyptian ship, and i dont know what they 'mistaked' the UN observation post for.
i know mossad is a really good inteligence service. but some claims are just ridicolous (like the one about the named lists of terrorists killed). im not disputing what they really gather, but what others report they have supposedly gatheres (i have no doubt that some of the buildings attacked were in fact used to house missiles, but i also have no doubt most were not). now, im pretty sure that mossad reported only the buildings they knew to be valid targets. as for buildings that werent; theres nothing easier than to tell someone to make a press conference and claim there were terrorists inside and that your 'intelligence' provided the data.
and YOU certanly cant get or represent an unbiased view on the situation. you have to undersdand (since youve started the thread about 'truth') that there are always at least three versions of truth: yours, theirs and the 'real' truth (that is usually somewhere in between the other two). you represent your truth (how you see things) and i try to represent something between 'real' and 'theirs'. but you probably will never see it as such because you just blindly believe everything your government tells you.
as for my prejudice; i only base it on the things i see. and right now i really cant see anything thats good on either side. and as i havent had the time to watch the news for some time, i cant comment on the resolution. but im glad bot sides accepted it. its a nice change that both sides finally started accepting resolutions. maybe the region will start to return to sanity after all.
|
|
|
|
|
bigga
Aug 13, 2006, 5:53 PM
Post #60 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2002
Posts: 365
|
In which case, in your mind, The Israeli army is always guilty until you've seen proof to the contrary. Does that about some it all up?
|
|
|
|
|
thegreytradster
Aug 14, 2006, 1:50 AM
Post #61 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2003
Posts: 2151
|
The problem is not that Lebanon is defending itself this would never be an issue if the UN (Useless Nincompoops) had enforced their own resolutions rather than being co opted by a terrorist organization that as its charter calls for the extermination of Israel and has been at war with the US from around 1981.
In reply to: - full implementation of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, and of resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680 (2006), that require the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon, so that, pursuant to the Lebanese cabinet decision of July 27, 2006, there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese state,
Israel almost immediately agreed to a cease fire, (maybe not the wisest thing to do)
Lebanon has finally agreed, (although they as a government, and army have had almost no involvement)
Hezbohla still hasn't made up their minds, (which means they've resolved to keep fighting).
This will continue for at least another month until the Hezbos are completely destroyed as a fighting force. The majority of the Lebanise will quietly applaud as the Shia move en-mass to Syria.
|
|
|
|
|
feanor007
Aug 14, 2006, 5:26 AM
Post #62 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2004
Posts: 377
|
In reply to: The Lebaneese have the right to protect thier land, even if it involves a militia randomly attacking random places.
again the wrong horn must be blown. random attacking is not defense, isreal's incursions are a calculated response to ATTACKS. Lebannon/Hezbollah started this fight and are now crying that Isreal is deciding to end it. countries gain security by demostrating that if they are attacked they can and will kick the crap out of who ever attacked, countries that fail at this cease to exist. Isreal is fighting one of the few just wars in a while.
on another note, bigga i would like to hear an israeli explination about the liberty.
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Aug 14, 2006, 6:16 AM
Post #63 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
In reply to: In which case, in your mind, The Israeli army is always guilty until you've seen proof to the contrary. Does that about some it all up?
well, if i see a lot of civilians die, its obvious that something has gone wrong. if it happened once in a while, i would give them the benefit of the doubt. but not if its, you know, kindof, a tradition.
and im just saying that i would find it really hard to believe into any investigation that prooved them not-guilty that they themselves conducted.
you know, there is a reason why the accused do not investigate their own crimes and judge their trials. if they were allowed to do so, there would be no convictions.
lebanon didnt attack israel. and i also wouldnt call some thing israel did in this war 'defence'. delibertely targeting civilian infrastructure/population is not defence, and that goes for both sides.
and while were on resolutions that lebanon didnt (couldnt) carry out (namely the ones about hezbollah) and should be fully implemented (with which i fully agree; hezbollah has to go); what about resolutions 242 (israels should withdraw from occupied territories; 1967), 446 (settlements on occupied territories are illegal and a serious threat to peace and israel should kidndof act in accordance to geneva convention regarding civilians on occupied territories; 1979) and 478 (golan heights; 1980). they should be fully implemented too.
|
|
|
|
|
col
Aug 14, 2006, 11:32 PM
Post #64 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 232
|
In reply to: Some more food for thought: There is a Biblical scenario that readily implies NBC protocols. If your interested, I'd be happy to find it.
NBC is a US television station yes?
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Aug 14, 2006, 11:37 PM
Post #65 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: and im just saying that i would find it really hard to believe into any investigation that prooved them not-guilty that they themselves conducted.
Safe to say, then, that you would also find it hard to belive any investigation in which they found their own people guilty?
;)
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Aug 15, 2006, 7:12 AM
Post #66 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
In reply to: In reply to: and im just saying that i would find it really hard to believe into any investigation that prooved them not-guilty that they themselves conducted. Safe to say, then, that you would also find it hard to belive any investigation in which they found their own people guilty? ;)
actually, no. but that would really amaze me in these cases.
the objective of every army i know of after making a mistake is first to cover it up and then to protect its personnel from legal harm. thats why i wouldnt believe any non-guilty verdict from an internal investigation. or would you believe a non-guilty verdict that a murder suspect judged himself?
thats why you need (and have) outside investigators for such cases.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Aug 15, 2006, 1:21 PM
Post #67 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: actually, no. but that would really amaze me in these cases. the objective of every army i know of after making a mistake is first to cover it up and then to protect its personnel from legal harm. thats why i wouldnt believe any non-guilty verdict from an internal investigation. or would you believe a non-guilty verdict that a murder suspect judged himself? thats why you need (and have) outside investigators for such cases.
My point is that if you're not going to trust an internal investigation that finds them innocent, then you can't trust one that finds them guilty, either.
|
|
|
|
|
pinktricam
Aug 15, 2006, 1:34 PM
Post #68 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 7947
|
In reply to: In reply to: Some more food for thought: There is a Biblical scenario that readily implies NBC protocols. If your interested, I'd be happy to find it. NBC is a US television station yes? |
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
Aug 15, 2006, 10:36 PM
Post #69 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
In reply to: In reply to: actually, no. but that would really amaze me in these cases. the objective of every army i know of after making a mistake is first to cover it up and then to protect its personnel from legal harm. thats why i wouldnt believe any non-guilty verdict from an internal investigation. or would you believe a non-guilty verdict that a murder suspect judged himself? thats why you need (and have) outside investigators for such cases. My point is that if you're not going to trust an internal investigation that finds them innocent, then you can't trust one that finds them guilty, either.
:wtf:
So I take it that if you were a judge, all your cases would go to trial, regardless of the defendant's plea?
|
|
|
|
|
vivalargo
Aug 16, 2006, 4:03 AM
Post #70 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 26, 2002
Posts: 1512
|
I am not a fan of Muslim governments, mainly because I spent so much time adventuring in places like Indonesia and know the crazy duplicity that goes by the name of law. But I hae to wonder: what will it ever take to stop this madness. It seems like two runaway wills clashing with no sense of the broad picture. It's almost like an addiction at this point, attacke, counterattack, ad nauseum. It so far beyond right and wrong -- however you describe it -- that it comes down to who can inflict the most damage till a 3rd party comes in and stops it . . . for a while.
I'm thinking a new kind of leader must emerge from Israel whose passion is for resolution. He/she is out there somewhere, I pray. By the looks of this recent skirmish we humans haven't evolved in 3,000 years, or more.
JL
|
|
|
|
|
my_name_is_fake
Aug 16, 2006, 6:47 AM
Post #71 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 66
|
I too, would like to hear bigga's view on USS liberty during the 6 day war.
that and also that massacre that happened under Ariel Sharon's rule ( the name of the place escapes me at the moment). How is that guy anyway?
some good reads ( 83 pages!)
http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/w...1_walt.pdf
THE ISRAEL LOBBY AND U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
Authors:
John J. Mearsheimer
Department of Political Science
University of Chicago
Stephen M. Walt
John F. Kennedy School of Government
Harvard University
also Paul Findley's They Dare Speak out.
|
|
|
|
|
bigga
Aug 16, 2006, 4:02 PM
Post #72 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2002
Posts: 365
|
Hi MyNameIsFake.
There are two versions of the USS liberty (that I know of) that make sense, in light of all the controversy around it. One is that the USS Liberty, an American Intellegence Gathering vessel, was mistaken for an Egyptian ship. This is the official version of both the American and Israeli Government. The other version is that Israel attacked the ship on purpose.
This last is the version I am more inclined to believe, for a few reasons.
These reasons also have to answer the strange fact then that Israel purposefully shot a boat belonging to its closest ally out of the water.
The first, official, version seems to have too many holes.
Firstly, Liberty survivors as well as high-up American officials have always mantained that it was no mistake. Some Israeli Officers have also come forward to say the same.
Secondly, and most convincing for me, is the answer you get if you ask an Israeli about the USS Liberty. The answer is that Israel shot it out of the water, intentionaly, for doing what the spy ship was built to do... spying. The unnoficial Israeli version is that the spy ship was carrying out some or other form of clandestine activy which it did not want to become known to Israel, and would refuse to identify itself as an American vessel in order to protect its real doings, and was eventually shot out of the water. This version holds water for me for a few reasons. Firstly, with so many many politicians, naval radar operators, intellegence workers, airforce and navy soldiers involved, in a country as small as israel, and with the way the internal israel media loves to dig out dirty laundry, the real story is bound to get out eventually, whether its made official or not.
Second of all it explains some otherwise very wierd things. Such as the motivation for Israel to shoot an allied vessel out of the water in a time of war, reports of warning given to America 24 hours before, reports of the white house calling off american fighters that were on their way to the ships aid + a complete denial not only by Israel but by America that nothing more happened other than a mistaken identity. It seems to me that America wouldn't bend over that far backwards to screw its own people. I don't see enough motive for them to do that. Unless they would be 'embarassed' by what that ship was really doing there if it became official. It wouldn't be the first time such a thing has happened in America, or am I wrong? Hollywood has built an entire ganre of films on that very premise. So it becomes in the interest of America that its real activities do not become public, (hence some strange stuff by the Americans), Israel, what ever the circumstances of it, does not want to be seen as blowing up an American ship, and walla, all of a sudden everyone agrees it was an accident.
This is not fact what I'm saying here. As it is the facts are already years old. Its just the version of the story which to my mind is the most believable. Its simply my opinion. If you can give me a version of the story that makes more sense to me then I'll change my opinion. Truth is, the incident happened so long ago, we'll never really know, I dont spend to much time worrying about it.
The place you are thinking of where the massacre occured were the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila in southern lebanon. In short Israel was inside lebanon after invading to remove PLO, that terrorist organisation who's leader, although almost unanimously named a terrorist by the entire world, also had a Nobel Peace Prize (go figure). Eventually the PLO 'officially' left Lebanon. At this time, believe it or not, the lebanese army and the phelangists are considered allies of the Israeli army. Anyway Israel found that many of the PLO terrorists had stayed behind(surprise surprise) and eventually, under Ariel Sharon, went to get them (braking quite a few agreements by doing so if I'm not mistaken) and started looking for them in different villages. The Phelangists, a Christian Lebanese group, said that they would get the PLO from the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila. The IDF would handle the rest. Israel provided ordinances for this task and held different positions around sabra and shatila but none inside. Basically what then Happened inside Sabra and Shatila was nothing short of a massacre. Men, women and children were simply slaughtered and I'm not sure about numbers but the body count was rather large. The claim was then (and now) that Sharon knew what was going on inside the camps and did not stop it.
I must say, though I am really no fan of Sharon, and I live here in Israel where there is no shortage of leftwingers who would like him put away for his settlement ideology alone, I have as of yet never seen any proof at all that this is the case. However, Israel did conduct an investigation into what happened, and found that, though he did not actually know what was going on, in hindsight he should have actually known what was to come since the Phalangists had done such things before.
My personal opinion. He didn't know what was happenning but he probably should have guessed. And hows he doing? He's been in a coma for quite a while now and and I heard 2 days ago that his situation has now taken a very bad turn for the worse, so if he really does have any accounts that need settling, the time for it does not seem too far away.
Personaly, I don't think that a common interest is enough to chose an ally. If the phalangists were as moraly repulsive as that, then we should have never accepted their help with regards to anything, not just sabra and shatila. (and all those of you who are itching to say Israel is just as morally repulsive better come with backup and not just shoot from the hip)
|
|
|
|
|
bigga
Aug 17, 2006, 1:28 AM
Post #73 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2002
Posts: 365
|
Here is an interesting site to look at, for those of you who feel obligated to believe the "facts" that lebanon is claiming and the media is reporting.
http://www.dinocrat.com/archives/category/mainstream-media/
Its alot of reading, I know, but then theres a lot of Bullsh**.
Its crazy how used to it people have gotten here. I personally know of an article featured in the New York Times showing a picture of an Israeli soldier, snarling with his batton raised high in the air. standing over a boy curled up at his feet. the caption read, "Israeli Soldier beats palestinian child". This 'palestinian child' was actually a boy from chicago who's father is good friends with my uncle and who I have personally met. When the boys parents called up the Times and informed them that the 'palestinian boy' was in fact their son, and that the soldier 'beating' him was infact the boys only protection from a mob of palestinians who were truelly beating him, well as you can imagine the retraction was not exactly printed on the front page (as I beleave the article was). Never can the contrast between the news reported and the truth by more clear. And its worrying to think about all the trash made up and printed where the subjects involved didn't happen to be oversees to catch them with their pants down.
And what motivates a journalist to take a picture and then try and fit the story he wants into it, EVEN if it is the exact opposite of the truth. Talk about pushing an agenda!!
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Aug 18, 2006, 8:34 AM
Post #74 of 87
(2127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
In reply to: In reply to: actually, no. but that would really amaze me in these cases. the objective of every army i know of after making a mistake is first to cover it up and then to protect its personnel from legal harm. thats why i wouldnt believe any non-guilty verdict from an internal investigation. or would you believe a non-guilty verdict that a murder suspect judged himself? thats why you need (and have) outside investigators for such cases. My point is that if you're not going to trust an internal investigation that finds them innocent, then you can't trust one that finds them guilty, either.
and you base your loginc on what??
you need to understand that every accused has the wish to be found not-guilty. so if he were to conduct the investigation and trial himself he would probably be found not-guilty regardless of him being guilty or not. so a non-guilty verdict in such a case doesnt prove anything.
but if he found himself guilty, then you can only assume that he really was because no sane man/organization would confess to crimes they didnt commit (lets leave reasons like saving loved ones from persecutions and such 'exotic' reasons out of the picture).
i would prefer an external investigation, because then both judgements have validity (though, ironically, internal guilty verdicts have greater validity than external ones).
as for that faulty article in the NYT... would you say that it is the norm or an exception? what really suprises me is the fact that such a picture was published at all, considering the influence certain groups have over US media. /conspiracy theory/ maybe such groups acutally knew the photo to be a fake and used it to reduce validity of other such (though not-fake) pictures /end conspiracy theory/
|
|
|
|
|
bigga
Aug 18, 2006, 10:56 AM
Post #75 of 87
(2123 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2002
Posts: 365
|
Overlord, the New York Times is traditionaly anti Israel and Pro Palestinian. Articles have even been written about that. (some are probably available on the internet if you wanna check) so I don't know why you have to come up with some conspiracy theory to prove that it can't be what it looks like. Besides, the journalists had no way of knowing the boys family was going to see the article and blow the whistle.
I agree with you about the problems of an internal investigation. When it comes to political investigation I agree with you 100%. The army however is a different story. The army as a body has no arm in politics, and has no interest in covering up its mistakes rather than fixing them. The entire military is entirely based on improving on mistakes. And the people who are encharged with carrying out these investigations are all millitary people, none of whom have any future political career to worry about or any other motivations other than the improvement of their army. And not once has an investigation by our army been proved wrong by international investigations that have followed them, and they have (jenin the clearest example). I understand why you have doubts about an internal investigation, and you being a foreigner I can't change them. For me, living here where the Army is a true civilian army, and having fought in it and been in combat more than once, having witnessed first hand the morality of my army in combat, I have no problem at all with the military conducting an investigation, because I will believe the results, whatever they may be. And as I say as far is the world is concerned the IDF's record is clean in this regard. Innocent until proven guilty no?
Our politics lately are a different story.
And an external investigation?. Almost every country and organisation in this world has their own opinion about Israel and they make huge efforts to portray it that way (one way or the other). Just look at the differences between how, for example, Fox News and BBC or Sky would report the same story. I have seen, with my own eyes, UN peace keepers in Southern Lebanon (The previous UNIFUL) colaborating with Hizbollah. Israel has even captured on tape some very questionable activities by UNIFIL which I have seen myself and for the life of me I don't know why we don't make it public. When I was serving in Chevron there was a case of members of TIPH, an organisation sent to monitor the peace between the jewish and arab settlers of chevron (mainly from sweden if I remember), vandalizing a water boiler on the roof of an arab family, photographing it and then reporting that Israeli soldiers had been shooting up the water boilers on rooves for the hell of it. These are peace keepers pushing an agenda.
So to be perfectly honest, Israel has far less faith in an 'external investigation' and with good reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
