depoix Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Don't think that the UN was around when the mandate was given. it wasnt,it was my mistake, it was the league of nations the british held the jewish immigrants back after palastine was divided because the arabs were massing to attack the part of palastine given to the jews it was later that the league of nations took responsibility and the british left,the rest is history ,the boats came in the trouble started and it still continues over 60 years later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
depoix Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 what proof do u have that it is their land? many think differently including the christians.... This can be quickly verified by checking the Old Testament: “This is the land of which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, ‘I will give it to your offspring’” (Deut. 34:4). Numerous passages in Genesis and Exodus speak to the same thing. thats ok if god put his signature to it i suppose ,but and its a serious but ,the people who wrote the bible were not arabs so the text is a little biased dont you think ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callippo Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 they were dropping banned white phosphorus onto built up areas It's not 'banned'. White phosphorus doesn't come up under the Chemical Weapons Conventions. The weapons was used most often during World War II in military formulations for smoke screens, marker shells, incendiaries, hand grenades, smoke markers, colored flares, and tracer bullets. Nobody ever said it was a chemical weapon then. The only people to have used chemical weapons in the Middle East have been Arabs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAMALOCHA! Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 The only people to have used chemical weapons in the Middle East have been Arabs. supplied by the west Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dell12 Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 what proof do u have that it is their land? many think differently including the christians.... This can be quickly verified by checking the Old Testament: “This is the land of which I swore to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, ‘I will give it to your offspring’” (Deut. 34:4). Numerous passages in Genesis and Exodus speak to the same thing. I do not accept religion as giving a group of people a legitimate claim to a piece of land. I could quite easily make up a religion which says I have a right given by god to rule France. I'd say the fact that the Palestinians lived alongside Jews in Palestine for hundreds of years gives the Palestinians a pretty good claim to the land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callippo Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 The only people to have used chemical weapons in the Middle East have been Arabs. supplied by the west West Germany, to be precise. They gave both Nasser, when he gassed his fellow Arabs in Yemen, and Saddam, when the victims were Iranians and Kurds, the expertise to do it. but it still wasn't West Germany's fault. Those Arab leaders sought out the means and more importantly chose to deploy chemical weapons. Israel and the United States never have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smithster Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 they were dropping banned white phosphorus onto built up areas It's not 'banned'. White phosphorus doesn't come up under the Chemical Weapons Conventions. The weapons was used most often during World War II in military formulations for smoke screens, marker shells, incendiaries, hand grenades, smoke markers, colored flares, and tracer bullets. Nobody ever said it was a chemical weapon then. The only people to have used chemical weapons in the Middle East have been Arabs. Correction. It is not 'banned' as such, but it is regulated... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus Article 1 of Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons defines an incendiary weapon as 'any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target'. The same protocol also prohibits the use of incendiary weapons against civilians (already forbidden by the Geneva Conventions) or in civilian areas. There is no defence. The IDF depolyed this stuff in civilian areas, and deliberately and indiscriminately targetted civilians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
depoix Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 (edited) they were dropping banned white phosphorus onto built up areas It's not 'banned'. White phosphorus doesn't come up under the Chemical Weapons Conventions. The weapons was used most often during World War II in military formulations for smoke screens, marker shells, incendiaries, hand grenades, smoke markers, colored flares, and tracer bullets. Nobody ever said it was a chemical weapon then. its banned under the geneva convention if used agaist civilians or military personel using it in such a way constitutes a war crime ,evidence of israe;s use of it is contained in the link below i would risk saying there will be lots more information about its use on the web,during the invasion of gaza you could see it exploding as it burst on the town,the israelis themselves filmed it and it was later removed from their arsenal after complaints from other nations and agencies http://majikthise.typepad.com/majikthise_/2009/04/israel-admits-to-white-phosphorus-as-weapon-of-war-in-gaza.html http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6150448.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=797093 Edited January 14, 2010 by depoix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Switchblade Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Hang on, you're really confusing me now. Are you saying now that you believe that the tunnels are used for bringing food in? In which case, why would you claim that the film I saw of this actually happening must have been just propaganda? You are totally contradicting yourself. Do you just like arguing with people for the sake of it? . I never said all food was brought in by tunnels. food is not disallowed by normal methods. Munitions are not allowed and that is the main reason for the tunnels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Switchblade Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 supplied by the westAnd Chemical Ali never existed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now