niccodemi
-
Posts
65 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Forums
Downloads
Quizzes
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by niccodemi
-
-
- Popular Post
7 hours ago, Hawaiian said:Violence begets violence. It was Hamas that decided to use foreign aid to fortify Gaza instead of bettering the lives of those they governed. Israel did not invade Gaza. There is no justification for what happened on October 7.
Invade?? Israel has been occupying Gaza for decades...
-
1
-
2
-
More than 3000 Israelis have signed an open letter "Save us from ourselves" calling on international community to put pressure on Israel to stop current actions and policies towards its neighbors.
"Unfortunately, the majority of Israelis support the continuation of the war and massacres, and a change from within is not currently feasible. The state of Israel is on a suicidal path and sows destruction and devastation that increase day by day"
-
1
-
-
Interview with Mark Perlmutter, US doctor who volunteered in Gaza, in which he provides a realistic picture of things happening on the ground and in general.
-
On 9/11/2024 at 10:13 PM, Celsius said:
You will not get installment payment option with a secured credit card.
At least Krungsri secured credit card gives the option for installment payment. I have tried it in the past and it worked. However it is pointless to use installments with secured credit card.
-
1
-
-
Israeli newspaper Haaretz has published a report on IDF using Palestinians as shield during military operations.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:
If you keep killing the replacements, as some point, they will run out of replacements, yes?
That is correct and high ranking Israeli government officials have same ideas which they share with public.
"Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich implied on Monday that he believes blocking humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip is “justified and moral” even if it causes two million civilians to die of hunger, but the international community won’t allow that to happen."
-
A report by two surgeons who volunteered for two weeks at Gaza European Hospital. It is lengthy but describes well how terrible living conditions are currently in Gaza.
Below extract from the linked article
"We started seeing a series of children, preteens mostly, who’d been shot in the head. They’d go on to slowly die, only to be replaced by new victims who’d also been shot in the head, and who would also go on to slowly die. Their families told us one of two stories: the children were playing inside when they were shot by Israeli forces, or they were playing in the street when they were shot by Israeli forces."
-
1
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, rabas said:
Yes, that's why I put the link to more details in the post, it is controversial. In fact, the title of the link page is “Controversy in Russia regarding the legitimacy of Eastward NATO expansion”. It's a good summary.
If you read the link, “not one more inch” comes from discussions on Germany reunification, at which time the Warsaw Pact was still intact and would not collapse for more than a year. Can you imagine the West promising Russia that they would not move one more inch into Warsaw Pact countries until their unforeseen collapse? So not one inch was about Germany reunification.
The other point, there are no recorded notes, not even on a paper napkin, no mention of the issue in the agreement itself, and no statements about its absence in the agreement after signing.
I don't know, not sure anyone does but as Julia said Putin's statement that it was guaranteed seems to hold little water. It was a Putinism. But note Julia seems to suggest Putin believed it. She has made similar points before about what is in Putin's mind versus reality. That is something that needs consideration.
You make valid points, but let's consider for a moment that there were absolutely no promises on NATO expansion and that Putin could not use such non-existent promises or agreements as a reason to invade Ukraine. Don't you think that bringing NATO closer and closer to Russia's borders would just be asking for trouble, especially in an area as sensitive as Ukraine?
On the other hand, the US has the Monroe Doctrine, which essentially states that no foreign great powers should form military alliances with countries in the Western Hemisphere. The Cuban Missile Crisis was a prime example of how this doctrine was applied in practice and what happens to countries that don't comply. Russia likely wants this same principle respected on their side, though within a much more limited area since Russia cannot project its power as far as the US can.
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, Danderman123 said:
Obviously, you don't believe that nations have the right of self determination.
What limits on *your* country's decision making are acceptable to you?
Of course people / nations have a right to self determination. But some countries (especially those in vicinity of more powerful neighbors) have to be mindful of their surroundings. As history shows it was not wise for Cuba to seek military alliance with Soviet Union - don't you see any similarities with NATO - Ukraine situation?
-
1
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
19 hours ago, rabas said:Watch (2 min) Russian born Russia/Putin expert Julia Ioffe discuss NATO guarantees. This is a short clip from her longer talk Putin and the Presidents. Also see The Putin Files.
From the link which you posted:
Later that day, at a meeting with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, he acknowledged that "It is important for the Soviet Union and other European countries to have guarantees that if the United States maintains its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, there will be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction or military presence by a single inch in the eastern direction". and, in addition, he asked Gorbachev whether he would prefer a united Germany "outside NATO, completely independent, without American troops, or a united Germany that retains ties with NATO, but with a guarantee that, that the jurisdiction or NATO troops will not extend to the east of the current line." When Gorbachev replied that "the expansion of the NATO zone is unacceptable," Baker agreed with this.
It's clear that there was no written agreement about NATO not expanding eastward but her (Julia Loffe) claim that promises were all a fiction is not a serious argument - plenty of records in the link you posted.
Regardless of the above, I fail to understand why anyone would think that expanding NATO towards Russia's borders, considering it was Russia's mortal enemy throughout the Cold War, is a good idea.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
18 hours ago, jvs said:
Did you watch the video i posted by Times Radio?A lot is explained in there.
Even in 2014 Russia was the aggressor also with Georgia.
Yes, I watched it. I couldn't find much new information apart from what we hear from mainstream media in West, basically Russia is bad, Putin is bad and he wants to conquer Ukraine while provoking NATO and West will prevail by supplying more and more weapons to Ukraine. There are some truths in there for sure, even war in Georgia in 2008 is mentioned however there is no attempt to explain the root cause of all these issues with Russia.
By the way the war in Georgia happened only a few months after NATO summit which I mentioned earlier and I believe that that was not a coincidence. Russia opposed previous NATO expansions in 1999 and in 2004 but couldn't do anything about it. Following is what US ambassador to Moscow at the time had to say about expansion to Ukraine:
Quote“Ukrainian entry into NATO is the brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin),” he wrote in a 2008 memo to then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. “In more than two and a half years of conversations with key Russian players, from knuckle-draggers in the dark recesses of the Kremlin to Putin’s sharpest liberal critics, I have yet to find anyone who views Ukraine in NATO as anything other than a direct challenge to Russian interests.”
His leaked cable (NYET MEANS NYET) is also interesting to read.
The best explanation is provided by J. Mearsheimer who predicted Russia wrecking Ukraine already back in 2015.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, jvs said:
For the umpteenth time!The Ukraine did not go into this war!It was putin all the way!
I do agree you are basically saying the Ukraine is fighting and dying for the West,i hope that will change soon.As far as the F-16s go, they can also use airport in neighboring countries.
That will be a problem for putin.
Sure he will spout more talk but i believe that is all it is,he has been crying escalation since the first outside arms reached the Ukraine.
If you are watching what russian TV are saying,they are going to nuke all of Europe any time now!
Putin has only respect for one thing,true powerful opposition.!!!!!!
There is no question that Russia is aggressor since 2022 as far as its relationship with Ukraine is concerned but wouldn't you agree that US and NATO are to blame for the cause of the troubles (starting in 2014)?
Part of statement from NATO summit in 2008
"NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO. Both nations have made valuable contributions to Alliance operations."
-
2
-
-
20 hours ago, Bkk Brian said:
“Hamas has been holding our hostages in Rafah, which is why our forces are operating in Rafah"
Want the war to end?
Tell Hamas to free the Hostages and surrender.His statement contradicts Netanyahu's idea from few weeks ago.
"
Netanyahu said Israel would enter Rafah, which Israel says is Hamas’ last stronghold, regardless of whether a truce-for-hostages deal is struck. His comments appeared to be meant to appease his nationalist governing partners but it was not clear whether they would have any bearing on any emerging deal with Hamas.
“The idea that we will stop the war before achieving all of its goals is out of the question,” Netanyahu said, according to a statement from his office. “We will enter Rafah and we will eliminate Hamas’ battalions there — with or without a deal, to achieve the total victory.”
"
https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-news-04-30-2024-f5e14fd176d69f9c4e23b48f3ab5af6a
-
21 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:
Palestinians will keep fighting until they get what they want , that is why they cannot live peacefully on the land and that is why they need to be removed from the land
What is the issue with giving them what they want? By them I am referring to Palestinians not Hamas. There is nothing extraordinary in their proposal at Camp David Summit in 2000.
-
2
-
-
21 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:
Jews "Judaizing " Jerusalem ?
As Al-Quds /Jerusalem was 100 % Jewish before Muslims took over the land , it could be said that Jews are taking Al-Quds back from the Muslim invaders
What year / during which period was Jerusalem 100% Jewish before Muslims took over the land?
-
2
-
-
20 hours ago, Wobblybob said:
Palestinians don't want a two state solution either, the reason the Israelis don't want a 2SS is pretty obvious, the reason the Palestinians don't want a 2SS is because they want Israel and the annihilation of the citizens of Israel.
So reverting to my initial question to you, what should the Israelis do, lay down their arms and let the Palestinians kill them?????
They could have agreed to Palestinian proposal during Camp David Summit in 2000.
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:Because Israel sees it for what it is, a reward for 10/7
By this analogy - is State of Israel a reward for the bombing of King David hotel?
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:Because its rewarding acts of terrorism and it will encourage more acts of terrorism .
What do you think that Israelis were doing when they were fighting to establish their own state?
-
3
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:Because its rewarding acts of terrorism and it will encourage more acts of terrorism .
Do you believe that once the shooting stops that Palestinians will just live happily ever after among whatever is left of Gaza?
As long as Palestinians in occupied territories don't get a viable solution in either own sovereign state or as citizens with equal rights to Israelis they are going to resist.
-
2
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:Your opinion is wrong , Palestinians want Israel replaced by a hard-line Islamic sharia state called Palestine .
They don't want a two state solution, they want a one state solution from the river to the sea
No doubt that some Palestinians want what you described. However they don't have capabilities to achieve it. On the other hand some Israelis want exact same thing - one state only for the (majority) of Jews. The only difference between them is that Israel has been much more successful in pursuing the objective - they have been occupying Palestinian territories for over 50 years now.
-
2
-
1
-
15 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:
Gaza was not occupied for years prior to 10/7
Was it a part of sovereign state?
Why then does Israeli government seem to be so unhappy about recent recent recognition of Palestinian state by few European countries?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories
-
27 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:
Yes, the U.N gave Israel the right to occupy the land in 1948 , legally
Gaza strip and West Bank as well?
-
On 5/28/2024 at 10:41 PM, Wobblybob said:
No I don't agree, every death in Gaza is down to Hamas for without their murderous intervention in Israel none of this would be happening.
In my opinion the core of the issue is the Israeli treatment of Palestinians on the occupied territories. If they either agreed on the two state solution or if all of them had same rights in one state it is much less likely that we would be witnessing events such as Intifadas and Oct 7th.
-
1
-
-
On 5/28/2024 at 10:39 PM, coolcarer said:
It’s occupied because the hostages and Hamas are there. No other reason. Hamas started a war on Oct 7th. Hamas took hostages back to Gaza on Oct 7th
Are you implying that that territory has not been occupied before Oct 7th?
-
1
-
Why Did Hamas Attack Israel on Oct 7th 2023 a Historical Perspective
in The War in Israel
Posted
Ben-Gurion, Israel's first PM could have not make it any clearer:
"Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Our God is not theirs. We come from Israel, it's true, but two thousand years ago, and what is that to them? There has been anti-Semitism the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They only see one thing: we have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?"