Israel/Palestine Shenanigans

Status
Not open for further replies.
dowie said:
The problem you've got there is Palestine isn't currently a state - so I don't believe you could apply that law...

like I said if the IDF invades Jordan then maybe...
Click to expand...

Its not a full member state of the UN but a non-member observer state.

The legal groundwork for such a move was laid in Nov 2012 when the 193-member U.N. General Assembly overwhelmingly approved the de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine by upgrading the Palestinian Authority's observer status to "non-member state" from "entity.”
Click to expand...

If it wasn't for western intervention (i.e. US veto's etc) - Israel would have been judged and shamed internationally for the war criminal it is a long long time ago.

Typical justice system working in the favour of the strong and wealthy. But now they have been recognised as a state they are working on bring the ICC on the scene.

That's why netanyahu is bricking himself fearing the ICC, look at the lengths he's gone to to get the US on his side against the palestinians taking anything to the ICC:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/7/netanyahu-asks-us-help-israel-avoid-war-crime/

Mr. Netanyahu met with a delegation of U.S. lawmakers, including Rep. Steve Israel, to discuss some of the recent combat operations and to ask for assistance in staying out of the International Criminal Court, the New York Post reported. His request came as several Palestinian leaders met with ICC officials to speak about joining the international body.
Click to expand...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/07/us-mideast-gaza-icc-analysis-idUSKBN0G723M20140807

If the Palestinians were to sign the ICC's founding treaty, the Rome Statute, the court would have jurisdiction over crimes committed in the Palestinian territories.

With Palestinian authorization, an ICC investigation could then examine events as far back as July 1, 2002, when the court opened with a mandate to try individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.
Click to expand...

Once its established that Israel has commit war crimes - lets see how the UK public take to fellow UK citizens joining an army complicit in war crimes. Whilst it might not be breaking UK law, these UK IDF recruits will be breaking international law then.

Not long now till Israel gets what's coming to it. Doesn't matter how much their US buddies cry over it.
 
zoomee said:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/33-34/90 - This act is currently under review and due to be amended shortly.
Click to expand...

That law is both not applicable to Israel or any foreign nation not in a state of War with the UK or it's allies and has also been superseded by UK legal precedence when British Nationals fought in the Spanish Civil War. The ironic thing is that a British national can legally fight for the Assad Regime, but not for the Anti Assad Fighters as that could make them subject to our anti-terrorist laws.

Your claim that Britons fighting for the IDF are breaking the law is wrong, it is as simple as that.

Also perhaps you can give us evidence that the legislation is currently under review and is to be amended shortly?
 
Last edited:
zoomee said:
Its not a full member state of the UN but a non-member observer state.
Click to expand...

I really don't care, or rather I do care, I hope there is a two state solution but as for whether it is illegal for Brits to join the IDF - it isn't... yes you want it to be illegal but that doesn't make it so - you're still just clutching at straws
 
Castiel said:
The ironic thing is that a British national can legally fight for the Assad Regime, but not for the Anti Assad Fighters as that could make them subject to our anti-terrorist laws.
Click to expand...

yup - IIRC there was an American citizen in the press fighting with rebels in Libya during the uprising against Gaddafi.... not an issue as he wasn't fighting with a terror organisation.

I think arguably a brit may be able to fight in the FSA but they'll likely face/detention and a lot of questioning upon returning given that a lot of the British fighters are joining IS etc...
 
I suspect many of the people joining the idf hold dual citizenship so therefore national service is mandatory. The usa had a similar policy in ww2 , one infantry division known as the rainbow division was made up of men with dual citizenship, (this was the unit that liberated Dachau concentration camp). Also some ex British military personnel served in the armed forces of Rhodesia and south Africa, many more as mercenaries in other African conflicts or more recently in the Balkans.
 
wingman44115 said:
Not many of the anti-Israel people commenting now Israel has proof that Hamas is using people as human shields with the goal of them dying.

http://nypost.com/2014/08/hamas-manual-details-civilian-death-plan-israel/
Click to expand...

This article states that 1900 Palestinians have been killed and of those, 900 are militants. So, whilst the absolute figure sounds high, a civilian to combatant kill ratio of about 2:1 is exceptionally low especially in a built up area. Probably one of the lowest recorded.

That is incredible precision and restraint.

Those of you who will try to point out the Hamas ratio of 62:3 or about 1:20 being even lower would be wrong because Hamas intentionally targeted civilian targets and through both Israel's Iron Dome and use by civilians of provided bomb shelters, this ratio is skewed in Hamas's favour...however that is not through a lack of ill will nor intent on their behalf.
 
Noughtboy said:
This article states that 1900 Palestinians have been killed and of those, 900 are militants. So, whilst the absolute figure sounds high, a civilian to combatant kill ratio of about 2:1 is exceptionally low especially in a built up area. Probably one of the lowest recorded.

That is incredible precision and restraint.

Those of you who will try to point out the Hamas ratio of 62:3 or about 1:20 being even lower would be wrong because Hamas intentionally targeted civilian targets and through both Israel's Iron Dome and use by civilians of provided bomb shelters, this ratio is skewed in Hamas's favour...however that is not through a lack of ill will nor intent on their behalf.
Click to expand...

So the guys who kill more civs are the good guys ? :p
 
Noughtboy said:
This article states that 1900 Palestinians have been killed and of those, 900 are militants. So, whilst the absolute figure sounds high, a civilian to combatant kill ratio of about 2:1 is exceptionally low especially in a built up area. Probably one of the lowest recorded.

That is incredible precision and restraint.

Those of you who will try to point out the Hamas ratio of 62:3 or about 1:20 being even lower would be wrong because Hamas intentionally targeted civilian targets and through both Israel's Iron Dome and use by civilians of provided bomb shelters, this ratio is skewed in Hamas's favour...however that is not through a lack of ill will nor intent on their behalf.
Click to expand...

900 combatants? source please.

accepted figures were 80% civilian deaths which israel didn't dispute AFAIR
 
Noughtboy said:
This article states that 1900 Palestinians have been killed and of those, 900 are militants. So, whilst the absolute figure sounds high, a civilian to combatant kill ratio of about 2:1 is exceptionally low especially in a built up area. Probably one of the lowest recorded.

That is incredible precision and restraint.

Those of you who will try to point out the Hamas ratio of 62:3 or about 1:20 being even lower would be wrong because Hamas intentionally targeted civilian targets and through both Israel's Iron Dome and use by civilians of provided bomb shelters, this ratio is skewed in Hamas's favour...however that is not through a lack of ill will nor intent on their behalf.
Click to expand...

As I already mentioned in an earlier post the NY Post appears to be the US equivalent of The Sun over here (both also owned by NewsCorp) so I wouldn't put too much faith in the news it contains. The usually recognised percentage is approximately 80% civilian casualties, which is around what the UN are stating.

EDIT: An interesting article on the civilian/militant death proportions and why there are such differences.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...4fd734-1f28-11e4-9b6c-12e30cbe86a3_story.html

It appears from the above link that the NY Post used the Israeli group B’Tselem's numbers rather than the multiple other independent sources (UN, Human Rights charities etc.).
 
Last edited:
IS in Iraq is burying alive women and kids in the north of the country...they belong to a religious minority...complete nutheads the lot of them. Stuck in the dark ages.
 
Iraklis F.C. said:
IS in Iraq is burying alive women and kids in the north of the country...they belong to a religious minority...complete nutheads the lot of them. Stuck in the dark ages.
Click to expand...

If they were stuck in the3 Dark Ages then they wouldn't be doing that...Arabic culture in the so called Dark Ages was anything but Dark or barbaric.
 
Castiel said:
If they were stuck in the3 Dark Ages then they wouldn't be doing that...Arabic culture in the so called Dark Ages was anything but Dark or barbaric.
Click to expand...

yup and even a few decades ago some aspects of Islamic cultures in the middle east and Asia were much more liberal than today... thanks Saudi Arabia....

Photos from Helmand province in the 50s and 60s show women wearing knee length skirts, no headscarf etc..etc..
 
Dark ages of the Middle East, for the commonly accepted context, would be modern times. Last 20-30 years or so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom