Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week

[Jetboogieman]

Re: Sources: Obama Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week

Sources: Obama Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week | The Weekly Standard

More proof Israel has, at least until 2012, no friend in the USA. I hope they realize it's just a mistake, and don't hold our great mistake against us after Obama is removed from office.

You know, at the end of the day, regardless of the politics between your two nations... you're still giving them billions of aid every year, and your overzealousness to paint Obama as Anti-Israeli can only point to the fact that's what you're gonna think no matter what.


I seem to remember you always saying, "Don't trust government"... so if that's true, why are you absolutely 100% willing to trust a foreign government who has every reason to want to conceal the truth (even if they don't). I don't care to say anything about Israel or take sides, I did just want to point this out though.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Israel to Support Anti-Israel Actions!!!!

Israel will accept international role in flotilla probe, officials say - CNN.com

Israeli officials said Friday they will accept international participation in their investigation into the deadly boarding of the Turkish flotilla ship destined for Gaza.​

Damn ain't that somethin?
Even Israel is "anti-Israeli"

 

[Jetboogieman]

Re: Israel to Support Anti-Israel Actions!!!!

Damn ain't that somethin?
Even Israel is "anti-Israeli"

Damn Anti-Semites!!!!

 

[NolaMan]

Re: Israel to Support Anti-Israel Actions!!!!

Already a thread on this

http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...port-anti-israel-resolution-un-next-week.html

Can a moderator merge them?

 

[RightinNYC]

The problem with this is that Israel has a bad reputation in the world, deserved or not. Any investigation done by Israel is going to be rejected out of hand by most. If the investigation is done by an organization outside of Israel, and concludes nothing wrong was done, then it has real meaning.

FWIW, I don't think the Great Satan's global reputation on things like terrorism or detainees is much better. The reason why the UN didn't demand an international investigation into Abu Ghraib back in 2005 wasn't because the world trusted the US, but because they knew we'd smother that effort in the cradle.

 

[Agent Ferris]

Re: Sources: Obama Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week

I support the commission. The flotilla was a major international incident and the only "trial" it has received has been in the court of media and public opinion. If Israel did no wrong then it has nothing to be afraid of. The incident happened in international waters so the UN is within its full right to call for an investigation. I'm glad, for once, the U.S. administration isn't vetoing something that could bring positive results and restore faith.

The U.N. is not an independent observer they are decidedly anti-Israel. Did the U.N. condemn or set up a commission for the North Korean sinking of a South Korean ship which was a blatant act of war? But no Israel gets investigated for inspecting a jihadist owned and operated ship who readily admitted it was not on a humanitarian mission, whose crew dreampt of martyrdom and attempted to murder Israeli weapons inspectors.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Re: Sources: Obama Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week

The U.N. is not an independent observer they are decidedly anti-Israel.

You mean they're "anti-Israel" after 1948

 

[Agent Ferris]

Frankly, I don't get what the big deal is. If Isreal boarded the ship in international waters, they were in the wrong.

No they weren't they didn't need to be in Israeli waters because they readily admitted there intention to run the blockade.

Sure the ship may have been carrying illegal good/material or even harboring suspected terrorist, but a sovereign nation still has no right to board a vessal outside their territorial waters - if that was, in fact, the case here.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[jallman]

This is not an entirely accurate statement. Being in international waters does not mean that no laws apply any longer.



The United States has made no indication that they believe anything Israel did was "illegal." Now, without seeing the structure of the actual investigation that will come from the UN it is hard to determine, but on the surface, at this point, it seems just like an Israeli witch hunt.

If they were in international waters, as long as the flotilla wasn't engaging in piracy, there was zero grounds to board the vessel. The order of blockade does not have any power in international waters. Israel should have waited until they entered the blockade region and then boarded.

But if Israel boarded those boats in international waters, by all means nail them to the wall for it just like we would anyone else. I'm tired of Israel getting a pass today for what happened in Germany 70 years ago.

 

[Agent Ferris]

good move, Obama

if we are to regain our credibility, internationally, we cannot continue to defend the indefensible

israel, by its own actions, has pushed our government to this limit

if israel has done nothing in this incident for which it should be ashamed, then this report will reveal that
it will also reveal whether israel has acted in a way which deserves to be criticized

and in the end, like the Goldstone Report, it will be filed away and israel will continue to do what it always does, oppress Palestinians
only with each UN report the world will become more aware of israel's egregious actions

Give me a ****ing break, Goldstone was working for the Arab-bloc controlled UNHRC which holds anti-Israel days under the laughable guise of anti-Racismn even though all citizens of Israel have full and equal rights under Israeli law regardless of race, creed, or gender, while completely ignoring the plight of non-Muslims, women, gays, etc living under Islamic dhimmitude, the Goldstone Report does not even try to hide its biased, the investigation was convened only to investigate Israel while leaving out Hamas's actions alltogether, which means they completely ignored the fact that Hamas uses human shields, fires into civilian sectors from civilians sectors, doesn't wear uniforms, and otherwise violates all laws and customs of war which are intended to limit civilian casualties. Even Goldstone has been critical of his own investigation citing that it relied on Hamas, that nothing had been proven, and he would not be surprised if a lot of it turned out not be true, he, also, rejected the U.N. resolution endoresing the contents of the report out of hand.

 

[Redress]

FWIW, I don't think the Great Satan's global reputation on things like terrorism or detainees is much better. The reason why the UN didn't demand an international investigation into Abu Ghraib back in 2005 wasn't because the world trusted the US, but because they knew we'd smother that effort in the cradle.

I really don't think our reputation outside of a few countries is that bad. We may not be liked much, but I don't think we are seen in the same light as Israel. Of course, hard to say from the inside.

 

[donsutherland1]

Re: Israel to Support Anti-Israel Actions!!!!

Israel will accept international role in flotilla probe, officials say - CNN.com

Israeli officials said Friday they will accept international participation in their investigation into the deadly boarding of the Turkish flotilla ship destined for Gaza.​

Damn ain't that somethin?
Even Israel is "anti-Israeli"

There's a difference between an international investigation under the auspices of the UN and an international role within an Israeli investigation. I have no objections to the latter. If, in fact, the latter is what will be proposed, then the story in The Weekly Standard is not correct. We'll see what actually is proposed.

 

[pragmatic]

Re: Israel to Support Anti-Israel Actions!!!!

There's a difference between an international investigation under the auspices of the UN and an international role within an Israeli investigation. I have no objections to the latter. If, in fact, the latter is what will be proposed, then the story in The Weekly Standard is not correct. We'll see what actually is proposed.

Large difference. The integrity/purity of the UN has been missing for a long time. (if it ever existed...)



.

 

[Agent Ferris]

Re: Sources: Obama Administration to Support Anti-Israel Resolution at UN Next Week

You mean they're "anti-Israel" after 1948

Ya and the legitimate government of China was on the security council until 1971 and now the UN doesn't even recognize them. The U.N. has been corrupted and the General Assembly (especially the UNHRC) has become dominated by tyrants and despots and the UNHRC itself is completely under the thumb of the Arab Bloc. Call me when the UNHRC sets up a commission to investigate the sinking of the South Korean vessel by North Korea.

 

[Agent Ferris]

If they were in international waters, as long as the flotilla wasn't engaging in piracy, there was zero grounds to board the vessel.

They stated their intention to run the blockade, Israel did not have to wait for them to break the blockade to stop and search them.

The order of blockade does not have any power in international waters. Israel should have waited until they entered the blockade region and then boarded.

67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:

(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;

International Humanitarian Law - San Remo Manual 1994

 

[Gardener]

I wonder what these discussions would look like without the twin apologetic fallacies of the appeal to authority and the appeal to popularity, both of which are an integral component of the argumentation of those with bias against Israel?

 

[Redress]

I wonder what these discussions would look like without the twin apologetic fallacies of the appeal to authority and the appeal to popularity, both of which are an integral component of the argumentation of those with bias against Israel?

Holy straw man. The argument used by those in favor of such an investigation is that Israel alone cannot be trusted to do an honest, unbiased investigation. This is neither an appeal to authority nor popularity. It's also not apologetic.

 

[Gardener]

Holy straw man. The argument used by those in favor of such an investigation is that Israel alone cannot be trusted to do an honest, unbiased investigation. This is neither an appeal to authority nor popularity. It's also not apologetic.

The arguments supporting a U.N. investigation are both.

THe U.N. is demonstrably biased, so appeals to their authority are fallacious. The arguments typically offered are that the U.N. reflects the opinions of the majority, also a falacy. The rhetorec that utilizes such argumentation are acts of apologia since they are constructed only AFTER an opinion has been reached -- in this case, as you have pointed out -- one with a bias against Israel.

 

[justabubba]

The arguments supporting a U.N. investigation are both.

THe U.N. is demonstrably biased, so appeals to their authority are fallacious. The arguments typically offered are that the U.N. reflects the opinions of the majority, also a falacy. The rhetorec that utilizes such argumentation are acts of apologia since they are constructed only AFTER an opinion has been reached -- in this case, as you have pointed out -- one with a bias against Israel.

what basis do you have to assert that the UN is biased (presumably, against the government of israel)?

 

[Redress]

The arguments supporting a U.N. investigation are both.

THe U.N. is demonstrably biased, so appeals to their authority are fallacious. The arguments typically offered are that the U.N. reflects the opinions of the majority, also a falacy. The rhetorec that utilizes such argumentation are acts of apologia since they are constructed only AFTER an opinion has been reached -- in this case, as you have pointed out -- one with a bias against Israel.

Israel is demonstratively biased as well. Hence we see the problem. Asking for an independent investigation under UN auspices(not a UN investigation but responsible to the UN, as you would know if you did just a touch a research) is certainly preferable to letting the people being investigated doing it themselves.

Further, it is not an appeal to any authority, it is simply saying that an investigation is needed, and Israel is not the right party to carry out that investigation. Finding out what happened is not pre-judging, it is finding out for sure what happened and the legality and appropriateness of it. There is no apologizing for any one going on.

Just throwing out your usual buzzwords and mindless accusations is not going to work very well. The trick is to make an actual reasoned argument. However, I eagerly await the accusations that I am anti-Israel and pro-terrorist. I would not want to interfere with your script.

 

[Gardener]

Just throwing out your usual buzzwords and mindless accusations is not going to work very well. The trick is to make an actual reasoned argument. However, I eagerly await the accusations that I am anti-Israel and pro-terrorist. I would not want to interfere with your script.

This flame bait certainly crosses the line of civility.

I will not rise to your bait.

 

[Agent Ferris]

Holy straw man. The argument used by those in favor of such an investigation is that Israel alone cannot be trusted to do an honest, unbiased investigation. This is neither an appeal to authority nor popularity. It's also not apologetic.

Why can Israel not be trusted to conduct and investigation? The U.S. government conducts investigations into itself and its military all of the time.

 

[Agent Ferris]

what basis do you have to assert that the UN is biased (presumably, against the government of israel)?

Well let's start with the fact that the UNHRC held an anti-Israel summit.

 

[Redress]

Well let's start with the fact that the UNHRC held an anti-Israel summit.

The general use of the term "anti-Israel" around here is that is does not blindly accept what Israel says and does. You need to actually document that the summit was truly anti-Israel, not just claim it.

 

[pragmatic]

US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice was on Fox News Sunday this morning. (Gotta lover her, that is one tough broad!!) Chris Wallace gave her a very challenging (but I thought fair) interview on a wide spectrum of topics.

One of the topics are the "Israeli Investigation". Rice gave every indication that the US (Obama) will not support a UN sponsored investigation of the Israeli/Flotilla/Gaza incident.

Encouraging news......


.