Re: Sounds familiar
In the same way that wifi is a glorified Marconi-era radio link?
326 posts • joined 14 Jul 2007
"There are surely those in Israel who would prefer attack to diplomacy."
To the "West", attack and "diplomacy" are the same thing.
The "West"'s "diplomatic" efforts with regards to Iranian nuclear enrichment boils down to: stop your enrichment, dismantle all your enrichment infrastructure and ship out all your enriched uranium OR we'll bomb the shit out of you.
The "West"'s "diplomatic" efforts with regards to Syria boils down to: President Assad step down and gtfo of Syria OR we'll bomb the shit out of you.
"Yeah, the Chinese are still the worst when it comes to stealing tech."
Do you mean they are "worst at it" or "worst for it"?
"People focus on NSA and GCHQ because that's what they hear of, but their spying is mainly targeted at military/terror threats,"
Problem is they are treating EVERYTHING as a potential military/terror threat and hence are scooping everything they can get their hands on. Killing everybody in London is bound to remove 1 or 2 people who maybe be a potential threat, but that is hardly the most efficient or the most acceptable way of doing things.
"while the Chinese spying is aimed at stealing tech"
I'll eat my Huawei router (If I had one) if it can be proven that the NSA and GCHQ are not engaged in stealing tech - that may not be their primary mission but they're doing it nonetheless.
"... and suppressing human rights."
Whilst the Chinese in general have been enjoying more freedoms and human rights over the last 3-4 decades, the opposite is true of the US and the UK.
"ALL Chinese companies are nominally the property of the Chinese state, and the Chinese state has unrestricted rights to all company assets."
I don't know how you worked this out. Granted a lot of the major companies are state owned, if this is what you mean then fine, but then don't use the word "ALL". If that is not what you mean then I'm sure by whatever chain of logic you used to come to that conclusion can also be used to reach the same conclusion for any other company in any other country.
"The Chinese secret service runs the Chinese counterparts of Facebook and Google,"
Well do you have a youtube (or even a youku) link to back up your claims?
"and if the secret service wants to insert code in the firmware of a Huawei product then Huawei will comply."
At this moment in time there is no credible proof to support this. If there was credible proof do you not think that the US govt would have exposed this already? Or are they keeping quiet so as to not let anybody know that they are reading all the communiques shuttling back and forth between the CCP and Chinese companies?
The "surprise" is that they are coercing/threatening commercial entities into helping them do the spying. And they have muzzled those commercial entities so that they are not allowed to reveal that they have been co-opted by the NSA. Thus there can be no meaningful oversight.
"[As a side note: I firmly believe all archaic post-war regulations should be removed and Japan should be allowed to re-arm itself as they see fit.]"
What, like how Germany was "allowed" to re-arm prior to WW2?
Unlike Germany, after WW2 Japan has never properly apologised for the atrocities their troops have committed, even worse they are denying those atrocities. The postwar generation are not taught about the real events of WW2 and hence many of them are genuinely puzzled as to why other Asian countries have such strong anti-Japanese feelings. When a prominent politician comes up with shit like this, about the use of forced prostitution :
“In the circumstances in which bullets are flying like rain and wind, the soldiers are running around at the risk of losing their lives. If you want them to have a rest in such a situation, a comfort women system is necessary. Anyone can understand that,” Hashimoto, also the Osaka mayor, told reporters in a building of the Osaka city government.
... you can understand why most of Asia doesn't want to see Japan "re-arm". Even though the Japanese military is officially a "self-defence" force, their budget is very similar to that of the UK or France and are already one of the best equipped forces in the world.
To be rehabilitated into the "civilised" world, Japan needs to at least:
- apologise sincerely, without reservations and qualifications, to the people whom the crimes were committed against, for the crimes they have committed from the beginning of the 20th century through to the dropping of the 2 atomic bombs,
- teach their children the real events concerning their quest for Asian dominance - all the atrocities and crimes committed needs to be laid bare and discussed in detail
- hunt down and bring to justice the remaining war criminals, most don't need hunting down since they're well known figures living in comfortable retirement.
- make it unlawful to deny that the Japanese have committed heinous war crimes
- pay reparations to the victims of their crimes, starting with those who have been forced into prostitution
Basically do what Germany did after WW2.
You don't seem to have read or understood my remark. Fighting for your own freedom and defending your own way of life - which is what the British, French, Soviets etc were doing - is not "noble" and there is nothing to remember or forget and no lessons to be learnt, because "fighting for/defending your own interests" is ... natural. So we're talking about the 2 dominant colonialists, Britain and France, fighting for survival against the 2 wannabe colonialists, Germany and Japan, not fighting for some ideal like freedom and liberty for all mankind. In some cases the colonialists promised their colonies freedom if they helped them in their fight against "tyranny", and in all cases they reneged on their promises. So after WW2 all the colonies were recolonised and any attempts to regain sovereignty or achieve independence were brutally suppressed. So what happened to the freedom if that was one of the lessons of WW2?
"We didn't when Saddam gassed the Iranians, and we didn't when the previous Assad gassed the Syrians, and I see no reason to go after the new Assad now."
... especially when nothing was done after the US used chemical weapons in Iraq in 2004, and Israel used them Lebanon in 2006 and again in Gaza in 2008.
"Seemingly, many have forgotten that the Great War and WWII—at least for many of the infantrymen and others who fought in them—were about freedom, defending a way of life, and to live in peace without being dominated by totalitarian governments."
How naive. Both WWs were about empire building and defence of empire.
About freedom, whose freedom? After WW2, countries that had been <sarcasm>liberated</sarcasm> by the japs were promptly recolonised by the colonialists.
@ Michael Habel
"Besides Osamba already robed NASAs cradle for its Milk Money so he could fund his Healthcare Scheme. "
Maybe he should rob the welfare department aka warfare department (aka defense department) to fund NASA?
@ frank ly
"Woud the ISS or the LHC be a good model for joint projects of this nature?"
Depends on who has the final say. China expressed an interest in joining the ISS, but the US didn't want them.
Most IE exploits didn't require user input, you only need to "visit" a dodgy website to get infected. This particular "exploit" requires you to explicitly allow the installation of a plugin. If you're dumb enough to install from unknown sources then you deserve to be exploited.
"That's how extradition treaties normally work: If a crime is committed against the people of country X, and country Y, if country X submits an extradition request before country Y prosecutes, the prosecution will be put on hold until the extradition is approved or not. If the extradition is not approved, country Y may proceed with a prosecution, should they so desire."
That is exactly NOT how it works. Extradition is for cases where someone (anyone) commits a crime IN country X and somehow ends up in country Y before country X was able to arrest them. Country X then asks country Y to extradite alleged criminal back to country X, where the crime was committed, to stand trial.
In other words, in most (all?) legal jurisdictions, crimes are tried according to where they are committed, and not according to whom they are committed against.
But being the world's policeman, the US is beyond mere national laws or international laws. If they want someone they have options other than extradition: such as abduction, rendition, or simply the laying of false charges.
"Give people the money to buy it, then they can make their own decisions on what they want."
Except that that won't work in a cruelly capitalist system like in Hong Kong. Whenever the government gives out money or subsidies to the poor/elderly the filthy landlords immediately raise the rent of those unfortunate enough not to be living in government subsidised housing.
"they have one tiny medical reactor that already has 50 years of fuel"
Stop peddling your lies. I already corrected you once on this. Last time they bought fuel was 20 years ago, the amount they bought was expected to last 10-20 years.
"that might actually require you to get a clue - unlikely!"
My thoughts exactly.
'Bankers also don't push pencils through screens "just to see what would happen".'
Of course, they are too busy crashing the economy and see who'll pick up the pieces.
"Tightly integrating malware protection into the OS is something MS are trying to do"
I read that as "Tightly integrating malware into the OS", which is something MS has been doing since forever.
As long as Australia stays a faithful poodle to the US then there is little chance of being on the receiving end of sanctions.
"The word is _entirely_ subjective and malleable, that's why they love to use it so often."
The word has been abused so much by the Israelis that real, god fearing terrorists wouldn't be seen dead associating with the likes that Israel calls "terrorists".
The abuse of the word has reached new depths when after the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly in favour of upgrading the State of Palestine's status to non-member state, a former Israeli FM called it a "strategic terror attack".
"And how do you know Stuxnet was a USA creation?"
The US govt did nothing to deny the NY Times report, and in fact took credit for it.
"Iran which only wants to enrich uranium for innocent "research purposes" - the research being "how big a bomb can we build?"
If you have definite proof that Iran is making a "bomb", then show it to the US and the IAEA, because so far they don't have proof.
"when the **** hits the fan, who do you think everyone is going to be trying to hide behind in order to have their butts saved? Iran or the USA?"
When the shit comes from the US as is most likely the case, don't look to them to save you.
"Just look at 20th century history in China to decide if you really want them to be the world's superpower."
Since WW2 China has only been involved in 2 major wars involving other countries, Korean and Vietnam. The former as a result of US led invasion of N Korea, and the latter as a result of US led attempts to conquer N Vietnam.
It has also been involved in one or two minor border skirmishes with India, Vietnam and the USSR/Russia.
Since the death of Chairman Mao and the subsequent opening up of the economy, China hasn't been involved in any wars or lent support to whatever communist "insurgencies" that remain in around the world.
In contrast the US has invaded or tried to invade or has unleashed major military action on:
- N Korea (and threatened to use nuclear weapons on China for daring to support the North)
- Dominican Republic (on the side of a military regime which deposed a democratically elected leader)
- Laos (between 1964 and 1973, US bombers dropped more ordnance on Laos in this period than was dropped during the whole of the WW2. This is in a country just over half the size of California.)
- Iraq (again)
And the US has a shameful record of covertly or otherwise of deposing democratically elected or popular leaders who are "too independent" (ie doesn't do what the US tells them to do) and replacing them with often brutal military dictatorships or despots:
Nicaragua 1980s, trafficking arms to Iran and using proceeds to fund the Sandinista terrorists, trafficking drugs via Manuel Noriega (dictator of Panama, subsequently abducted by the US and convicted for drugs trafficking) and using proceeds to fund the Sandinista terrorists who wanted to overthrow a democratically elected government.
Dictatorships or authoritarian regimes that even China doesn't support are eagerly propped up by the US:
South America, all the right-wing military dictatorships
Africa, all the resource-rich regimes, plus Egypt before the overthrow of Mubarak
Middle East, all the oil-rich authoritarian monarchies
Central Asia, all the oil-rich dictatorships
Asia - Philippines, Indonesia, Taiwan, S Korea all had military dictatorships fully supported by the US until popular action replaced them with more or less functioning democracies.
With China you get what it says on the packet - they will not interfere in other countries internal affairs and they don't.
With the US they say they're fully committed to freedom of speech, self-determination, human rights, rule of law etc, except when they're not, which from the above list of examples is a lot of the time.
"The radio spectrum surrounding us belongs to us. Governments selling it to Telcos who increase their charges to pay for it is simply a substantial stealth tax on mobile communications."
I'm sure if the government gave out free licences to the telcos you would also be complaining that the government had been negligent for not extracting the maximum value from our public resources.
"Apple have taken some flak but then again they are +500m a year (and more as they sell more devices)."
You seem to think that's a good thing. It might be if you're a shareholder, and only if Apple thinks it should share the savings with the shareholders and continue to issue dividends.
But if you're an isheep then those savings are not passed onto you in the form of lower device prices.
You are indeed. Microsoft with Windows illegally obtained a monopoly, which was further maintained through dubious lock-ins and deliberate non-interoperability. Thank $deity that Apple has so far not managed to achieve a monopoly status, otherwise they could very well be a worse monopolist than Microsoft. You are misled into thinking Apple rules the world because you are overwhelmed by the hype and the fanaticism of the isheeps. The same hype and fanaticism that is rewriting history by attributing the invention of the smartphone to Apple, hotly contested by the fandroids who probably thinks Googsung invented the smartphone.
I see from your tone that you don't believe the Palestinians. Do you believe the UK govt then?
"Whitehall officials said the Palestinians were now being asked to refrain from applying for membership of the international criminal court or the international court of justice, which could both be used to pursue war crimes charges or other legal claims against Israel.
Abbas is also being asked to commit to an immediate resumption of peace talks "without preconditions" with Israel. The third condition is that the general assembly's resolution does not require the UN security council to follow suit."
It's obvious that the UK/US/France are also trying to cover their own arses - in the event that Israel is brought before one of the two courts, the actions of the three in supporting Israel's criminal actions will be severely called into question. Sales of arms to a regime knowing full well they would be used to kill civilians would be one of the charges levelled against at least one of the trio.
Again, since Israel claims to be the perpetual victim of terrorists attacks, why doesn't it relish the chance to bring the perpetrators to justice?
The US/EU/Israel is forever branding the Palestinians as terrorists and perpetrators of untold war crimes. However when push comes to shove it's obvious who is more worried about being judged in a court of law.
"But the US and Britain are attempting to weaken the impact of a UN vote in support of statehood by putting considerable pressure on the Palestinian leadership to offer guarantees that it will not take advantage of the new status to accuse Israel of war crimes at the international criminal court (ICC) or seek territorial rulings at the international court of justice.
Palestinian officials said Britain and the US had pressed Abbas to sign a confidential side letter, which would not be presented to the UN general assembly, committing the Palestinian Authoritity not to accede to the ICC.
France has been pressuring the Palestinians to amend the resolution before statehood is recognised to make it clear that Israel could not be taken to the ICC for its actions. Israeli officials are particularly concerned over an investigation of its assault on Gaza four years ago, Operation Cast Lead, which was widely condemned as a war crime because of the scale of Palestinian deaths and the level of destruction."
'... as one European official put it, "taking Israel to the court is a real red line"'
Yeah, a red line drawn with the blood of the Palestinians.
The Palestinians are ready to be judged for their alleged crimes, is Israel ready for the same?
"Your attempts to equate a redundant Jewish splinter group with mainstream Fakeistinian politics is simply laughable."
You haven't addressed the fact that a leader of a terrorist group, Yitzhak Shamir, was eventually made a leader of Israel. And Israel awards members of the terrorist group to which Shamir belonged with military honours.
Iran not only regularly directly threatens the destruction of Israel ...
"Instead go argue directly with Ban Ki Moon"
He is a spineless US poodle. His only commendable act so far is to attend this year NAM summit despite US pressure.
"Ban Ki-Moon condemns threats against Israel"
"EU's Ashton condemns "hateful" Iran remarks on Israel"
I missed the part where Iran called on the Palestinians (or even just Hamas) to destroy Israel. Please point it out.
"And then we're off into some fantasy land regarding Iran's nuke activities!"
Please point to any credible source which says there is conclusive evidence that Iran has an ongoing nuclear weapons program, and is currently intent on making nuclear weapons.
"Iran has a tiny medical reactor that alerady has a stock of fuel to last it decades."
Yeah the last (only?) batch of fuel sold to Iran by Argentina in 1992 is estimated to last 10-20 depending on what capacity Iran operated the reactor at. So 2 decades on from 1992, brings us to the present, which is about time the fuel runs out. So you seem to be right for once, except you meant decades from now, in which case you are obviously wrong. Hence Iran's need for more fuel to feed this reactor and the 5 others that they're building. This will allow them to be near self-sufficient in medical isotopes.
Considering that US sold Iran that original medical reactor which used HEU fuel, and since then has refused to sell them the fuel or to even deliver fuel apparently already paid for, forcing Iran to turn to Argentina to get the reactor converted to use 20% enriched fuel, and even then the US has pressured other countries to stop selling any fuel to Iran, it is only rational for Iran to make sure they don't get shafted by the US anymore.
"In a letter dated 19 February 2010, Iran informed the IAEA that it was still seeking to purchase the required fuel for the TRR on the international market and would be willing to exchange LEU for fuel assemblies "simultaneously or in one package inside the territory of Iran." Iran requested that the IAEA convey this message to the P5+1 but the sides were not able to restart negotiations.  The breakdown of talks was followed by a new nuclear fuel swap proposal brokered by Brazil and Turkey. On 17 May 2010, Brazil, Turkey and Iran issued a joint statement in which Iran agreed to export half of its LEU stock (1,200kg) to Turkey as a confidence-building measure, in return for 120kg of 20% enriched uranium for use in its medical research reactor. The deal, however, was not accepted by Western countries, who saw Iran's agreement to the removal of only 1,200kg of LEU from its territory as too little, too late."
"But, as I showed with the simple example of Silwan and East Jerusalem, you can't state all of the West Bank is unquestioningly their land. It is a double-standard to insist Israel has a building freeze unless the Fakeistinians do also"
East Jerusalem has been illegally annexed by Israel, not recognised by any other UN member, and it is under the full control of Israel, any building works going on there can only proceed with Israel's say so. So what is your point again?
"but Israel agreed to it for ten months becasue they wanted talks."
I've already pointed out the timeline of events in that so-called 10 months freeze. Netanyahu deliberately humiliated Biden and rubbed Obama's nose it by announcing the new settlements during Biden's visit to Israel.
"Return of those areas to Fakeistinian control was conditional on there being an improvement in security, i.e. no terror attacks. That didn't happen"
Israel also has a duty to stop its violence as well, during the period 1993-2000, as a result of violence on both sides, over 300 were killed on the Israeli side, and over 700 killed on the Palestinian side. And don't you whine that "they started it".
"indeed until the Barrier went up the suicide bombers were being sent to kill Israeli civillians with almost clockwork regularity."
Said barrier of which an estimated 10% is built on stolen Palestinian land.
"Even after the Barrier violent attacks against Israeli settlements in the West Bank continued, in breach of the Oslo Accord terms."
And there are just as frequent, if not more, attacks by settlers on Palestinians. When Palestinians attack settlers, they are automatically labelled terrorists and are often killed outright with no right to a trial, and have their family homes demolished as a matter of course as punishment on the remaining family members. When settlers attacks Palestinians, the Israeli authorities say they will investigate and more often than not no charges are pressed, and in the rare cases where settlers are charged and prosecuted and found guilty they are given a token sentence, their families are not punished, their homes are not demolished. Is that fair?
"but now Hamas is the elected representatives of the Fakeistinians, and they reject the Accord outright because their only solution is the eradication of Israel."
The negotiations towards a final settlement is with the President of the PA, who currently is Abbas. He has been given the authority to negotiate with Israel. There are hardline, fundamentalist Jewish parties who flit in and out of Israel's governing coalition all the time, and who oppose any kind of peace with the Palestinians. And Lieberman's raving, foaming at the mouth racist attitudes is as ugly as anything the Palestinians has to offer. So what was your point again?
"Please provide proof of collaboration between Fatah and Israel or I'll simply put that statement in the "blindly ranting" bin."
"Really? Please do provide proof of this, actual concrete actions to disrupt any reconcilliation."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned that the authority must decide whether it wants "peace with Israel or peace with Hamas."
Sounds like an explicit threat. Coupled with the "leaked" plans to topple Abbas it shows just how lawless and depraved Netanyahu and friends is.
"Partial compliance is not compliance. Still, despite the Fakeistinians not living up to their full commitments, Israel has returned areas of the West Bank to PNA control as a measure of good faith."
Up to the Second Intifida, 7 years after Oslo an area of less than one fifth of the West Bank is under nominal full PA control. Despite the PA's efforts, continued Israeli actions such as denying permits for Palestinians to build new homes; continual building of settlements; arbitrary and humiliating searches, beatings & detentions; turning a blind eye to destruction of property and violence by settlers; forcing Palestinians to go through dozens of checkpoints to get from X to Y within the West Bank; no guaranteed safe passage from West Bank to the Gaza Strip; etc can only fuel Palestinian resentment and result in eventual violence.
Again, Netanyahu shows the worth of Israel's good faith:
"They asked me before the election if I'd honor [the Oslo accords]," he said. "I said I would, but ... I'm going to interpret the accords in such a way that would allow me to put an end to this galloping forward to the '67 borders. How did we do it? Nobody said what defined military zones were. Defined military zones are security zones; as far as I'm concerned, the entire Jordan Valley is a defined military zone. Go argue."
It's small wonder that Sarkozy and Obama have no love for that guy.
"Isn't it a first step to identify the killers, THEN proceed to try them? You cannot prove who the killers were, indeed your own source mentions Afghan government forces, not US ones."
Here's another report on that same incident:
"Western Troops Accused of Executing 10 Afghan Civilians, Including Children"
“First the foreign troops entered the guest room and shot two of them. Then they entered another room and handcuffed the seven students. Then they killed them. Abdul Khaliq [the farmer] heard shooting and came outside. When they saw him they shot him as well. He was outside. That’s why his wife wasn’t killed.”
"Great, so it must be really easy for you to supply some links to back up your claims, right? Oh, you don't. This is my surprised face, honest!"
Search for: night raids afghanistan
And you will get all the links you need.
And here's a few quotes from Afghan president Hamid Karzai:
"Similarly, going into the Afghan homes – searching Afghan homes without the authorization of the Afghan government – is something that should stop now."
"No coalition forces should go into Afghan homes without the authorization of the Afghan government."
"Civilian deaths and arbitrary decisions to search people’s houses have reached an unacceptable level and Afghans cannot put up with it any longer."
"Afghan life is not cheap and it should not be treated as such."
"Part of that list was that they shouldn't, on their own, enter the houses of our people and bombard our villages and detain our people."
"Which has nothing to do with modern war crimes commited by Hamas or Fatah. Trying to excuse the massive and continued practice of war crimes by refering back to a previous event is self-delusion."
Are you stupid or are you really stupid. Lehi (Stern Gang) used terrorism to fight for an Israeli state. This Israeli state directly resulted in the Palestinian problem, giving rise to the PLO and later Hamas who are using largely the same tactics as what the Stern Gang used, to fight for a Palestinian state. Now say it again that there is no connection.
'You didn't even manage to accuse Yitzhak Shamir of any crimes, just said "he was in this group, it had an ideology, therefore it justifies war crimes."'
1) Shamir was one Chief of Operations of the Stern Gang. He never denied being a member, and seemed to have reveled in the fact, and defended its policies.
2) It is not a matter of debate that the gang has carried out numerous terrorists activities. Even Israel acknowledged that when it declared it a terrorist organisation and arrested its members (but subsequently gave them a state pardon).
Hence Yitzhak Shamir was a leader of a terrorist organisation. Israel requires less proof than that to deem the killing of what they say are Palestinian militants (and any collateral damage civilians), as righteous in the name of "self defence".
This is the headline in the Daily Telegraph's obituary of Shamir:
"Yitzhak Shamir, who has died aged 96, was a former terrorist who, a little to his own surprise, found himself Prime Minister of Israel in 1983."
"Israel was founded by an act of the UN Security Council, unanimously approved."
UN General Assembly Resolution 181: For: 33 Abs: 10 Against: 13
"Maybe you forgot to mention it seeing as it is part of the basis of the Oslo Accord which the Fakeistinians signed up to but have not adhered to. The second of the key principles of 242 is as follows ..."
Arafat and Abbas have largely adhered to the Oslo Accords.
To link the Oslo Accords with the actions or inactions of the other Arab states in your manner:
"Now, consider that of the Arab states directly involved in that War - Syria, Egypt and Jordan - Syria has not signed a peace treaty with Israel"
is meaningless. If Israel wants peace with those other Arab nations then reach "Oslo Accords" with them as well, because the Oslo Accords is an agreement concering Israel and the Palestinians, only.
Until Israel returns the illegally annexed Golan Heights to Syria then Syria will not sign a peace treaty - not whilst Assad is in power. Of course, if the US manages to install a puppet government in Syria then there is a good chance that the Golan Heights will be ceded in return for US "aid". "Aid", because these days, US "aid" is largely in the form of arms sales, and the training of the police to suppress dissent, and training of the military to "counter insurgents".
"they have a habit of siding with losers, just like when Haj Amin al-Husseini (Arafat's uncle) sided with Hitler. Gee, I wonder which one of Hitler's policies appealed to the Muslims that joined the SS?"
If true it looks like a page straight out of the Stern Gang's playbook, when they tried to ally with the Nazis to fight against the hated British. Gee, I wonder which of Hitler's policies appealed to the terrorist gang?
"Iran supports Hamas and calls for the destruction of Israel. I suppose you will try and weasel out by claiming Iran is Persian and not Arab."
Following Hamas' denunciation of Assad (Iran's ally) and the relocation of their offices to Qatar, Iran's support for Hamas is questionable. In any case can you point to any instance in which Iran called on the Palestinians (or even just Hamas) to destroy Israel?
Ever since the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the "West" has been calling for Iran's destruction, and this was translated into action with the less than covert support for Iraq's invasion of Iran. So what does that prove?
I don't know of any other country that can make explicit threats of war against another country without getting at least a rap on the knuckles from the UN. But Israel can, and continues to make bellicose and belligerent threats against Iran on the basis of unproven claims that Iran is attempting to build nuclear weapons.
".... the Palestinians also have a right to defend themselves....." How is the Fakeistinians shooting rockets out of Gaza at Israeli civillians a defensive act? ..."
In exactly the same manner as Israel is defending itself by killing civilians, women and children alike in its operations to kill militants.
"If Hamas and Fatah had both refrained from attacking Israel out of Gaza the blockade would have been long gone."
And you fail to ask why the Palestinians are attacking Israel. As long as their land is being occupied and they aren't able to lead normal lives and Israel has no intention of resuming the so called peace process then Palestinians are justified in using any means at their disposal to fight against it.
"like when Iran is trying to hide news of their upping their uranium refinement efforts"
My oh my, I don't know where you get your news from. Maybe from the point of view of living under a stone all news is "hidden". Any time there is a ramping up of Iran's nuclear activities, they are pleased to announce it to the world with glee. It is both a way to telling the US that Iran will continue to exercise it's RIGHT to enrichment unless the US can come to the negotiating table with sensible offers, and as a way to show the Iranian people that they are making progress on nuclear technology.
Note how Iran denied that they suspended enrichment.
More importantly, what most western media fails to highlight is the fact that whenever Iran's supply of 20% enriched uranium reaches a certain amount, they convert the "surplus" into fuel for their medical reactor. This conversion renders the material unsuitable for weaponisation. To Fox's credit they do have a report:
And the sham of the P5+1 "talks", which is nothing more than modern day gunboat diplomacy - Iran, stop your ALL enrichment even though you are entitled to it, or we will bomb you back to the Stone Age (all options on the table).
Reasonable alternatives were put forward by countries such as Russia, Turkey and Brazil. These were initially welcomed by the US, but behind the scenes arm twisting of the US by Israel, led to the rejection of all of them. So now the only offer on the table for Iran is stop all enrichment, or ELSE.
"idiots like you that think they can win through violence."
When Israel can show they can maintain their occupation of the West Bank and their blockade of the Gaza Strip without the use of violence then the Palestinians would have lost the moral right to violent resistance.
"As already pointed out, not only is this a stupidly biased idea when there are no pre-reqs on the Fakeistinians to do likewise,"
Aside from the fact that Palestinians have the innate right to build on their own land, why would Israel need to pre-req the Palestinians not to build in the West Bank? Israel controls who can and cannot build in the West Bank - any, illegal in Israeli law, buildings by Palestinians can and are demolished.
"but Abbas also moves the goalposts every time he needs to. Meanwhile he has completely failed to implement the pre-reqs of the Oslo Accord"
He and Arafat before him, have implemented them as best they could.
As for completely failed, the failure of the Barak and previous Netanyahu governments to return Area B & Area C to the Palestinians would count as such. This failure to implement the Oslo Accords on the part of Israel is in large part responsible for the Second Intifada
"including holding free and fair elections (he has usurped Hamas, the elected government party, overstayed his term as President, and eliminated his political opponents in the West Bank)."
It's all very well saying that. Elections were held once, the "international" community didn't like the results. The political opponents eliminated were mostly either requested by Israel, or those Israel would've liked to see eliminated anyway. Given the state of affairs between Hamas and Fatah right now and elections held will be less than free and fair. Anytime there are attempts at reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas, Israel is there ready to oppose and disrupt. Israel knows full well a reconciled Palestinian side will have a stronger mandate to demand a resumption of peace talks, something Israel is not willing to oblige.
"Yet Israel doesn't ask for pre-reqs to every round of talks, because Israel is willing to negotiate."
Since Israel holds all the cards it's hard to see what they can pre-req from the PNA, the main ones, renunciation of violence, recognition of Israel, was already done years ago. The fact that Abbas has done "all that he was required to do", the lack of pre-reqs from Israel is no surprise. More recently, as a result of the UN bids by the PNA, the resulting vociferous threats from the US and Israel is pre-req enough.
"You also seem to have skated over the fact this was a JOINT-operation, so it could have been Afghan forces doing any killings, even if you did prove they were civillians which you have not."
Isn't it up the killers to prove that the killed were militants? Did you miss the executive summary? Why did Nato claimed militants were killed then denied operation took place? If did Nato were so sure the killed were militants then why say the operation didn't take place?
As has been reported in the media, these night raids cause massive disruptions in villagers lives and the killing of civilians is giving the militants fresh recruits. In the meantime Nato deludes itself into thinking it is winning because every person killed is a militant, until the villagers prove otherwise, in which case Nato will try to whitewash the operation in question, or open an "investigation", which invariably leads nowhere.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020