All the PPP ought to know about Syria is that House Republicans support the Alawites (Assad's tribe) as they protect Christians from the Muslim extremists. The Russians have an interest in Assad keeping a lid on any revolution as their Muslims in the southern provinces of Russia continue to present a threat. The US is interested in keeping WMD out of the hands of anybody.

Quote "The US is interested in keeping WMD out of the hands of anybody." unquote

Kari you should know that Israel is exempted

Israel had it a long time now. It has behaved even better than India and Pakistan in that it never threatened to use their nukes against any one. It is there to prevent a wiping out of the Jewish race like Hitler attempted - sort of like "never again". And this helps explain some of Israel's extreme behavior.

ASJ, your pro-Palestine credentials are not superior to others here who do not see Israel like you do, or other Arabs for that matter. A dislike of Israels' treatment of the Palestinians, especially in Gaza, like most of us share here does not mean we must see Israel in the way you do.

BTW South Africa gave up its program when Mandela took over. Now Iran seems to feel that the sanctions are better ligted than pursuing a nuclear weapons program.

Sometimes I am appalled at your lack of knowledge of Israel and its chemical weapons warfare re:

Israel used chemical Weapons against the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, against Lebanon and Gaza during military assaults in 2006, and during Operation Cast Lead against Gaza in 2008-2009. Such was the evidence against Israel that Tel Aviv was forced, after initially denying accusations by the Lebanese government that it had done so, to admit that it had used phosphorous shells, which cause chemical burns, in its war against Lebanon in 2006.

Even the American Govt was quiet about this.

This is well reasoned and written Mr Kari. 

ISRAELIS USING CHEMICAL WEAPONS WITH THE UNITED STATES SILENT APPROVAL:

The well-known US film director James Longley happened to be filming in Gaza, Khan Yunis and Rafah during the first major Israeli incursion in the spring of 2001. He immediately filmed the victims. Gaza Strip, his award-winning film, shows very graphically the reality of chemical warfare--the canisters, the doctors, the eyewitnesses, and the awful suffering of the victims, many of whom were hospitalised for days or weeks.

These attacks were to continue for several years. In June 2004, Gush Shalom, an Israeli peace group, reported an incident in the West Bank village of al-Zawiya where 130 patients were being treated for gas inhalation after the Israeli army broke up nonviolent protests against Israel’s security wall. The group said it was not the usual tear gas. It asked, “Now, is this a way of dispersing a demonstration, or is it chemical warfare?”

As the news of these new gases trickled out, international journalists investigated, with BBC Television carrying out a special report in 2003 into Israel’s use of “new, unidentified weapons”. It reported that Israel refused “to say what the new gas was.”

During Israel’s military assault on Gaza in the summer of 2006, doctors reported that dozens of victims had completely burned bodies and shrapnel-type injuries that X-ray machines had been unable to detect.

Lengthy research and analysis of the samples of metals found in the victims’ bodies and examination of the unusual wounds led to the conclusion that the most likely cause was missiles very similar to the US-made Dense Inert Metal Explosive (DIME). Other victims were found to have traces of tungsten, a highly carcinogenic substance.

Israel again used phosphorous shells, whose effects are extremely harmful, in the weeks-long aerial bombardment of the largely unarmed and defenceless civilian population during Operation Cast Lead in 2008-09--the murderous assault on Gaza that resulted in between 1,166 and 1,417 Palestinian deaths, with just 13 Israeli deaths, 4 of them from friendly fire.

The UN fact-finding report, known as the Goldstone Report, reiterated the findings of numerous other respected international studies, confirming Israel’s disproportionate use of force against the Palestinians, and accusations against Israel and Hamas of war crimes and “possible crimes against humanity”, including Israel’s use of phosphorous. It said that Israeli forces were “systematically reckless” in using white phosphorus in built-up areas, citing the Israeli attack on the UN Relief and Works Agency compound in Gaza City, the attack on the Al Quds hospital, and the attack on the Al Wafa hospital.

Far from this resulting in any referral of Israel to the International Criminal Court, Goldstone and his co-authors were subject to an international campaign of bullying, intimidation and vilification of the investigation by Israel, leading Goldstone to make a cringing retraction of his own conclusions. But his three co-authors rejected calls to recant their report or misrepresent its purpose, saying that it would “disregard the rights of Palestinian and Israeli victims to truth and justice”.

It was Israel’s development of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, coupled with its vastly superior military forces, that prompted Damascus to establish its own chemical weapons programme following the capture in 1967 of Syria’s Golan Heights, their subsequent occupation and annexation, and the establishment of Israeli settlements inhabited by 20,000 Israelis.

ISRAEL'S UNLAWFUL USE OF WHITE PHOSPHORUS IN GAZA:

RAIN OF FIRE:

March 25, 2009

Quote posted by Kari "Israel had it a long time now. It has behaved even better than India and Pakistan in that it never threatened to use their nukes against any one."

Bai are you Rip Van Winkle or what, you need to wake up from you very long slumber

• Page 5
• Page 7
• Page 6 of 9

V. Israel's Shifting Statements on

White Phosphorus

Since the media first reported the IDF's use of white phosphorus in Gaza on the tenth day of military operations, the IDF and Israeli government have shifted their public positions on the issue, from outright denial, to justifying its use, to announcing an internal investigation.

The Times of Londonfirst reported white phosphorus use in Gaza on January 5.  The next day, an IDF spokesman contacted by Human Rights Watch at first said the IDF was using white phosphorus to mark targets and then denied that white phosphorus was being used.[65]  He claimed that the media had mistakenly identified a shell used to mark targets as white phosphorus.  The denials to the media continued.  On January 7, an IDF spokesman told CNN, "I can tell you with certainty that white phosphorus is absolutely not being used."[66]

Reporters inside Gaza and in Israel quickly contradicted the IDF's claim.  On January 8, the Times published photographs of white phosphorus munitions on pallets next to IDF artillery batteries outside of the Gaza Strip.[67]  Based on these images, Human Rights Watch identified the munitions as M825A1 white phosphorus artillery shells.  On January 9 and 10, 2009, Human Rights Watch researchers on the Gaza-Israel armistice line just south of Sderot observed multiple air-bursts of artillery-fired white phosphorus over what appeared to be the Gaza City/Jabalya area.  On January 10, Human Rights Watch issued a press release, calling on Israel to "stop using white phosphorus in military operations in densely populated areas of Gaza."[68]

Media photographs of what appeared to be air-burst white phosphorus made the IDF's denials increasingly untenable.  Still, on January 13, IDF Chief-of-Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Askenazi told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that "[t]he IDF acts only in accordance with what is permitted by international law and does not use white phosphorus."[69]  That same day, however, other IDF officials began to backtrack on their position, ceasing to deny the use of white phosphorus and claiming that the IDF "uses weapons in compliance with international law."[70]

Also on January 13, an Associated Press report quoted Peter Herby, head of the Arms Unit at the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), as saying that white phosphorus use to create a smokescreen or illuminate a target is not prohibited under international law, and that the ICRC had "no evidence to suggest it's being used in any other way."[71]  Two days later, on January 15, following news reports that the IDF had hit the UNRWA compound in Gaza City with white phosphorus shells, Israeli government spokesperson Mark Regev used the ICRC's statement to justify the IDF's attack.  "I would point you to the statement yesterday of the International Committee of the Red Cross," he told CNN.  "After looking into the issue [of whether the IDF was using white phosphorus], they found absolutely no wrongdoing on Israel's part."[72]

On January 17, however, the ICRC publicly disputed this interpretation of its position.  "We have not commented publicly on the legality of the current use of phosphorus weapons by Israel, contrary to what has been attributed to us in recent media reports," Herby said in an official statement.[73]  Nevertheless, the Israeli government continued to misstate the ICRC's position to justify its use of white phosphorus.[74]

In response to media requests, the ICRC further clarified its position. "The fact that International Humanitarian Law does not specifically prohibit phosphorous weapons does not imply that any specific use of weapons containing this substance is legal," Peter Herby told the Christian Science Monitor in early February. "The legality of each incident of use has to be considered in light of all of the fundamental rules I have mentioned. It may be legal or not, depending on a variety of factors."[75]

According to the newspaper, Herby also said: "The use of such white phosphorous weapons against any military objective within concentrations of civilians is prohibited unless the military objective is clearly separated from the civilians. The use of air-dropped incendiary weapons against military objectives within a concentration of civilians is simply prohibited. These prohibitions are contained in Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons."

In the face of ongoing criticism about the IDF's use of white phosphorus, on January 19 IDF Chief-of-Staff Ashkenazi announced that he had requested the Military Advocate General to investigate allegations that the IDF had used white phosphorus in Gaza. "In response to the claims of NGOs and claims in the foreign press relating to the use of phosphorus weapons, and in order to remove any ambiguity, an investigative team has been established in southern command to look into the issue," an army statement said.[76]  According to Haaretz, the army appointed an artillery officer, Col. Shai Alkalai, to investigate a reserve paratroop brigade that might have fired white phosphorus into crowded areas of Beit Lahiya.  The brigade fired about 20 such shells in the densely populated area of northern Gaza, the newspaper said.[77]

On January 23, The Times quoted Yigal Palmor, an Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman, as saying, "Yes, phosphorus was used but not in any illegal manner. Some practices could be illegal but we are going into that. The IDF is holding an investigation concerning one specific incident."[78]  An unnamed Israeli defense official told the newspaper that, "at least one month before [white phosphorus] was used a legal team had been consulted on the implications."[79]

In response to written questions about white phosphorus use in Gaza from Human Rights Watch, the IDF said on February 15 that it had "established an investigative team in the Southern Command to look into issues which you have raised, and our reply will be made on the basis of their findings."

don't get asj started..he might mistakenly comment on the suicide bomber who killed 78 in Pakistan

There is only one thing worse than a katahar, that is a dunce katahar....double shame to you.

Base you are on the button, I have given Kakahar, two times to redeem himself but both time he has been caught shitting his pants

Hey Sh1tface....had a katahar for today yet?? Try nen-wah next time...