Re: The Myth Of Occupied Gaza

Peter Webb wrote:

> 
> "Siobhan Medeiros" <sbm2006@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:9846334f-e4b8-4769-b5dd-95a583572a4d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> com... 
>> On May 10, 8:29 pm, "Peter Webb"
>> <webbfam...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote: 
>>> "Viejo Vizcacha" <elbie_jovis_ka...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:e9665$48265a66$d15a8c85$32167@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > Peter Webb wrote:
>>>
>>> >> "Viejo Vizcacha" <nats_ugly...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> >> news:d1380b02-fec1-4a78-b72e-0bbe27a36fc9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> >> oups.com... 
>>> >>> On May 10, 2:41 pm, "simple_langu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"
>>> >>> <simple_langu...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote: 
>>> >>>> source:http://www.wa****ngtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/
>>> >>>> 2008/05/09/AR200... 
>>>
>>> >>>> authors: David B. Rivkin Jr. and Lee A. Casey are
>>> >>>> Wa****ngton lawyers who served in the Justice Department
>>> >>>> under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. They
>>> >>>> were members of the U.N. Subcommission on the Promotion and
>>> >>>> Protection of Human Rights from 2004 to 2007. 
>>>
>>> >>> Nuff said. I do not even have to read that piece to know it
>>> >>> does not bring anything different than what is being pushed
>>> >>> by AIPAC. 
>>>
>>> >>> VV
>>>
>>> >> You should have read it. It makes a compelling case that Gaza
>>> >> and the West Bank are not "occupied territory", and Israel
>>> >> has (essentially) no
>>> >> duty-of-care over the residents of that area.
>>>
>>> > Nobody asked Israel to take care of the residents of Gaza.
>>> > What is requested is that Israel does not strangle Gaza. 
>>>
>>> > VV
>>>
>>> Yes they are. They want Israel to provide it with fuel, food,
>>> and electricity. 
>>>
>>
>> Which they are morally required to do ever since they seized the
>> city from Syria.
>>
> 
> Ummm ... Gaza was controlled by Egypt. Its nowhere near Syria. I
> would have thought that even if you didn't know any history of the
> Middle East, basic geography would tell you that Gaza could not
> possibly have been part of Syria.
> 
> Do you get Austria and Australia confused as well? A lot of people
> do. 
> 
> But I note that you agree that Gaza is asking for stuff from the
> Israelis (who they want to destroy), and hence that VV was wrong -
> my point exactly. 
> 
> 
>>> Israel is doing *nothing* to stop Gaza obtaining these; all it
>>> is doing is refusing to supply unlimitted quantities of these
>>> itself. 
>>
>> And where else are they supposed to get it from, idiot?
>>
> 
> Well, there are 191 other nations in the UN who also aren't
> supplying Gaza with food or oil. Nothing stopping any of them
> doing it. 
> 
> Funny that the one country that Hamas is trying to destroy is the
> one nation that you single out as not doing enough to help the
> people in Gaza. Why aren't you complaining about Iran; unlike
> Israel, Hamas is not trying to destroy Iran, yet the Iranians are
> supplying far less to the people of Gaza than are the Israelis.
> 
> 
> 
>>>
>>> I note that many Middle Eastern countries refuse to trade with
>>> Israel, 
>>
>> Duh, gee, I wonder why?
>>
> 
> I don't know why Iran (for example) won't trade with Israel, other
> than for some reason they have taken it upon themselves to hate
> Israel. Do you know why?
> 
> 
>> but
>>> Palestine is complaining for the exact opposite reason.
>>>
>>> I see no reason that the government of Israel should assist the 
>>> government of a nation that is committed to the desctruction of
>>> Israel. 
>>
>> IT's not a nation, idiot, it's a city.  In fact, Israel refuses
>> to let it become a nation.
>>
> 
> Quite the contrary. The Gaza strip is more than a city; and Israel
> allows it complete self-determination excepting that it will not
> allow it to im****t weapons.
> 
> (That's because of the "destroy Israel" bit. If they would drop
> this, and acknowledge the right of Israel to exist, then Israel
> would be delighted for it to become a nation).
> 
> 
>> Ads for the destruction argument, you think they're going to
>> think kindly of you after they invade, take their land from them
>> to build settlements, and turn them into second-class citizens in
>> their own city. 
>>
> 
> I thought we were discussing the supposed starving of the
> population of Gaza by Israel?
> 
> Why did you lurch off-topic? Find it hard to follow complicated
> arguments? 
> 
> 
> 
>>>It would be
>>> like complaining that the allies in WW2 did the wrong thing by
>>> not selling Germany fuel in WW2.
>>
>> Actually, they did. Or at least Rockefeller did.
>>
> 
> Ummm ... not when the USA was part of the allies.
> 
> Still, you avoid the point. Why should Israel supply a regime
> committed to its destruction?
> 
> 
>>> It makes no sense at all.
>>
>> Who do you think paid for the reconstruction of Germany and
>> Japan, retard?  Why do you think we're no longer hostile toward
>> those countries? 
>>
> 
> I thought we were dicussing the embargo? It seems like just about
> the only subject you don't want to discuss. Why is that?
> 
> But in answer to your question, because we invaded Germany, hung
> the leaders of the Nazi regime, and fully occupied the country
> until thew population had fully renounced Nazism.
> 
> Are you proposing Israel does the same in Gaza?
> 
> 
>> On the other hand, we took a "let them stew in their own juices"
>> attitude toward Germany after the first world war.  The result
>> was the second world war.
>>
> 
> The interesting thing (for me) is that almost the entire Middle
> East complains about the fact that Gaza is an economic basket
> case, but none of them seem inclined to help. Why is that? Why
> doesn't Iran supply Gaza with fuel? There is absolutely nothing to
> stop them doing this, or to provide other investments that would
> better the plight of the people there. I find it bizarre that
> people (such as you) complain when Israel doesn't provide Gaza
> with unlimiited fuel, but have no problem that Iran doesn't
> either. Particularly as Iran is a massive oil producer, and claims
> to be a friend of Palestine.
> 
> Why is that?
> 
> 
> 
>>> >> Perhaps if you bothered to read articles that you don't agree
>>> >> with, your opinions might change. 
>>>
>>> > People who served with Reagan and Bush have nothing of
>>> > interest to teach about Israel and Palestine. 
>>>
>>> It is indeed a pity you didn't read the article.
>>
>> I read it.  It's bull****.
>>
> 
> I see.
> 
> Do you have any actual facts to sustain your opinion, or do you
> think its bull**** on principle?
> 
> 
>>>
>>> Still, some people just have closed minds, and even refuse to
>>> even look at articles that they think they may not agree with. 
>>
>> So says the hypocrite and idiot who thinks it's perfectly OK to
>> bomb a hundred people to kill one militant. 
> 
> Of course, if you don't have any actual facts, please feel free to
> just spew personal abuse.


LOL, Yet another gives Siobhan Medeiros a lesson. One would think 
that he/she/it would think a bit before posting such replies.  It 
appears that some things never change.