Israel launches Gaza offensive, kills Hamas commander
GAZA (Reuters) - Israel launched a major offensive against Palestinian militants in Gaza on Wednesday, killing the military commander of Hamas in an air strike and threatening an invasion of the enclave that the Islamist group vowed would "open the gates of hell".
The onslaught shattered hopes that a truce mediated on Tuesday by Egypt could pull the two sides back from the brink of war after five days of escalating Palestinian rocket attacks and Israeli strikes at militant targets.
Operation "Pillar of Defence" began with a surgical strike on a car carrying the commander of the military wing of Hamas, the Iranian-armed Islamist movement which controls Gaza and dominates a score of smaller armed groups.
Within minutes of the death of Ahmed Al-Jaabari, big explosions were rocking Gaza, as the Israeli air force struck at selected targets just before sundown, blasting plumes of smoke and debris high above the crowded city.
Panicking civilians ran for cover and the death toll mounted quickly. Nine people including three children were killed, the health ministry said, and about 40 people were wounded.
Army tanks shelled border areas of Gaza in south and the Israeli navy shelled a Hamas security position from the sea.
Hamas stuck back, firing at least four Grad rockets at the southern city of Beersheva in what it called its initial response. Israel reported damage but no casualties.
The escalation in Gaza came in a week when Israel fired at Syrian artillery positions it said had fired into the Israeli-annexed Golan Heights amid a civil war in Syria that has brought renewed instability to Lebanon.
Egypt, whose new Islamist government is still honoring the 1979 peace agreement with Israel, condemned the raids on Gaza as a threat to regional security and withdrew its ambassador from Israel. It also summoned the Israeli envoy to Cairo to deliver a protest and called for an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council.
Russia called for an end to the raids.
A second Gaza war has loomed on the horizon for months as waves of Palestinian rocket attacks and Israeli strikes grew increasingly more intense and frequent.
Israel's Operation Cast Lead in 2008-2009 began with a week of air attacks and shelling, followed by a land invasion of the blockaded coastal strip, sealed off at sea by the Israeli navy. Some 1,400 Palestinians were killed and 13 Israelis died.
KILLED IN HIS CAR
Hamas said Jaabari, who ran the organization's armed wing, Izz el-Deen Al-Qassam, died along with a Hamas photographer when their car was blown apart by an Israeli missile.
The charred wreckage of a car could be seen belching flames, as emergency crews picked up what appeared to be body parts.
Israel confirmed it had carried out the attack and announced there was more to come. Reuters witnesses saw Hamas security compounds and police stations blasted apart.
"Today we relayed a clear message to the Hamas organization and other terrorist organizations," Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said. "And if there is a need, the IDF (Israel Defence Forces) is prepared to broaden the operation. We will continue to do everything in order to protect our citizens."
Immediate calls for revenge were broadcast over Hamas radio.
"The occupation has opened the gates of hell," Hamas's armed wing said. Smaller groups also vowed to strike back.
"Israel has declared war on Gaza and they will bear the responsibility for the consequences," Islamic Jihad said.
Southern Israeli communities within rocket range of Gaza were on full alert, and schools were ordered closed for Thursday. About one million Israelis live in range of Gaza's relatively primitive but lethal rockets, supplemented in recent months by longer-range, more accurate systems.
"The days we face in the south will, in my estimation, prove protracted," Brigadier-General Yoav Mordechai, Israel's chief military spokesman, told Channel 2 TV.
"The home front must brace itself resiliently."
Mordechai said Israel was both responding to a surge in Palestinian rocket salvoes earlier this week and trying to prevent Hamas and other Palestinian factions from building up their arsenals further.
Among the targets of Wednesday's air strikes were underground caches of longer-range Hamas rockets, he said.
Asked if Israel might send in ground forces, Mordechai said: "There are preparations, and if we are required to, the option of an entry by ground is available."
OBAMA BRIEFED
Israeli President Shimon Peres briefed U.S. President Barack Obama on the operation, Peres's office said in a statement. He told Obama that Jaabari was a "mass-murderer" and his killing was Israel's response to Palestinian rocket attacks from Gaza.
"Israel is not interested in stoking the flames, but for the past five days there has been constant missile fire at Israel and mothers and children cannot sleep quietly at night," said Peres, who visited the border town of Sderot earlier.
In the flare-up that was prelude to Wednesday's offensive, more than 115 missiles were fired into southern Israel from Gaza and Israeli planes launched numerous strikes.
Seven Palestinians, three of them gunmen, were killed. Eight Israeli civilians were hurt by rocket fire and four soldiers wounded by an anti-tank missile.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas asked Arab League Secretary General Nabil al-Arabi to call an emergency meeting of the League's Council to denounce "dangerous Israeli escalation and brutal aggression on our people in the Gaza Strip".
The leader of Hamas in the Gaza Strip, Ismail Haniyeh, called on Arab states, especially Egypt, to halt the assault.
Egypt's foreign ministry condemned the Israeli strikes, saying any further escalation "could have negative repercussions on the security and stability of the region".
Israel's intelligence agency Shin Bet said Jaabari led Hamas' takeover of Gaza in 2007, when the militant Islamist group ousted fighters of the Fatah movement of its great rival, the Western-backed Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas.
It said he instigated the attack that led to the capture of Israeli Corporal Gilad Shalit in a kidnap raid from Gaza in 2006. Jaabari was also the man who handed Shalit over to Israel in a prisoner exchange five years after his capture.
Israel holds a general election on January 22 and Netanyahu has pledged to retaliate harshly against Hamas. But Israel is also wary of the reaction from Mursi's Egypt, whose ruling Muslim Brotherhood is the spiritual mentor of Hamas.
Hamas has been emboldened by its rise to power, viewing Mursi as a "safety net" who will not permit a second Israeli thrashing of Gaza, home to 1.7 million Palestinians.
Hamas is also supported by Iran, which Israel regards as a rising threat to its own existence due to its nuclear program.
Helped by the contraband trade through tunnels from Egypt, Gaza militias have smuggled in better weapons.
But their estimated 35,000 Palestinian fighters are still no match for Israel's F-16 fighter-bombers, Apache helicopter gunships, Merkava tanks and other modern weapons systems in the hands of a conscript force of 175,000, with 450,000 in reserve.
(Additional reporting by Dan Williams, Crispian Balmer and Ori Lewis in Jerusalem; Writing by Douglas Hamilton; Editing by Giles Elgood)
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I don't know why, but I have always loved Israel's response to the shenanigans of HAMAS, and other "terrorist" groups that hit them...
I wouldn't call them shenanigans. More like using a tomahawk missile to kill a really annoying fly who won't leave you alone when you're trying to eat.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I don't know why, but I have always loved Israel's response to the shenanigans of HAMAS, and other "terrorist" groups that hit them...
I wouldn't call them shenanigans. More like using a tomahawk missile to kill a really annoying fly who won't leave you alone when you're trying to eat.
More like using a tomahawk missile to kill guys firing other missiles into your country.
Oh their crazy. I don't have a problem with them striking Hamas.
My position is just that Israel is often times extremely heavy handed in how it deals with these attacks. They don't need to roll tanks through entire neighborhoods in what virtually amounts to a terror campaign to deal with terrorists.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I don't know why, but I have always loved Israel's response to the shenanigans of HAMAS, and other "terrorist" groups that hit them...
I wouldn't call them shenanigans. More like using a tomahawk missile to kill a really annoying fly who won't leave you alone when you're trying to eat.
More like using a tomahawk missile to kill guys firing other missiles into your country.
Why is Hamas shooting missiles into Israel again?
Umm, because they were sold out of Schwarma at the local Schwarma stand??
LordofHats wrote: Oh their crazy. I don't have a problem with them striking Hamas.
My position is just that Israel is often times extremely heavy handed in how it deals with these attacks. They don't need to roll tanks through entire neighborhoods in what virtually amounts to a terror campaign to deal with terrorists.
I have no problem with heavy handed response.
We were accused of that during the Kosovo war... drove me nutso.
LordofHats wrote: Oh their crazy. I don't have a problem with them striking Hamas.
My position is just that Israel is often times extremely heavy handed in how it deals with these attacks. They don't need to roll tanks through entire neighborhoods in what virtually amounts to a terror campaign to deal with terrorists.
Thats not heavy handed. Firebombing Gaza from stem to stern with fuel air bombs is heavy handed. Its all in the perspective.
Perhaps because aggressive israeli settlers keep taking more and more of their land? And because they are under an oppressive blockade that limits what supplies they have access to? There's more than 1 side to this whole thing and both have legitimate grievances.
Not a fan of Hamas, but elements on Israel's side are as bad.
I've always seen it as being rather fair-handed actually... I mean, in the past, Hamas has hit schools and other civilian buildings, buses and whatnot, and Israel, by and large has responded by hitting a directly military target in return... kind of a, flatten a school, we'll flatten your whole base sort of thing.
Da Boss wrote: Perhaps because aggressive israeli settlers keep taking more and more of their land? And because they are under an oppressive blockade that limits what supplies they have access to? There's more than 1 side to this whole thing and both have legitimate grievances.
Not a fan of Hamas, but elements on Israel's side are as bad.
Evidently the blockade is not nearly oppressive enough if it can get thousands of missiles through. Just a thought. Landwise I think you're thinking of the West Bank side. Thats where a lot of the hallabaloo about developments are coming from. Note I am not disagreeing with you on that, just which district.
Frazzled's solution:
Gaza you're completely utterly free. You're an independent country. But if you fire missiles into us, we carpet bomb everything and Gaza is now Israel.
West Bank. We'll freeze right here and give you $1.0Billion in recompense. You're a free country. But if you attack us, we carpret bomb everything and the West Bank is now Israel.
Deal?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I've always seen it as being rather fair-handed actually... I mean, in the past, Hamas has hit schools and other civilian buildings, buses and whatnot, and Israel, by and large has responded by hitting a directly military target in return... kind of a, flatten a school, we'll flatten your whole base sort of thing.
As noted, a proper Russian response would be much more...levelling...
Remember, in Stalinist Russia GRANDMA eats the Wolf!
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I don't know why, but I have always loved Israel's response to the shenanigans of HAMAS, and other "terrorist" groups that hit them...
I wouldn't call them shenanigans. More like using a tomahawk missile to kill a really annoying fly who won't leave you alone when you're trying to eat.
More like using a tomahawk missile to kill guys firing other missiles into your country.
Why is Hamas shooting missiles into Israel again?
Because the Israelis keep 'populating the hilltops', I believe the way it was phrased by Netanyahu.
I guess he's suggesting that by Israeli's "populating the hilltops" they are taking all the choicest lands for themselves, creating some perceived (and possibly real) advantage/disadvantage situations.
Ensis Ferrae wrote:I don't know why, but I have always loved Israel's response to the shenanigans of HAMAS, and other "terrorist" groups that hit them...
I compare it roughly to ROK Marines in Vietnam. If they got ambushed a few times in the same village they came back with a bulldozer. There's something satisfying about retaliation.
Da Boss wrote:Perhaps because aggressive israeli settlers keep taking more and more of their land?
The resistance of the palestinians is admirable, the zionists stole the palestinians land and some of them are fighting to get there land back .Would you not fight to get your country back if someone invaded ? i say to hell with zionists and there evil acts of murder and other crimes against mankind.
Facts: Attacks on southern Israel
Attacks on Israeli towns and communities continue as you read this message:
+120 rockets have been fired at Israel this week. +760 rockets have been fired at Israel in 2012. +2500 rockets have been fired at Israel since 2009. Terrorists hold more than 10,000 rockets in Gaza.
One million Israelis, 14% of the population, are under the threat of rocket fire.
That is equivalent to 44 million U.S. citizens under the threat of rocket fire.
Gaza terrorists targeted an IDF jeep this week, injuring four soldiers. (Video)
Hamas rules the Gaza strip and is responsible for all that occurs in Gaza and all that is launched form there.
Hamas, supported by Iran, has wielded authority over the Gaza Strip since 2007.
In my mind... the gloves need to come off.
The UN Security Council will hold a closed emergency meeting on Wednesday to discuss Israeli strikes against the Gaza Strip, France said, as Israel threatened a wider offensive in the Palestinian enclave to stem rocket salvoes by Hamas militants. The French UN mission announced on its Twitter feed that the meeting would be a “closed private debate” beginning at 9:00 P.M. EST (0200 GMT Thursday). Council diplomats said Israeli and Palestinian envoys would speak at the meeting. (Reuters)
The annoying thing is that Hamas launches an offensive, then tries to act like the wounded party when the Israelis return the favor. Usually ducking behind the "Oh oh we're gonna call for peace talks! Really!" flag.
For the actually killing of the scum bag du jour. Good effect on target, clear to repeat. Just to be sure.
+120 rockets have been fired at Israel this week. +760 rockets have been fired at Israel in 2012. +2500 rockets have been fired at Israel since 2009. Terrorists hold more than 10,000 rockets in Gaza. One million Israelis, 14% of the population, are under the threat of rocket fire. That is equivalent to 44 million U.S. citizens under the threat of rocket fire. Gaza terrorists targeted an IDF jeep this week, injuring four soldiers. (Video) Hamas rules the Gaza strip and is responsible for all that occurs in Gaza and all that is launched form there. Hamas, supported by Iran, has wielded authority over the Gaza Strip since 2007.
I find this interesting for a few reasons:
They only mention the number of rockets fired, not how many people have actually been injured or killed by them.
They don't mention how much crap they've rained down on Gaza (in the form of rockets and missiles and other assorted explosive stuff)
It seems written specifically to appeal to the US (equivalent to 44 million US citizens, making sure to mention Iran)
Also the logical leap to go from 14% of Israel can be targeted to 44 million US citizens can be targeted is pretty substantial, and requires a logical run-up and logical spring shoes.
Shotty wrote: The resistance of the palestinians is admirable, the zionists stole the palestinians land and some of them are fighting to get there land back .Would you not fight to get your country back if someone invaded ? i say to hell with zionists and there evil acts of murder and other crimes against mankind.
Sure. But if I was fighting for my land for half a century and only succeeding in making my situation worse, I'd conclude I was a piss-poor strategist who had no idea what the hell I was doing, and move to Sweden or something.
+120 rockets have been fired at Israel this week. +760 rockets have been fired at Israel in 2012. +2500 rockets have been fired at Israel since 2009. Terrorists hold more than 10,000 rockets in Gaza.
One million Israelis, 14% of the population, are under the threat of rocket fire.
That is equivalent to 44 million U.S. citizens under the threat of rocket fire.
Gaza terrorists targeted an IDF jeep this week, injuring four soldiers. (Video)
Hamas rules the Gaza strip and is responsible for all that occurs in Gaza and all that is launched form there.
Hamas, supported by Iran, has wielded authority over the Gaza Strip since 2007.
I find this interesting for a few reasons:
They only mention the number of rockets fired, not how many people have actually been injured or killed by them.
They don't mention how much crap they've rained down on Gaza (in the form of rockets and missiles and other assorted explosive stuff)
It seems written specifically to appeal to the US (equivalent to 44 million US citizens, making sure to mention Iran)
Also the logical leap to go from 14% of Israel can be targeted to 44 million US citizens can be targeted is pretty substantial, and requires a logical run-up and logical spring shoes.
Not to mention the fact that I read a report stating that only one rocket got through the 'Iron Dome' system, injuring several people. It's crazy that the IDF and al-Qassam brigades are live tweeting each other as the conflict is ongoing.
Ohh man... the snarky, sarcastic remarks that you could do on twitter.... i mean, right before Israel fires artillery back at Hamas,They should tweet: Happy Hanukah, MoFos!!
Ensis Ferrae wrote:I don't know why, but I have always loved Israel's response to the shenanigans of HAMAS, and other "terrorist" groups that hit them...
I compare it roughly to ROK Marines in Vietnam. If they got ambushed a few times in the same village they came back with a bulldozer. There's something satisfying about retaliation.
Da Boss wrote:Perhaps because aggressive israeli settlers keep taking more and more of their land?
Really in Gaza? Since when.
Agreed. I've not heard of that at all in Gaza. I have heard of that on the West Bank, but the two are now practically separate countries now.
So how's my plan? Gaza gets complete independence, but then has to act like or the hammer falls absolutely?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Shotty wrote: The resistance of the palestinians is admirable, the zionists stole the palestinians land and some of them are fighting to get there land back .Would you not fight to get your country back if someone invaded ? i say to hell with zionists and there evil acts of murder and other crimes against mankind.
So you're down with rocketing school child. Got it.
Shotty wrote: The resistance of the palestinians is admirable, the zionists stole the palestinians land and some of them are fighting to get there land back .Would you not fight to get your country back if someone invaded ? i say to hell with zionists and there evil acts of murder and other crimes against mankind.
Sure. But if I was fighting for my land for half a century and only succeeding in making my situation worse, I'd conclude I was a piss-poor strategist who had no idea what the hell I was doing, and move to Sweden or something.
Yep. Other than complete obliteration of one side or the other (which frankly was the time honored tradition in that region) is there a way to stop?
As an American all I can say as - quit supporting ALL of them and let them do what they do. IN this instance I'm actually in agreement if Obama is trying a foreign policy pivot back to Asia.
Agreed. I've not heard of that at all in Gaza. I have heard of that on the West Bank, but the two are now practically separate countries now.
So how's my plan? Gaza gets complete independence, but then has to act like or the hammer falls absolutely?
Gaza did split with the West Bank a few years ago. Shortly after the unilateral disengagement, which I strongly suspect was always to make it easier to go after the Palestinians when they acted up again.
If some guy stood outside your house and shot at it all day long, but only managed to hit you once, you wouldn't have a problem with it? You'd be ok with some jerk from across the street telling you that you couldn't respond to it? Couldn't call the cops?
These CIVILIANS in Israel have this happen to their home every day. They didn't sign up for it. It's a part of their everyday life. Some people need to learn some friggen perspective on this.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I don't know why, but I have always loved Israel's response to the shenanigans of HAMAS, and other "terrorist" groups that hit them...
I wouldn't call them shenanigans. More like using a tomahawk missile to kill a really annoying fly who won't leave you alone when you're trying to eat.
More like using a tomahawk missile to kill guys firing other missiles into your country.
Why is Hamas shooting missiles into Israel again?
Because they are denied access to most foodstuffs, products and form of dignity and are constantly being bombed invaded or overflown by supersonic jets at treetop height. Their homes are bulldozed, they are shot at by snipers with impunity from Israeli watchtowers and their land is being stolen.
If some guy stood outside your house and shot at it all day long, but only managed to hit you once, you wouldn't have a problem with it? You'd be ok with some jerk from across the street telling you that you couldn't respond to it? Couldn't call the cops?
These CIVILIANS in Israel have this happen to their home every day. They didn't sign up for it. It's a part of their everyday life. Some people need to learn some friggen perspective on this.
And thats the problem how do we end this? Does one side have to wipe the other side compeltely and utterly out, or can they just stop already?
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I don't know why, but I have always loved Israel's response to the shenanigans of HAMAS, and other "terrorist" groups that hit them...
I wouldn't call them shenanigans. More like using a tomahawk missile to kill a really annoying fly who won't leave you alone when you're trying to eat.
More like using a tomahawk missile to kill guys firing other missiles into your country.
Why is Hamas shooting missiles into Israel again?
Because they are denied access to most foodstuffs, products and form of dignity and are constantly being bombed invaded or overflown by supersonic jets at treetop height. Their homes are bulldozed, they are shot at by snipers with impunity from Israeli watchtowers and their land is being stolen.
Would it piss you off Frazzie?
I would have moved away long ago. But then again I've been accused of occasionally being sane.
What is the answer for them (I know what it should be for us - aka the USA GETOUT GETOUT GETOUT).
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I don't know why, but I have always loved Israel's response to the shenanigans of HAMAS, and other "terrorist" groups that hit them...
I wouldn't call them shenanigans. More like using a tomahawk missile to kill a really annoying fly who won't leave you alone when you're trying to eat.
More like using a tomahawk missile to kill guys firing other missiles into your country.
Why is Hamas shooting missiles into Israel again?
Because they are denied access to most foodstuffs, products and form of dignity and are constantly being bombed invaded or overflown by supersonic jets at treetop height. Their homes are bulldozed, they are shot at by snipers with impunity from Israeli watchtowers and their land is being stolen.
Would it piss you off Frazzie?
You realize everything you just posted is wrong right?
Well, I guess not since you actually posted it.
Here's an interesting little story, from after the easing of the blockade a couple years ago.
MrDwhitey wrote: You're suggesting an entire country move? Nice.
The entire country is the size of my back yard. I mean seriously if you're in a free fire zone - leave. People do that the world over. Hell all my neighbors in Houston took a several thousand mile trip - partially on foot - to get here, and here aint no place to write home about. That was just for a job. So answer the question. I've put up one method. How can this be fixed? 1. They are their own country but are responsible for their own actions. 2. Isreal lines up tanks and dozers and physically drives everyone out of Gaza/WB. 3. Iran nukes Israel. Israel nukes Iran. 4. Israel, en masse buys up Montgomery county in Texas and find out about the greatness of Goode's chicken fried steak. They even bring the Wailing Wall.
If some guy stood outside your house and shot at it all day long, but only managed to hit you once, you wouldn't have a problem with it? You'd be ok with some jerk from across the street telling you that you couldn't respond to it? Couldn't call the cops?
Yeah, I'd probably bulldoze their house, kill their entire family, then high-five the Americans, whilst simultaneously expecting absolutely no retaliation whatsoever because the Old Testament says I'm in the right. Also, some stuff about WWII.
These CIVILIANS in Israel have this happen to their home every day.
If some guy stood outside your house and shot at it all day long, but only managed to hit you once, you wouldn't have a problem with it? You'd be ok with some jerk from across the street telling you that you couldn't respond to it? Couldn't call the cops?
Yeah, I'd probably bulldoze their house, kill their entire family.
krieger wrote:Me too!
Though I suspect you forgot to use the sarcasm font.
The question shouldn't be about retaliation, the Israelis are clearly in the right to do that; but it should be about the level of retaliation.
When your retaliation operations kill so many people that your country is seen in a bad light all over the world, you've gone way too far.
Huffy wrote: The question shouldn't be about retaliation, the Israelis are clearly in the right to do that; but it should be about the level of retaliation.
When your retaliation operations kill so many people that your country is seen in a bad light all over the world, you've gone way too far.
However, there are many out there who do not think they have gone too far, or that the level of retaliation places them in a bad light.
Huffy wrote: The question shouldn't be about retaliation, the Israelis are clearly in the right to do that; but it should be about the level of retaliation.
When your retaliation operations kill so many people that your country is seen in a bad light all over the world, you've gone way too far.
Basically, this. Let's say for the sake of argument that the Israelis have every right to defend themselves - that doesn't give them license to do whatever they want. There's just no sense of proportion. Even worse, their actions are making them less secure, not more. Israel has done more to make major conflict in the Middle East inevitable than pretty much any other country, with the possible exception of the US.
Huffy wrote: The question shouldn't be about retaliation, the Israelis are clearly in the right to do that; but it should be about the level of retaliation.
When your retaliation operations kill so many people that your country is seen in a bad light all over the world, you've gone way too far.
Huffy wrote: The question shouldn't be about retaliation, the Israelis are clearly in the right to do that; but it should be about the level of retaliation.
When your retaliation operations kill so many people that your country is seen in a bad light all over the world, you've gone way too far.
Right, they haven't killed much of any one yet except a Hamas military commander. The negative reaction is the usual anti-Israeli knee jerk one.
The only thing more sad than the intractable problems in the Middle East are those that get sexually aroused at violent retaliation that results in the murder of innocents.
If my country voted a political party which the majority f the western world classes as terrorists into government I would leave and I wouldn't be surprised about my old house getting bombed.
Glorioski wrote: If my country voted a political party which the majority f the western world classes as terrorists into government I would leave and I wouldn't be surprised about my old house getting bombed.
I hope you don't live in Northern Ireland, then. Sinn Fein are represented in the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Huffy wrote: The question shouldn't be about retaliation, the Israelis are clearly in the right to do that; but it should be about the level of retaliation.
When your retaliation operations kill so many people that your country is seen in a bad light all over the world, you've gone way too far.
Basically, this. Let's say for the sake of argument that the Israelis have every right to defend themselves - that doesn't give them license to do whatever they want. There's just no sense of proportion. Even worse, their actions are making them less secure, not more. Israel has done more to make major conflict in the Middle East inevitable than pretty much any other country, with the possible exception of the US.
It is a specific policy of terrorists to shelter themselves near schools/hospitals. This is a)to exploit the Isrealis reluctance to fire on civilian targets (despite what the news would have you believe, the Isrealis are a civilised country and their troops do not butcher civilians needlessly) and b)to create sympathy.
Nothing funny or clever about using human shields.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheHammer wrote: The only thing more sad than the intractable problems in the Middle East are those that get sexually aroused at violent retaliation that results in the murder of innocents.
The death of innocents, not the murder of innocents. This sort of gutless reaction is the reason military force of any kind is unpopular in this day and age, hence why tensions simply build and build.
Glorioski wrote: If my country voted a political party which the majority f the western world classes as terrorists into government I would leave and I wouldn't be surprised about my old house getting bombed.
I hope you don't live in Northern Ireland, then. Sinn Fein are represented in the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Not sure what purpose that weak parallel serves other than to suggest you agree with a political party being associated with a private military.
Huffy wrote: The question shouldn't be about retaliation, the Israelis are clearly in the right to do that; but it should be about the level of retaliation.
When your retaliation operations kill so many people that your country is seen in a bad light all over the world, you've gone way too far.
Why?
Because when the game turns to you vs the world, the world tends to win. And when your reaction causes everyone to go "wow, that guy is insane/crazy" the other side is getting them to switch over to their viewpoint.
I agree that Hamas would tend to use hospitals and schools as defensive locations, but the Israelis damage their image every time they destroy one, or kill civilians in the process. The fact of the matter is through these actions opinion is turning against Israel; so they really need to be careful with the level of their response.
Glorioski wrote: If my country voted a political party which the majority f the western world classes as terrorists into government I would leave and I wouldn't be surprised about my old house getting bombed.
I hope you don't live in Northern Ireland, then. Sinn Fein are represented in the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Not sure what purpose that weak parallel serves other than to suggest you agree with a political party being associated with a private military.
I think he was making the obvious point that some terrorists are in place already in a country most of us can relate to.
Northern Ireland isn't a weak parallel at all in fact I've always thought the had more in common than not.
The IRA is no longer armed and Sin Fein is not recognized by the US, the Eu, Canada and Japan as a terrorist organization. Neither have they been voted into majority government. That's a weak parallel.
Huffy wrote: The question shouldn't be about retaliation, the Israelis are clearly in the right to do that; but it should be about the level of retaliation.
When your retaliation operations kill so many people that your country is seen in a bad light all over the world, you've gone way too far.
Basically, this. Let's say for the sake of argument that the Israelis have every right to defend themselves - that doesn't give them license to do whatever they want. There's just no sense of proportion. Even worse, their actions are making them less secure, not more. Israel has done more to make major conflict in the Middle East inevitable than pretty much any other country, with the possible exception of the US.
The Israelis have been under attack from the Palestinians and their neighbouring Arab countries ever since the UN have voted them into existence, and have been kicking their collective buts since aproximately that time as well. The "plight" of the Palestinian people is one of their own making. If they hadn't attacked the Israelis in the first place, they would have their own independent little nation. If they would put down their weapons and didn't elect terrorists as their representatives, they would probably also have an independent Palestinian nation by now.
Under those circumstances, my sympathy for the Palestinians is less than overwhelming...
TheHammer wrote: The only thing more sad than the intractable problems in the Middle East are those that get sexually aroused at violent retaliation that results in the murder of innocents.
Thats the only thing you can think of thats more sad? I can think of many.
1. Dropping that last slice of pizza.
2. Dropping my hamburger and watching in shock as Rodney appears from nowhere and eats it.
3. Witnessing in person my absolute inability to type.
4. Not placing in my tournament tonight.
Warfare in the ME is a constant since well, people.
Huffy wrote: The question shouldn't be about retaliation, the Israelis are clearly in the right to do that; but it should be about the level of retaliation.
When your retaliation operations kill so many people that your country is seen in a bad light all over the world, you've gone way too far.
Why?
Because when the game turns to you vs the world, the world tends to win. And when your reaction causes everyone to go "wow, that guy is insane/crazy" the other side is getting them to switch over to their viewpoint.
I agree that Hamas would tend to use hospitals and schools as defensive locations, but the Israelis damage their image every time they destroy one, or kill civilians in the process. The fact of the matter is through these actions opinion is turning against Israel; so they really need to be careful with the level of their response.
When does the game turn to you vs. the world?
So what? If the choice is let them bomb your schools or a bunch of nattering nabobs on the public dole whine at the UN, I'd take the UN whining.
Actually Frazzled would go all out and get it over with if he was boss. If he was just a citizen Frazzled would not be living there. There is no good Tex Mex in the ME, it is truly bereft of God's good grace. Not like Texas and Mexico.
I understand pretty well how general resolutions work. I was also using a figure of speech, which I suspect you understood pretty well, but you couldn't miss a chance to be pedantic, now could you? Don't need to answer that, it was a rhetoric question, also a figure of speech.
Oh I get it! You were using the figure of speach known as "Artistic Licence" "Storytelling" or "Yarn Spinning" or where I come from its called making gak up.
AustonT wrote: Oh I get it! You were using the figure of speach known as "Artistic Licence" "Storytelling" or "Yarn Spinning" or where I come from its called making gak up.
Well, I better set the truth out there then:
On 29 November 1947, the General Assembly adopted a resolution recommending the adoption and implementation of Resolution 181. This resolution was described as a Plan of Partition with Economic Union which, after the termination of the British Mandate, would lead to the creation of independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem.
On 30 November 1947, an armed band of Palestinians attacked a bus and killed five Jews, starting what was called the 1947 – 1948 Civil War, that ultimately ended with a decisive Jewish victory and the actual creation of the state of Israel.
Now that the truth is out there, I still stand by my comment that the Palestinians started attacking Jews from the very beginning and that if they had been reasonable from the start, they would have their own independent nation by now. I know how UN resolutions work, but given the power of the UN at the time, odds are that the original resolution would have been upheld and the original boundaries for a Jewish and an Arab state would have been respected. But from the very start, the stated goal of Palestinians and almost all Arab neighbouring countries is to completely wipe out Israel, so Israel is just defending itself and has been for the past 65 years of its existence!
I'm just glad we can all agree that because of what happened in 1947 that the Palestinians deserve anything they get.
As a Zionist who has been to Israel several times let me just say this: the vast majority of Israelis I've known or met, to be fair many are mostly secular and this likely does not apply to the Ultra Ortohodox, hate the way right wing Americans view Israel and how they should act within the region.
Why does no one talk about the constant expansion into Palestinian territory, bulldozing of settlements, and so on? The argument can be EASILY made that the militant palestinians are retaliating themselves. Because Israel is the side with better hardware and more money, they kick the crap out of the Palestinians every time. So the Palestinians engage in asymmetrical warfare. Can't win a fair fight, being wiped out, fight dirty. Neither side is innocent in this, and assigning "levels of guilt" is near impossible.
Da Boss wrote: Why does no one talk about the constant expansion into Palestinian territory, bulldozing of settlements, and so on? The argument can be EASILY made that the militant palestinians are retaliating themselves. Because Israel is the side with better hardware and more money, they kick the crap out of the Palestinians every time. So the Palestinians engage in asymmetrical warfare. Can't win a fair fight, being wiped out, fight dirty. Neither side is innocent in this, and assigning "levels of guilt" is near impossible.
The game is rigged from the gate. Hamas was elected, but we in the west don't like that so we won't say the democratically elected government of gaza, we say armed group or terrorist group. See, if you're poor and can't afford a real army you're a terrorist, if the worlds number one super power supports you and gives you all their hand me down toys you're a democratic modern civilized state and just like the world's number one super power is totally never guilty of terrorism, merely collateral damage.
Well Hoss....eerrr Boss. I'm not going to defend/condemn Isreal expansion. Its a little hard to do when I know I'm five miles from Native American Reservation...maybe 10 mile at most. That be Puyllaup....I know there's another reservation north of me to...and one near everyone favorite town that harbor emo vampires but they have werewolves on that rez.....
Da Boss wrote: Why does no one talk about the constant expansion into Palestinian territory, bulldozing of settlements, and so on? The argument can be EASILY made that the militant palestinians are retaliating themselves. Because Israel is the side with better hardware and more money, they kick the crap out of the Palestinians every time. So the Palestinians engage in asymmetrical warfare. Can't win a fair fight, being wiped out, fight dirty. Neither side is innocent in this, and assigning "levels of guilt" is near impossible.
That is predicated on the notion that Israel was established, and immediately set about a campaign of military action against the Palestinians. Not the case. They were attacked, and it's been tit for tat ever since.
And, this is just a thought now, but aren't terrorist groups known to brag about their attacks and video tape them, only to later post those videos online... guess I know where Israel is taking its cues from, seeing as they posted the video of the assassination of hamas's military chief on youtube and their... twitter... feed... I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
Da SGTMAJ says no Da Boss. You cannot have a break since I gave YOU a break for three days. Drink water and fill more sandbags for God would like a his shrapnel barrier a bit higher since he's 6'7"
Da Boss wrote: Yeah, because the land that Israel was founded on was empty from the start, right?
Jesus. Give me a break.
+1
What do you expect an indigenous population to do when their home is being annexed and they're told to take a hike? I'm sure that sort of thing has always ended peacefully throughout history and the Palestinians are the only people ever who couldn't just down a chill pill and find somewhere else to live...
So if I go into your house and remove you at gun point and tell you it's mine now, if you kill me or a member of my family, you started the endless cycle of violence as my children and grandchildren battle yours and as such regardless of the context of the battle after that point, you will always be in the wrong... fail
It's my contention that CHEERLEADING one side over the other in a conflict like this is idiotic, and that the no questions asked support that the US gives to Israel makes it complicit in any atrocities committed by the Israelis.
By the way. I don't like Hamas, I don't support them. Similarly, I dislike the extremists on both sides of the troubles in the North of Ireland.
Da Boss wrote: Yeah, because the land that Israel was founded on was empty from the start, right?
Jesus. Give me a break.
+1
What do you expect an indigenous population to do when their home is being annexed and they're told to take a hike? I'm sure that sort of thing has always ended peacefully throughout history and the Palestinians are the only people ever who couldn't just down a chill pill and find somewhere else to live...
So if I go into your house and remove you at gun point and tell you it's mine now, if you kill me or a member of my family, you started the endless cycle of violence as my children and grandchildren battle yours and as such regardless of the context of the battle after that point, you will always be in the wrong... fail
Then what do you propose to resolve this?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Da Boss wrote: It's my contention that CHEERLEADING one side over the other in a conflict like this is idiotic, and that the no questions asked support that the US gives to Israel makes it complicit in any atrocities committed by the Israelis.
By the way. I don't like Hamas, I don't support them. Similarly, I dislike the extremists on both sides of the troubles in the North of Ireland.
Is that really that hard to understand?
Um... Israel is our ally... what are we supposed to do?
You seem to be proposing slow motion genocide, or at least approving it, since you have not criticised the continual expansion of Israel's settlements and the nature of the blockade.
As to what I propose to resolve this, feth, I don't know. The Peace Process in Northern Ireland was incredibly torturous and even now risks being undone by dissidents, and there was nowhere near the level of (justified) bad blood on both sides.
But I think a goddamned START would be if the US would stop supporting Israel so damn ardently and criticise them a bit for there misteps, just as they should criticise and not support Hamas. You guys give them a fethtonne of money, that makes you somewhat responsible, to my mind.
What do you expect an indigenous population to do when their home is being annexed and they're told to take a hike? I'm sure that sort of thing has always ended peacefully throughout history and the Palestinians are the only people ever who couldn't just down a chill pill and find somewhere else to live...
So if I go into your house and remove you at gun point and tell you it's mine now, if you kill me or a member of my family, you started the endless cycle of violence as my children and grandchildren battle yours and as such regardless of the context of the battle after that point, you will always be in the wrong... fail
I'll correct your analogy a bit: you come into my house with members of the government, who inform me that, legally, my house is now yours. None of my neighbors are willing to let me live with them, but they're more than happy to keep giving me guns to use as I take ineffective potshots at you. I do this for over half a century, and show no signs of stopping despite the fact that I'm making no progress and your resolve to stay is not weakening.
I think Americans can't empathise very well with the weaker sides in these conflicts. At least, that's how it comes across to me in these debates. I can totally see the frustration and hopelessness that could lead to terrorist acts in the face of such overwhelming force.
Da Boss wrote: You seem to be proposing slow motion genocide, or at least approving it, since you have not criticised the continual expansion of Israel's settlements and the nature of the blockade.
As to what I propose to resolve this, feth, I don't know. The Peace Process in Northern Ireland was incredibly torturous and even now risks being undone by dissidents, and there was nowhere near the level of (justified) bad blood on both sides.
But I think a goddamned START would be if the US would stop supporting Israel so damn ardently and criticise them a bit for there misteps, just as they should criticise and not support Hamas. You guys give them a fethtonne of money, that makes you somewhat responsible, to my mind.
This isn't a black or white situation...
And again, they're our Allies... by nature, we're supposed to support them.
We also give a gethtonne of money to Egypt? So, what's your point?
AustonT wrote:Roll back a little. Since the UN voted who into existence?
PhantomViper wrote: crickets
If you were hoping to just keep posting walls of unrelated text so I'd forget the question: I will not.
Da Boss wrote:Why does no one talk about the constant expansion into Palestinian territory, bulldozing of settlements, and so on? The argument can be EASILY made that the militant palestinians are retaliating themselves.
Because Gaza very publically speedster itself from the West Bank and there are no Israeli settlers in Gaza. The IDF evicted them at gunpoint.
That argument carries no wieght in this conversation.
Jihadin wrote:Da SGTMAJ says no Da Boss. You cannot have a break since I gave YOU a break for three days. Drink water and fill more sandbags for God would like a his shrapnel barrier a bit higher since he's 6'7"
I count maybe 4-5 peeps will get this.
In one of my gakky ROTC classes our instructor asked how much overhead cover you needed for 155mm.
My answer was "Jesus" for which I received extra credit, in addiotion to the original points.
I think Americans can't empathise very well with the weaker sides in these conflicts. At least, that's how it comes across to me in these debates. I can totally see the frustration and hopelessness that could lead to terrorist acts in the face of such overwhelming force.
whembly: No, not really. I mean, I think it'd be better if we all were, but in the right situation I have no problem with using violence if I need to.
Why do you ask?
America has no leg to stand on when it comes to discussing annexing territory from it's former inhabitants.
That said I fully support Israel. A lot of people like to apply modern ideals to how the Israeli nation was formed. Unfortunately it isn't the same as the late 40's. In the late 40's invasion of a country for territory was still ok. Israel did nothing wrong by the standards of the day and were in fact lucky to survive the creation of their country.
Also, I can tell you right now how America would react to being bombed day-in, day-out and I approve of it. So I have no problem with Israel reacting in a similar fashion. If anything I'm in the camp of just annex it. Live here in peace or get out of our new borders. it would probably produce less casualties in the long run anyway.
Edit:
Oh, and I have problems empathizing with a people constantly antagonizing someone stronger than them and then crying when they get back handed. Sane peoples don't antagonize the big kid on their block and hope their uncle shows up to help.
However, I don't believe in supporting Israel no matter what. They've done much to Palestine that people shouldn't turn a blind eye too. Their hands aren't clean.
Da Boss wrote: You seem to be proposing slow motion genocide, or at least approving it, since you have not criticised the continual expansion of Israel's settlements and the nature of the blockade.
As to what I propose to resolve this, feth, I don't know. The Peace Process in Northern Ireland was incredibly torturous and even now risks being undone by dissidents, and there was nowhere near the level of (justified) bad blood on both sides.
But I think a goddamned START would be if the US would stop supporting Israel so damn ardently and criticise them a bit for there misteps, just as they should criticise and not support Hamas. You guys give them a fethtonne of money, that makes you somewhat responsible, to my mind.
This isn't a black or white situation...
And again, they're our Allies... by nature, we're supposed to support them.
We also give a gethtonne of money to Egypt? So, what's your point?
We should quit writing checks to foreign governments for...anything? Reduces the deficit and helps get us out of harm's way?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Da Boss wrote: Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aid in the world, so I can see why they'd support you guys.
The Palestinians decisions over the years have made this bed and now the get to lay in it.
Their neighbors don't take them in en mass because when that last happened they tried to take land from Jordan by armed force and the King of Jordan sent in the tanks.
Maybe I'm a bit biase to because I lived and worked under those conditions to. Its not fun when the rocket alerts comes on and everyone dashes for the bunkers.
I don't always take the side of the strongest. In this case it happens I agree with the strongest but that isn't always the case. I just have trouble empathizing with people who are idiots. And like it or not how the palestinians are acting and have been acting for the last several decades is idiotic.
@Crablezworth
Empathy wasn't invented after the 1940's. But I'd throw out there that it National Empathy was developed much later than that. Appear weak before that and invite yourself to foreign rule. That's not allowed so much nowadays.
@Thread
In general I'm a fan of grow up or get out. But the world doesn't really accept that idea anymore.
Right. Okay. I can see you're ignoring several points here, so I will reiterate.
Israel is allowing settlers to gradually expand the area that they claim as their own, forcing the Palestinians further back. Whether an armed solution is the right idea or not, can you not see how it would happen in that situation? This is not even mentioning the other provocations.
I'm not saying Hamas are in the right, but god damnit, supporting one side over the other in this situation is not only idiotic, it is MORALLY WRONG.
Da Boss wrote: Or cut the aid to the ones that spend the money on tanks instead of food.
No cut them all off. We still get the blame and don't get the credit.
I don't know if now, but there was a time when we were shipping rice to Egypt - with "foriegn aid from the USA" or such. The Egyptians rebagged all the rice before shipping it out so people couldn't see it was a gift from the US.
The best thing we can do is - like Switzerland - nothing except offer to send low level functionaries to help mediate negotiations. No one gets aid. No one gets protection.
Of course that might be a careful of what you wish for scenario. An unfettered Israel might truly go off.
Good for them. Israel's neighbour's are rather aggressive, I can support that they respond in turn by standing up for themselves. My family's background's Jewish, and though my mother wants to distance herself from that because of Israel's more recent actions, I don't see a problem with a people defending themselves. Israel feel that it needs to constantly over play its hand though, so its just a pity that these skirmishes are probably going to end up with another war in the region though. =/
I'm not saying Hamas are in the right, but god damnit, supporting one side over the other in this situation is not only idiotic, it is MORALLY WRONG.
The US has been withholding money from Israel and forcing them to back down on a number of expansions. To say that we've been blindly giving them aid is also wrong. Here is a Wiki Primer
Good reading for those that think Israel is without fault.
Right. Okay. I can see you're ignoring several points here, so I will reiterate.
Israel is allowing settlers to gradually expand the area that they claim as their own, forcing the Palestinians further back. Whether an armed solution is the right idea or not, can you not see how it would happen in that situation? This is not even mentioning the other provocations.
I'm not saying Hamas are in the right, but god damnit, supporting one side over the other in this situation is not only idiotic, it is MORALLY WRONG.
Y'know, if I were surrounded by several neighbors who had stated, at various points throughout my history, that their goal was to drive me into the sea, and supported the idiots lobbing rockets into my civilian populations for no reason other than to cause terror, I'd probably try to grab as much land as possible, too.
I think you need to take a step back. I can absolutely choose to support one side over another based on ideology, my personal beliefs, or my own moral compass. I could even support one side by flipping a coin if I chose (though I would agree this would be stupid).
As for settling the region and pushing back the palestinians it's been pointed out time and again in this thread (and you've ignored it) that this isn't happening in the Gaza region. You do realize that you can live in peace in Israel if you are muslim or christian right? But it's pretty hard to live in other areas of the middle east as a Jew.
I can understand some of the issues faced by Palestinians. But can you understand that many of them were caused by the Palestinians themselves? I don't think Israel can do no wrong but I do find them more in the right based on their situation than I do the Palestinians.
Think the last arms deal we had with Isreal was selling them like 14 Apaches Longbows like within six months. So they've brought a battalion worth of attack helicopters that the terrain strongly supports them
The interesting parts are the pressure that Clinton, Bush, and Obama have put on the Israeli Prime Minister to back down on a lot of their expansions. Something I wasn't aware of, to be honest.
kronk wrote: The interesting parts are the pressure that Clinton, Bush, and Obama have put on the Israeli Prime Minister to back down on a lot of their expansions.
kronk wrote: The interesting parts are the pressure that Clinton, Bush, and Obama have put on the Israeli Prime Minister to back down on a lot of their expansions.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I don't know why, but I have always loved Israel's response to the shenanigans of HAMAS, and other "terrorist" groups that hit them...
I wouldn't call them shenanigans. More like using a tomahawk missile to kill a really annoying fly who won't leave you alone when you're trying to eat.
More like using a tomahawk missile to kill guys firing other missiles into your country.
Why is Hamas shooting missiles into Israel again?
Because they are denied access to most foodstuffs, products and form of dignity and are constantly being bombed invaded or overflown by supersonic jets at treetop height. Their homes are bulldozed, they are shot at by snipers with impunity from Israeli watchtowers and their land is being stolen.
Would it piss you off Frazzie?
I would have moved away long ago. But then again I've been accused of occasionally being sane.
What is the answer for them (I know what it should be for us - aka the USA GETOUT GETOUT GETOUT).
So the Israelis want your country and will bomb you until you leave.
The BBC provided a picture of one of the "terrorists" killed in the airstrikes by those poor long suffering Israelis.
It's hard to not see justification in attacking an entity that has fired hundreds of rockets at you over the past week. There's no genocide and the clear distinction here is Israel doesn't intentionally target civilians whereas Hamas and its bros base everything they have around attacking civilians.
Orlanth wrote: The BBC provided a picture of one of the "terrorists" killed in the airstrikes by those poor long suffering Israelis.
Well, I'm convinced. If the Israelis have killed children while targeting terrorists, clearly they're far worse than the guys who blow up buses full of civilians, pizza restaurants, ice cream parlors, grocery stores, houses, and so forth; at least those guys check to make sure there aren't any kids around first.
The Israelis have been under attack from the Palestinians and their neighbouring Arab countries ever since the UN have voted them into existence, and have been kicking their collective buts since aproximately that time as well.
The last real "war" was in '73; no the spats in Lebanon, West Bank, and Gaza dont count....Israeli existence hasn't been under threat since the 6 day war.
The "plight" of the Palestinian people is one of their own making
If they would put down their weapons and didn't elect terrorists as their representatives, they would probably also have an independent Palestinian nation by now.
So they elected the wrong group, ergo its all their fault......clearly they should have elected the pro-Israel party. And its awful hard to tell people who've been fighting for generations to put down their weapons when they face blockades and water being diverted from their lands and so on.
I don't support the actions of Hamas and other Palestinian factions but the heavy handed response of Israel is also unacceptable. I like Frazzled's idea of cutting off all aid; failing that we should give both sides heavy weapons, then break out the popcorn
No idea why I laughed at your reply Frazz but I agree.
edit
On a side bar I had to look up what they're using for rockets. Thank Gawd the insurgents in Afghanistan are not on to this. They use the PoS chinese rocket...eerrr russian rocket
The Qassam rocket (Arabic: صاروخ القسام Ṣārūkh al-Qassām; also Kassam) is a simple steel artillery rocket developed and deployed by the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the military arm of Hamas. Three models have been produced and used between 2001 and 2011.
More generally, all types of Palestinian rockets fired into southern Israel, for example the Palestinian Islamic Jihad Al Quds rockets, are called Qassams by the Israeli media, and often by foreign media.[4]
The Qassam gained notoriety as the best-known type of rocket deployed by Palestinian militants mainly against Israeli civilians, but also some military targets during the Second Intifada of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.[5][6] Since 2000, Palestinian rockets, which include the Qassam, alongside others such as the Grad rocket, have claimed the lives of 22 Israelis and one Thai national
Origin
Qassam rockets are named after the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the armed branch of Hamas, itself named for Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, a militant Syrian preacher whose death during a guerrilla raid against British Mandatory authorities in 1935 was one of the catalysts for the 1936 Arab Revolt.[9][10]
[edit] Rocket launches
The production of Qassams began in September 2001 following the outbreak of the Second Intifada. The first Qassam to be launched was the Qassam-1, fired on October 2001, with a maximum range of 3 kilometers (1.9 mi) to 4.5 kilometers (2.8 mi).[9] February 10, 2002 was the first time Palestinians launched rockets into Israel, rather than at Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip. One of the rockets landed in Kibbutz Saad.[11] A Qassam first hit an Israeli city on March 5, 2002 when two rockets struck the southern city of Sderot. Some rockets have hit as far as the edge of Ashkelon. By the end of December 2008, a total of 15 people had been killed by Palestinian rockets since attacks began in 2001.[12]
Rocket design and cost
Rockets being exhibited
The aim of the Qassam rocket design appears to be ease and speed of manufacture, using common tools and components. To this end, the rockets are propelled by a solid mixture of sugar and potassium nitrate, a widely available fertilizer. The warhead is filled with smuggled or scavenged TNT and urea nitrate, another common fertilizer.[13]
The rocket consists of a steel cylinder, containing a rectangular block of the propellant. A steel plate which forms and supports the nozzles are then spot-welded to the base of the cylinder. The warhead consists of a simple metal shell surrounding the explosives, and is triggered by a fuze constructed using a simple firearm cartridge, a spring and a nail.[13]
While early designs used a single nozzle which screwed into the base, recent rockets use a seven-nozzle design, with the nozzles drilled directly into the rocket baseplate. This change both increases the tolerance of the rocket to small nozzle design defects, and eases manufacture by allowing the use of a drill rather than a lathe during manufacture due to the smaller nozzle size. Unlike many other rockets, the nozzles are not canted, which means the rocket does not spin about its longitudinal axis during flight. While this results in a significant decrease in accuracy, it greatly simplifies rocket manufacture and the launch systems required.[13] The propellant of Palestinian rockets is generally made from fertilizer, and the TNT warhead is smuggled through the Rafah border tunnels into the Gaza Strip.
Cost
The cost of the materials used for manufacturing each Qassam is up to $800 or €500 (in 2008-9) per rocket
Israeli reaction
An Israeli boy and resident of Sderot crippled by Palestinian Qassam rocket fire.[16]
A Qassam rocket is displayed in Sderot town hall against a background of pictures of residents killed in rocket attacks
The introduction of the Qassam rocket took Israeli politicians and military experts by surprise,[17] and reactions have been mixed.[18] In 2006, the Israeli Ministry of Defense viewed the Qassams as "more a psychological than physical threat."[19] A 2008 study found that over half of Sderot's residents have been hurt, either physically or psychologically by Qassams.[20] The Israel Defence Force has reacted to the deployment of the Qassam rockets by deploying the Red Color early warning system in Sderot, Ashkelon and other at-risk targets. The system consists of an advanced radar that detects rockets as they are being launched, and loudspeakers warn civilians to take cover between 15 and 45 seconds before impact[21] in an attempt to minimize the threat posed by the rockets. A system called Iron Dome, designed to intercept the rockets before they can hit their targets, is in use since March 2011. A Second system (Nautilios) is developed for intercepting Qassam via laser beams.
[edit] Palestinian reaction
The firing of Qassam rockets from the Gaza Strip into Israel has been opposed by those living closest to the firing location due to Israeli military responses. On July 23, 2004 a family attempted to physically prevent the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades from setting up a Qassam rocket launcher outside their house. Members of the brigade shot one member of the family, an Arab boy, and wounded 5 others.[22][23][24][25] In October 2010 five children and three women were injured after a Qassam rocket training site exploded near a crowded residential area of Tel As-Sultan in Rafah. Palestinian Center for Human Rights has condemned Hamas for storing explosive material near civilians. In August a similar explosion wounded 58 and destroyed seven houses.
Da Boss wrote:You seem to be proposing slow motion genocide
Fine, I'll be the one that says it: yes.
I care feth all for Palestinians as a group. They are untrustworthy violent snakes. You'll find Palestinian supporters of the peace process wind up dead or expatriates (and then quite possibly dead in suspicious circumstances). I'm not afraid to say that I want Palestinians to disappear, when Arafat rejected the offer at Camp David he rejected any right of the Palestinians to negotiate, or as Clinton called it "The impossible more." Barak offered the Palestinians everything, and when they rejected it they should have received nothing. If Israel was to reassert full control over the POT and initiate a pogrom to remove Hamas and other dissidents I'd happily ( and no doubt un-popularly) cheer them along. Because the average "Palestinian" would be better off as an Israeli Arab. At the same time Israel should demand that all Arabs accept citizenship (for those that continue to refuse but receive government services and local voting rights.) or face deportation. Israel has been conciliatory for long enough, while people like you bitch and moan about how awful they are. Let them secure their territories once and for all and protect their citizens and anyone inside those border can get in line or leave. Quite frankly Israel is a socialist utopia, the ones that leave would be idiots. Let the Palestinian dream live on in Egypt or Jordan and see how long THEY tolerate the Palestinians bs. Jordan's already had it's taste.
Da Boss wrote:AustonT: if you think the two aren't linked...
It's really hard to use the justification that "Jews are stealing our land!" When the Jews forced the stubborn Jews out of their houses to give you land. If you really think that the link to Israeli settlers in the West Bank is that strong I suppose you also support the Israelis launching reprisals in the West Bank for all the Gaza missile attacks, right?
same issue wrote:
Da Boss wrote:Or cut the aid to the ones that spend the money on tanks instead of food.
Or, is it that we're allowed to sell "x" amount of defense weapons to Israel?
We give Israel money specifically to buy weapons, from us, but also from themselves in a larger proportion of that money than any other nation we give defense aid to. The unwritten half of that deal is that we get unrestricted access to their RandD. Which we have benefited from in spades.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
NEWater wrote: I just wish Iran would get the bomb already.
The rules of this site do not permit adequate rebuttal to this comment.
Da Boss wrote: Or cut the aid to the ones that spend the money on tanks instead of food.
Nope.
Cut them all off. No food, no money. Let's focus on ourselves for a decade and let the world sort itself out.
Those that were meant to survive will.
Exalted. Exactly, I'm sick of giving out billions in aid that could be doing all sorts of good work right here at home and then having the world spit in our eye.
Da Boss wrote:You seem to be proposing slow motion genocide
Fine, I'll be the one that says it: yes.
I care feth all for Palestinians as a group. They are untrustworthy violent snakes. You'll find Palestinian supporters of the peace process wind up dead or expatriates (and then quite possibly dead in suspicious circumstances). I'm not afraid to say that I want Palestinians to disappear, when Arafat rejected the offer at Camp David he rejected any right of the Palestinians to negotiate, or as Clinton called it "The impossible more." Barak offered the Palestinians everything, and when they rejected it they should have received nothing. If Israel was to reassert full control over the POT and initiate a pogrom to remove Hamas and other dissidents I'd happily ( and no doubt un-popularly) cheer them along. Because the average "Palestinian" would be better off as an Israeli Arab. At the same time Israel should demand that all Arabs accept citizenship (for those that continue to refuse but receive government services and local voting rights.) or face deportation. Israel has been conciliatory for long enough, while people like you bitch and moan about how awful they are. Let them secure their territories once and for all and protect their citizens and anyone inside those border can get in line or leave. Quite frankly Israel is a socialist utopia, the ones that leave would be idiots. Let the Palestinian dream live on in Egypt or Jordan and see how long THEY tolerate the Palestinians bs. Jordan's already had it's taste.
Orlanth wrote: The BBC provided a picture of one of the "terrorists" killed in the airstrikes by those poor long suffering Israelis.
Well, I'm convinced. If the Israelis have killed children while targeting terrorists, clearly they're far worse than the guys who blow up buses full of civilians, pizza restaurants, ice cream parlors, grocery stores, houses, and so forth; at least those guys check to make sure there aren't any kids around first.
Right?
A really good friend of mine lost her little sister in a suicide bombing in Israel back in the 90s. I personally can see exactly how much of a threat a seven year old girl and her mother were to the Palestinian people can't you? /sarcasm
As to the donkey cave who seemed to be implying they want a nation nuked off the face of the Earth...
Fixed that for you. There's plenty of guns in Catholic Belfest, don't worry about that Though on the whole yeah, the IRA is a shadow of its former self.
Exalted. Exactly, I'm sick of giving out billions in aid that could be doing all sorts of good work right here at home and then having the world spit in our eye.
So you'd be happy for Isreal to be destroyed and the Jewish people obliterated? Just so we're clear.
Fixed that for you. There's plenty of guns in Catholic Belfest, don't worry about that Though on the whole yeah, the IRA is a shadow of its former self.
Exalted. Exactly, I'm sick of giving out billions in aid that could be doing all sorts of good work right here at home and then having the world spit in our eye.
So you'd be happy for Isreal to be destroyed and the Jewish people obliterated? Just so we're clear.
Meh, you may think there are plenty of arms. To a Texan its positively a firearms desert.
Exalted. Exactly, I'm sick of giving out billions in aid that could be doing all sorts of good work right here at home and then having the world spit in our eye.
So you'd be happy for Isreal to be destroyed and the Jewish people obliterated? Just so we're clear.
Last I checked Israel has a wonderful defense industry that works quite well (better then the U.S.'s) and is supplemented by one of the better military forces in the world, sounds like Israel really doesn't need help from the U.S. to defend itself. Thanks for playing though.
Fixed that for you. There's plenty of guns in Catholic Belfest, don't worry about that Though on the whole yeah, the IRA is a shadow of its former self.
Meh, you may think there are plenty of arms. To a Texan its positively a firearms desert.
Hell it's a firearms desert compared to my personal gun safe.
Exalted. Exactly, I'm sick of giving out billions in aid that could be doing all sorts of good work right here at home and then having the world spit in our eye.
So you'd be happy for Isreal to be destroyed and the Jewish people obliterated? Just so we're clear.
Not seeing where you're getting from A to B. The US deciding to pull back its incredible foreign aid support in the region (civilian and military) does not equate to being ok if a people are obliterated.
If the existence of Israel's population is dependent on US aid then they need to be shipped to the US, or Puerto Rico (soon to be the US too hopefully). If you're going to be US citizens, you should like be in the USA no?
Frazzled wrote:
Meh, you may think there are plenty of arms. To a Texan its positively a firearms desert.
Unlike guns in Texas they're unlikely to be used against soldiers of the state.
KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Last I checked Israel has a wonderful defense industry that works quite well (better then the U.S.'s) and is supplemented by one of the better military forces in the world, sounds like Israel really doesn't need help from the U.S. to defend itself. Thanks for playing though.
Isreal does have a wonderful defence industry. However they are outnumbered around 50 to 1 by the Arabs around them. I doubt the technical/strategic advantage is *that* good.
Frazzled wrote:
Not seeing where you're getting from A to B. The US deciding to pull back its incredible foreign aid support in the region (civilian and military) does not equate to being ok if a people are obliterated.
If the existence of Israel's population is dependent on US aid then they need to be shipped to the US, or Puerto Rico (soon to be the US too hopefully). If you're going to be US citizens, you should like be in the USA no?
On the scale of the United States economy it's tiny. The USA gives $3 billion dollars a year. We both know that's nothing.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Last I checked Israel has a wonderful defense industry that works quite well (better then the U.S.'s) and is supplemented by one of the better military forces in the world, sounds like Israel really doesn't need help from the U.S. to defend itself. Thanks for playing though.
Isreal does have a wonderful defence industry. However they are outnumbered around 50 to 1 by the Arabs around them. I doubt the technical/strategic advantage is *that* good.
Frazzled wrote: Not seeing where you're getting from A to B. The US deciding to pull back its incredible foreign aid support in the region (civilian and military) does not equate to being ok if a people are obliterated.
If the existence of Israel's population is dependent on US aid then they need to be shipped to the US, or Puerto Rico (soon to be the US too hopefully). If you're going to be US citizens, you should like be in the USA no?
On the scale of the United States economy it's tiny. The USA gives $3 billion dollars a year. We both know that's nothing.
So you're saying Israel needs it's $3 billion a year in foreign aid to survive... but that that amount of money is nothing? Make up your mind man! Also see pretty much every war Israel's been previously involved in. The tech advantage wasn't even as good as it is now and it's curb checked all it's neighbors to the point the ones right around them with Lebanon excluded probably don't want to try again. Egypt is possible but they're having internal issues, as is Syria. Jordan's pretty damn moderate for a Muslim nation and again has gotten a serious bloody nose the past couple times. So that leaves Iraq (internal problems and US ally, Saudia Arabia US ally to busy making money, Turkey - to far away to care, US Ally, NATO member, respectable nation. annnnd Iran who would have to go through at least two nations to get where they want to go and drive the Israelis into the sea.
Is it possible for the whole ME to rise up and attack? Yes but not likely. Regardless pulling the annual financial aid to the Israelis wouldn't hurt them that much and I'm not saying we shouldn't continue to have their backs as a long time ally in the region.
Any way, the 3 billion isn't what we're talking about with regards to aid, it's the 53 billion (rounded up slightly) that the US gives out every year.
Orlanth wrote: The BBC provided a picture of one of the "terrorists" killed in the airstrikes by those poor long suffering Israelis.
Well, I'm convinced. If the Israelis have killed children while targeting terrorists, clearly they're far worse than the guys who blow up buses full of civilians, pizza restaurants, ice cream parlors, grocery stores, houses, and so forth; at least those guys check to make sure there aren't any kids around first.
Right?
Actually governments are supposed to be better than the terrorists.
Civilian casualties in Gaza are massive.
First of all, we all need to acknowledge something regarding this situation: None of us knows what it is like to be living in their shoes, and so at best, we are playing armchair generals and politicians.
Now that we have checked our egos at the door, let us consider the reality Israel is facing with the current state of the ME. There are more then a few items that have them nervously watching their TV and computer screens. While I am sure everyone here is educated and well informed, I think it would be best to revisit a select number of instances: Syria has descended into civil war, and has been shelling/bombing Israeli territory. On top of that there is a distinct possibility that the constant clashes on the Turko-Syrian border could escalate into something much worse, Egypt is talking about tossing out the peace accord between themselves and the Israelis (which would include re-militarizing the Sinai Peninsula), Iran's seemingly unstoppable march to obtaining a nuclear device, and a whole slew of new Islamist governments which are weak, inexperienced and hot blooded. Of course, this isn't the half of it when it comes to the ME, but that goes without being said.
All of this could have led to an attitude in Israel that they need to show their zero tolerance policy for any problems, and led them to being much more public about their plans for self defense and retaliation. Gaza is the absolute easiest of targets because it is constantly provoking Israel, and Israel isn't really going to lose anything by very publicly giving a show of strength towards them. I am not saying this is the best way to handle this, but I personally tend to support Israel because of the constant threats and crap that is slung their way by all of their neighbors. I am not claiming I have a good solution to all of this, but I think this should help us keep a strong contextual viewpoint of the problems going on at this moment, and examine the situation with greater clarity.
I'm not saying Hamas are in the right, but god damnit, supporting one side over the other in this situation is not only idiotic, it is MORALLY WRONG.
By some people's logic, France and much of Belgium should not be countries. The Germans took that land through "lawful" armed conflict, and yet we (Brittain, America, and Russia) forced Germany to give it back.
In some ways, we are still doing this, only in reverse. Israel would very easily take Gaza and the West Bank through military force (and I'd argue, without the use of genocide), but thus far much of the Western World is forcing them to "play nice" and give the Palestinians land to live in.
AustonT wrote: I care feth all for Palestinians as a group. They are untrustworthy violent snakes.
It occurs to me that if we could ever get the bottom of finding out how people end up thinking nonsense like the above, then we'd have not only a solution to the problem of Israel and Palestine, but likely a solution to every humanitarian disaster caused by conflict.
But I suspect we'll never understand how a person could end up writing off a whole people.
AustonT wrote: I care feth all for Palestinians as a group. They are untrustworthy violent snakes.
It occurs to me that if we could ever get the bottom of finding out how people end up thinking nonsense like the above, then we'd have not only a solution to the problem of Israel and Palestine, but likely a solution to every humanitarian disaster caused by conflict.
But I suspect we'll never understand how a person could end up writing off a whole people.
Okay seb... I'll bite.
Where do you draw the line and hold a group of people responsible for their government?
So the Hamas and their 'holy war' isn't a real challenge to Israelite armed forces? if so then Hamas is actually dependent on Al Assard regime rather than a direct support from Teheran or Sino-Russian bloc.
And how Iran reacts to it? How will they use their nukes if the they really posesses a functional sets of any.
1. Nuke first. invade later
2. Nuke if they're going to lose the full blown war so no victor will be declared once it's over.
Actually governments are supposed to be better than the terrorists.
Civilian casualties in Gaza are massive.
Civilian casualties in Gaza are "massive" because the people waging a campaign of terrorism against Israel continue to hide out among - you guessed it - civilians in Gaza. With the knowledge and support of said civilians, for the record. Israelis do not target civilians, Palestinian terrorists routinely target civilians. Israel could wipe the Palestinians off the face of the planet if it chose to do so, and has not. The Palestinians elected a 'government' whose stated goal is to wipe Israel off the face of the planet.
If that's moral equivalency in your eyes, then I'll too have to simply say that the rules of the site prevent my response.
I sure wish my country would wash it's hands of the whole affair. This isn't a problem within the purview of the United States, it doesn't affect our national security, and we should stop sending money to either side. If anything, our ham-fisted attempts to "help" have actually weakened our security.
AustonT wrote:Roll back a little. Since the UN voted who into existence?
PhantomViper wrote: crickets
If you were hoping to just keep posting walls of unrelated text so I'd forget the question: I will not.
Are you having a slow day?
The post I made was what I was meaning when I said that the UN voted Israel into existence.
Resolution 181 was the UNs plan to divide the region into a Palestinian country and a Jewish country.
And yes, I know that Resolution 181 wasn't an actual act of: "we now create the country of Israel: PLING", like I said before (and you as well), I was using hyperbole.
Orlanth wrote: The BBC provided a picture of one of the "terrorists" killed in the airstrikes by those poor long suffering Israelis.
Well, I'm convinced. If the Israelis have killed children while targeting terrorists, clearly they're far worse than the guys who blow up buses full of civilians, pizza restaurants, ice cream parlors, grocery stores, houses, and so forth; at least those guys check to make sure there aren't any kids around first.
Right?
Actually governments are supposed to be better than the terrorists.
Civilian casualties in Gaza are massive.
You do realize that the missile batteries that have been attacking Israel the last few days were set up between a Mosque and a playground right?
AustonT wrote: I care feth all for Palestinians as a group. They are untrustworthy violent snakes.
It occurs to me that if we could ever get the bottom of finding out how people end up thinking nonsense like the above, then we'd have not only a solution to the problem of Israel and Palestine, but likely a solution to every humanitarian disaster caused by conflict.
But I suspect we'll never understand how a person could end up writing off a whole people.
I suspect very much that Auston, like myself have had many dealings with people of Muslim persuasion over in the Middle East. As a result of these experiences, as well as those of other people in more public venues have led to a fairly legitimate reason to see entire nations as untrustworthy, violent snakes. To me, it is not nonsense to think of them this way; They have done NOTHING to dissuade people from this notion.
That only showed that you do NOT gak with Israel - the Israel gak you.
Seriously, after what Israel did in 1967 I would never go in war against them. Especially now when they have on of the most elite military and nukes.
AustonT wrote: I care feth all for Palestinians as a group. They are untrustworthy violent snakes.
It occurs to me that if we could ever get the bottom of finding out how people end up thinking nonsense like the above, then we'd have not only a solution to the problem of Israel and Palestine, but likely a solution to every humanitarian disaster caused by conflict.
But I suspect we'll never understand how a person could end up writing off a whole people.
AustonT wrote:Roll back a little. Since the UN voted who into existence?
PhantomViper wrote: crickets
If you were hoping to just keep posting walls of unrelated text so I'd forget the question: I will not.
Are you having a slow day?
The post I made was what I was meaning when I said that the UN voted Israel into existence.
Resolution 181 was the UNs plan to divide the region into a Palestinian country and a Jewish country.
And yes, I know that Resolution 181 wasn't an actual act of: "we now create the country of Israel: PLING", like I said before (and you as well), I was using hyperbole.
The UN didn't vote Israel into existence anymore than they voted a Palestinian state or an international free zone around Jerusalem.
To say otherwise isn't hyperbole its just false.
Hamas has been the legally elected government of the Palestinians since 2006.
I'm just being silly. Hamas is crazy though. Of course they really don't act much like a government either but w/e. Palestinians get hosed either way.
Looks like things are hitting the fan fast over there. I'm guessing Israel's gonna invade again. Hamas is going to cry foul and beg the rest of the world to help the rest of the world will bicker over it for a couple weeks and then things will settle down until we do it all over again two years from now
The UN didn't vote Israel into existence anymore than they voted a Palestinian state or an international free zone around Jerusalem.
To say otherwise isn't hyperbole its just false.
My sincerest apologies, I had completely forgot your "UN haterz" stance and didn't frame my comments with that in mind...
This cartoon in today's Times succinctly expressed my feelings on the matter:
I don't necessarily agree with Israel's often heavy-handed response to Arab aggression but nor do I buy into the sympathy vote for Palestine. Unfortunately, both sides come out of the whole thing looking rather shabby.
Stole this from another site:
Take a couple of Israeli fighter jets capable of super sonic flight and have them buzz whatever passes for the Hamas HQ and Gaza business district at about 100 feet. Break some windows.
Then wait. If more rockets, repeat, just with lots more jets over the rest of Gaza.
Then wait. If more rockets, repeat, this time drop some bombs.
Stole this from another site:
Take a couple of Israeli fighter jets capable of super sonic flight and have them buzz whatever passes for the Hamas HQ and Gaza business district at about 100 feet. Break some windows.
Then wait. If more rockets, repeat, just with lots more jets over the rest of Gaza.
Then wait. If more rockets, repeat, this time drop some bombs.
Stole this from another site:
Take a couple of Israeli fighter jets capable of super sonic flight and have them buzz whatever passes for the Hamas HQ and Gaza business district at about 100 feet. Break some windows.
Then wait. If more rockets, repeat, just with lots more jets over the rest of Gaza.
Then wait. If more rockets, repeat, this time drop some bombs.
Well you're using cold war style warning tactics in a situation where there is a hot war. Airplanes are flying all the time. I'd proffer the Hamas big wigs are in hiding since Israel got one of their heavies a few days ago.
As a human the whole area makes God sad.
As a Texan I just say, quit supporting anyone in the ME in any way and stay the heck out.
It seems likely to me that another ground war will happen in Gaza. It's likely past the point of no return for that.
If the Egyptian PM dies in Gaza then it's about to get real.
Pretty chilling. A lot of respect for the Gaza resident;
"You can hear what's happening and I'm not going to comment on that. We need to get past 'Who's the victim and who's the victimizer'--we need to get that out of the way and get on with things."
AgeOfEgos wrote: "You can hear what's happening and I'm not going to comment on that. We need to get past 'Who's the victim and who's the victimizer'--we need to get that out of the way and get on with things."
]
Oh yes this. Who is this guy and how do we give him/her a medal?
Israel's willing to destabilize Iran and work to help stop its Nuclear armament. Frankly I don't see the issue with them going out of their way to achieve this. If civilian casualties result in gross numbers then its Hamas' fault for sticking their missile sites in public areas in order to gain media sympathy. The western nations don't want Iran's government to have power, and yet its the in thing to critise Israel for going through the red tape. If Israel create set backs for Iran how many western leaders won't see this as a plus whilst in private? ^^
Wyrmalla wrote: If civilian casualties result in gross numbers then its Hamas' fault for sticking their missile sites in public areas in order to gain media sympathy. ^^
I'm sorry, no. While I agree that the firing of rockets into Israel by Hamas is reprehensible, horrid and above all pointless, you simply cannot expect a ragtag welfare armed force to sit in the middle of the desert while lobbing dumbfire s**twads which may as well be a giant IR crosshair. Israel has the capacity to accurately strike incredibly small targets even on the move, however a hellfire missile and other high tech ordnance cost a lot more than some shells being lobbed from Tel Aviv or some coastal warship.
Having the better toys and an incredibly well trained and armed "defense" force (not to mention air force) puts the onus on the Israelis in my eyes to be the bigger men and pony up for accurate strikes. I'm not expecting them to sit there and do nothing as Hamas rockets rain down on their cities but they have the capacity to prosecute this better, and I will give them credit for the accuracy of their initial strikes but they seem be looking more at the balance sheet and giving less of a f**k. No matter what, the narrative for any civilian Israeli forces kill seems to automatically be "collateral damage" while any casualty caused by an unguided munition launched by Hamas is a terrorist act, it's the oldest story in the book. When poor people wage war its terrorism and when rich people do it it's defense... it's getting old.
Calling Hamas’s bluff and firing on rocket launch sites and suspected munitions caches with increasingly hefty artillery isn't preventing Hamas from the continued use of this tactic and it only plays into their hands as the "martyrs" stack up, killing women and children with an artillery strike is a fantastic way to help Hamas replenish its losses. It's overkill and it's stupid. And in all honesty that seems to be Bibi's goal, surround them, starve them, radicalize every last atom of their being so as to play right into the narrative that somehow everyone in gaza is a terrorist. You kill enough of them, I assure you that will be the case before long.
Hamas certainly doesn’t think that if they lob enough rockets Israel will somehow disappear. They're doing this to elicit a response, its theater, and everyone’s watching. And sadly like all radical acts of violence, it plays right into the hands of the radicals on the other side of the conflict and they feed off of each other. Hamas wants this, Bibi wants this. And the world is sick of all their s**t.
Wyrmalla wrote: If civilian casualties result in gross numbers then its Hamas' fault for sticking their missile sites in public areas in order to gain media sympathy. ^^
I'm sorry, no. While I agree that the firing of rockets into Israel by Hamas is reprehensible, horrid and above all pointless, you simply cannot expect a ragtag welfare armed force to sit in the middle of the desert while lobbing dumbfire s**twads which may as well be a giant IR crosshair. Israel has the capacity to accurately strike incredibly small targets even on the move, however a hellfire missile and other high tech ordnance cost a lot more than some shells being lobbed from Tel Aviv or some coastal warship.
Having the better toys and an incredibly well trained and armed "defense" force (not to mention air force) puts the onus on the Israelis in my eyes to be the bigger men and pony up for accurate strikes. I'm not expecting them to sit there and do nothing as Hamas rockets rain down on their cities but they have the capacity to prosecute this better, and I will give them credit for the accuracy of their initial strikes but they seem be looking more at the balance sheet and giving less of a f**k. No matter what, the narrative for any civilian Israeli forces kill seems to automatically be "collateral damage" while any casualty caused by an unguided munition launched by Hamas is a terrorist act, it's the oldest story in the book. When poor people wage war its terrorism and when rich people do it it's defense... it's getting old.
Calling Hamas’s bluff and firing on rocket launch sites and suspected munitions caches with increasingly hefty artillery isn't preventing Hamas from the continued use of this tactic and it only plays into their hands as the "martyrs" stack up, killing women and children with an artillery strike is a fantastic way to help Hamas replenish its losses. It's overkill and it's stupid. And in all honesty that seems to be Bibi's goal, surround them, starve them, radicalize every last atom of their being so as to play right into the narrative that somehow everyone in gaza is a terrorist. You kill enough of them, I assure you that will be the case before long.
Hamas certainly doesn’t think that if they lob enough rockets Israel will somehow disappear. They're doing this to elicit a response, its theater, and everyone’s watching. And sadly like all radical acts of violence, it plays right into the hands of the radicals on the other side of the conflict and they feed off of each other. Hamas wants this, Bibi wants this. And the world is sick of all their s**t.
I'm sorry... but, just what do you expect Israel to do... take it in the teeth everytime? This is not a conventional war...
It reminds me of a phrase...
If the Hamas lays down their weapons... there will be peace...
If Israel lays down their weapons... there will be another holocaust.
Having the better toys and an incredibly well trained and armed "defense" force (not to mention air force) puts the onus on the Israelis in my eyes to be the bigger men and pony up for accurate strikes. I'm not expecting them to sit there and do nothing as Hamas rockets rain down on their cities but they have the capacity to prosecute this better, and I will give them credit for the accuracy of their initial strikes but they seem be looking more at the balance sheet and giving less of a f**k. No matter what, the narrative for any civilian Israeli forces kill seems to automatically be "collateral damage" while any casualty caused by an unguided munition launched by Hamas is a terrorist act, it's the oldest story in the book. When poor people wage war its terrorism and when rich people do it it's defense... it's getting old.
Wyrmalla wrote: If civilian casualties result in gross numbers then its Hamas' fault for sticking their missile sites in public areas in order to gain media sympathy. ^^
I'm sorry, no. While I agree that the firing of rockets into Israel by Hamas is reprehensible, horrid and above all pointless, you simply cannot expect a ragtag welfare armed force to sit in the middle of the desert while lobbing dumbfire s**twads which may as well be a giant IR crosshair. Israel has the capacity to accurately strike incredibly small targets even on the move, however a hellfire missile and other high tech ordnance cost a lot more than some shells being lobbed from Tel Aviv or some coastal warship.
Having the better toys and an incredibly well trained and armed "defense" force (not to mention air force) puts the onus on the Israelis in my eyes to be the bigger men and pony up for accurate strikes. I'm not expecting them to sit there and do nothing as Hamas rockets rain down on their cities but they have the capacity to prosecute this better, and I will give them credit for the accuracy of their initial strikes but they seem be looking more at the balance sheet and giving less of a f**k. No matter what, the narrative for any civilian Israeli forces kill seems to automatically be "collateral damage" while any casualty caused by an unguided munition launched by Hamas is a terrorist act, it's the oldest story in the book. When poor people wage war its terrorism and when rich people do it it's defense... it's getting old.
Calling Hamas’s bluff and firing on rocket launch sites and suspected munitions caches with increasingly hefty artillery isn't preventing Hamas from the continued use of this tactic and it only plays into their hands as the "martyrs" stack up, killing women and children with an artillery strike is a fantastic way to help Hamas replenish its losses. It's overkill and it's stupid. And in all honesty that seems to be Bibi's goal, surround them, starve them, radicalize every last atom of their being so as to play right into the narrative that somehow everyone in gaza is a terrorist. You kill enough of them, I assure you that will be the case before long.
Hamas certainly doesn’t think that if they lob enough rockets Israel will somehow disappear. They're doing this to elicit a response, its theater, and everyone’s watching. And sadly like all radical acts of violence, it plays right into the hands of the radicals on the other side of the conflict and they feed off of each other. Hamas wants this, Bibi wants this. And the world is sick of all their s**t.
Yeah, because its so easy to just take out a rocket site and not hit anything else! The technology, readiness and capability really is not there yet. If Israel had that capability they would use it, not just to win the PR war, but to scare the gak out of the terrorists.
Israel does not get a free pass and everyone knows it. Every action of they take is picked apart by the world media, they work pretty hard to keep collateral damage to minimum, but what you are asking is impossible.
I look at it this way, Israels live in fear most every day that today is the day that some random rocket comes and takes their lives away. Palestinians only seam to have to worry about rockets every once in a while when Israel gets fed up with the horsegak and throws some actual targeted smak down. Even that seams a little predictable, if you see or hear people launching rockets from your backyard maybe you might want to leave for a bit just in case there is some retaliation. Just saying.
This is a great video on how counter battery fire ACTUALLY works. In normal circumstances you get a general location, and drop a spread of shells across the whole area. The Israeli counter battery efforts to take out Hamas rocket sites are pretty clearly more restrained then that because Gaza still exists.
The Palestinian press can't wait to parade dead children in front of the cameras so Israel can be made to look bad, when its Hamas that hides behind the human shields of their own children.
GG
On the scale of the United States economy it's tiny. The USA gives $3 billion dollars a year. We both know that's nothing.
Horse gak. Thats $3.0BN that could go for college tuitions, better robes, or improved manga style robot armor suits. Its our money. feth them.
fyi, the military aid is invested back into the U.S. arms industry, which employees hundreds of thousands of Americans and is facing a crisis given the world economic slump, which has caused many buyers and nations to cut back their deals (but not Israel). Netherlands, Italy, Canada, and UK are all questioning the F-35, vital to Lockheed's business, for instance, but not Israel because it was purchased with military aid. This is why U.S. businesses are supportive of military aid to Israel: money given by the government goes to Israel then back into an American business which is experiencing cutbacks.
It's not like economic aid to other countries (such as Egypt) where it simply is thrown at their economy.
And even if it wasn't invested back into U.S. industries, it's indeed a minuscule amount. Moreover the Arab Spring has demonstrated all of your allies in the region are doomed to eventually implode. You think Saudi Arabia won't fall to Islamists? That's what they said about Egypt. The exception here of course is Israel. The time will come when they'll be your only friend in this vital region.
On the scale of the United States economy it's tiny. The USA gives $3 billion dollars a year. We both know that's nothing.
Horse gak. Thats $3.0BN that could go for college tuitions, better robes, or improved manga style robot armor suits. Its our money. feth them.
fyi, the military aid is invested back into the U.S. arms industry, which employees hundreds of thousands of Americans and is facing a crisis given the world economic slump, which has caused many buyers and nations to cut back their deals (but not Israel). Netherlands, Italy, Canada, and UK are all questioning the F-35, vital to Lockheed's business, for instance, but not Israel because it was purchased with military aid. This is why U.S. businesses are supportive of military aid to Israel: money given by the government goes to Israel then back into an American business which is experiencing cutbacks.
It's not like economic aid to other countries (such as Egypt) where it simply is thrown at their economy.
And even if it wasn't invested back into U.S. industries, it's indeed a minuscule amount. Moreover the Arab Spring has demonstrated all of your allies in the region are doomed to eventually implode. You think Saudi Arabia won't fall to Islamists? That's what they said about Egypt. The exception here of course is Israel. The time will come when they'll be your only friend in this vital region.
The issue with these attacks is that everyone stares at this issue through the tiny window of what the news covers right now. And the news, of course, shows the most dramatic, exciting moments of fighting. And fair enough, seeing the Iron Dome shoot down a rocket is pretty damn cool, and seeing the damage on both sides of the border is pretty emotional. It's just plain good tv, no fault on the news companies for showing that.
But the problem is everyone walks away afterwards, and begins spouting opinions based on nothing more than that little window of news they saw, they don't consider the greater context of events. Well sure, Israel has a right to defend itself, and if Hamas leaders are going to remain among the civilian population then civilian deaths are going to happen.
But the bigger issue remains the settlement of Palestinian land, and the quarantine enforced upon Palestine. The reality is that if the whole of Israeli society really wanted an end to the violence, then they'd stop the settlements, and they'd work towards a solution that gave Palestine a chance at a viable economy.
But that isn't happening. And all the while we get all this debate nonsense about who has the right to shoot missiles at who.
Where do you draw the line and hold a group of people responsible for their government?
I don't have a problem with the people of Palestine being held responsible for the actions of Hamas. If they don't want Israeli helicopters blowing up their homes and children, they should stop firing rockets at Israeli homes.
Similarly, I don't have a problem with Israeli civilians being held responsible for the actions of Israel. If they don't want to come under rocket attack, then they should stop settling Palestinian land.
The problem I had with AustonT's post is with the mentality of calling a group of people, any group of people, as "untrustworthy violent snakes". That's just straight up crazy talk.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote: Wait... am I wrong? Didn't the Palestinian elect the Hamas?
Yes, they were. There was supposed to be another election this year but it was postponed to next year due to in-fighting between Hamas and Fatah.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ensis Ferrae wrote: I suspect very much that Auston, like myself have had many dealings with people of Muslim persuasion over in the Middle East. As a result of these experiences, as well as those of other people in more public venues have led to a fairly legitimate reason to see entire nations as untrustworthy, violent snakes. To me, it is not nonsense to think of them this way; They have done NOTHING to dissuade people from this notion.
No, it's crazy pants nonsense.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Brother Captain Alexander wrote: That only showed that you do NOT gak with Israel - the Israel gak you. Seriously, after what Israel did in 1967 I would never go in war against them. Especially now when they have on of the most elite military and nukes.
So what would you do when they kept settling your land? Just let them do it?
"Over the past three days, 737 rockets from Gaza were fired upon Israel: 492 landed, but 245 were intercepted by the system, Israel Defense Forces said Saturday"
You know, this is how you wage a war, shoot $800 rockets at the enemy and they block them with $62,000.00 missiles fired from a $50 million dollar battery. Its just crazy.
Andrew1975 wrote: "Over the past three days, 737 rockets from Gaza were fired upon Israel: 492 landed, but 245 were intercepted by the system, Israel Defense Forces said Saturday"
You know, this is how you wage a war, shoot $800 rockets at the enemy and they block them with $62,000.00 missiles fired from a $50 million dollar battery. Its just crazy.
No really crazy when the benefactors will open their wallets.
Andrew1975 wrote: "Over the past three days, 737 rockets from Gaza were fired upon Israel: 492 landed, but 245 were intercepted by the system, Israel Defense Forces said Saturday"
You know, this is how you wage a war, shoot $800 rockets at the enemy and they block them with $62,000.00 missiles fired from a $50 million dollar battery. Its just crazy.
It isn't that much of a problem, when you've got much, much deeper pockets than the other side. Take a look around Palestine some time - an $800 rocket is a fair chunk of resources.
Andrew1975 wrote: "Over the past three days, 737 rockets from Gaza were fired upon Israel: 492 landed, but 245 were intercepted by the system, Israel Defense Forces said Saturday"
You know, this is how you wage a war, shoot $800 rockets at the enemy and they block them with $62,000.00 missiles fired from a $50 million dollar battery. Its just crazy.
Not when firing those $800 rockets mean you'll get blown up or have to spend the rest of your short life in hiding. Hamas leaders can choose to either fire rockets or die, and the self-proclaimed martyrs leading these Jihadist groups are rarely as brave as they make themselves out to be (Hezbollah is a good example, which hasn't lifted a finger against Israel for 6 years).
Harriticus wrote: Not when firing those $800 rockets mean you'll get blown up or have to spend the rest of your short life in hiding. Hamas leaders can choose to either fire rockets or die, and the self-proclaimed martyrs leading these Jihadist groups are rarely as brave as they make themselves out to be (Hezbollah is a good example, which hasn't lifted a finger against Israel for 6 years).
Other than a broad stereotype, what made you proclaim the leaders of either Hezbollah or Hamas are self proclaimed martyrs?
Well, it's just the last time Israel sent ground troops in Hamas were the first to get the hell out of there. There wasn't any 'ha ha you guys aren't living up to your martyr ideals'.... because they don't profess martyr ideals.
It's just, despite the opinions of people who half watch the news and like to form general opinions about what people 'over there' are like, what we're seeing here isn't the result of people crapping on about dying for a cause. What we're seeing is the collapse of an unstable five year relationship in which Hamas stopped (most) rockets from being launched into Israel, and in exchange Israel sent in money that allowed Hamas to keep open hospitals and the like. This situation was always problematic because Hamas simply doesn't have complete control over every armed group in Gaza and so not every missile could be stopped. As such, when missiles were launched into Israel, how do the Israelis know that Hamas did everything they could? Eventually they decided that Jabari wasn't doing enough so they whacked him. Whether he wasn't doing enough was because he didn't want to or couldn't didn't matter, following the logic of Defense Minister Ehud Barak "In the Middle East there is no second chance for the weak."
Add in the West Bank, where peaceful co-existance is basically Israel settling more and more land... which leaves the people of Gaza to wonder exactly what their options are. Sure, shooting missiles at the country with the powerful military is pretty stupid, but what other plan is there? Peacefully co-exist until they've taken all your land?
Oh, and add in that both countries have elections in the near future meaning neither side is willing to look weak, and you get the situation we have today.
And in response to all that complexity people on the internet talk about the treacherous snake people of Palestine, and how Hamas are all self proclaimed martyrs.
Harriticus wrote: Not when firing those $800 rockets mean you'll get blown up or have to spend the rest of your short life in hiding. Hamas leaders can choose to either fire rockets or die, and the self-proclaimed martyrs leading these Jihadist groups are rarely as brave as they make themselves out to be (Hezbollah is a good example, which hasn't lifted a finger against Israel for 6 years).
Other than a broad stereotype, what made you proclaim the leaders of either Hezbollah or Hamas are self proclaimed martyrs?
Their own words, they invoke martyrdom whenever one of them dies and express their willingness to die.
It is not a "stereotype" to label the leaders of Jihadist terrorist organizations these things. I advise you look at the Hamas reaction to Jabari's death, where martyrdom was invoked by guys such as Haniyeh and Zahar.
Harriticus wrote: Their own words, they invoke martyrdom whenever one of them dies and express their willingness to die.
It is not a "stereotype" to label the leaders of Jihadist terrorist organizations these things. I advise you look at the Hamas reaction to Jabari's death, where martyrdom was invoked by guys such as Haniyeh and Zahar.
You're confusing political theatre with political reality.
It's a bit like thinking US politicians are absolutely committed to the welfare of injured soldiers because they wear little American flag pins. Or like thinking Iran gives two gaks about the Palestinians because they make noise about their great suffering whenever it suits their political purposes.
Meanwhile, look at the actual actions of Hamas. Look at their actions the last time Israel invaded - they got the feth out of town. Look at the very realpolitik deal they struck with Israel after that - they negotiated to police the various armed groups and stop more rocket fire in exchange for humanitarian aid. And so, like the PLO before them, Hamas became the next administrator for hire for the Israelis in Gaza (albeit a lot less corrupt than the PLO). Now, whether Hamas chose not to stop every rocket, or whether they simply weren't capable of stopping every rocket is up for debate, but the reality is they were stopping most of them. But, with elections around the corner (in both Israel and Palestine), they weren't stopping enough rockets, and so Israel took action.
That's the political reality of the situation. But hey, learning all that and thinking about what it means and where to go from here is complicated and hard. Better to just declare one side a bunch of martyr loons and move on.
Why do people seem to think that Israel is the enemy here?
I watched a documentary about blaming Israel and Antisemitism.
I also recently had an epiphany about why the Holocaust happened. I think anyone who says it could happen here needs to be evaluated, but it's the same sort of thinking going on. Just blame the Jews.
Why do people seem to think that Israel is the enemy here?
Whose enemy?
They are the guys with vastly more money and vastly superior military force, who keep the other side brutally poor and keep taking more of their land. Culturally and historically, as an American I certainly feel more friendly toward Israel than Palestine, but I don't think their conduct toward the Palestinians is admirable.
We don't. You've just read the thread very poorly, in order to justify a simplistic political position you already held.
Neither Israel nor anyone within Israel is to blame for this situation. Nor is Palestine or anyone within Palestine.
The situation is the product of a very understandable politcal view held by many Jewish and non-Jewish people (in the wake of the holocaust it was believed the only way for the Jews to be safe was to have a homeland), which was complicated when the Palestinian people did something very few people expected (they didn't leave and settle elsewhere, but instead stayed and began slowly to form their own national identity).
That situation would be difficult enough, before you factor in the politcally powerful minority within Israel who believes they have a right to claim even more land in Gaza and on the West Bank.
Despite those problems, a hell of a lot of people on both sides have done a hell of a lot of things to try and stop the violence and resolve this issue. The problem is that finding a conclusion that will satisfy not just the leaders of both sides, but all the various sub-factions within each side has proven near impossible, and it only takes a few people to start another cycle of violent reprisals.
I also recently had an epiphany about why the Holocaust happened. I think anyone who says it could happen here needs to be evaluated, but it's the same sort of thinking going on. Just blame the Jews.
bs. Absolute 100% bs.
The holocaust happened because people who had a great deal of power came to see an ethnic minority as sub-human.
To the extent that has been seen in this thread, it's from people talking about Palestinians being treacherous snakes.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AustonT wrote: Neither do plenty of Israelis, B'tselem comes to mind first.
It's always interesting to compare the complexity of the debate within Israel itself, to the nonsense you get outside of Israel. There you'll find ex-Defense and ex-Mossad people on and off record talking about the need for a long term strategy for peace and a willingness to make concessions in order to secure Israel's security long term*. But when similar arguments are put forward in places like this, they get called anti-semitic.
The whole thing is quite baffling.
*A common thread is that, no matter what anyone thinks of the Palestinians, the situation is bad for Israel, and a long term threat to its security. From a defence POV its bad because having an army touring an urban environment places a terrible grind on military resources and destroys morale - something most US citizens would now understand after the experience in Iraq. And from an intelligence POV there is a massive concern that if another conflict is waged with Hamas the IDF might be too successful and Hamas could collapse... and in that power vortex Israel might have to give up all pretence and become a governing power in their own right, which would be a political and administrative nightmare.
Ariel Sharon's son Gilad Sharon argues that Gaza should be deprived of fuel and electricity entirely, seeking a "decisive solution". Why he'd even use an expression that will immediately draw comparison to the Final Solution is beyond me.
Jerusalem Post wrote:There is no middle path here – either the Gazans and their infrastructure are made to pay the price, or we reoccupy the entire Gaza Strip.
Anyone who thinks Hamas is going to beg for a cease-fire, that Operation Pillar of Defense will draw to a close and quiet will reign in the South because we hit targets in the Gaza Strip, needs to think again.
With the elimination of a murderous terrorist and the destruction of Hamas’s long-range missile stockpile, the operation was off to an auspicious start, but what now? This must not be allowed to end as did Operation Cast Lead: We bomb them, they fire missiles at us, and then a cease-fire, followed by “showers” – namely sporadic missile fire and isolated incidents along the fence. Life under such a rain of death is no life at all, and we cannot allow ourselves to become resigned to it.
A strong opening isn’t enough, you also have to know how to finish – and finish decisively. If it isn’t clear whether the ball crossed the goal-line or not, the goal isn’t decisive. The ball needs to hit the net, visible to all. What does a decisive victory sound like? A Tarzan-like cry that lets the entire jungle know in no uncertain terms just who won, and just who was defeated.
To accomplish this, you need to achieve what the other side can’t bear, can’t live with, and our initial bombing campaign isn’t it.
THE DESIRE to prevent harm to innocent civilians in Gaza will ultimately lead to harming the truly innocent: the residents of southern Israel. The residents of Gaza are not innocent, they elected Hamas. The Gazans aren’t hostages; they chose this freely, and must live with the consequences.
The Gaza Strip functions as a state – it has a government and conducts foreign relations, there are schools, medical facilities, there are armed forces and all the other trappings of statehood. We have no territorial conflict with “Gaza State,” and it is not under Israeli siege – it shares a border with Egypt. Despite this, it fires on our citizens without restraint.
Why do our citizens have to live with rocket fire from Gaza while we fight with our hands tied? Why are the citizens of Gaza immune? If the Syrians were to open fire on our towns, would we not attack Damascus? If the Cubans were to fire at Miami, wouldn’t Havana suffer the consequences? That’s what’s called “deterrence” – if you shoot at me, I’ll shoot at you. There is no justification for the State of Gaza being able to shoot at our towns with impunity. We need to flatten entire neighborhoods in Gaza. Flatten all of Gaza. The Americans didn’t stop with Hiroshima – the Japanese weren’t surrendering fast enough, so they hit Nagasaki, too.
There should be no electricity in Gaza, no gasoline or moving vehicles, nothing. Then they’d really call for a ceasefire.
Were this to happen, the images from Gaza might be unpleasant – but victory would be swift, and the lives of our soldiers and civilians spared.
IF THE government isn’t prepared to go all the way on this, it will mean reoccupying the entire Gaza Strip. Not a few neighborhoods in the suburbs, as with Cast Lead, but the entire Strip, like in Defensive Shield, so that rockets can no longer be fired.
There is no middle path here – either the Gazans and their infrastructure are made to pay the price, or we reoccupy the entire Gaza Strip. Otherwise there will be no decisive victory. And we’re running out of time – we must achieve victory quickly. The Netanyahu government is on a short international leash. Soon the pressure will start – and a million civilians can’t live under fire for long. This needs to end quickly – with a bang, not a whimper.
The views expressed in this op-ed do not reflect the editorial line of The Jerusalem Post
Ariel Sharon's son Gilad Sharon argues that Gaza should be deprived of fuel and electricity entirely, seeking a "decisive solution". Why he'd even use an expression that will immediately draw comparison to the Final Solution is beyond me.
Jerusalem Post wrote:There is no middle path here – either the Gazans and their infrastructure are made to pay the price, or we reoccupy the entire Gaza Strip.
Anyone who thinks Hamas is going to beg for a cease-fire, that Operation Pillar of Defense will draw to a close and quiet will reign in the South because we hit targets in the Gaza Strip, needs to think again.
With the elimination of a murderous terrorist and the destruction of Hamas’s long-range missile stockpile, the operation was off to an auspicious start, but what now? This must not be allowed to end as did Operation Cast Lead: We bomb them, they fire missiles at us, and then a cease-fire, followed by “showers” – namely sporadic missile fire and isolated incidents along the fence. Life under such a rain of death is no life at all, and we cannot allow ourselves to become resigned to it.
A strong opening isn’t enough, you also have to know how to finish – and finish decisively. If it isn’t clear whether the ball crossed the goal-line or not, the goal isn’t decisive. The ball needs to hit the net, visible to all. What does a decisive victory sound like? A Tarzan-like cry that lets the entire jungle know in no uncertain terms just who won, and just who was defeated.
To accomplish this, you need to achieve what the other side can’t bear, can’t live with, and our initial bombing campaign isn’t it.
THE DESIRE to prevent harm to innocent civilians in Gaza will ultimately lead to harming the truly innocent: the residents of southern Israel. The residents of Gaza are not innocent, they elected Hamas. The Gazans aren’t hostages; they chose this freely, and must live with the consequences.
The Gaza Strip functions as a state – it has a government and conducts foreign relations, there are schools, medical facilities, there are armed forces and all the other trappings of statehood. We have no territorial conflict with “Gaza State,” and it is not under Israeli siege – it shares a border with Egypt. Despite this, it fires on our citizens without restraint.
Why do our citizens have to live with rocket fire from Gaza while we fight with our hands tied? Why are the citizens of Gaza immune? If the Syrians were to open fire on our towns, would we not attack Damascus? If the Cubans were to fire at Miami, wouldn’t Havana suffer the consequences? That’s what’s called “deterrence” – if you shoot at me, I’ll shoot at you. There is no justification for the State of Gaza being able to shoot at our towns with impunity. We need to flatten entire neighborhoods in Gaza. Flatten all of Gaza. The Americans didn’t stop with Hiroshima – the Japanese weren’t surrendering fast enough, so they hit Nagasaki, too.
There should be no electricity in Gaza, no gasoline or moving vehicles, nothing. Then they’d really call for a ceasefire.
Were this to happen, the images from Gaza might be unpleasant – but victory would be swift, and the lives of our soldiers and civilians spared.
IF THE government isn’t prepared to go all the way on this, it will mean reoccupying the entire Gaza Strip. Not a few neighborhoods in the suburbs, as with Cast Lead, but the entire Strip, like in Defensive Shield, so that rockets can no longer be fired.
There is no middle path here – either the Gazans and their infrastructure are made to pay the price, or we reoccupy the entire Gaza Strip. Otherwise there will be no decisive victory. And we’re running out of time – we must achieve victory quickly. The Netanyahu government is on a short international leash. Soon the pressure will start – and a million civilians can’t live under fire for long. This needs to end quickly – with a bang, not a whimper.
The views expressed in this op-ed do not reflect the editorial line of The Jerusalem Post
There are three options:
*do nothing. Hamas and Hezzbullah will continue to kill Jews.
*continued counter attacks. This gives Hamas power. As Iran's puppet Israel becomes more tightly bound between Hezzbullah and Hamas. There is no political interest in Hamas and the other radicals to not fire rockets.
*go Biblical. I see this as a growing threat that one side or the other is going to attempt to wipe out the other side to end it.
Yet the easy peaceful solution is there, but the guys who stay in power from the killing have the power to stop it.
The problem is that peace won't be able to start because even if the Hamas leadership decide to stop, rocketting will still occur because it's the location, not the politics.
I'd much rather see israel deploy a suitcase nuke in the middle of palestine than for them to do nothing. Going peaceful will not achieve anything and both sides are not going to agree to anything that lasts more than a few weeks tops before the rockets go off again.
The only solution is a DMZ patrolled by UN troops, backed up by anti-rocket solutions.
both sides are at fault, and both sides don't want to admit they are at fault. Both sides issues ultimatums and destroy people.
I have a gut feeling that palestine will resort to civilan shielding, and that a war may actually be very close on the horizon.
Ariel Sharon's son Gilad Sharon argues that Gaza should be deprived of fuel and electricity entirely, seeking a "decisive solution". Why he'd even use an expression that will immediately draw comparison to the Final Solution is beyond me.
"Zionism is the final solution of the Jewish question."
-Theodor Herzl, 1899.
Israel rying to make peace with Hamas is impossible.....you can't have peace when the other side has it in their charter a declaration for your destruction as a nation and a people. The only way this is going to end is for Israel to move into Gaza in force and remove all traces of Hamas from there. Unfortunantly this will result in more civilian casualties due to how Hamas positions it's warfighters and gear amongst the population. Until this is done there can be no lasting peace, such as it would be, between the residents of Gaza (which Israel gave to them BTW) and Israel.
Zathras wrote: Israel rying to make peace with Hamas is impossible.....you can't have peace when the other side has it in their charter a declaration for your destruction as a nation and a people. The only way this is going to end is for Israel to move into Gaza in force and remove all traces of Hamas from there. Unfortunantly this will result in more civilian casualties due to how Hamas positions it's warfighters and gear amongst the population. Until this is done there can be no lasting peace, such as it would be, between the residents of Gaza (which Israel gave to them BTW) and Israel.
One could do that and then declare Gaza is a free country. Israel could restrict its borders, but any other border/airspace/water is sovereign territory. If rockets still come then declare war and make Gaza part of Israel, with the survivors being immigrants with whatever policy Israel has for immigration to citizenship.
Seems to me someone is poking a sleeping tiger...
Sweet Emprah... MODS, didnt' realize how big this image was... you can delete it if it causes problems.
TheHammer wrote: I'm just glad we can all agree that because of what happened in 1947 that the Palestinians deserve anything they get.
As a Zionist who has been to Israel several times let me just say this: the vast majority of Israelis I've known or met, to be fair many are mostly secular and this likely does not apply to the Ultra Ortohodox, hate the way right wing Americans view Israel and how they should act within the region.
Ariel Sharon's son Gilad Sharon argues that Gaza should be deprived of fuel and electricity entirely, seeking a "decisive solution". Why he'd even use an expression that will immediately draw comparison to the Final Solution is beyond me.
"Zionism is the final solution of the Jewish question."
-Theodor Herzl, 1899.
The term "Final Solution" has a whole different meaning today than it did pre-WWII, which I'm sure you're aware of, especially when someone draws comparisons to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, i.e. the almost complete obliteration of a city. Stop being willfully obtuse.
TheHammer wrote: I'm just glad we can all agree that because of what happened in 1947 that the Palestinians deserve anything they get.
As a Zionist who has been to Israel several times let me just say this: the vast majority of Israelis I've known or met, to be fair many are mostly secular and this likely does not apply to the Ultra Ortohodox, hate the way right wing Americans view Israel and how they should act within the region.
Zathras wrote: Israel rying to make peace with Hamas is impossible.....you can't have peace when the other side has it in their charter a declaration for your destruction as a nation and a people. The only way this is going to end is for Israel to move into Gaza in force and remove all traces of Hamas from there. Unfortunantly this will result in more civilian casualties due to how Hamas positions it's warfighters and gear amongst the population. Until this is done there can be no lasting peace, such as it would be, between the residents of Gaza (which Israel gave to them BTW) and Israel.
One could do that and then declare Gaza is a free country. Israel could restrict its borders, but any other border/airspace/water is sovereign territory. If rockets still come then declare war and make Gaza part of Israel, with the survivors being immigrants with whatever policy Israel has for immigration to citizenship.
I think we're already at the point of Gaza being a country in its own right. It has a functioning government in Hamas that was elected by the people of Gaza. The only solution to stop the rockets, IMO, is for Israel to take back Gaza. It will be ugly and condemned by the world community as usual but is the only way that I can see to stop the rockets being fired at Israel. A cease fire will not work because, eventually it will be broken, more than likely by Hamas, and will just start back up again to the pain and suffering of the residents of Gaza.
And I think the gak's about to hit the fan....there are reports of IDF aircraft dropping leaflets over a wide area warning residents to evacuate to the safer areas of Gaza City with directions on where to go to find shelter.
The Israelis are not screwing around this time. I'd suggest it's because they've been feeling very externally pressured, especially with the specter of nuclear Iran outside their borders, it's really time to clean house at "home" so to speak so that if the external bad guys decide it's time to play hard ball again, they don't have to deal with Hamas screwing around and murdering civilians in the background. Two front wars, especially when one front is a mass conventional and potentially nuclear battle front and the other is a full on Urban/COIN hell hole is not a good time.
Edit: here's a helpful infographic from the IDF PA office that I found floating around on Facebook on what the IDF is doing to minimize civilian casualties as much as possible.
Roof knockers sound like a rather trouser soiling experience.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: The Israelis are not screwing around this time. I'd suggest it's because they've been feeling very externally pressured, especially with the specter of nuclear Iran outside their borders, it's really time to clean house at "home" so to speak so that if the external bad guys decide it's time to play hard ball again, they don't have to deal with Hamas screwing around and murdering civilians in the background. Two front wars, especially when one front is a mass conventional and potentially nuclear battle front and the other is a full on Urban/COIN hell hole is not a good time.
Edit: here's a helpful infographic from the IDF PA office that I found floating around on Facebook on what the IDF is doing to minimize civilian casualties as much as possible.
Roof knockers sound like a rather trouser soiling experience.
That would be a fair comparison if Hamas had the same resources as Israel in this war. They don't so they engage in asymmetrical warfare.
Clearly not, but you seem to be condemning Israel for it's collateral damage, while praising Hamas for committing murder. At least Israel is trying to only kill bad guys. The PIRA, Al-Qaeda and Timothy freakin McVeigh didn't or don't have gak in the way of resources either. I suppose their murders are justified as well?
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Clearly not, but you seem to be condemning Israel for it's collateral damage, while praising Hamas for committing murder. At least Israel is trying to only kill bad guys. The PIRA, Al-Qaeda and Timothy freakin McVeigh didn't or don't have gak in the way of resources either. I suppose their murders are justified as well?
Please point out where I have praised Hamas.
Find it, and point it out.
I said cheerleading one side over the other is wrong.
Hamas are not in the right. Neither is Israel. The whole damn situation is a big barrel of wrong.
The other comparison is a fallacious argument. Hamas are not comparable to Al Qaeda (not an international terror group motivated purely by ideology), the PIRA (More directly comparable to the old IRA who were fighting to force recognition of the civil rights issues for catholics and what they saw as British "occupation" of the North. Broadly. In simple terms.) or Timothy McVeigh (one lunatic). They are a violent extremist group, but they have recognisable motivations. Similarly, the Israelis motivations are understandable.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Clearly not, but you seem to be condemning Israel for it's collateral damage, while praising Hamas for committing murder. At least Israel is trying to only kill bad guys. The PIRA, Al-Qaeda and Timothy freakin McVeigh didn't or don't have gak in the way of resources either. I suppose their murders are justified as well?
Please point out where I have praised Hamas.
Find it, and point it out.
I said cheerleading one side over the other is wrong.
Hamas are not in the right. Neither is Israel. The whole damn situation is a big barrel of wrong.
The other comparison is a fallacious argument.
See... I don't understand this argument...
So... the Hamas fires Rockets at Israel... what do you think Israel should do?
Israel continues to blockade, continues to expand into Palestinian territory illegally, bulldozing settlements.
What do you expect Hamas to do?
Edit: As to what Israel should do, well, I hesitate to suggest solutions because I know the limits of my own knowledge and competence. But at the moment, the way out seems to be either a real peace process, with concessions for both sides, or genocide. Personally, I think anyone who thinks genocide is an option is as close to evil as I'll admit exists, so I'd favour more efforts from both sides towards peace negotiations. Hamas have a responsibility to track down and disavow and incarcerate the extremists who break ranks and fire rockets. Israel has a responsibility to halt expansion, stop the blockade, and possibly give back some of the land it has stolen.
No I am not, jesus. What gives you that idea?
I am thinking Israel does what it does for defence. I am also thinking that it is not working, because guess what, bomb people as much as you like, take as much of their land as you like, but as long as there are any angry young men left in their culture, they're gonna fight back.
Also, it fething pisses me off that just because I don't wholeheartedly support Israel, I must be a Hamas supporting antisemite. for feth's sake, there's more shades of grey in the world than that. My first serious girlfriend was Israeli, I'm well acquainted with the Israeli point of view and the concerns they have.
Edit: yeah, I am Irish, and I DO NOT support the IRA or Sinn Féin, FYI. But I think maybe being from a small, powerless country gives one some insight into the mindset that can lead to these sorts of actions.
I am Irish, and I DO NOT support the IRA or Sinn Féin, FYI. But I think maybe being from a small, powerless country gives one some insight into the mindset that can lead to these sorts of actions.
Its mostly a joke, but all after FYI makes plenty of sense.
For future reference "asymmetric warfare" cannot even generously be applied to randomly lobbing rockets at civilians.
Da Boss wrote: Also, it fething pisses me off that just because I don't wholeheartedly support Israel, I must be a Hamas supporting antisemite. for feth's sake, there's more shades of grey in the world than that. My first serious girlfriend was Israeli, I'm well acquainted with the Israeli point of view and the concerns they have.
Edit: yeah, I am Irish, and I DO NOT support the IRA or Sinn Féin, FYI. But I think maybe being from a small, powerless country gives one some insight into the mindset that can lead to these sorts of actions.
Chill man (I really miss my avatar ). I understand.
But, at some point, the past grievances/reasons doesn't matter. What matters is the present and right now it's ugly.
Da Boss wrote: Israel continues to blockade, continues to expand into Palestinian territory illegally, bulldozing settlements.
What do you expect Hamas to do?
I could care less about Hamas.
In honesty if I was a Palestinian I'd just let Israel take over. Palestinians inside Israel lead much better lives than the ones living outside the walls. The people of Palestine have to wake up and realize that they are just Pawns in a game. Palestinians living in Israel get treated better than Palestinians living in most of the "Palestinian friendly" countries.
In honesty if I was a Palestinian I'd just let Israel take over. Palestinians inside Israel lead much better lives than the ones living outside the walls.
Da Boss wrote: Unfortunately, you can say "past grievances don't matter" til you're blue in the face, but people never listen.
You are so right about that... which is why one side needs to put it aside and "deal with it". Meaning... forget the past, either diplomatically resolve it, or go to war and finish it.
I'm sorry for getting so angry. I dunno why, but this argument makes my blood boil faster than nearly any other.
No problem dude... your point does stand in that there are no angels in this situation. I think that if diplomacy don't work... all that's left is Darwinism.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Clearly not, but you seem to be condemning Israel for it's collateral damage, while praising Hamas for committing murder. At least Israel is trying to only kill bad guys. The PIRA, Al-Qaeda and Timothy freakin McVeigh didn't or don't have gak in the way of resources either. I suppose their murders are justified as well?
A different solution would be for Israel to respond by bombing every the general area of a suspected site with 1000 tons worth of cluster bombs.
The sad thing is I and Palestinian descendant were able to come up with a workable solution in about 15 minutes over lunch. For an encore we're going to look at the Somalia situation tomorrow. *1967 borders. Yea its narrow. Israel has nukes now. It can deal. *Gaza and WB are independent countries. Israel can put up 100foot wide barriers on its side, but G and WB controlled their own borders, just like any other country. *land bridge in similar fashion to the Berlin bridge - aka train wide section. Israel could put up a 100 fout wide barrier all along if it wanted. *Gaza gets water access-standard 12 mile limit. *No overflights or patrols by either side into either's territory.
Attacks after that would be considered acts of war by a foreing nation.
Andrew1975 wrote: Not sure what to make of that? Are you making fun of the statement or questioning its validity?
Erm... what?
I was replying to Austin.
Oh... sorry...
I don't speak for him, but I think he was agreeing with ya.
I get it. There are some people that are still under the impression that Israels treat other people poorly inside their borders. They actually treat them pretty well, better than I would have expected honestly, and better than they get treated by their "Arab brothers". It seams such a waste. Think of what those territories would be like if the money was spent on improving the land and economy instead of blowing it all up. I mean if I were a Palestinian I would be praying for Israel to move in.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Clearly not, but you seem to be condemning Israel for it's collateral damage, while praising Hamas for committing murder. At least Israel is trying to only kill bad guys. The PIRA, Al-Qaeda and Timothy freakin McVeigh didn't or don't have gak in the way of resources either. I suppose their murders are justified as well?
A different solution would be for Israel to respond by bombing every the general area of a suspected site with 1000 tons worth of cluster bombs.
Well if they followed standard counter battery procedure they'd be leveling about a city block around each launch site with artillery.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Clearly not, but you seem to be condemning Israel for it's collateral damage, while praising Hamas for committing murder. At least Israel is trying to only kill bad guys. The PIRA, Al-Qaeda and Timothy freakin McVeigh didn't or don't have gak in the way of resources either. I suppose their murders are justified as well?
A different solution would be for Israel to respond by bombing every the general area of a suspected site with 1000 tons worth of cluster bombs.
Well if they followed standard counter battery procedure they'd be leveling about a city block around each launch site with artillery.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Clearly not, but you seem to be condemning Israel for it's collateral damage, while praising Hamas for committing murder. At least Israel is trying to only kill bad guys. The PIRA, Al-Qaeda and Timothy freakin McVeigh didn't or don't have gak in the way of resources either. I suppose their murders are justified as well?
A different solution would be for Israel to respond by bombing every the general area of a suspected site with 1000 tons worth of cluster bombs.
Well if they followed standard counter battery procedure they'd be leveling about a city block around each launch site with artillery.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Clearly not, but you seem to be condemning Israel for it's collateral damage, while praising Hamas for committing murder. At least Israel is trying to only kill bad guys. The PIRA, Al-Qaeda and Timothy freakin McVeigh didn't or don't have gak in the way of resources either. I suppose their murders are justified as well?
A different solution would be for Israel to respond by bombing every the general area of a suspected site with 1000 tons worth of cluster bombs.
Well if they followed standard counter battery procedure they'd be leveling about a city block around each launch site with artillery.
Depends on the type of counter battery. I do know they have M109 Paladins. 155mm has a kill radius of 150m. A battery is eight tubes so it'll be more then a block. So we're looking at HE shell with the fuze set to point or delay.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Clearly not, but you seem to be condemning Israel for it's collateral damage, while praising Hamas for committing murder. At least Israel is trying to only kill bad guys. The PIRA, Al-Qaeda and Timothy freakin McVeigh didn't or don't have gak in the way of resources either. I suppose their murders are justified as well?
A different solution would be for Israel to respond by bombing every the general area of a suspected site with 1000 tons worth of cluster bombs.
The sad thing is I and Palestinian descendant were able to come up with a workable solution in about 15 minutes over lunch. For an encore we're going to look at the Somalia situation tomorrow.
*1967 borders. Yea its narrow. Israel has nukes now. It can deal.
*Gaza and WB are independent countries. Israel can put up 100foot wide barriers on its side, but G and WB controlled their own borders, just like any other country.
*land bridge in similar fashion to the Berlin bridge - aka train wide section. Israel could put up a 100 fout wide barrier all along if it wanted.
*Gaza gets water access-standard 12 mile limit.
*No overflights or patrols by either side into either's territory.
Attacks after that would be considered acts of war by a foreing nation.
Frazzled:bringing some semblance of peace in our time
Frazzled wrote: There are three options:
*do nothing. Hamas and Hezzbullah will continue to kill Jews.
*continued counter attacks. This gives Hamas power. As Iran's puppet Israel becomes more tightly bound between Hezzbullah and Hamas. There is no political interest in Hamas and the other radicals to not fire rockets.
*go Biblical. I see this as a growing threat that one side or the other is going to attempt to wipe out the other side to end it.
Yet the easy peaceful solution is there, but the guys who stay in power from the killing have the power to stop it.
That's all just nonsense, and doesn't describe the situation at all.
The plain and simple fact is that Israel isn't 'doing nothing'. It continues to settle land past the borders it agreed to. If sporadic missile fire was really such an unacceptable risk then the first thing it'd stop doing is taking land. And after that it'd ease up on quarantine restrictions, allowing livestock and building materials in to give the people some chance of building an economy that isn't dependant on offering cheap labour to Israel.
It doesn't do that, of course, because there are powerful vested interests in Israeli society that want to continue to expand Israel's borders, and who make a lot of money out of controlling the flow of aid into Gaza and the West Bank, and who make a lot of money out of the cheap labour provided.
And meanwhile people jump on the internet to talk about how Hamas are motivated out of some comic book type evil to just want Israel dead. It's absurd.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Zathras wrote: Israel rying to make peace with Hamas is impossible.....you can't have peace when the other side has it in their charter a declaration for your destruction as a nation and a people.
For the last five years Hamas has policed the region, not firing rockets and preventing other armed groups from firing rockets as best it could. They did this in exchange for funds to continue to maintain hospitals and public utilities. This idea of Hamas as an organisation utterly dedicated to the destruction of Israel just makes no fething sense when you look at their actions.
I fething wish people would just fething read about what's actually going on before jumping on the internet and announcing their oh so savvy political opinions to the world.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I'd buy that if their primary target was the Israeli military and government as opposed to purely civilian targets.
All of which would be completely relevant if the situation consisted of;
1) Everything is peaceful and good.
2) Holy gak, rockets, how did that happen.
But those rockets didn't just happen out of nowhere, for no other reason than Hamas and the other armed groups are pure evil.
Israel is happy to maintain crippling quarantines on the occupied territories and continue to expand their border with new settlements. Then they cry bloody murder when people respond to the hardship inflicted on them.
I don't believe for one second that firing rockets is acceptable, but the plain and simple truth is that rockets and other forms of desperate retaliation (bombs and suicide bombers) will continue until Israel lets the occupied territories become nations in their own right, with the capabilty to build an economy capable of supporting itself.
I mean, faced with the conditions forced on the people of Palestine, who wouldn't retaliate however they could?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote: See... I don't understand this argument...
So... the Hamas fires Rockets at Israel... what do you think Israel should do?
Well, as I've pointed out several times in this thread... Hamas actually policed the region, fired no rockets of its own, and prevented other armed groups from firing rockets (mostly, a few were still launched). This relationship worked up until the point where Israel decided Hamas wasn't stopping enough rockets, and killed the Hamas leader responsible for this arrangement. gak has since hit the fan. The elections in Israel and Gaza, and the vote before the UN to recognise Gaza as a non-member state were likely influencing factors.
And yeah, when rockets are fired, I'd expect and understand Israel doing exactly what they're doing. But when you live in an (unofficially) occupied zone, under incredibly strict permanent quarantine, and with Israel advancing over the borders they agreed to to settle more of your land, and where living conditions are only barely survivable because people work as incredibly cheap labour in Israel and through foreign aid... what do you think the Palestinians are going to do but launch rockets?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote: You're thinking the Israel blockade's and expand into territories in a vacuum.
Yes, that is in a vacuum. They can stop those actions at any time they want.
Note the quarantine isn't only on goods that can be used in weapons. They're on livestock, building supplies, and basic items that are quarantined for the express purpose of preventing the Palestinians from building a functioning economy.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Da Boss wrote: Also, it fething pisses me off that just because I don't wholeheartedly support Israel, I must be a Hamas supporting antisemite. for feth's sake, there's more shades of grey in the world than that. My first serious girlfriend was Israeli, I'm well acquainted with the Israeli point of view and the concerns they have.
Edit: yeah, I am Irish, and I DO NOT support the IRA or Sinn Féin, FYI. But I think maybe being from a small, powerless country gives one some insight into the mindset that can lead to these sorts of actions.
I love that someone can call Palestinians treacherous snakes, and no-one bats an eye lid. But you can point out that Hamas and the Palestinians are acting in response to genuine issues and you must be, as you say, a Hamas supporting anti-semite.
It reminds of one the other times this was debated, and Fraz freaked the feth out because he thought someone was suggesting that the only solution was to force the Israelis to leave. I pointed out that the person had actually said the only solution was the forced removal of the Palestinians... at which point there was silence. Somehow that wasn't even worthy of a mention.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote: Chill man (I really miss my avatar ). I understand.
But, at some point, the past grievances/reasons doesn't matter. What matters is the present and right now it's ugly.
The settling of land and the extreme quarantine are present grievances. How do you not get that?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Andrew1975 wrote: In honesty if I was a Palestinian I'd just let Israel take over. Palestinians inside Israel lead much better lives than the ones living outside the walls. The people of Palestine have to wake up and realize that they are just Pawns in a game. Palestinians living in Israel get treated better than Palestinians living in most of the "Palestinian friendly" countries.
Israel doesn't want to occupy the region while there's Palestinians living in it. They would end up a minority in their own country, a new movement to give Palestinian people the vote would be inevitable, and the whole thing would become near identical to the situation in Israel's old friend and ally South Africa.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote: The sad thing is I and Palestinian descendant were able to come up with a workable solution in about 15 minutes over lunch. For an encore we're going to look at the Somalia situation tomorrow.
*1967 borders. Yea its narrow. Israel has nukes now. It can deal.
*Gaza and WB are independent countries. Israel can put up 100foot wide barriers on its side, but G and WB controlled their own borders, just like any other country.
*land bridge in similar fashion to the Berlin bridge - aka train wide section. Israel could put up a 100 fout wide barrier all along if it wanted.
*Gaza gets water access-standard 12 mile limit.
*No overflights or patrols by either side into either's territory.
Attacks after that would be considered acts of war by a foreing nation.
What's most telling about that is that it is way less than Palestine is asking for now. Wikileaks showed diplomatic cables in which Hamas was willing to accept the present day borders, with existing settlements. Israel rejected it out of hand.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
youbedead wrote: It's not actually israel paying for it, it's a US based interest group
Pro-Israel groups in the US are so much worse than the most extreme of groups in Israel itself.
whembly wrote: You're thinking the Israel blockade's and expand into territories in a vacuum.
Yes, that is in a vacuum. They can stop those actions at any time they want.
Note the quarantine isn't only on goods that can be used in weapons. They're on livestock, building supplies, and basic items that are quarantined for the express purpose of preventing the Palestinians from building a functioning economy.
And if they stop those actions, would the rockets/terrorist activites stop?
whembly wrote: Explain to me why Israel is settling the lands and maintaining the extreme quarantine?
The reasons are complex, and most certainly not representative of Israel as a whole. One major reason is that, simply put, there is a lot of money in it for the right people. Cheap labour for certain industries in Israel. Lots of cash to be made with the provision of humanitarian supplies, from approved providers. It's interesting to note the close connections that exist between many of these businesses and politically powerful generals in the IDF.
The settlements, on the other hand, are basically the result of religious and cultural convictions.
And if they stop those actions, would the rockets/terrorist activites stop?
And there's the complicating factor. Because there was a genuine effort at some measure of reconciliation, when Israel left the security zone in Lebanon in 2000. Which Hezbollah then launched rockets from, leading to an eventual ground invasion from Israel... which more or less killed the political debate for reconciliation elsewhere within Israel. An understandable reaction, but unfortunately one taken advantage of by the more aggressive parties within Israel.
But, despite the poor response that time, a proper two state solution, with a viable Palestine as an independant state remains the only plausible solution. It won't stop all the violence straight away, but it is the only solution long term that can stop the violence. And it is a solution that, at this point, only Israel can move towards.
Okay seb... I agree with everything you said there... and it's a very astute academic observation.
I believe... and this is whembly shoot gak out of his ass... that a very basic human reaction/emotion is driving here...
Injustice via short-term memory.
I don't think the Palestinian/Israelis are reacting to the injustices with that same perspective you've just expoused. There are immediate injustices going on on both sides:
a) Gaza is under heave embargos on basic stuff... land is view being stolen from Israel
b) Terrorist in Gaza are waging Terrorist acts and lobbing rockets at Israel
I'm sure there are numerous accounts on both sides.
So, either both sides tries to resolve this diplomatically and humanely...
-or-
All out war needs to happen where there is only the victors and conquered/annihilated people.
Otherwise... what we're seeing now will continue to happen till kingdom come.
@seb Yeah especially since many of the most ardent Pro-Israel groups are just fundamentalists that want Israel to prevail and exist just so that it can be wiped out later, it's beyond stupid. It also kind of sucks that if you're a Jew the it's expected that throw your full hearted support behind Israel
It's a nice theory Sebster, but to be honest I don't ever see the attacks on Israel stopping. There are too many people that want them gone. There is always going to be someone launching rockets at them or attacking them in some way, there are too many people interested in keeping this fight going for it to stop that easily. There are many reasons this conflict has gone on for so long and it has little to do with settlements. Its just and excuse and when that excuse is gone they will just find another one.
That being said, Yes Israel should stop the settlements, just to prove the point.
And yeah, when rockets are fired, I'd expect and understand Israel doing exactly what they're doing. But when you live in an (unofficially) occupied zone, under incredibly strict permanent quarantine, and with Israel advancing over the borders they agreed to to settle more of your land, and where living conditions are only barely survivable because people work as incredibly cheap labour in Israel and through foreign aid... what do you think the Palestinians are going to do but launch rockets?
And the cycle starts again.
Why are we quarantined?
Because you shoot rockets at us!
That makes me angry I'm gonna shoot rockets at you!
I love that someone can call Palestinians treacherous snakes, and no-one bats an eye lid. But you can point out that Hamas and the Palestinians are acting in response to genuine issues and you must be, as you say, a Hamas supporting anti-semite.
But that is also the issue. Both sides seam to be acting in response to genuine issues. Nobody bats an eye about that because we have all seen in the past where leaders of these groups call Israelis much worse things than treacherous snakes. We have all seen leaders of these islamic/middle east/ arab (take your pick as to which name you prefer) countries call for the outright destruction of Israel. Which is where this comes into play.
And meanwhile people jump on the internet to talk about how Hamas are motivated out of some comic book type evil to just want Israel dead. It's absurd.
Because to most people it seams very likely. Look around at what references exist out there as far as anti Israel leaders go. You don't get much more comic book than Ahmadinejad. Yes he's not Hamas but in many ways he represents the anti Israel hatemongers.
Your obviously well informed on the situation, but I think you downplay how much people really do hate Israel, for no other reason than that it exists. I think Israel could do everything right and it wouldn't change much. That's how hate works, its not really all that rational after awhile. I think that is what it boils down to. If they don't hate your religion it's your skin tone, if not skin tone, hair color, if not hair color, politics, none of it matters because they hate you because you are not them... and they do hate.
So for the sake of argument, lets say Israel pulls back the settlements, and ends the blockade. What then? You know it won't stop the violence completely or instantly. So now that Israel has made the concessions how long is a reasonable amount of time to sit back, not retaliate and expect things to change? 6 months a year, 2 years? Does Israel wait until the territories become actual nations? Where is the upside in that? It just means Israel will have a harder time dealing with them when the gak eventually hits the fan...and it will.
I think your asking for a lot of good faith and risk on Israels part, which is something that few of their neighbors seam to be willing to extend to them.
Jihadin wrote: Depends on the type of counter battery. I do know they have M109 Paladins. 155mm has a kill radius of 150m. A battery is eight tubes so it'll be more then a block. So we're looking at HE shell with the fuze set to point or delay.
No no that won't do at all. I want bigger booms. Anybody have a zeppelin we can use?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote: Whoa... just read that Hilary Clinton is heading into the region... (to do what... I have no idea).
We should send Bill too.
I'm sure everyone feels safer now. Hillary's on the way!
Lets just declare the whole area of the west bank a shooting gallery. Everyone wins.
(*end sarcasm*
With Iran to the north, and allegedly smuggling rockets. Syria has shelled part of Israel, no wonder the prime minister feels backed into a corner. There's one of the most unstable countries in the world at his doorstep, one of the most unpredictable nuclear powers next door, and israels getting bombed the ***** out every few hours or so.
It's not just every couple of days a rocket gets fired, you are talking every few minutes. And most aren't reported now because its either intercepted, or falls on *dead ground*.
Hamas needs to either tighten the **** up on it's security, or israel to invade and finish the job it started 3 years ago.
An explosion hit a bus in central Tel Aviv on Wednesday, wounding at least 21 people. One of the casualties was in serious condition, one sustained light-to-moderate injuries, and the rest were lightly wounded.
Police opened an immediate manhunt for two suspected terrorists.
The explosion occurred at the corner of Shaul Hamelech and Henrietta Szold Streets just after noon. A suspect was arrested about half an hour after the explosion, but was quickly released from custody.
Passersby were ordered to keep their distance from the scene. Security alert was raised to level 4 in the area surrounding the Kirya, Israel's national defense compound. The municipality ordered schools to keep pupils indoors for nearly two hours after the attack.
To be fair Hamas did not claim responsibility tor the attack, but they will be catching the flak for it clearly.
Doctadeth wrote: israel to invade and finish the job it started 3 years ago.
Not quite a simple task, for one it may turn into another 2006 Lebanon...they don't know how beefed up Hamas has gotten, they may have ATGMs and MANPADs from Libya/Syria/Iran etc. and there's no certainty of destroying all the weapon caches without an occupation that would be rejected by everyone.
It's also political suicide considering the Israeli elections are coming up, not to mention the adverse effects it would have on international relations.
Whembs, Hilary is over in Cairo trying to help the Egyptians broker a cease-fire/prevent a ground invasion
Doctadeth wrote: israel to invade and finish the job it started 3 years ago.
Not quite a simple task, for one it may turn into another 2006 Lebanon...they don't know how beefed up Hamas has gotten, they may have ATGMs and MANPADs from Libya/Syria/Iran etc. and there's no certainty of destroying all the weapon caches without an occupation that would be rejected by everyone.
It's also political suicide considering the Israeli elections are coming up, not to mention the adverse effects it would have on international relations.
Whembs, Hilary is over in Cairo trying to help the Egyptians broker a cease-fire/prevent a ground invasion
Ah... makes sense since I think the US can't directly negotiate with the Hamas...
Doctadeth wrote: israel to invade and finish the job it started 3 years ago.
Not quite a simple task, for one it may turn into another 2006 Lebanon...they don't know how beefed up Hamas has gotten, they may have ATGMs and MANPADs from Libya/Syria/Iran etc. and there's no certainty of destroying all the weapon caches without an occupation that would be rejected by everyone.
It's also political suicide considering the Israeli elections are coming up, not to mention the adverse effects it would have on international relations.
Whembs, Hilary is over in Cairo trying to help the Egyptians broker a cease-fire/prevent a ground invasion
Carpet bombing?
Hamas is down with blowing up the bus:
"Hamas blesses the attack in Tel Aviv and sees it as a natural response to the Israeli massacres...in Gaza," he told Reuters. "Palestinian factions will resort to all means in order to protect our Palestinian civilians in the absence of a world effort to stop the Israeli aggression."
And if they stop those actions, would the rockets/terrorist activites stop?
Sebs can dance around it and call it complicated as much as he wants. As long as Hamas is in power the answer is an emphatic "No"
Hamas Charter wrote:[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement.(abbr HAMAS)
Lets also not forget that Hamas has publically opposed Palestinan statehood. You know because it would force them to recognize Israel's existence.
In other words it's not complicated at all.
Dude, you really need to stop assuming that just because you got shocked when you pressed the button the last 39 times, you'll get shocked when you press the button this time. That's absurd. There's no evidence of that, despite the overwhelming evidence.
Mr Netanyahu accepted Mr Obama's "suggestion to give a chance to Egypt's proposal for a ceasefire and so give an opportunity to stabilise the situation and calm it before there will be need to apply greater force".
Think Egypt can craft a solution that both sides would agree with...
If military force could solve this issue, it would have been solved a long time ago. However, since we are talking about it, military force must not be the answer.
To argue that this time military force will solve the problem seems.... impractical.
Mr Netanyahu accepted Mr Obama's "suggestion to give a chance to Egypt's proposal for a ceasefire and so give an opportunity to stabilise the situation and calm it before there will be need to apply greater force".
Think Egypt can craft a solution that both sides would agree with...
This won't last long...
Especially since Egypt has already publicly stated that Israel is responsible for the situation.
An explosion hit a bus in central Tel Aviv on Wednesday, wounding at least 21 people. One of the casualties was in serious condition, one sustained light-to-moderate injuries, and the rest were lightly wounded.
Police opened an immediate manhunt for two suspected terrorists.
The explosion occurred at the corner of Shaul Hamelech and Henrietta Szold Streets just after noon. A suspect was arrested about half an hour after the explosion, but was quickly released from custody.
Passersby were ordered to keep their distance from the scene. Security alert was raised to level 4 in the area surrounding the Kirya, Israel's national defense compound. The municipality ordered schools to keep pupils indoors for nearly two hours after the attack.
To be fair Hamas did not claim responsibility tor the attack, but they will be catching the flak for it clearly.
They may not be claiming responsibility, but they certainly gave it their "blessing"
Easy E wrote: If military force could solve this issue, it would have been solved a long time ago. However, since we are talking about it, military force must not be the answer.
To argue that this time military force will solve the problem seems.... impractical.
Thaty so wrong its not funny.
Its military force that is giving Hamas power
Inversely Israel could literally wipe out every man, woman, and child opposing it.
Easy E wrote: If military force could solve this issue, it would have been solved a long time ago. However, since we are talking about it, military force must not be the answer.
To argue that this time military force will solve the problem seems.... impractical.
Thaty so wrong its not funny.
Its military force that is giving Hamas power
Inversely Israel could literally wipe out every man, woman, and child opposing it.
Militarily yes the could. Politically not so much, Israel would most likely be signing their own death sentence if they handled it that way.
Easy E wrote: If military force could solve this issue, it would have been solved a long time ago. However, since we are talking about it, military force must not be the answer.
To argue that this time military force will solve the problem seems.... impractical.
Thaty so wrong its not funny. Its military force that is giving Hamas power Inversely Israel could literally wipe out every man, woman, and child opposing it.
Militarily yes the could. Politically not so much, Israel would most likely be signing their own death sentence if they handled it that way.
(looks at Israel's stockpile of tanks, planes, and nukes) er how exactly?
In fact from a logical perspective it makes a lot of sense to do so.
Cease fire will last for a week, then the firing starts again. The problem is that to effectively counter Hamas, that israel lose international legitimacy and morality by hitting civilians that hamas are using as human shields.
We know that the 3 jhihad responses of the Ghaza strip (1987,2003 and now) are based around both the religious and political views of the region.
We know that Hamas are being supplied from the outside with rockets by a neighboring country (Iran).
If Hamas stops firing rockets into israel, they lose support from the right-wing elements in palestine (which are their support atm). That means they will continue to do so. Israel either suffers relentless rocket attacks and constant civilian casualties, OR counterattacks. Or number 3. A neutral force makes a DMZ, and also has counter-battery fire for the rockets. This should either be NATO or the USA. Thinking the USA this time.
The fourth time this happens, will be with more advanced weapons. I don't like thinking about that, but here it is. Dirty bombs, chemical and biological agents, and nukes.
For why this happens, Iran will supply the materials. Because Palestine and Israel are a constant state of war.
Andrew1975 wrote: It's a nice theory Sebster, but to be honest I don't ever see the attacks on Israel stopping.
People claim everything is hopeless and will go on forever, and then it stops. Happens all the time. Remember all those sci-fi books that were written in the 80s that had the US and USSR as two monolithic empires hundreds of years into future? Within a few years they were made to look ridiculous. Remember how the troubles with Ireland were such an impossible, unsolvable mess, until they weren't.
There are many reasons this conflict has gone on for so long and it has little to do with settlements. Its just and excuse and when that excuse is gone they will just find another one.
In the history of disputes this one isn't even that old.
And the argument that another nation taking your land and settling it isn't a cause for greivance is just absurd. And the same could be said for any argument that keeping an obscenely tight quarantine is just an excuse.
I've asked it before and I'll ask it again, if you were kept in poverty through crushing quarantine, and another country kept taking your land, what would you do?
That being said, Yes Israel should stop the settlements, just to prove the point.
Not 'just to prove the point'. Because it isn't their fething land.
But that is also the issue. Both sides seam to be acting in response to genuine issues. Nobody bats an eye about that because we have all seen in the past where leaders of these groups call Israelis much worse things than treacherous snakes. We have all seen leaders of these islamic/middle east/ arab (take your pick as to which name you prefer) countries call for the outright destruction of Israel. Which is where this comes into play.
Oh, for sure. There is incredible anti-semitism within Palestine (and I'd argue even worse in the greater Middle East, who cry crocodile tears for Palestine really as a political stick to whack Israel with).
But my comment was about people in this thread, and in the West in general. The hyper-sensitivity to any criticism of Israel, while at the same time all kinds of racist bs is thrown out about Palestinians is incredible.
Because to most people it seams very likely. Look around at what references exist out there as far as anti Israel leaders go. You don't get much more comic book than Ahmadinejad. Yes he's not Hamas but in many ways he represents the anti Israel hatemongers.
And that's because most people don't know anything about the situation, so they go for the simple message shown in the 2 minute news coverage. And then they add in the other little snippets they know, like "Ahmadinejad is a loon" and "Israel built a nation out of nothing" and assume they know enough to go telling other people their opinion on the issue.
It's the arrogance of that that pisses me the most, truth be told.
Your obviously well informed on the situation, but I think you downplay how much people really do hate Israel, for no other reason than that it exists.
Not at all. I'm well aware of the hatred of Israel. You read what I've read and you'll come across stuff that'd make a Nazi think 'oh come on now, the Jews aren't that bad'. There is a massive problem with anti-semitism in the region.
But that doesn't mean the situation in Gaza is entirely out of the hands of the Israelis.
There's immense anti-semitism in Saudi Arabia, but through politics and economics they're now a paid and bought for US client state. Same for Egypt, even after the coup. Egypt is actually the party enforcing the largest border on the quarantine.
I think Israel could do everything right and it wouldn't change much. That's how hate works, its not really all that rational after awhile. I think that is what it boils down to. If they don't hate your religion it's your skin tone, if not skin tone, hair color, if not hair color, politics, none of it matters because they hate you because you are not them... and they do hate.
And I just think that simply isn't true. Politics and real, immediate material impacts to people's lives matter more than hate.
Whoever taught you geography needs to be dragged in to the street and shot.
Hamas needs to either tighten the **** up on it's security, or israel to invade and finish the job it started 3 years ago.
Once again... Hamas had prevent almost every missile being fired. Then Israel thought that wasn't enough, and blew up the Hamas leader responsible for policing the region. All the missiles being fired now are in retaliation for that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AustonT wrote: Sebs can dance around it and call it complicated as much as he wants. As long as Hamas is in power the answer is an emphatic "No"
I'm not dancing around anything. I'm asking for the chattering nitwits to actually go and learn about the situation instead of just spamming whatever half informed nonsense they've got in their heads.
Hamas Charter wrote:Lets also not forget that Hamas has publically opposed Palestinan statehood. You know because it would force them to recognize Israel's existence.
In other words it's not complicated at all.
And in the 1990s the UK Labour party charter still contained a clause calling for the nationalisation of the means of production.
And with Hamas you have them operating an agreement with Israel to police Gaza in exchange for humanitarian aid from early 2009 until just a few weeks ago. A deal that Israel, not Hamas, decided to end.
And yet, well, you've totally got some words written in a charter. That's some awesome political theatre there, that totally dismisses the actual political reality of what's been going on. Well done. You got me.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seaward wrote: Dude, you really need to stop assuming that just because you got shocked when you pressed the button the last 39 times, you'll get shocked when you press the button this time. That's absurd. There's no evidence of that, despite the overwhelming evidence.
It's complicated, man.
Yeah, you're right. What we need is more people on the internet pretending they know what they're talking about.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote: Thaty so wrong its not funny.
Its military force that is giving Hamas power
Inversely Israel could literally wipe out every man, woman, and child opposing it.
But they won't, because they're not immoral monsters. And so it's stupid to keep on talking about it as if it were an option.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Doctadeth wrote: We know that Hamas are being supplied from the outside with rockets by a neighboring country (Iran).
It appears more severe measures are needed. It now appears your geography teacher needs to be shot, then burned, then shot again.
fething seriously, Iran isn't to the North of Gaza, and there's no less than two countries in the way.
And if you don't know stuff about the region that fething google maps can teach you, how on Earth do you think you've got the knowledge needed to make any kind of comment on the situation?
Andrew1975 wrote: It's a nice theory Sebster, but to be honest I don't ever see the attacks on Israel stopping.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Doctadeth wrote: We know that Hamas are being supplied from the outside with rockets by a neighboring country (Iran).
It appears more severe measures are needed. It now appears your geography teacher needs to be shot, then burned, then shot again.
fething seriously, Iran isn't to the North of Gaza, and there's no less than two countries in the way.
And if you don't know stuff about the region that fething google maps can teach you, how on Earth do you think you've got the knowledge needed to make any kind of comment on the situation?
Okay then, how about first of all, one of the most freaking HARDEST to patrol places on earth (iraq) and then through Jordan....which again isn't the most safest place in the world. If the USA couldn't destroy mobile scud launchers in Iraq, then a convoy carrying rockets would be impossible to destroy....and it doesn't need to look military either.
And its also not about Irans geography, but the flashpoint of where the conflict is. You've got customers, you are going to have weapons. And then what about Syria, thats still under massive unrest, and doesn't even have a BORDER post anymore. Its actually very easy to get around security patrols and checkpoints if you try....
Doctadeth wrote: And its also not about Irans geography, but the flashpoint of where the conflict is. You've got customers, you are going to have weapons. And then what about Syria, thats still under massive unrest, and doesn't even have a BORDER post anymore. Its actually very easy to get around security patrols and checkpoints if you try....
Yeah, it isn't just about geography. But when your commentary on the subject shows you don't even know the most basic elements of the geography of the region, how much weight are we supposed to put in your claims that it is easy to get through the region's borders?
I mean, how much stock would you put in a claim that Australia's borders are under threat because people keep walking here from New Zealand?
Doctadeth wrote: And its also not about Irans geography, but the flashpoint of where the conflict is. You've got customers, you are going to have weapons. And then what about Syria, thats still under massive unrest, and doesn't even have a BORDER post anymore. Its actually very easy to get around security patrols and checkpoints if you try....
Yeah, it isn't just about geography. But when your commentary on the subject shows you don't even know the most basic elements of the geography of the region, how much weight are we supposed to put in your claims that it is easy to get through the region's borders?
I mean, how much stock would you put in a claim that Australia's borders are under threat because people keep walking here from New Zealand?
Actually, I'd say it very much is possible. You can walk from New zealand......Aboard a CRUISE SHIP. But yeah, from a basic scan of google maps, there is very much of a problem trying to police a border that wide 24/7 A glance at my volumes of War Machine (nice little magazine about conflict) and it's issues on the middle east in 1987.....So excuse me for commenting on a thread that piques my interest. See top gear iraq for border posts in the area. and the fact that syria is unstable, lebanon is also not known for it's friendliness towards Israel.
Oh, maybe then Hamas haven't done anything bad.....like been a terrorist organisation in the past. Maybe those people who fire the 600 dollar each rockets are doing so singularly, rather than organised.
No matter which way israel turn, they have very few choices they can make that doesn't make them A) a target, or B) an agressor. Cease fires just won't work because hamas still depends very much on civilian deaths. (and matyrdom). So unless Israel wants to become a non-entity by either inaction or sustained bombardment by rockets....its either going to be counterattack, and raise hell, which I predict because of the spokeperson broadcasts and the presidential broadcasts.
A cease fire will last a month, then shooting will restart and the situation will reoccur. So, how to avoid this? one side needs to be placated or forced out of the area.
Doctadeth wrote: So excuse me for commenting on a thread that piques my interest.
But if it piques your interest but you don't really know much about the issue, wouldn't you come in and ask questions, and look to learn more about the issue. Instead you've just come in telling everyone else what it's all about, when you thought Iran neighboured Gaza to the North.
See top gear iraq for border posts in the area.
Oh come on.
Maybe those people who fire the 600 dollar each rockets are doing so singularly, rather than organised.
No matter which way israel turn, they have very few choices they can make that doesn't make them A) a target, or B) an agressor. Cease fires just won't work because hamas still depends very much on civilian deaths. (and matyrdom). So unless Israel wants to become a non-entity by either inaction or sustained bombardment by rockets....its either going to be counterattack, and raise hell, which I predict because of the spokeperson broadcasts and the presidential broadcasts.
Your first mistake is to assume Israel's actions are entirely based on ending this issue, is a huge mistake and fails to capture any of the complexity of the situation. If Israel was motivated purely by the desire to stop the fighting, then they'd stop the settlements.
Your second mistake is that the rockets represent a threat to Israel's existance. They're a threat to individuals, but the idea of launching so many rockets that Israel is destroyed is just silly.
Your third mistake is is that Hamas depends on civilian deaths. Actually, Hamas is trapped in a strange game where they're dependant on Israeli funds to continue to deliver basic humanitarian aid, while at the same time dependant on Palestine for popular support - if they lose either of these they lose any legitimacy and relevance in the region - ask the PLO/Fatah about that. The civilian deaths are a purely defensive measure against Israeli military strikes.
A cease fire will last a month, then shooting will restart and the situation will reoccur. So, how to avoid this? one side needs to be placated or forced out of the area.
Your first mistake is to assume Israel's actions are entirely based on ending this issue, is a huge mistake and fails to capture any of the complexity of the situation. If Israel was motivated purely by the desire to stop the fighting, then they'd stop the settlements.
Your second mistake is that the rockets represent a threat to Israel's existance. They're a threat to individuals, but the idea of launching so many rockets that Israel is destroyed is just silly.
Your third mistake is is that Hamas depends on civilian deaths. Actually, Hamas is trapped in a strange game where they're dependant on Israeli funds to continue to deliver basic humanitarian aid, while at the same time dependant on Palestine for popular support - if they lose either of these they lose any legitimacy and relevance in the region - ask the PLO/Fatah about that. The civilian deaths are a purely defensive measure against Israeli military strikes.
I really like how you condemn Israel for legalizing a few settlements that existed since 1990 in their own damn country while at the same time you condone the killing of innocent civilians by seemingly saying that the rocket attacks aren't a threat to the existence of Israel so Israel should just supposedly let them happen...
Lets just be clear here, this isn't about the big bad Jews throwing out innocent Palestinians from their homes and occupying them, this was about the Israeli government giving legal status to 3 settlements that existed since 1990's and that AFAIK were built in unoccupied land to begin with!
Also, another little fault in you arguments is that the Palestinians haven't been self determined since 110 BC(?!), so it hasn't been "their land" for a long long time, they had a chance to gain self determination in 1947 and blew it, they had another chance in 2000 and blew it again, how many more chances should they be given while they insist on blowing up buses full of civilians at the same time?
Justifying Israeli expansion by saying that "The Palestinians weren't using it anyway" is laughable.
Lebensraum anyone? /Godwin
I guess it's harder to identify with the poor suppressed than the rich Western country dealing with "Terrorists"
It's incredulous that when Politicians speak about this they talk about "Israels right to defend itself" but never mention the aggressive expansion and besieging of Palestinians. Obama's speech was painful, but he has a Nobel Peace prize so I guess he knows what he is talking about... right?
So essentially, justifying mob killings, suicide bombings and massed rocket terror campaigns against largely civilian targets is justified over surgical strikes that are aimed at causing few civilan casualties as possible to the point where areas are pre-warned of assault.
Well. That seems logical. to legitimize terror tactics, that are aimed NOT at military targets, but at causing the most amount of devastation and then claiming that the carnage caused was caused by the side that actually suffered the attack.
Israel is spending thousands of dollars attempting to set up anti-missile defenses to disrupt terror activities that are funded by Hamas. If that was to happen to the USA, if cuba, or mexico suddenly began firing barrages of rockets into the USA, would the USA not retaliate?
And the sad thing is, its always been happening since that area was colonised.
Medium of Death wrote: Justifying Israeli expansion by saying that "The Palestinians weren't using it anyway" is laughable.
Lebensraum anyone? /Godwin
I guess it's harder to identify with the poor suppressed than the rich Western country dealing with "Terrorists"
It's incredulous that when Politicians speak about this they talk about "Israels right to defend itself" but never mention the aggressive expansion and besieging of Palestinians. Obama's speech was painful, but he has a Nobel Peace prize so I guess he knows what he is talking about... right?
There is no such thing as "Israel expansion" all that land is a part of Israel, it is not and never belonged to any Palestinian nation simply because a Palestinian nation never existed.
The "siege" of the Palestinians was only made because, before that "siege" existed, you had weekly suicide bombings in Israel perpetrated by those same Palestinians, at least the rocket attacks are much less precise than a guy wearing a bomb vest and walking into a crowded market...
Its harder to identify with the "poor suppressed" when those "poor suppressed" wilfully kill innocent women and children, including their own, for political reasons!
Doctadeth wrote: So essentially, justifying mob killings, suicide bombings and massed rocket terror campaigns against largely civilian targets is justified over surgical strikes that are aimed at causing few civilan casualties as possible to the point where areas are pre-warned of assault.
Well. That seems logical. to legitimize terror tactics, that are aimed NOT at military targets, but at causing the most amount of devastation and then claiming that the carnage caused was caused by the side that actually suffered the attack.
Israel is spending thousands of dollars attempting to set up anti-missile defenses to disrupt terror activities that are funded by Hamas. If that was to happen to the USA, if cuba, or mexico suddenly began firing barrages of rockets into the USA, would the USA not retaliate?
And the sad thing is, its always been happening since that area was colonised.
If the US decided that they didn't like the Canadian Minister for Defence and killed him with an anti-tank missile, would anyone be outraged that Canada struck back?
Doctadeth wrote: So essentially, justifying mob killings, suicide bombings and massed rocket terror campaigns against largely civilian targets is justified over surgical strikes that are aimed at causing few civilan casualties as possible to the point where areas are pre-warned of assault.
Well. That seems logical. to legitimize terror tactics, that are aimed NOT at military targets, but at causing the most amount of devastation and then claiming that the carnage caused was caused by the side that actually suffered the attack.
Israel is spending thousands of dollars attempting to set up anti-missile defenses to disrupt terror activities that are funded by Hamas. If that was to happen to the USA, if cuba, or mexico suddenly began firing barrages of rockets into the USA, would the USA not retaliate?
And the sad thing is, its always been happening since that area was colonised.
If the US decided that they didn't like the Canadian Minister for Defence and killed him with an anti-tank missile, would anyone be outraged that Canada struck back?
Would any one have a problem with an airstrike if that same Minister for Defense had been organizing the random and intermittent shelling of American cities? Sebster can say that Hamas was "stopping" the rocket attacks all he wants, but the facts remain that there were a couple hundred rocket attacks in the weeks leading up to the Al-Qassam brigade's general getting bumped off, this means either Hamas is terrible at controlling it's own populace and lets every yahoo who wants one build or equip himself with missiles OR it was a new offensive, Occam says "The terrorist organization that loves murdering school children with suicide bombers on a bus, is probably behind the mass rocket fire on civilian targets from the territory their political wing controls"
PhantomViper wrote: I really like how you condemn Israel for legalizing a few settlements that existed since 1990 in their own damn country while at the same time you condone the killing of innocent civilians by seemingly saying that the rocket attacks aren't a threat to the existence of Israel so Israel should just supposedly let them happen...
If you'd bothered to read the thread you'd have seen I've said multiple times that the rocket attacks are wrong. For the record, I also believe Israel is within it's right to use force to prevent such attacks.
My issue is with pretending the rocket attacks exist in isolation of other factors, and that
Lets just be clear here, this isn't about the big bad Jews throwing out innocent Palestinians from their homes and occupying them, this was about the Israeli government giving legal status to 3 settlements that existed since 1990's and that AFAIK were built in unoccupied land to begin with!
The settlements are still expanding, both in population and area. From 2000 until this year the population has expanded from about 370,000 to 540,000. Claiming 'oh there's no new settlement's is the most transparent nonsense.
I mean, fething seriously, if someone occupied part of your country, even if they stopped new settlements there 12 years ago, but kept expanding those settlements, would you brush it off as new big deal? I mean seriously, can anyone honestly claim that wouldn't piss them off?
Also, another little fault in you arguments is that the Palestinians haven't been self determined since 110 BC(?!), so it hasn't been "their land" for a long long time, they had a chance to gain self determination in 1947 and blew it, they had another chance in 2000 and blew it again, how many more chances should they be given while they insist on blowing up buses full of civilians at the same time?
The fault there, in your argument, is that you think because a government failed in 1947, that their children and children's children don't deserve to have self-governance. Which is a ridiculous piece of nonsense.
And, as I've posted many times before, when your land is taken and quarantine keeps you in near poverty, isn't only half sensible to expect violence? That doesn't make that violence justified, but the one-two punch of keeping the population oppressed and then moaning when they respond violently is quite absurd.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Doctadeth wrote: So essentially, justifying mob killings, suicide bombings and massed rocket terror campaigns against largely civilian targets is justified over surgical strikes that are aimed at causing few civilan casualties as possible to the point where areas are pre-warned of assault.
No, not justifying the rocket attacks, or the bombings or any other violence from any groups within Palestine.
Rather, trying to explain that the issue is a lot more complex than poor little Israel and mean terrorist Palestine. And trying to show, more than anything else, that a peaceful solution to the issue lies primarily with Israel.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
PhantomViper wrote: There is no such thing as "Israel expansion" all that land is a part of Israel, it is not and never belonged to any Palestinian nation simply because a Palestinian nation never existed.
Oh, so I guess they can take whatever they want then. Anyway, that argument is utter nonsense. As long as there's been a notion of an Israel there's been a notion of a Palestinian state. That's how partition works.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
KalashnikovMarine wrote: Sebster can say that Hamas was "stopping" the rocket attacks all he wants, but the facts remain that there were a couple hundred rocket attacks in the weeks leading up to the Al-Qassam brigade's general getting bumped off
Any nitwit can look at the numbers before the attack, and see that very sporadic rocket fire is nothing like the thousands of missiles launched after Ahmed Jabari got blown up. There is, afterall, a reason the Israeli government continued its deal with Hamas up until November 14. Unless you'd like to speculate that the Israeli government is also plotting against Israel.
Yes, immediately before Jabari was knocked off there was a massive increase in the number of rockets fired, after those Palestinian kids were killed by IDF tank fire. That's why Jabari got whacked.
The question before Israel now is whether it was better to look to de-escalate the issue on November 10, or kill Jabari, start military operations and arrange 13 days later.
And the disappointing thing in this thread is how hard it has been to get people to see even a sensible version of Israel's side of the issue. Instead it's just 'they're terrorists and so while I'm not at all clear about what Israel's actual policy is in this area I'm totally 100% behind whatever it is they're doing'
Why yes, it is very much more of a complex issue then simply stopping firing rockets.
I will concede that the israeli blockade on gaza city is not helpful towards inciting violence their way. However, palestinian overtures have been not to find a peaceful solution, but rather using civilian casualties to try and discredit israeli attempts to halt violent acts.
Why not just have a DMZ? patrolled by UN forces or NATO forces which counter any rocket strikes or military attack by either side? Still works for north Korea and those guys have Nukes.
PhantomViper wrote: I really like how you condemn Israel for legalizing a few settlements that existed since 1990 in their own damn country while at the same time you condone the killing of innocent civilians by seemingly saying that the rocket attacks aren't a threat to the existence of Israel so Israel should just supposedly let them happen...
If you'd bothered to read the thread you'd have seen I've said multiple times that the rocket attacks are wrong. For the record, I also believe Israel is within it's right to use force to prevent such attacks.
My issue is with pretending the rocket attacks exist in isolation of other factors, and that
You always said "the rocket attacks are wrong, but...", the "but" kind of disavows your previous condemnations...
The rocket attacks are just the newest way that terrorists found to continue their campaign of terror, since the blockade actually put a cramp on their previous "human being filled with explosives" method of delivery. Trying to pretend that they are solely a reaction to Israel's latest actions is naive at best, yes the escalation in numbers may be a reaction the the killing of the Hamas leader, but they had never really stopped before that, had they?
Lets just be clear here, this isn't about the big bad Jews throwing out innocent Palestinians from their homes and occupying them, this was about the Israeli government giving legal status to 3 settlements that existed since 1990's and that AFAIK were built in unoccupied land to begin with!
The settlements are still expanding, both in population and area. From 2000 until this year the population has expanded from about 370,000 to 540,000. Claiming 'oh there's no new settlement's is the most transparent nonsense.
I mean, fething seriously, if someone occupied part of your country, even if they stopped new settlements there 12 years ago, but kept expanding those settlements, would you brush it off as new big deal? I mean seriously, can anyone honestly claim that wouldn't piss them off?
Repeat after me: its not their country, it never was their country. The Palestinians themselves reneged on the UN division of the region in 1947 and again reneged on the division of the area offered to them in 2000.
Also, another little fault in you arguments is that the Palestinians haven't been self determined since 110 BC(?!), so it hasn't been "their land" for a long long time, they had a chance to gain self determination in 1947 and blew it, they had another chance in 2000 and blew it again, how many more chances should they be given while they insist on blowing up buses full of civilians at the same time?
The fault there, in your argument, is that you think because a government failed in 1947, that their children and children's children don't deserve to have self-governance. Which is a ridiculous piece of nonsense.
I think that they don't deserve to have self governance because they actually refused it again in 2000 and also because in the first elections that they had, they chose to vote for the party that had "pushing all the Jews to the sea" as their political platform... That doesn't sound like a group wiling to enter negotiations to me...
PhantomViper wrote: There is no such thing as "Israel expansion" all that land is a part of Israel, it is not and never belonged to any Palestinian nation simply because a Palestinian nation never existed.
Oh, so I guess they can take whatever they want then. Anyway, that argument is utter nonsense. As long as there's been a notion of an Israel there's been a notion of a Palestinian state. That's how partition works.
And the Palestinians have always rejected that partition, if they would accept it, then there would be peace, they would have their own country and THEN we could talk about Israeli expansionism.
And why is the argument nonsense? Did you condemn the UK every time they built something in Northern Ireland just because the IRA didn't like it?
Did you condemn Spain every time they built something in Catalunya just because ETA claimed the region as their own?
Hamas needs to grow the feth up and realise that if 60+ years of violence didn't solve things, maybe they should give the diplomatic way a try one of these days...
Easy E wrote: If military force could solve this issue, it would have been solved a long time ago. However, since we are talking about it, military force must not be the answer.
To argue that this time military force will solve the problem seems.... impractical.
Thaty so wrong its not funny.
Its military force that is giving Hamas power
Inversely Israel could literally wipe out every man, woman, and child opposing it.
Which is exactly my point. If a pure military solution would work.... then Israel would have used it and been done with it by now.
Since they haven't, it must not be the optimal solution. Therefore, considering ways to solve the problem now in a purely military way is.... impractical.
nomsheep wrote: Surely if we are allied with Israel, We let them deal with it and IF they go to war, we go to war with them?
We'd fight alongside the U.S so where's the difference?
There would be so much opposition to that course of action in the UK, I very much doubt an already unpopular tory government would choose to take the political damage.
Doctadeth wrote: Why yes, it is very much more of a complex issue then simply stopping firing rockets.
Absolutely.
I will concede that the israeli blockade on gaza city is not helpful towards inciting violence their way. However, palestinian overtures have been not to find a peaceful solution, but rather using civilian casualties to try and discredit israeli attempts to halt violent acts.
Honestly it depends on the Israeli and Palestinian governments in power at that time. Wikileaks recently exposed a private communication from Hamas to the Israeli government, in which Hamas conceded basically everything. Every land claim, every security restriction. Israel rejected it out of hand.
Why not just have a DMZ? patrolled by UN forces or NATO forces which counter any rocket strikes or military attack by either side? Still works for north Korea and those guys have Nukes.
Look at the range of even the low end rockets, and then look at the size of the region. It'd be nice but unfortunately it's not really practical.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
PhantomViper wrote: You always said "the rocket attacks are wrong, but...", the "but" kind of disavows your previous condemnations...
Oh, so when I state that the rockets are wrong, you just tell me I don't really mean that. That is a unique approach to debate.
The rocket attacks are just the newest way that terrorists found to continue their campaign of terror, since the blockade actually put a cramp on their previous "human being filled with explosives" method of delivery. Trying to pretend that they are solely a reaction to Israel's latest actions is naive at best, yes the escalation in numbers may be a reaction the the killing of the Hamas leader, but they had never really stopped before that, had they?
Duh. If you'd cared to read the thread you'd have noticed I also stated that if the Iron Dome proved effective, then you'd just see Palestinians go back to the old methods of sneaking a bomb over the border.
Though I expect now you'll just claim I didn't really mean that, either.
Repeat after me: its not their country, it never was their country. The Palestinians themselves reneged on the UN division of the region in 1947 and again reneged on the division of the area offered to them in 2000.
Repeat after me - when you're born somewhere you have a basic right to live there, and have a government from there. And any political nonsense about what your grandparent's generation did is stupid bs spouted by people who think politics matters more than people's livelihoods.
I think that they don't deserve to have self governance because they actually refused it again in 2000 and also because in the first elections that they had, they chose to vote for the party that had "pushing all the Jews to the sea" as their political platform... That doesn't sound like a group wiling to enter negotiations to me...
And again we have people confusing political theatre with political reality.
Accept this one basic piece thing - Israel gives money to Hamas to goven Palestine, provide hospitals, schools, stuff like that. Once you accept that, you have to either claim the unbelievably stupid - that Israel would give money to an organisation absolutely dedicated to the destruction of Israel, or that Hamas, like Fatah before it, makes a lot of anti-Israel claims that it has no interest nor ability to follow through on.
And the Palestinians have always rejected that partition, if they would accept it, then there would be peace, they would have their own country and THEN we could talk about Israeli expansionism.
You really know nothing of the peace process at all, do you?
And why is the argument nonsense? Did you condemn the UK every time they built something in Northern Ireland just because the IRA didn't like it?
If they were changing the borders, then they would have been worthy of scorn.
Hamas needs to grow the feth up and realise that if 60+ years of violence didn't solve things, maybe they should give the diplomatic way a try one of these days...
You really, honestly know absolutely nothing of the peace process... and yet you want to go on line and shout about it anyway. Remarkable.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
whembly wrote: Sorta on topic...
Morsi is now a de-facto Dictator now...
We want this guy to facilitate any Peace agreement between Gaza and Israel?
The recent decrees by Morsi are very disappointing, but why would that change anything in regards to Israel and Palestine? Weren't you lot fine with Mubarak when he was dictator?
). I understand.
