The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > So what’s changed since the most recent war? > Comments

So what’s changed since the most recent war? : Comments

By Keith Kennelly, published 11/1/2007

Israel needs to be told it is out of step with world opinion and decency.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
So Mr Kennelly was naturalised in 1984. One wonders where he came from?
His first sentence says it all. "World Opinion"!! "Decency"!! Since when has World Opinion helped the two million killed in Southern Sudan, to say nothing of the countless others traumatized, driven from their homes etc.
Since when has World Opinion helped the persecuted in Darfur and other parts of Africa, China, North Korea, Laos, Cambodia, Indonesia, West Papua... The list could go on.
How "decent" is it for the Arabs to be teaching their children that it is wonderful to be martyrs, to blow up innocent men, women and children?
Five out of six posts have told Mr Kennelly how pathetic his effort was. One could almost feel sorry for him if it was not for the fact that his misinformation leads gullible people astray.
Perhaps I have missed it but surely a disclaimer - "The views presented are not necessarily the views of On Line Opinion" would at least prevent misconceptions. Fairgo.
Posted by fairgo, Monday, 15 January 2007 12:19:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Southern Ireland, North England and Scotland via New Zealand.

But 'fair go' for a fair go please state exactly the
'misinformation' I've written.
Don't be shy and hide behind the usual generalisations.
Be specific..point them out. Come on be a man now.

I await with baited breath.

Keith Kennelly
Posted by keith, Monday, 15 January 2007 12:32:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Kieth,
your piece is refreshingly honest and you seem to understand the mechanics of whats occurring in the region well. Rather than pitting one absolutist analogy or ideology against another, your critique sheds light on the real, factual precipitants that are at the center of the Palestinian, Israeli issue. Have u viewed a documentary presented by Sydney born journalist John Pilger called Palestine is still the issue? i recommend watching it..

http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=746557429802139093&q=palestine+is+still+the+issue
Posted by peachy, Monday, 15 January 2007 11:35:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hello Peachy

No I had not seen Pilger's article. Now having watched it I felt the most basic anger. That is not good as it becomes destructive eventually. I prefer an analytical type approach, as dictated in our western Greek heritage. It's propensity to centre on truth usually overcomes the natural embellishments and prejudices of public emotive based outporings.

Thanks for your comments
Keith Kennelly
Posted by keith, Tuesday, 16 January 2007 10:09:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“Palestinian territories are still occupied” - yes, they still occupied by terrorists of different degree of willingness to put themselves in “martyrdom”.

A fact is Gaza and West Bank are under a rule of democratically elected self-governing president, PM with MP are all in situ.

Had not author of an article heard of such a reality in territories inhabited solely by the Arabs of Palestine?
Posted by MichaelK., Tuesday, 16 January 2007 12:01:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More balanced than I would have expected (given the volume of one-sidedness that gets published), but a few points, repeating some of what others have pointed out. There does seem to be a higher standard for the Israelis than the Arabs. This could be construed as racist on 2 counts, both toward Jews & Arabs.

"Those captive Israeli soldiers, Israel’s spark for the war, have still not been freed in Gaza or Lebanon although negotiations are taking place. Israel still has thousands of Palestinian detainees, detained without trial."

Someone above pointed out the interesting use of "Israel's spark for war" bit, but I'll also point to "Palestinian detainees without trial". Presumably it's not important that the Israeli soldiers are also "detained without trial".

"Palestinian territories are still occupied...The West Bank is still occupied... Israeli checkpoints are still operating...The “defensive wall” still encircles pockets of Palestinian land".

And the suicide bombers & rockets keep on coming. I don't think the author is trying to be biased but he is nevertheless. In effect he is saying that these Israeli actions are leading to the aggressive acts Israel faces. But you could also argue the reverse. That the aggressive acts are causing these Israeli responses. Again, the different standards.

"Do these to actions by the Israeli Government indicate a desire for peace? No. They show Israel’s aggression... They indicate Israel’s desire to stir trouble....Does it think building new West Bank settlements are the way to peace?

Again, this could all be argued in reverse against the Palestinians with their acts of aggression.

And if it's "reasonable" to call for a "return to pre-67 war borders", is it also reasonable to call for a return to Germany's pre-WW2 borders with it's neighbours? If not why not? Germany started WW2 & lost land & so did the Arabs in 67.

Agree with Boaz re the lofty quotes by people who themselves (Lincoln at any rate) also started war. Besides, Franklin's quote could also be argued in favour of war, ie. in order to keep liberty, as in eg. standing up to Hitler's totalitarianism
Posted by TNT, Sunday, 21 January 2007 12:07:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy