Well, they could try the thing where you don't join the military in the first place. It prevents things like being committed to illegal occupations, and stops the pressure of having to kill innocent people in foreign lands that never attacked us.>> ^Fantomas:

>> ^volumptuous:
Hey soldiers, I have an idea. GTFO of Iraq.
Unfortunately I don't think the soldiers have any say in the matter.

Anyone play Endless War?

Feels like it evolved into real life, I mean seriously, WHICH country is going to invade America and make the use of one of these actually necessary. England maybe? France? Are the Palestinians going to object to their illegal occupation and shoot some long range pipe bombs over the Mediteranean and Tyrrhenian Seas and the Atlantic Ocean so they blow up some seagulls on the East Coast? Maybe Mexico will forget that they are connected to NA by land and paddle boats around and storm America with a large shipment of Marijuana?

Can't let those hippies get high, gotta bomb those 'sea-Mehicans' with airspace-ships or we're doomed.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'palestine, john rees, middle east' to 'palestine, john rees, middle east, israel, zionism, illegal occupation' - edited by EndAll

Yes, FDA approvals and restrictions are broken and need to be fixed. But throwing out the concept of an FDA is ridiculous and dangerous to the health of the citizenry. Same with the EPA. Once collusion is involved, of course the agency is going to fail. But if run properly, it's an incredibly valuable tool in our democratic arsenal. FEMA can do awesome things, but put some heckuva-Brownie's in charge and its an unmitigated disaster.

Just as most libertarians (I am assuming) would agree that a federal military is useful and effective when not abused, but if corrupt motherfuckers use it for nation-building and natural resource stealing and illegal occupations does not mean we should do away with a military entirely.

Making an agency fail through corruption and collusion, then pointing at that failure so you can dismantle it or argue against it, is disingenuous.

You people just don't get it


• Bush lying the country into an illegal occupation of a sovereign nation = Hero
• Obama rolling tax-rates back to Reagan era = Fascist


Jeez guys, watch Fox a little more please!

Abu Rahma (the camera man, Ed.) stated in his affidavit:
I can assert that shooting at the child Muhammad and his father Jamal came from the above-mentioned Israeli military outpost, as it was the only place from which shooting at the child and his father was possible. So, by logic and nature, my long experience in covering hot incidents and violent clashes, and my ability to distinguish sounds of shooting, I can confirm that the child was intentionally and in cold blood shot dead and his father injured by the Israeli army.

Also notice that the reason they could not run away was because the kid was already shot in the knee.

And yes, the Israli state do take pride in their biblical scale repercussions, as BillPayer stated.

Ah well, that kid should still be alive no matter who or what. Illegal occupation of other peoples land does not help the Israeli cause one bit.

>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^Irishman:
Free Palestine. End the illegal occupation. Stop the oppression.

If only it could be that simple.
How is ending the occupation defined?
-Removal of all troops?
-Lifting aerial and naval blockades?
-Granting right of return?
-The elimination of the Israeli state and restoration of historic Palestine?
Hamas founders and charter define it is all the above by the way.
What borders define Palestine?
-1946?
-1948?
-1967?
-1973?
-Current Day?
Finally, in the -ahem- unlikely -ahem- event that rocket and suicide attacks on Israel(if it is still allowed to exist) continue for years afterwards, what is Israel expected to do?


Well, it's an ugly, ugly mess down there. It was a mistake to create Israel in the first place, because there was no historic basis for it. It was just done. And the borders have even fluctuated pretty wildly, as you already indicated.

There are no easy solutions.

One solution is for the involved parties to duke it out, so to speak, at the cost of many innocent lives.
Another is for the rest of the world to take a side and either force an agreement (and risk another uprising) or wipe out one side (which is virtually impossible, and also genocide).

There are no laws for the world, so we have no real jurisdiction to arbitrate their conflict, so natural conclusion is to isolate the countries from the rest of the world and let them have their fight, and to the victor goes the spoils. This is of course tremendously unfair, because we've already helped one side pretty damn much, and it's also very inhumane because many, many lives are wasted.

As I said, there are no easy solutions. Can you think of reasonable solutions?

(I hesitate to add this, but at the heart of this conflict is once again the elephant in the room - religion. If people were reasonable, this would not be nearly as bad as it is.)

>> ^Irishman:
Free Palestine. End the illegal occupation. Stop the oppression.


This trite sloganeering illustrates the flaccidity of Pro-Palestinian Western activists.

If you try and engage them in dialog that won't fit on a sign or tee shirt, they fall back to a last resort of branding one a "Racist" who supports "Genocide" and "Occupation".

These slurs ring as hollow as the 7.62 rounds that glance off the armor of the IDF tanks.

>> ^Irishman:
Free Palestine. End the illegal occupation. Stop the oppression.


If only it could be that simple.

How is ending the occupation defined?
-Removal of all troops?
-Lifting aerial and naval blockades?
-Granting right of return?
-The elimination of the Israeli state and restoration of historic Palestine?
Hamas founders and charter define it is all the above by the way.

What borders define Palestine?
-1946?
-1948?
-1967?
-1973?
-Current Day?

Finally, in the -ahem- unlikely -ahem- event that rocket and suicide attacks on Israel(if it is still allowed to exist) continue for years afterwards, what is Israel expected to do?

Free Palestine. End the illegal occupation. Stop the oppression.

It's so "extremist" to want to stop illegal occupation of sovereign nations, and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

How "extremist"!!!!

I am very familar with Amnesty reports.

The atrocities are IN RESPONSE to Israeli attacks and oppression AND they are justifiable military attacks on occupied land.

Hamas is what you get when you invade an arab land.
Hezbollah is what you get when you invade an arab land.
The IRA is what you get when you invade Ireland.
The ANC is what you get when you invade South Africa.

All of this is IN RESPONSE to occupation and oppression.
IN RESPONSE.

When Israel kills civilians, Hamas kills civilians in return. The difference is that Hamas do it on OCCUPIED LAND.

Hamas can define whatever they want in their charter, are you suggesting we remove the democratic right of a sovreign country just because another country doesn't like what's in their charter? This can be resoved politically, without fighting, but you can't do that without a ceasefire. It's not that I don't believe it, it's that I UNDERSTAND it.

Hamas was created IN RESPONSE to the Israeli occupation. It would not and could not have been elected to power without Israel scattering the Palestinian people with an illegal occupation. The Israeli invasion created the conditions for an extremist government to come to power.

"Israel was only occupying Southern Lebanon to stop PLO attacks on Israel."
Where in the hell did you get that idea from? The PLO was set up to liberate Palestine, when you grow up where I grew up you learn about the PLO when you're 12 years old.

"The only thing Israel has refused is the 'right of return'"
Israel has NOT RESPONDED to THREE mediated calls for a ceasefire.

If you are suggesting that Hamas was set up to invade Israel you are wrong.

You are suggesting that Israel's justification for invading Palestine is Hamas' charter. Yet the occupation LED to Hamas being elected by creating the conditions for an extremist Palestinian government. Hamas has saved more Palestinian lives and fought off more sieges than the PLO. All occupations create the conditions for extremist governments, and historically these have all been resolved when the extremists politicise themselves.

All of the criticisms you lay against Hamas can also be said of Nelson Mandella, the Irish Republicans, and the ANC.

Stop trying to defend your own personal beliefs, open your eyes, educate yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxh4HUDaoaU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpA1f1GZgns

http://inminds.co.uk/palestine-rally-13apr02.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3037117.stm
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/855881.html
http://israels60thbirthday.com/2008/05/13/pro-palestinian-rally-through-london/
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/12/books/12arts-PROPALESTINI_BRF.html
http://origin.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,49971,00.html
http://www.davepearce.me.uk/Palestine/palestine_solidarity.htm
http://www.opendemocracy.net/conflict-middle_east_politics/union_engagement_4485.jsp



In reply to this comment by bcglorf:

Hezbollah was set up to drive Israeli occupying forces from Lebanon (and it drove MOST but not all of them out in 2000).


More or less, and their mandate is certainly far better than that of Hamas. Israel was only occupying Southern Lebanon to stop PLO attacks on Israel. I'd say that gives some valid reason for being there, but I'd still agree it was wrong. Before you judge Israel alone though, remember the better part of the PLO army in southern Lebanon was there because Jordanian forces had already chased them out of Jordan. Hezbollah has since continued to use southern Lebanon to launch attacks deeper into Israel. Given Hezbollah's strong ties to Syria and Iran though, I think Israel does have legitimate security concerns about just watching Hezbollah build up forces on the border. But more to the point, we were talking about Hamas...


Hamas was set up to drive occupying forces from Palestine.


And I've already told you that Hamas defines Palestine as not just the occupied territories beyond the '68 borders, and not even just the territory outside the '48 borders, but also the entirety of Israel. If you refuse to believe it go read Hamas Charter, and if you still refuse to recognize this I don't see us getting any where.


Israel has refused time and time again to respond to the offer of a ceasefire in return for removing their forces from occupied territory.


The only thing Israel has refused is the 'right of return', they have offered themselves to return back to the '68 borders. Is it really Israel's fault a ceasefire fails when it is most often broken by attacks on Israeli checkpoints or cities?


Amnesty International has even condemned the killings of civilians by Israeli armed forces, and that is a good place to start to learn about what is really going on.


Thanks, others have pointed me to the same report before. You really should go read it, it seems to make it very clear that the vast majority of atrocities committed in Palestinian territory are the result of factional fighting between groups like Fatah and ... Hamas. Amnesty International has also repeatedly condemned Hamas and Hezbollah for using human shields in their tactics. That aught to take out some of the fire in condemning Israel for collateral damages, no?

You don't just decide to not negotiate with an elected democratic government because you view them as extremists from inside your own culture. Nelson Mandella was an extremist, my own country is now governed by people who murdered and planted bombs in the 1970s, in retaliation to British oppression. They are extremists but they are not terrorists.

Hamas does not exist to stir retaliatory strikes from Isreal, that is American propoganda and is completely untrue. Hamas wants to liberate their country which has been illegally occupied by Isreal and wants to reassemble their nation which is an entirely legal and legitimate goal.

As MP George Galloway has said, a suicide bombing of of a group of Israeli soldiers in illegal occupation of Palestinian lands is an entirely legitimate military act, a suicide bombing of a group of Israeli settlers illegally occupying Palestinian land is an entirely justifiable military action. A suicide bombing of a falafel stall in Tel Aviv is not. A bombing of a nightclub in Haifa is not.

It is not the methods or the weapons that make them terrorists.

Isreal is circling and taking over Palestinian land, the idea that they are encouraging any kind of withdrawal is laughable and untrue.



In reply to this comment by bcglorf:

Hamas is not a splinter group, it has a political mandate and the people put Hamas in power. It is more than an analogy I use, there are Palestinian flags flying in the streets of Belfast right now. The Irish republican parties do not recognise Northern Ireland as being British, that is a political position with democratic support.


I call Hamas a splinter group in the sense of operating through suicide bombers and operating on a mandate to remove all Jews from the region because they are Jewws. In Hamas' sick and twisted version of Islam, that's every good muslim's duty. Did you not even look at the quotes I gave you, go read the whole charter and see for yourselft. That they managed to get a political mandate just makes them all the worse. The extremists in the world need to be marginalized, not dignified by negotiating with them. I'd say negotiating with Fatah and refusing to recognize Hamas until they change their mandate is the proper course.


It is not the moderates who have to be negotiated with, no political struggle has ever been resolved by moderates, it is the extremists who need to negotiate.


And few political struggles with extremists have been resolved through negotiating, that's why history is littered with assassinations, coups, and wars. I'd rather see negotiations with the reasonable elements than lending any strength or dignity to extremists.


Hamas recognising Isreal's right to exist would loose the support of the people who put them in power and is political suicide, no government of Palestine, not Hamas nor anyone else put there by those people can ever do that. If it were not for Hamas Palestine would have been wiped off the map, Isreali troops have been beaten back time and time again by Palestinian forces.


Now your listening too closely to Hamas' propaganda. Hamas runs out of Syria, they are primarily an engine to stir retaliatory strikes from Israel. Syria provides the funding, training, and rockets so Hamas can attack Israeli civilians. Then the Hamas militants hide in civilian homes and mosques and wait to see if Israel will come after them. All the while Syria hopes for as many dead Palestinians as possible to rally more anti-Israeli sentiment. Hamas lacks any real military strength to 'beat back' Israeli forces. Israel has always mantained a policy of short and quick military operations. The only goal they have is to defend their civilians from attack. Taking land is not a goal so there is no invasion for Hamas to even try to beat down.


Whatever the historical context, it is the will of the people today that is paramount, this is the very essence of democracy and it is the only way all of these conflict historically have been resolved. The Isreali and Palestinian people are sick of the bloodshed, but only the Palestinians have taken the political steps. This is exactly how it happened in Ireland.


And what political steps are you proposing Palestinians have taken? Electing Hamas, seems to me to be making things worse and giving a mandate of more war and bloodshed, not less. For Israel's part, their political process has continued to encourage withdrawal from expanded settlements and encouraged the handover of land taken in previous wars over to the Palestinian Authority.

I agree a bit with you that Irishman gets out of hand.

In reply to this comment by arsenault185:
Ok. Im sure this is the 100th time someone has suggested this, but we need a *douchebag invocation to flag videos as containing large quantities of douche. What MG is talking about with the 8 year thing: When you enlist you are committing 8 years to the military. When you sign for say, 5 years, you are committing to 5 years active duty, with the understanding that should the Army require you after your active commitment, they can still call you back.

Lurch, you pretty much nailed it on the head.

Irishman, get ready for the classic youtube favorite: STFU.

15Minutes: Its not an illegal order. Sure, its an illegal occupation, but just because hes been called back in to support the Iraqi War on Terror, doesn't necessarily mean he will be going back to Iraq.

MG: Your awesome.

Australia has just pulled all of its troops out of Iraq, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said that the "war was based on a lie". Not that it was a war in the first place, it was a blatant invasion and illegal occupation.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/war-based-on-a-lie-says-rudd/2008/06/02/1212258741705.html