Will this increase or decrease the likelihood of terrorist actions in America, Europe and the rest of the world?

If you were a member of a family murdered in this conflict, would you be seeking revenge?

Should Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert, be tried for war crimes if or when this conflict comes to an end?

What will the price of oil be in 4 weeks time?

This is an article about Israel, its real motives and its intentions to take more and more of Palestinian land.

It is written by Noam Chomsky and published today.

It makes very interesting reading. It is well worth reading it all.

http://rabble.ca/news/2012/12/noam-chomsky-significance-un-palestine-vote-and-recent-violence-gaza

it will of course be an OPINION and NOT necessarily correct let alone policy ..... however, israel's actions in recent days assuredly merit strong economic sanctions as mere world opprobrium will merely be shrugged off

5 European Nations Summon Envoys of Israel
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/04/world/middleeast/5-nations-summon-israeli-envoys-to-protest-settlement-plans.html?_r=0

shame it's not many more ..... but of course lily-livered USA taking a strong stance instead of just bleating would be the best but FAR too much to hope for

Is this a precursor to a complaint to the ICC?

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/palestinians-to-un-israel-must-be-held-accountable-for-settlement-expansion-1.482425

Palestinians to UN: Israel must be held accountable for settlement expansion

Official PA complaint, lodged less than a week after status upgraded, warns that Israeli expansion forebodes further 'war crimes', adds that Israel is behaving 'in a rogue, hostile and arrogant manner'.

The Palestinians accused Israel in a letter to the United Nations of planning to commit further "war crimes" by expanding settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem after the Palestinians won de facto United Nations recognition of statehood and warned that Jerusalem must be held accountable.

In the letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the UN Security Council, the Palestinians said Israel was behaving "in a rogue, hostile and arrogant manner, contravening all principles and rules of international law and reacting with contempt to the will of the international community."

what you quote above does not REMOTELY equate to war crimes or anything approaching it, much as you obviously wish it did ..... do at least try to be an adult as objectivity is clearly beyond you , as you admit

Here is the same story as reported by the Jerusalem Post. Note the use of the phrase 'war crime'.

It is a war crime because it contravenes The Geneva Convention, which states that it is not permissible to settle your own people in a country that you are occupying. The situation is quite clear

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=294596

In letter to UN Sec.-Gen. Ban, Palestinians say Israel is a "rogue state" and call settlement expansion a "war crime";

Cynic
Look at my previous post 6485 about article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention.

"Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war states: "The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own population into the territories it occupies."

if you say so .... you are clearly getting back to your old bad habits and no longer worth reading

Here is the actual text of article 49 of the Geneva Convention

Part III : Status and treatment of protected persons #Section III : Occupied territories
ARTICLE 49

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/WebART/380-600056

This is the last sentence

The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.

.........

Hence a war crime.

United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 465 (1980): “Israel’s policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in [the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem] constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention… and a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East.” The resolution calls on Israel to “dismantle the existing settlements.”

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 1998 (Article 8(b)(viii)) defines “the transfer directly or indirectly by the Occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies” as a War Crime indictable by the International Criminal Court.

An interesting vote today at the UN bearing in mind that Israel doesn't want Iran to have nuclear weapons, but has had its own since 1967 and always refuses inspection.

The United Nations passed, Tuesday, an overwhelming vote calling for inspecting Israel nuclear facilities, and called on Israel to open its facilities for this inspection especially since Tel Aviv never allowed international inspectors access to its nuclear facilities.

The vote passed with 174 votes for the inspection, while six countries voted against, and six abstentions. The vote also calls on Israel to join the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty without further delay.

The countries that voted against the resolution were Israel, the United States, Canada, Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands.

It is worth mentioning that Israel, along with Pakistan, India and North Korea, refuses to become members of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Not really worth mentioning at all. Possession of nuclear weapons is perhaps the only reason Israel hasn't been destroyed by its sworn enemies.

You need to take a break from this subject Greg, you're as rabid as the loons in Israel and what little remains of Palestine. No perspective, no objectivity and no sense.

Possession of nuclear weapons has made no difference to Israel's existence, It is the support of the US that has saved Israel, mainly due to supplying advanced weapons and almost limitless funds when they request them. Israel got nuclear weapons as a result of the various conflicts they had been involved in up to 1967. As it turned out, they have never needed nuclear weapons. The idea of Israel detonating a nuclear bomb anywhere in the ME is somewhat absurd. It is really no deterrent at all. They seem to feel possessing a nuclear deterrent gives them the balance of power in the region. That may be be a better explanation of why they don't want Iran to have it.

Israel is an expanding colonial country of the worst kind. Nothing they say can ever be trusted. Peace talks are just delaying tactics as they scoop up more and more land.

This is a bit more like it!

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/merkel-to-warn-netanyahu-promote-peace-process-or-face-world-seclusion-1.482465

Merkel to warn Netanyahu: Promote peace process or face world seclusion
Prime minister to meet German chancellor in Berlin on Wednesday evening
Merkel is expected to tell Netanyahu that he must choose between promoting the peace process and establishing a Palestinian state, a move that would secure the existence of Israel as a Jewish democratic state, or continue expanding settlements, thus leading to the transformation of Israel into an apartheid state that is isolated internationally.

Haystack , your begining to make Fred sound reasonable.

What's your problem with Israel ?

Would you rather the nutters in Palestine/Syria etc have nuke capabilities than them ?

Put yourself in their position and tell us what you would do different.

HS (and his handler fahel) is incapable of even a modicum of objectivity and thus, to my mind and seemingly many others, loses virtually all credibility ..... for this reason, i stayed away from this thread for many months as it really was too tedious going round and round with the same mantra being incessantly repeated

Dil,

It would seem that my opinions correspond to the majority of the world's opinion about Israel and its abuses of it "American" based power.

I think that it is no longer acceptable that one country or race is allowed to play by one set of rules and another to ignore them or change them at their own will.

I cannot see why it is right that a small population such as the UK can have Nuclear ability, but another can't.

(I may prefer it.)

It is time for Israel to change its policies, before the backlash becomes intolerable.

this nuclear non-proliferation is a tricky issue for pretty obvious reasons, that surely do not yet more endless (and entrenched) discussion here
i think if robert oppenheimer could have put the genie back in the bottle he would have done

i can't be bothered to backtrack through all the latest postings, but i can't see the connection between israel's current behaviour and stance and allowing free nuclear hand to the likes of iran