Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ustrello wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LethalShade wrote:
Well, when you treat people like second class citizens while rejecting all form of talk with said people, you can expect them to be pissed off.
Sure, ISIS probably have some influence in what's going on there. Not going to deny it. But Palestinians are pissed off for a reason.
But, sure, stabbing innocent civilians in the street will not help at all and things will get worse for both sides.

Would you be trustful of people who have tried to destroy your country more than once?

The French seem to get along with their German neighbours......

Until a line is drawn there can be no agreements and no end to violence.

Sure, but did the Kaiser or Hitler want to exterminate all of the french and possibly destroy all of their culture?

Some in the middle east want Israel and its inhabitants exterminated.

Some want Israel to stop killing its own population.

Some want Israel to stop killing other countries citizens.

Some want violence and opposition to Israels right to exist to end.

Some want violence towards Israeli jews to end.

I would suggest that a far greater number just want things settled once and for all. Which would take all sides to stop posturing. All ethnicities to begin at day 0. For The Israeli leadership and Hammas et al this would be impossible.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I'm astounded at the rationalization of targeted ethnic killings of Jews

How do you rationalize the killing and stealing of land from Palestinians? Or is this just a one way street where Israel is fetishized and Palestinians are demonized? Both need to get their gak together; both have blood on their hands.

One side declared war on another, one side lost and lost territory because of it. Pretty simple

One side declared war on another with extermination in mind, then played victim after it lost is more like it

Let's not forget the actions & attitudes of groups like Lehi, Irgun, etc either here in that original conflict, that actively engaged in terrorist bombings, hangings, massacres, etc of their own, groups that, much like Hezbhollah, later formed the core of a national military and had members later go on to attain very high political standing.

Aye. Lehi killed UN mediator Folke Bernadotte in '48, Lehi member Yitzhak Shamir went on to become Prime Minister of Israel twice.

There is no excusing murder on either side, but the Arab share of agitation is far greater.

Relapse wrote:
There is no excusing murder on either side, but the Arab share of agitation is far greater.

This is because the Palestinians are living under occupation, and Israeli Arabs are second class citizens, Israeli Jews aren't.
There is a lot of room for anger and agitation.

The fairer point would be what would happen to Israel if it ceased to oppress the Palestinians. Would there be peace and justice? Likely not.

 Orlanth wrote:

Relapse wrote:
There is no excusing murder on either side, but the Arab share of agitation is far greater.

This is because the Palestinians are living under occupation, and Israeli Arabs are second class citizens, Israeli Jews aren't.
There is a lot of room for anger and agitation.

The fairer point would be what would happen to Israel if it ceased to oppress the Palestinians. Would there be peace and justice? Likely not.

The answers might be found in 1948, 1967, and 1973.

Every one thought it was horrible Israel clamped down on cement and other construction materials, yet months later, what do we find? Massive cement tunnels leading toward civilian areas, validating Israels clamp down.

Relapse wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

Relapse wrote:
There is no excusing murder on either side, but the Arab share of agitation is far greater.

This is because the Palestinians are living under occupation, and Israeli Arabs are second class citizens, Israeli Jews aren't.
There is a lot of room for anger and agitation.

The fairer point would be what would happen to Israel if it ceased to oppress the Palestinians. Would there be peace and justice? Likely not.

The answers might be found in 1948, 1967, and 1973.

Every one thought it was horrible Israel clamped down on cement and other construction materials, yet months later, what do we find? Massive cement tunnels leading toward civilian areas, validating Israels clamp down.

The clamp down didn't stop the construction of the tunnels because there's enough rubble and recyclable concrete and other material to build simple tunnels with for decades already lying around if the guys building the tunnels can't get anything else. The tunnels also served as an economic life-support to bring in items like gasoline, clothing, etc.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Peter Wiggin wrote:
I'm astounded at the rationalization of targeted ethnic killings of Jews

How do you rationalize the killing and stealing of land from Palestinians? Or is this just a one way street where Israel is fetishized and Palestinians are demonized? Both need to get their gak together; both have blood on their hands.

You are sitting on land taken from its rightful owner because its rightful owner didn't have the numbers and repeating rifles until it was too late. That land in turn was likely stolen from someone else, who stole it from the resident bear and wolf populations.

Thats just the US. Now imagine someplace with a history measured in millenniums.

Israel reap what they sow.

It is this simple.

 Big Blind Bill wrote:
Israel reap what they sow.

It is this simple.

Did you have a similar opinion about the UK after Bishopsgate?

Someone coming into a thread this late like that is clearly not interested in proper discussion. Just ignore it guys

 CptJake wrote:

 Big Blind Bill wrote:
Israel reap what they sow.

It is this simple.

Did you have a similar opinion about the UK after Bishopsgate?

Sure.

Events like Operation Demetrius which introduced mass arrest and internment are considered now to be a breach of human rights and certainly inspired the next generation of activists, as Israel's actions against Palestine have done and currently continue to do.

It is exactly the same as America's treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay: if they weren't your enemy before, they sure as hell are going to be afterwards.

Does that answer your question?

Someone coming into a thread this late like that is clearly not interested in proper discussion. Just ignore it guys

Thanks?

Sure does.

Again, as a 3rd party who doesn't have a dog in the hunt, I don't see how the relevant peoples separate themselves from it.

Israel: Evidently they aren't going to pull up the Wailing Wall and move lock stock and barrel to Brownsville. So they are stuck in. If they pulled completely back to the 1967 and left those areas completely, building a giant WWZ type wall, I don't think there would be a hint of difference and the Wall would probably be torn down. Their building of settlements and occupation foster further attacks.

Palestine: dude you're stabbing grandmothers. In any other place they other side could firebomb your entire country. However, we have a region were the people are being used as political tools by other parties, and have no hope. Jordan doesn't want them, and they are so small they can't exist as a separate state with any kind of industry. Israel can't assimilate them, as they would destroy Israel.

Gaza: See Palestine but even worse. Egypt has them walled off and occasionally battles extremists in the borderlands near it. The place is the size of my back yard. How could they be independent?

Can you really group the Palestinians under one heading with regards to the current knife attacks?
It is unlikely that they are being orchestrated by the government, if at all.

Rocket attacks and bombings indicate some level of group co-ordination, the recent spate of attacks on the other hand all appear to be committed by individuals.
These are desperate acts by desperate people.

Their actions aside, they have the right to be desperate. The rest of the world has stood by, or even been vetoed by the US, whenever anything comes along that could upset the current one sided affair (see the Palestinian statehood vote in late 2014/ early 2015).
The Israeli government doesn't want change, because every year they gain more territory. The longer the current dispute goes on, the more they will get when it finally comes to an end.
Having their BFF America with a veto ensures the conflict won't end unless it is on their terms.

The knife attacks are a tragedy, but they are not the problem, merely a symptom.

You seem to think a UN vote means something. Thats funny.

 Frazzled wrote:
You seem to think a UN vote means something. Thats funny.

I think you are missing the point.

America's power to veto means something, as it blocked Palestine from becoming a recognised state.

Palestine doesn't want the power to vote at the UN, it wants to be declared as a state.

If it is recognised as a state then it will be much more protected under international law, and the motion would set precedent for further diplomatic discussions: something Israel does not wish to see.

 Frazzled wrote:
You seem to think a UN vote means something. Thats funny.

That teamed with the bias in the UN. Hamas fires thousands of rockets indiscriminately at Israel, hitting anything and everything, the UN is ok with this. Israel launches precision strikes after warning the residents nearby to take cover because it just got real. UN has large in depth discussions on how to punish Israel for its human rights violations.




Let me summarize that video for you in a single quote. "I don't think that there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when any army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF is doing today in Gaza"

Not convinced.

Reducing civilian casualties in a one sided conflict which has world media coverage sure is good of them...

...how about not displacing civilian populations and not withholding water for blackmail when the cameras are turned the other way?

When the established global system for global conflict resolution won't even recognise the Palestinian state as a state, and won't let them sit at the table as an equal, it should be no surprise that people turn away from diplomacy.

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
You seem to think a UN vote means something. Thats funny.

That teamed with the bias in the UN. Hamas fires thousands of rockets indiscriminately at Israel, hitting anything and everything, the UN is ok with this.

Well, most of the time they do not hit anything at all.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Israel launches precision strikes after warning the residents nearby to take cover because it just got real. UN has large in depth discussions on how to punish Israel for its human rights violations.

Let me summarize that video for you in a single quote. "I don't think that there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when any army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF is doing today in Gaza"

The problem here is that despite the efforts the IDF is doing a very, very lousy job at reducing innocent casualties. Let's look at the violent conflict last year for example. 5 Israeli civilians got killed, and 66 Israeli soldiers. That is like 8% civilian casualties. On the other hand, the UNHRC estimates that of the 2251 Palestinians killed, 65% were civilians. Even the Israeli foreign ministry estimated that at least 30% had been civilians. Now who is doing a better job? Hamas or the IDF?
The main problem however as I see it, is proportionality. The Palestinians throw rocks and fire a few homemade rockets, the Israelis strike back with fighter jets, armoured vehicles and artillery. The Isreali government of course has an obligation to protect its citizens, but its response is out of proportion.

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

Spoiler:

 CptJake wrote:

 Big Blind Bill wrote:
Israel reap what they sow.

It is this simple.

Did you have a similar opinion about the UK after Bishopsgate?

Sure.

Events like Operation Demetrius which introduced mass arrest and internment are considered now to be a breach of human rights and certainly inspired the next generation of activists, as Israel's actions against Palestine have done and currently continue to do.

It is exactly the same as America's treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay: if they weren't your enemy before, they sure as hell are going to be afterwards.

Does that answer your question?

Someone coming into a thread this late like that is clearly not interested in proper discussion. Just ignore it guys

Thanks?

Two wrongs don't make a right. All that will achieve is a cycle of revenge and never ending violence. And its self defeating - using terror tactics and deliberate targeting of civilians as a response to humans rights abuses (which are of course wrong and should be prosecuted) like Guantanamo will ultimately help justify those human rights abuses in the long term.

Are you really saying that you think terror attacks are a justifiable response?

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
You seem to think a UN vote means something. Thats funny.

I think you are missing the point.

America's power to veto means something, as it blocked Palestine from becoming a recognised state.

Palestine doesn't want the power to vote at the UN, it wants to be declared as a state.

If it is recognised as a state then it will be much more protected under international law, and the motion would set precedent for further diplomatic discussions: something Israel does not wish to see.

If it were a state Israel could have already annihilated it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Well, most of the time they do not hit anything at all.

Cool so the US can fire rockets at Moscow, as long as they aren't accurate. Good to know.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Big Blind Bill wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
You seem to think a UN vote means something. Thats funny.

I think you are missing the point.

America's power to veto means something, as it blocked Palestine from becoming a recognised state.

Palestine doesn't want the power to vote at the UN, it wants to be declared as a state.

If it is recognised as a state then it will be much more protected under international law, and the motion would set precedent for further diplomatic discussions: something Israel does not wish to see.

If it were a state Israel could have already annihilated it.

Exactly... it would've been conquered long ago.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Well, most of the time they do not hit anything at all.

Cool so the US can fire rockets at Moscow, as long as they aren't accurate. Good to know.

Do you have to be accurate if you're using nukes?

Asking for a friend...

Depends on the nuke.

The problem here is that despite the efforts the IDF is doing a very, very lousy job at reducing innocent casualties. Let's look at the violent conflict last year for example. 5 Israeli civilians got killed, and 66 Israeli soldiers. That is like 8% civilian casualties. On the other hand, the UNHRC estimates that of the 2251 Palestinians killed, 65% were civilians. Even the Israeli foreign ministry estimated that at least 30% had been civilians. Now who is doing a better job? Hamas or the IDF?
The main problem however as I see it, is proportionality. The Palestinians throw rocks and fire a few homemade rockets, the Israelis strike back with fighter jets, armoured vehicles and artillery. The Isreali government of course has an obligation to protect its citizens, but its response is out of proportion.

1: if Georgia fired rockets indiscriminately into Russia, Putin would invade the country and slaughter tens of thousands.
2: No other army in the history of armed conflict sends text message warnings and calls the residence before bombing a house, HAMAS forcing them to remain in the homes is the problem.
3: Who is doing the better job? Israel is. Why? Because Israel isn't hiding its military components inside civilian buildings, including schools and hospitals.

 Ghazkuul wrote:

The problem here is that despite the efforts the IDF is doing a very, very lousy job at reducing innocent casualties. Let's look at the violent conflict last year for example. 5 Israeli civilians got killed, and 66 Israeli soldiers. That is like 8% civilian casualties. On the other hand, the UNHRC estimates that of the 2251 Palestinians killed, 65% were civilians. Even the Israeli foreign ministry estimated that at least 30% had been civilians. Now who is doing a better job? Hamas or the IDF?
The main problem however as I see it, is proportionality. The Palestinians throw rocks and fire a few homemade rockets, the Israelis strike back with fighter jets, armoured vehicles and artillery. The Isreali government of course has an obligation to protect its citizens, but its response is out of proportion.

1: if Georgia fired rockets indiscriminately into Russia, Putin would invade the country and slaughter tens of thousands.
2: No other army in the history of armed conflict sends text message warnings and calls the residence before bombing a house, HAMAS forcing them to remain in the homes is the problem.
3: Who is doing the better job? Israel is. Why? Because Israel isn't hiding its military components inside civilian buildings, including schools and hospitals.

1. If I would have said that, it would have been called a "whataboutism" or some similar hypocritical nonsense. Regardless:
In 2008, Georgia attacked and killed Russian soldiers and civilians. Russia responded by invading Georgia. 224 Georgian civilians were killed in the following conflict, most of them due to action by Ossetian and Abchazian, rather than Russian forces.

2. Yet the Israelis bomb the house anyways? You can't blame Hamas when it is the IDF, not Hamas, who does the bombing. Imagine a situation where a criminal holds a hostage at gunpoint. The police shouts to the hostage to get out of the way, but the hostage obviously can't. The police then proceeds to shoot both hostage and criminal. People then cheer the police for doing such a good job warning the hostage and avoiding innocent casualties. Sounds right?
Also as a side note, when Russia warned the citizens of Grozny that the city was about to be bombed and they had a few days to leave before the bombardments started, the West was absolutely outraged and even considered economic sanctions. Double standards much?

3. Of course Hamas is not nice or anything, but the imbalance of force is such that Hamas has little choice but to hide in civilian buildings, they'd be bombed the minute they would establish themselves in the open. Besides, the Gaza strip is so small and crowded, it is hard not to be near a civilian building. Finally, it is still the choice of the IDF whether they bomb that school or not. Apparently Israel views taking out a few terrorists as important enough to bomb an entire schoold or hospital (war crime) to oblivion. They could also decide not to bomb, they are the only ones responsible.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

The problem here is that despite the efforts the IDF is doing a very, very lousy job at reducing innocent casualties. Let's look at the violent conflict last year for example. 5 Israeli civilians got killed, and 66 Israeli soldiers. That is like 8% civilian casualties. On the other hand, the UNHRC estimates that of the 2251 Palestinians killed, 65% were civilians. Even the Israeli foreign ministry estimated that at least 30% had been civilians. Now who is doing a better job? Hamas or the IDF?
The main problem however as I see it, is proportionality. The Palestinians throw rocks and fire a few homemade rockets, the Israelis strike back with fighter jets, armoured vehicles and artillery. The Isreali government of course has an obligation to protect its citizens, but its response is out of proportion.

1: if Georgia fired rockets indiscriminately into Russia, Putin would invade the country and slaughter tens of thousands.
2: No other army in the history of armed conflict sends text message warnings and calls the residence before bombing a house, HAMAS forcing them to remain in the homes is the problem.
3: Who is doing the better job? Israel is. Why? Because Israel isn't hiding its military components inside civilian buildings, including schools and hospitals.

1. If I would have said that, it would have been called a "whataboutism" or some similar hypocritical nonsense. Regardless:
In 2008, Georgia attacked and killed Russian soldiers and civilians. Russia responded by invading Georgia. 224 Georgian civilians were killed in the following conflict, most of them due to action by Ossetian and Abchazian, rather than Russian forces.

2. Yet the Israelis bomb the house anyways? You can't blame Hamas when it is the IDF, not Hamas, who does the bombing. Imagine a situation where a criminal holds a hostage at gunpoint. The police shouts to the hostage to get out of the way, but the hostage obviously can't. The police then proceeds to shoot both hostage and criminal. People then cheer the police for doing such a good job warning the hostage and avoiding innocent casualties. Sounds right?

3. Of course Hamas is not nice or anything, but the imbalance of force is such that Hamas has little choice but to hide in civilian buildings, they'd be bombed the minute they would establish themselves in the open. Besides, the Gaza strip is so small and crowded, it is hard not to be near a civilian building. Finally, it is still the choice of the IDF whether they bomb that school or not. Apparently Israel views taking out a few terrorists as important enough to bomb an entire schoold or hospital (war crime) to oblivion. They could also decide not to bomb, they are the only ones responsible.

Georgia never killed russian soldiers/civilians the entire world knew that was BS and Russia did it to "Free" parts of Georgia.

Yes, Israel still bombs the house because they have a duty to protect Israeli's not Palestinians. The point I was making though is that Israel bends over backwards to send warnings and prevent civilian casualties. The difference in the scenario is that HAMAS isn't holding anyone hostage. These civilians WILLINGLY keep weapons and personnel in their homes, which under the rules of war makes those homes legitimate military targets.

Yes it is Israels choice to bomb those schools and hospitals, WHICH ISNT A WARCRIME. The fact that UN personnel allowed Hamas to hide weapons and fighters inside these hospitals and schools is more of a war crime then Israel targeting them with bombers/artillery after yet again sending out several warnings.

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ghazkuul wrote:

The problem here is that despite the efforts the IDF is doing a very, very lousy job at reducing innocent casualties. Let's look at the violent conflict last year for example. 5 Israeli civilians got killed, and 66 Israeli soldiers. That is like 8% civilian casualties. On the other hand, the UNHRC estimates that of the 2251 Palestinians killed, 65% were civilians. Even the Israeli foreign ministry estimated that at least 30% had been civilians. Now who is doing a better job? Hamas or the IDF?
The main problem however as I see it, is proportionality. The Palestinians throw rocks and fire a few homemade rockets, the Israelis strike back with fighter jets, armoured vehicles and artillery. The Isreali government of course has an obligation to protect its citizens, but its response is out of proportion.

1: if Georgia fired rockets indiscriminately into Russia, Putin would invade the country and slaughter tens of thousands.
2: No other army in the history of armed conflict sends text message warnings and calls the residence before bombing a house, HAMAS forcing them to remain in the homes is the problem.
3: Who is doing the better job? Israel is. Why? Because Israel isn't hiding its military components inside civilian buildings, including schools and hospitals.

1. If I would have said that, it would have been called a "whataboutism" or some similar hypocritical nonsense. Regardless:
In 2008, Georgia attacked and killed Russian soldiers and civilians. Russia responded by invading Georgia. 224 Georgian civilians were killed in the following conflict, most of them due to action by Ossetian and Abchazian, rather than Russian forces.

2. Yet the Israelis bomb the house anyways? You can't blame Hamas when it is the IDF, not Hamas, who does the bombing. Imagine a situation where a criminal holds a hostage at gunpoint. The police shouts to the hostage to get out of the way, but the hostage obviously can't. The police then proceeds to shoot both hostage and criminal. People then cheer the police for doing such a good job warning the hostage and avoiding innocent casualties. Sounds right?

3. Of course Hamas is not nice or anything, but the imbalance of force is such that Hamas has little choice but to hide in civilian buildings, they'd be bombed the minute they would establish themselves in the open. Besides, the Gaza strip is so small and crowded, it is hard not to be near a civilian building. Finally, it is still the choice of the IDF whether they bomb that school or not. Apparently Israel views taking out a few terrorists as important enough to bomb an entire schoold or hospital (war crime) to oblivion. They could also decide not to bomb, they are the only ones responsible.

Georgia never killed russian soldiers/civilians the entire world knew that was BS and Russia did it to "Free" parts of Georgia.

I sincerely hope you don't believe that, because it is proven and accepted fact. Even the Georgians themselves have admitted and defended their actions.
http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2164&context=ilj

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Yes, Israel still bombs the house because they have a duty to protect Israeli's not Palestinians. The point I was making though is that Israel bends over backwards to send warnings and prevent civilian casualties. The difference in the scenario is that HAMAS isn't holding anyone hostage. These civilians WILLINGLY keep weapons and personnel in their homes, which under the rules of war makes those homes legitimate military targets.

And just before you said that Hamas was "holding them at gunpoint".
Israel does have a duty to protect Israelis, but in the same way you could argue Hamas has a duty to protect Palestinians. In any case, their duty does not give them a license to kill Palestinians whenever they see fit. Wars have rules, and Israel is not following them.

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Yes it is Israels choice to bomb those schools and hospitals, WHICH ISNT A WARCRIME. The fact that UN personnel allowed Hamas to hide weapons and fighters inside these hospitals and schools is more of a war crime then Israel targeting them with bombers/artillery after yet again sending out several warnings.

The Geneva Conventions (Article 19, 4th Convention) explicitly state that the presence of enemies or weapons in a hospital is not a valid reason for an attack, and not adhering to the Geneva Conventions is a warcrime.

Ghazkuul wrote:
Yes, Israel still bombs the house because they have a duty to protect Israeli's not Palestinians. The point I was making though is that Israel bends over backwards to send warnings and prevent civilian casualties. The difference in the scenario is that HAMAS isn't holding anyone hostage. These civilians WILLINGLY keep weapons and personnel in their homes, which under the rules of war makes those homes legitimate military targets.

Iron_Captain wrote:
And just before you said that Hamas was "holding them at gunpoint".
Israel does have a duty to protect Israelis, but in the same way you could argue Hamas has a duty to protect Palestinians. In any case, their duty does not give them a license to kill Palestinians whenever they see fit. Wars have rules, and Israel is not following them.

Ghazkuul wrote:
Yes it is Israels choice to bomb those schools and hospitals, WHICH ISNT A WARCRIME. The fact that UN personnel allowed Hamas to hide weapons and fighters inside these hospitals and schools is more of a war crime then Israel targeting them with bombers/artillery after yet again sending out several warnings.

Iron_Captain wrote:
The Geneva Conventions (Article 19, 4th Convention) explicitly state that the presence of enemies or weapons in a hospital is not a valid reason for an attack, and not adhering to the Geneva Conventions is a warcrime.

If they have a duty to protect palestinians why are they holding them at gunpoint in the line of fire? doesn't that directly contradict what you just said about trying to protect them?

And I highly suggest you go read the Geneva convention instead of just posting bits and pieces. It specifically says that enemy personnel can be there, and small arms that are going to be turned into the proper authorities. Utilizing a hospital/school to store military equipment is specifically forbidden by the Geneva convention and you would know that if you had spent 10 minutes reading instead of cherry picking.

Ain't family arguments a bitch? This one's been going on for over 2,000 years, so I don't envision it ending anytime soon.