GRIPES

[willedoo]

There's history of it. It will be a setback for a while but they'll survive again. Israel killed the previous heads of both organisations yet they survived and grew stronger.

[onetrack]

Jerry, you obviously haven't studied up on the Stern Gang and the Irgun, both groups being essentially terrorism gangs, who indulged in many terrorist acts against the British.

 

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Stern-Gang

 

And as for Nick Freitas - well, he's a Fundamentalist Christian Republican who joined the U.S. Army as method of revenge for 9/11 - he supports Trump - is dead against Obamas Affordable Care legislation, and wants it dismantled - is rabidly pro-gun - opposes any increase in the Federal minimum wage - and wants the Wall finished on the Mexican border. A fine example of a rabid right-winger in U.S. politics, and no doubt a vocal backer of the Israel of today.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Freitas

 

Regardless of Freitas Crusader approach, I do agree with a lot of what he has pointed out, about the Palestinians and their constant return to terrorism.

 

 

[old man emu]

8 hours ago, onetrack said:

Palestinians and their constant return to terrorism.

Years ago, in relation to some other organised use of force to achieve a political gain, it was said that if you are the one using the force, it's patriotism, but if you were receiving the force, it was terrorism. And again, history is written by the victorious.

[onetrack]

I think the important thing is to distinguish the introduction of the involvement of innocent civilians into politically driven murders, assassinations and kidnappings.

 

It's one thing to seek out and kill combatant and warmongering enemies who have clearly stated their aims - it's another thing altogether to kidnap and murder innocent civilians, and use them as pawns to gain power and territory. This is the most repugnant of all the acts of warmongering, and almost universally identifies the perpetrators as terrorists and indiscriminate, ruthless killers.

 

However, as ever in this world, civilians are always the ones who suffer greatly when combatants engage. The pure misery on fleeing civilians faces in wartime, is always etched on my mind.

[old man emu]

43 minutes ago, onetrack said:

it's another thing altogether to kidnap and murder innocent civilians,

I don't know if Israelis kidnapped any civilians, most likely not, but the civilian death and casualty numbers, as well as cutting off food, power and medical supplies strikes me as what is known as "unreasonable force". In our law, one can use force to stop an attack or to subdue an attacker. However, if the force used is beyond what is reasonable in the situation, then the person using that force is in the wrong.

 

What the Israelis are doing is using unreasonable force. Now, I think that the way they sabotaged the pagers was a quite fair thing to do, as the goal was to strike at members of the organisation.  I don't know if the reported casualties were simply organisation members who were wounded but not killed, or if they included innocent bystanders. However, blowing up whole buildings, which may and probably were used in part as operations centres, resulting in "collateral damage" is unreasonable.

[red750]

Hamas are the worst kind of cowards, hiding behind children, the sick and the elderly. Putting their operational centres in tunnels under schools, hospitals, residences etc.  As Netanyahu said, they have a tunnel system larger than the New York subway network. But he also has committed war crimes. It's fair enough to want to stop the rocket attacks and hostage taking, but as you say, too much collateral damage.

[nomadpete]

Good to see war confined to 'Gripes where it belongs'.

 

I can't stop hoping that Iran's supply of Shahaed (sp?) Drones to Putin might be disrupted by the Israelis.

 

Otherwise, the whole show highlights the desperate need for people to stop using religion as an excuse to attack others.

 

Will somebody remind all sides 'There are no winners in wars, only losers'

[onetrack]

I think the most despicable part of any warmongering group is the way they teach their toddler-age children that firearms are something to be worshipped, and how they teach their children that belief in the power of firearms is the way to go. The Middle Eastern terrorism groups are big on this, but they're followed closely by American Fundamentalists.

I find their attitude of a love of firearms repugnant, it's nothing short of idol-worship, and yet they fail to see it.

[spacesailor]

The ' same ' as aircraft, car , & tree lovers .

They are transport. 

I know of one ( moronic ) male , who wouldn't get a house mortgage.  Then went heavily into depth for his .

V8 police pursuit Commadore. 

HE ( I BELIEVE ) is now single .

Someone else is rearing his six kids .

spacesailor

[Jerry_Atrick]

4 hours ago, old man emu said:

I don't know if Israelis kidnapped any civilians, most likely not, but the civilian death and casualty numbers, as well as cutting off food, power and medical supplies strikes me as what is known as "unreasonable force". In our law, one can use force to stop an attack or to subdue an attacker. However, if the force used is beyond what is reasonable in the situation, then the person using that force is in the wrong.

One of the problems, as Peter points out is Hamas hides behind its civilian population. The cuting off, of water supplies (and electricity) is because Israel supply these to Gaza and they wanted to force Hamas out. I may be wrong, but I think they are reconnected, and I am dubious if the intention was solely directed at Hamas (in other words, try anf force the population to give up Hamas positions).  The food and medical supplied weren't cut off per se; it was too dangerous to bring them in. This of course, could be semantica, but the Egyptians weren't too happy about letting them in the via the Rafah gate in case Palestinians get out.

 

As a Palestinian citizen who wants nothing to do with the war, it is a sad plight.

4 hours ago, old man emu said:

What the Israelis are doing is using unreasonable force. Now, I think that the way they sabotaged the pagers was a quite fair thing to do, as the goal was to strike at members of the organisation.  I don't know if the reported casualties were simply organisation members who were wounded but not killed, or if they included innocent bystanders. However, blowing up whole buildings, which may and probably were used in part as operations centres, resulting in "collateral damage" is unreasonable.

Given the Israeli (Mossad?) ingenuity, I would tend to agree it is using unreasonable force and they could be more targeted, at least now. But they still have hostages in Gaza and they may noit know exactly where they are. Blowing up a building that they have intelligence tells them there are tunnels underneath where Hamas is located may seem excessive, but a country doesn't want to unnecessarily risk its fighting force to save civilians from the other side. This is the same with virtually all wars. If the building is an operational cerntre for the enemy  military, then all bets are on.. This has been done in many wars.

 

I am not defending indiscriminate targeting; and given the Israelis seem adept  at infiltration, they should probably use it more, but they should balance that against the risk to their own military personnel.

 

17 hours ago, onetrack said:

Jerry, you obviously haven't studied up on the Stern Gang and the Irgun, both groups being essentially terrorism gangs, who indulged in many terrorist acts against the British.

Obviously not; I had not heard of the Stern Gang, but I did know it was the Irgun who blew up the King David hotel. Be that as it may, the amount of terrorism they have performed is hardly enough to tar the Zionists with the systematically terrorist brush, is it?

 

4 hours ago, red750 said:

But he also has committed war crimes. It's fair enough to want to stop the rocket attacks and hostage taking, but as you say, too much collateral damage.

I agree, there is too much collaterial damage, but where does one draw the line, and what would it take to get Hamas and Hezbollah (and Iran, while you're at it) to the negeotioating table in good faith?  At this stage, it would be hard to get Israel there, too, although I would hazard to guess if their objectives were met (destruction of Hamas and Hezbollah, and it seems the Houthis as well), then Israel wouldn't seek to exterminate or move the rest of the Palestinians, et al. While it is a bad look for Israel, imagine if the upper hand went the other way.. I wouldn't like to be a peaceful Israeli citizen of Jewish extraction in that case. I think it would be a lot worse - but I could be wrong.

 

I am also not sure about the war crimes. The ICJ (or was it the ICC) focused on the invasion, I think, but they stopped short of calling it a war crime, as I recall. The assertion is with the killing of the civilians, Israel are committing war crimes (on a systematic basis; I am sure individual war crimes are being committed - as they have been by members acting individually rather than on command, of every country at war). As far as I am aware, there is no duty to protect citizens form the fallout of a conflict - the duty is not to target them or unreasonably deny them the flow humanitarian requirements (there is no obligation to provide it).

 

Collective punishment is a war crime, and the turning off the water and electricity may have fallen fouls of that, but interestingly, South Africa did not bring that to the ICJ.

Edited September 30 by Jerry_Atrick

[Jerry_Atrick]

New gripe.. Had an oral assessment of NSW Crim law today (this morning, my time). I must be getting old. Only had 2 hours sleep for various reasons - normally wouldn't impact me, but I totally forgot to add in mens rea as an element to the new crime of coercive control.. and even forgot, or couldn't articulate the Macquarie Dictionary meaning of coercion. FFS!

 

 

15 days to the exam.. I better get working!

[old man emu]

I hate Burt Bacharach and Hal David and Richard Carpenter and Karen Carpenter. They are responsible for that the earworm song, Close to You, to start in my head as soon as I step away from my hovel, and the bloody flies start zeroing-in on me.

Why do flies suddenly appear,

Everytime I'm not near?

Those damned flies, They long to be

Close to me.

[facthunter]

"Good Night Irene" does that. ALL mind numbing rubbish.  Nev

[spacesailor]

Just switch off your " ear-buds " .

silence is golden .

spacesailor

[red750]

I have a lot of difficulty with Chemist Warehouse. Not xenophobic, but it's diificult when virtually al;l the chemists in their dispensary are Asia. I have difficulty in understanding them at the best of times, but when they speak softly with masks on and acryllic barriers with small cutouts at countertop level, it is almost impossible. The chap today was tryingto ask a question and I had no idea what he was saying. He had to write it down on paper.

 

They work hard. There was a crowd like the showbag hall at the show, all anxious to be served. This is exacerbated by the fact that their narrow aisles are always blocked with stacks of stock. 

 

I switched to Chemist Warehouse when they opened nearby, after the manager of the chemist we had been loyal to for over 15 years pissed me off saying I had to wait to be served while they filled scripts for customers who were not in the shop and were coming back later.

[Bruce Tuncks]

The most chilling thing I have heard so far has been the palestinian leader who said how they were "winning" with the way they were forcing the israelis to become the bad guys. ( They were doing this by causing their own people to die...)

What hope is there?

And another thing...  that US guy who said how he was the first to notice how the nearby moslem countries were not helping the palestinians was just wrong....there has been discussion of this here for example. Not that he was wrong on everything, I agree with jerry.

[onetrack]

In War, psychology plays just as big a part in winning, as the number of soldiers killed. Psychological warfare undermines enemy morale, and low morale leads to a defeatist attitude.

[old man emu]

I strongly doubt that what the Israelis are doing is having any sort of negative effects on the morale of the Arab people who may not be members of the targeted military groups, but who are bearing the brunt of of the "collateral damage". The Palestinians have been coping a serve from the Israelis for seventy five years. That's five generations which have grown up in those conditions. Over the same period, the Israelis have had their culture shaped by similar factors which they believe affect their survival. 

 

We happily accept the physical evolution of a species in response to their environments. Surely there must be an evolution in the cultural mindset of a group which is subject to constant circumstances which affect its survival. Perhaps if the British hadn't done the dirty and failed to live up to the  the British government agreed to recognize Arab independence after the war in exchange for the Sharif of Mecca launching the Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Empire. (Lawrence of Arabia's bit), a situation of peaceful co-existence between the three Abrahamic religions of teh area might have been maintained.

 

 

[nomadpete]

My gripe about the above.......

 

All good in theory, but peace turns to shit as soon as religions raise their ugly head in politics.

[old man emu]

26 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

My gripe about the above.......

 

All good in theory, but peace turns to shit as soon as religions raise their ugly head in politics.

Religion can be one involved, but religion is, for some, just one form of fanaticism. Look at Hitler's, or Stalin's or Kim Jung Un's. I suppose I should have mentioned the three Abrahamic religions of the area. I don't really think that Islam -v- Judaism is the root of the problem. I think it is the arrival of so many displaced Jews after WWII and the differences in the economic cultures of the two groups.

 

Just look at the swing to the extreme Right that is occuring in Europe due to the massive influx of non-Europeans whose cultures are so different from the Europeans. The Arabs were screwed by the British and French between the Wars. Promises of independence were broken, and the Arabs were not included in the promises made by Britain and France to international Jewry.

 

There's more to the Arab/Israeli conflict than simply religion. But, as usual, Western Media doesn't provide us with a knowledgeable explanation of the history of the region. 

[willedoo]

2 hours ago, old man emu said:

I don't really think that Islam -v- Judaism is the root of the problem.

 

2 hours ago, old man emu said:

There's more to the Arab/Israeli conflict than simply religion.

I can't argue with those statements. Real estate has more to do with it than religion. If you forget about all the small stuff and just look at the main fundamental belief of those religions, Islam and the Jewish religion have much more in common with each other than either one does with Christianity. From a belief perspective the two of them should be natural allies against the Christians. I think it's more about power and land.

[old man emu]

14 minutes ago, willedoo said:

I think it's more about power and land.

Of course it is. The Jews wanted to get back their pre-Roman era traditional lands. The Zionist movement of the late 19th Century promoted that desire, but the politics of the First World War provided them with the support of Britain, France during the war, and the USA afterwards, since the Zionist movement was strongest in the USA. Then the Holocaust and the destruction of Europe in WWII generated multitudes of displaced persons, including Jews. So the Jews flooded into Palestine where there was already a sizable Jewish population from the inter-war arrivals.

 

The new arrivals took over the lesser quality land and applied the science and technology of Western Civilisation to make it agricultural productive. With the income from that production, they developed secondary industry. That gave them wealth, and with wealth comes power. Their religion really has nothing to do with the causes of the ongoing conflict. I bet there are more secular Jews than practising ones as there are amongst the Arabs and the Christians.

[Jerry_Atrick]

I don't agree that religion has nothing to do with the cause of the conflict; I think it is one of the main causes.

 

We talk about the current ME conflict as if it has only realy been going on since WWII, and that there was a bit of Zionism before it... But why Zionism, and why the ME.. Because of religion. And if you look at history throughout the ages, religion has been the excuse, and the cause of many a conflict. The three Abrahamic religions have been going at it for milleinia. And then you even have diffferrent branches within the same religion going at it hell for leather. Religion, which is, IMNSHO, just another form of tribalness - after all they can't all be right int hat theirs is othe only right religion. You have a ready made foprm of discrimination - them and us, when there is nothing else to discriminate against. And bloodshed has been borne on that basis in that region and beyond for millenia.

 

 

[nomadpete]

8 hours ago, old man emu said:

The new arrivals took over the lesser quality land and applied the science and technology of Western Civilisation to make it agricultural productive. With the income from that production, they developed secondary industry. That gave them wealth, and with wealth comes power.

Where did WE go wrong?

Isn't that what should have happened here in the last 200 years?

[old man emu]

56 minutes ago, nomadpete said:

Where did WE go wrong?

It's not that we went wrong, it is quite simply that we have never had the population size that develops an economy that can produce the money for investment in the production of goods. It is said that no money is made unless something is purchased by the consumer. If you don't have a large number of consumers, you don't make sales and therefore don't make money.