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.
Ketara wrote: Unfortunately, things aren't as simple as that. Israel's enacted some fairly atrocious levels of discrimination and oppression against the Palestinian people over the years, and most victims don't take a peaceful response to that sort of thing. When your little sister was killed in a air strike against a set of rockets based down the road, when you're denied a University level education, and you can't find a job because of economic restrictions, you tend to be somewhat inclined to back people who oppose the ones responsible for all of the above.
To keep it in perspective, if some crazy Floridians decided to make a habit out of firing rockets at major cities in Georgia, I would fully expect the US government to come in and blast us until we stopped. I would also run for the hills when that government called and said 'we will be blasting this area. Get out', which I believe Israel has been doing. Anyone staying had a chance to run. Even if those guys firing off the rockets were radical seperatists who were sure the South could rise again. I certainly would not expect any sort of federal aid, or to be treated as the other peaceful states until my state stopped blowing random people up.
Except in this case, the guys firing those rockets are the Florida State Government.
LordofHats wrote: I assume to point out that Israel responds with massively disproportionate force.
At the risk of repeating myself "What, in your opinion, is a proportionate response? And how do you determine what is proportionate?"
Do you think that there are other factors here that may influence the casualty rates, such as Israel building shelters, and Hamas launching attacks from densely populated urban areas? What about Hamas refusing to left people leave after Israel has warned people that they are at risk of staying in the area? Or Hamas' use of human shields?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/14 00:03:11
At risk of repeating the point, it's not really a matter of debate that Israel's "lets bomb the feth out of them" strategy has achieved little more than racking up civilian casualties. We're going to do this whole song a dance again in a few years, just like last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, like all the other times going on fifty years.
You can moan about human shields all you want, but it looks like Hamas' strategy of hiding behind a helpless population is working a lot better than Israel's strategy of blowing that population to bits. At least in so far as Hamas is just gonna end up doing this song and dance again a few years from now because Israel seems unable to make the kind of strikes that can cripple the various terror cells that make up the organization.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/14 00:29:35
Ketara wrote: Unfortunately, things aren't as simple as that. Israel's enacted some fairly atrocious levels of discrimination and oppression against the Palestinian people over the years, and most victims don't take a peaceful response to that sort of thing. When your little sister was killed in a air strike against a set of rockets based down the road, when you're denied a University level education, and you can't find a job because of economic restrictions, you tend to be somewhat inclined to back people who oppose the ones responsible for all of the above.
To keep it in perspective, if some crazy Floridians decided to make a habit out of firing rockets at major cities in Georgia, I would fully expect the US government to come in and blast us until we stopped. I would also run for the hills when that government called and said 'we will be blasting this area. Get out', which I believe Israel has been doing. Anyone staying had a chance to run. Even if those guys firing off the rockets were radical seperatists who were sure the South could rise again. I certainly would not expect any sort of federal aid, or to be treated as the other peaceful states until my state stopped blowing random people up.
Except in this case, the guys firing those rockets are the Florida State Government.
Or at the very least, Florida State University... Not quite the government itself, but they at minimum have state sanctioning
So what is proportionate, and how do you define it? YOu seem rather unable or unwilling to address this point, but you can declare that Israel's actions are disproportionate.
Regarding Israel's strategy when dealing with massed rocket attacks the Lebanon border has been pretty quiet after Cast Lead,
LordofHats wrote: At risk of repeating the point, it's not really a matter of debate that Israel's "lets bomb the feth out of them" strategy has achieved little more than racking up civilian casualties. We're going to do this whole song a dance again in a few years, just like last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, like all the other times going on fifty years.
You can moan about human shields all you want, but it looks like Hamas' strategy of hiding behind a helpless population is working a lot better than Israel's strategy of blowing that population to bits. At least in so far as Hamas is just gonna end up doing this song and dance again a few years from now because Israel seems unable to make the kind of strikes that can cripple the various terror cells that make up the organization.
Actually, one way to stop this is to stop legitimizing the Hamas.
Dreadclaw69 wrote: So what is proportionate, and how do you define it? YOu seem rather unable or unwilling to address this point, but you can declare that Israel's actions are disproportionate.
I've already pointed out that I consider their methods to be tantamount to total war;
Going total war on Gaza every time rockets get shot their way seems to be ineffective at achieving any goal other than killing human shields.
It's not neceassary to define what is proportionate to point out that current methods was far more force than is justified by their conflict.
Stop legitimizing Hamas
It's been pointed out on countless occasions that Hamas' ruling officials aren't the problem. Their inability to control their own organization is. It would be easier to stop legitimizing them if Israel changed strategy and left ground for a more sympathetic and reasonable body to take control of the area, but Israel seems to like keeping Hamas in charge. Sort of a strategy of 'perfect instability' I'd call it. Where things around them aren't stable enough for any significant threats to their national secuirty to prop up in their neighbors but there's just enough of a modicum of stableity in the area they can control the tempo. it works. It just kills a whole lot of Palestinians and leaves them in a state of perpetual screwed.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/07/14 01:10:17
LordofHats wrote: I've already pointed out that I consider their methods to be tantamount to total war;
It is a common occurrence that countries engaging in total war warn civilians to evacuate an area before launching a military strike? What actions do you believe show that Israel is engaged in total war, does this belief of yours include periods when Israel is not launching military operations in response to attack?
It is a common occurrence that countries engaging in total war warn civilians to evacuate an area before launching a military strike?
And they attack anyway knowing the civilians are still going to be there, while terror cells bounce off the strike which has failed to achive its goal. Israel is rather indifferent to the civilians that get killed in their operations. They play the game, but their actions show they don't care that much.
What actions do you believe show that Israel is engaged in total war
They launch air and artillery strikes against targets where they know civilians will be killed. Such strikes are not only ineffective against harming Hamas itself, as by the time Israel has attacked they've already moved, but they result in a lot of collateral damage as the force used in excess of what would be needed to achieve the goal. Hamas learned from the PLO and the 1980's that Israel is indifferent towards civilian deaths as a matter of policy. They've been using that ever since in their silly little PR campaign.
does this belief of yours include periods when Israel is not launching military operations in response to attack?
To an extent yes. Their continued bloackade of Gaza and the Palestinians hasn't stopped Hamas' ability to arm itself, but it has left the Palestinians destitute and with no options. Israel treats Palestinians in their own borders like criminals and has sweeping disrcriminatory policies against them. They've marked the entire population as their enemy as a matter of policy, and Israel itself is quite militarized as a state. If it's not total war, its damn close.
You know those times Sebster says that getting guns is the easy part of the revolution? Hamas is kind of the poster child for that Israel has some tough border controls, but it's never stopped anyone from getting Hamas and other terror groups what they want. It has left Palestinians at the mercy of these organizations who see them as puppets in their PR war.
Israel: You've got the dial set to 11, turn it back down to 1 or 2.
You'd think Israel would have one of the best and most developed anti-terror programs in the world... Except they don't. Whatever they do behind the scenes, it seems to do nothing to Hamas and its subsidiaries, but that just goes back to my point that Israel's government seems to want to maintain the instability of the region where its at. I don't really believe Israel can be this bad at these kind of operations, leading me to suspect the curret status quo is one they're attempting to control rather than fix it.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/07/14 01:39:34
LordofHats wrote: They launch air and artillery strikes against targets where they know civilians will be killed. Such strikes are not only ineffective against harming Hamas itself, as by the time Israel has attacked they've already moved, but they result in a lot of collateral damage as the force used in excess of what would be needed to achieve the goal. Hamas learned from the PLO and the 1980's that Israel is indifferent towards civilian deaths as a matter of policy. They've been using that ever since in their silly little PR campaign.
That is by no means total war. If Israel waged total war against Hamas, the conflict would be over in a couple months. As much as 50% of the Palestinian population might even survive. Much of Hamas likely would, too, they'd just be in another country.
The reality of modern military strikes against irregular forces is that you're going to kill civilians. You try to minimize casualties as much as possible, and you can even call of strikes against non-immediate threats when the risk of civilian casualties would be too great, but enacting a policy of "If there's going to be collateral damage, don't do anything," is just not feasible.
LordofHats wrote: And they attack anyway knowing the civilians are still going to be there, while terror cells bounce off the strike which has failed to achive its goal. Israel is rather indifferent to the civilians that get killed in their operations. They play the game, but their actions show they don't care that much.
Hamas has embedded itself within the civilian population, and fires rockets from population centers. Israel actively warns residents before they carry out a strike, actions intended to minimize civilian casualties. Should Israel not be able to defend herself against these attacks?
You may also have missed the news reports about Hamas leaders being targeted and killed in strikes since this operation began. That's hardly bouncing off the strike
LordofHats wrote: They launch air and artillery strikes against targets where they know civilians will be killed. Such strikes are not only ineffective against harming Hamas itself, as by the time Israel has attacked they've already moved, but they result in a lot of collateral damage as the force used in excess of what would be needed to achieve the goal. Hamas learned from the PLO and the 1980's that Israel is indifferent towards civilian deaths as a matter of policy. They've been using that ever since in their silly little PR campaign.
You keep saying "disproportionate" or an "excess" of force, yet when asked what you mean by this you refuse to explain
Is launching 762 rockets so far this year disproportionate? What about deliberately targeting civilians? Sending troops via sea to kill as many civilians as possible? Because these are all things that Hamas has done in just 2014. In 2012 they launched over 2200 rockets at Israel
LordofHats wrote: To an extent yes. Their continued bloackade of Gaza and the Palestinians hasn't stopped Hamas' ability to arm itself, but it has left the Palestinians destitute and with no options. Israel treats Palestinians in their own borders like criminals and has sweeping disrcriminatory policies against them. They've marked the entire population as their enemy as a matter of policy, and Israel itself is quite militarized as a state. If it's not total war, its damn close.
You know those times Sebster says that getting guns is the easy part of the revolution? Hamas is kind of the poster child for that Israel has some tough border controls, but it's never stopped anyone from getting Hamas and other terror groups what they want. It has left Palestinians at the mercy of these organizations who see them as puppets in their PR war.
Why is Gaza being blockaded? And Israel is not the only country with a border to Gaza too. Why have you not mentioned Egypt as blockading the area?
What about Gaza where the school children are taught that Jews are descended from apes and should be killed, or the training camps set up for school children where they handle rifles and play games based on killing or capturing Israelis?
It is interesting reading the distinction you make between the Palestinians and Hamas, yet you do not do the same for Israel.
Those poor downtrodden Israeli Arabs. Like Nawaf Massalha the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, 12 members of the Knesset, and many others such as Salim Joubran, a Christian Arab from Haifa descended from Lebanese Maronites, became the first Arab to hold a permanent appointment on the Court. Joubran's expertise lies in the field of criminal law.[133] George Karra, a Christian Arab from Jaffa has served as a Tel Aviv District Court judge since 2000. He was the presiding judge in the trial of Moshe Katsav. In 2011, he was nominated as a candidate for the Israeli Supreme Court.[134]
Foreign Service: Ali Yahya, an Arab Muslim, became the first Arab ambassador for Israel in 1995 when he was appointed ambassador to Finland. He served until 1999, and in 2006 was appointed ambassador to Greece. Other Arab ambassadors include Walid Mansour, a Druze, appointed ambassador to Vietnam in 1999, and Reda Mansour, also a Druze, a former ambassador to Ecuador. Mohammed Masarwa, an Arab Muslim, was Consul-General in Atlanta. In 2006, Ishmael Khaldi was appointed Israeli consul in San Francisco, becoming the first Bedouin consul of the State of Israel.[135]
Israel Defense Forces: Arab Generals in the IDF include Major General Hussain Fares, commander of Israel's border police, and Major General Yosef Mishlav, head of the Home Front Command and current Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories.[citation needed] Both are members of the Druze community. Other high-ranking officers in the IDF include Lieutenant Colonel Amos Yarkoni (born Abd el-Majid Hidr/ عبد الماجد Øيدر) from the Bedouin community, a legendary officer in the Israel Defense Forces and one of six Israeli Arabs to have received the IDF's third highest decoration, the Medal of Distinguished Service.
Israeli Police: In 2011, Jamal Hakroush became the first Muslim Arab deputy Inspector-General in the Israeli Police. He has previously served as district commander of two districts.[136]
Jewish National Fund: In 2007, Ra'adi Sfori became the first Arab citizen of Israel to be elected as a JNF director, over a petition against his appointment. The court upheld the JNF's appointment, explaining, "As this is one director among a large number, there is no chance he will have the opportunity to cancel the organization's goals."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/14 09:57:22
You try to minimize casualties as much as possible
I contend Israel only does as much as they think they should too keep international pressure as low as possible. Their war record really speaks for itself on this front. Our drone strikes kill civilians all the time and have a better record. For everyone killed by the Israeli military in Gaze, civilians amount for as much as 75% of the casualties, most of them killed in attacks that showed no discrimination between the armed and the unarmed. In campaigns that that achieve no long term goals. That's a piss poor record.
Should Israel not be able to defend herself against these attacks?
They don't need this much force to do that.
That's hardly bouncing off the strike
Say that in a few years when this all happens again.
enacting a policy of "If there's going to be collateral damage, don't do anything," is just not feasible.
Who ever suggested they shouldn't do anything?
You keep saying "disproportionate" or an "excess" of force, yet when asked what you mean by this you refuse to explain
Is launching 762 rockets so far this year disproportionate?
I mentioned artillery striking and air campaigns several times. Honestly I'm not going to put 2 and 2 together for you you should be capable of that on your own here.
In 2012 they launched over 2200 rockets at Israel
And as someone already showed, for all the rockets they fire their aim sucks. Killing hundreds of civilians every time a few Israelis get killed isn't helping anyone. Israel could be taking measures to lead to a long term solution but thus far seems uninterested in them. So long as that is the case, I see no reason not to call them out on their regular offensives that don't help anything.
It is interesting reading the distinction you make between the Palestinians and Hamas, yet you do not do the same for Israel.
Um, I've specifically pointed my comments at the Israeli government. And just because people have government positions doesn't mean they aren't be discriminated against. Whenever some local polity wants to build new projects in Palestinian neighborhoods, they just bulldoze the place down. In response to the recent killing of three Israeli teenagers, a mob killed a Palestinian teenager in equally brutal fashion. Palestinian businesses are less likely to get loans from banks. If you're this unfamiliar with Israels domestic policies.
We gave a black guy the Navy's highest honor in 1942. he was still discriminated against as were other blacks. Japanese Americans in the 442nd were the most decorated unit in US military history and they got discriminated against too. Discrimination doesn't stop because you give someone a nice desk job or some medals.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/07/14 10:24:52
You try to minimize casualties as much as possible
I contend Israel only does as much as they think they should too keep international pressure as low as possible. Their war record really speaks for itself on this front. Our drone strikes kill civilians all the time and have a better record. For everyone killed by the Israeli military in Gaze, civilians amount for as much as 75% of the casualties, most of them killed in attacks that showed no discrimination between the armed and the unarmed. In campaigns that that achieve no long term goals. That's a piss poor record.
How the feth do you propose the IDF to "handle" this then?
You forget, many of the weapon cache and launching sites are done in populated areas. Schools, hospitals, libraries, etc... are known to store these weapons. You'd need help from the natives to facilitate that...
How do you combat against that?
The IDF even setup tiplines and such for the natives to report where these weapon cache exists.
Should Israel not be able to defend herself against these attacks?
They don't need this much force to do that.
I'd argue they've been awfully restrained. There's only so much they can do before the whole regions blows up.
That's hardly bouncing off the strike
Say that in a few years when this all happens again.
enacting a policy of "If there's going to be collateral damage, don't do anything," is just not feasible.
Who ever suggested they shouldn't do anything?
What's your idea?
You keep saying "disproportionate" or an "excess" of force, yet when asked what you mean by this you refuse to explain Is launching 762 rockets so far this year disproportionate?
I mentioned artillery striking and air campaigns several times. Honestly I'm not going to put 2 and 2 together for you you should be capable of that on your own here.
What's the "appropriate" response then?
In 2012 they launched over 2200 rockets at Israel
And as someone already showed, for all the rockets they fire their aim sucks. Killing hundreds of civilians every time a few Israelis get killed isn't helping anyone. Israel could be taking measures to lead to a long term solution but thus far seems uninterested in them. So long as that is the case, I see no reason not to call them out on their regular offensives that don't help anything.
Why not? You'd rather go "Eye for an Eye" route?
You see, this is the problem with asymetrical warfare.... when one side is even more heavily armed, they're implored not to use disportionate force.
THAT is what keeping this conflict "hot" as the more heavily armed forces is fighting near their opponent's level.
It is interesting reading the distinction you make between the Palestinians and Hamas, yet you do not do the same for Israel.
Um, I've specifically pointed my comments at the Israeli government. And just because people have government positions doesn't mean they aren't be discriminated against. Whenever some local polity wants to build new projects in Palestinian neighborhoods, they just bulldoze the place down. In response to the recent killing of three Israeli teenagers, a mob killed a Palestinian teenager in equally brutal fashion. Palestinian businesses are less likely to get loans from banks. If you're this unfamiliar with Israels domestic policies.
Do you really think that's happening in a vacuum? Or could it be that the radical Palestinians are flaming these sectarian issues as well?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/14 13:59:08
LordofHats wrote: At risk of repeating the point, it's not really a matter of debate that Israel's "lets bomb the feth out of them" strategy has achieved little more than racking up civilian casualties. We're going to do this whole song a dance again in a few years, just like last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, like all the other times going on fifty years.
You can moan about human shields all you want, but it looks like Hamas' strategy of hiding behind a helpless population is working a lot better than Israel's strategy of blowing that population to bits. At least in so far as Hamas is just gonna end up doing this song and dance again a few years from now because Israel seems unable to make the kind of strikes that can cripple the various terror cells that make up the organization.
Maybe Israel should modify their strategy to the US "Massive Retaliation" strategy of the 50s. I like Ketara's idea though. Whatb if the ISIS thing united Iran, the US, Syria, and Israel...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Israel: You've got the dial set to 11, turn it back down to 1 or 2.
Or turn it up to 25.
Gaza is an urban center. WWII shows us what happens to urban centers if the guys with the bombers take the gloves off. I am not advocating this, just saying to ignorant people who are saying Isreal is using total war are woefully uneducated.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/07/14 14:08:57
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
The strikes may seem brutal but compared to what they could do the dial is low, no mass bombardments by artillary, or leveling entire towns. Look how much damage ww2 era tech could do and multiply. Bombs are far more powerful and accurate.
Not good but there only going to put up with rocket fire so long before they hit back, even with iron dome.
Sgt. Vanden - OOC Hey, that was your doing. I didn't choose to fly in the "Dongerprise'.
"May the odds be ever in your favour"
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I have no clue how Dakka's moderation work. I expect it involves throwing a lot of d100 and looking at many random tables.
FudgeDumper - It could be that you are just so uncomfortable with the idea of your chapters primarch having his way with a docile tyranid spore cyst, that you must deny they have any feelings at all.
jhe90 wrote: The strikes may seem brutal but compared to what they could do the dial is low, no mass bombardments by artillary, or leveling entire towns. Look how much damage ww2 era tech could do and multiply. Bombs are far more powerful and accurate.
Not good but there only going to put up with rocket fire so long before they hit back, even with iron dome.
From a targeting perspective the Israelis are acting very restrained. Hamas and their ilk purposely set launch sites and weapons caches where any retaliatory strikes are bound to damage civilian infrastructure and/or cause civilian casualties. The Israelis actually pass on hitting many targets they could legitimately strike in favor of a very limited response trying to take out specific node types within the Hamas structure. For example, yes, they hit the houses of some Hamas leaders and capped them and their families. But the munition types and delivery systems did very little damage to neighboring structures. That is very indicative of a targeteering effort designed to minimize collateral damage.
Now, Israeli intel (like anyone's) is never 100% and Hamas is very good at the deception game and at manipulating public/international opinion.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
Hmn, perhaps an obvious point, but it was interesting to hear the former head of the Israeli Ministry of Defence talk about the Iron Dome on the BBC there. Without out he said the alternative would've been for the Israelis taking a much harder stance against their enemies, amounting to them being involved in more wars. If the Israelis didn't have a way of defending themselves against Hamas rockets then they sure as hell wouldn't be using their strategic strikes method they're using at the moment. Well they've also invested in building bunkers and training people on how to handle airstrikes, but I doubt the Israelis would be using kid gloves if those rockets Hamas is sending over were actually killing people (plenty of people are being injured though, something not mentioned on the news often). The Israelis don't enjoy going to war or killing civilians, but all the money they invest in their military shows just how much they know their enemies are willing to force their hand. The Israelis tactics aren't going to stop the conflict, but they certainly reduce the number of casualties (on both sides). Diplomacy doesn't quite work in this situation given the distrust on both sides (that and the Israelis kind of find it difficult to talk to Hamas when they have primary demands like "yeah, would you mind releasing all those terrorists you have imprisoned, oh and I take it giving us all your land too wouldn't be much of a problem?"). So the Israelis did what they can to put down Hamas' latest spate of attacks with the minimum amount of casualties, but the media puts on hysterics about civilian deaths and people jump on the "Hamas are the victims here" camp. Whatever, I don't recall the media being this biased when American Marines were driving through Iraqi cities shooting at everything that moved, or how little civilian deaths are reported on in Afghanistan (though the fire doctrine of "only shoot if you can confirm you've been shot at, and even then fill out all this paperwork" presumably lowers how many of those occur, at least around those units that adhere to it). Meh, there's worse conflicts out there that are being handled in a far less humane manner, but people seem to jump on this one. Complain away about what the Israelis are doing, but unless you can come up with a better solution what they're doing right now is saying a hell of a lot more lives than what other countries do when handling terrorists (not just NATO like I mentioned, nah take a look at the Chinese and Russia).
LordofHats wrote: I contend Israel only does as much as they think they should too keep international pressure as low as possible. Their war record really speaks for itself on this front. Our drone strikes kill civilians all the time and have a better record. For everyone killed by the Israeli military in Gaze, civilians amount for as much as 75% of the casualties, most of them killed in attacks that showed no discrimination between the armed and the unarmed. In campaigns that that achieve no long term goals. That's a piss poor record.
Your contention is based on what?
Do US drone strikes have to contend with the following?
You keep talking about proportionate use of force, yet when pressed on it you keep declining to state what force you believe to be reasonable.
LordofHats wrote: Say that in a few years when this all happens again.
It strikes me as a difficult position to take to de-cry attempts to minimize civilian casualties, and at the same time complain about targeted strikes against terrorist cells/leaders. So what is your opinion of how Israel should respond?
enacting a policy of "If there's going to be collateral damage, don't do anything," is just not feasible.
Who ever suggested they shouldn't do anything?
You managed to insert a response to Seaward in the middle of our exchange.
LordofHats wrote: I mentioned artillery striking and air campaigns several times. Honestly I'm not going to put 2 and 2 together for you you should be capable of that on your own here.
You're avoiding the question. You keep talking about a proportionate response to hundreds of rockets, but you cannot actually elaborate on what you mean by disproportionate.
LordofHats wrote: And as someone already showed, for all the rockets they fire their aim sucks. Killing hundreds of civilians every time a few Israelis get killed isn't helping anyone. Israel could be taking measures to lead to a long term solution but thus far seems uninterested in them. So long as that is the case, I see no reason not to call them out on their regular offensives that don't help anything.
So because no one is hit (thanks to warning systems, shelters, and Iron Dome) Israel should just ignore hundreds of rockets fired at it. Interesting argument.
Their offensives that don't help? Other than kill Hamas leaders, thus losing expertise and skills, destroying stockpiles of weapons so they are not used against Israel, and the fact that Cast Lead stopped rocket attacks from the Lebanon. That level of not helping?
LordofHats wrote: Um, I've specifically pointed my comments at the Israeli government. And just because people have government positions doesn't mean they aren't be discriminated against. Whenever some local polity wants to build new projects in Palestinian neighborhoods, they just bulldoze the place down. In response to the recent killing of three Israeli teenagers, a mob killed a Palestinian teenager in equally brutal fashion. Palestinian businesses are less likely to get loans from banks. If you're this unfamiliar with Israels domestic policies.
Really? Tally says otherwise;
Government; 1
Israel; 21 on this page alone
And the murder was a heinous act that drew outrage and condemnation, as well as arrests and a forthcoming trial. What do you think happens in Gaza when Israelis are killed? They hand out treats and celebrate. You can compare and contrast the differences
LordofHats wrote: We gave a black guy the Navy's highest honor in 1942. he was still discriminated against as were other blacks. Japanese Americans in the 442nd were the most decorated unit in US military history and they got discriminated against too. Discrimination doesn't stop because you give someone a nice desk job or some medals.
So no actual examples of Israel discriminating, just a series of generalizations.
Spent a couple years living under rocket attacks. It sucks. Though after a month I just roll over and go back to sleep. If its my time to go its my time to go
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
You keep talking about proportionate use of force, yet when pressed on it you keep declining to state what force you believe to be reasonable.
According to the Law of War (or law of armed conflict or something like that) Proportionate use of force is:
Using the least amount of force to complete a military objective. Basically, you must do everything you can to limit collateral damage, but you still need to accomplish your military objectives.
For the US, this means that we don't generally drop a JDAM on one dude digging an IED hole on the side of the road, however we will drop that JDAM on a compound that current surveillance and intel reporting says is occupied by a large amount of militants.
How the feth do you propose the IDF to "handle" this then?
Preferably something other than "keep Gaza a third world crap hole where terrorists can control everyone." That strategy has been tried going on 30 years. Not working out is it? Israel needs to develop a comprehensive policy to weaken Hamas' rule, but it's fairly obvious by now Israel likes keeping Hamas in charge. You don't find it strange they dropped the PLO like rock, after a decade of negotiation and working for a peace, to start trying to court Hamas instead? Israel likes keeping Gaza the way it is.
They do need to get Palestinians on their side, but that'll never happen with their current policies which leave them with no one to turn to but Hamas.
when one side is even more heavily armed, they're implored not to use disportionate force.
Um yeah... That's how the whole morality of war thing gets applied by most people. Bombing an entire village to hit 1 target hasn't been in style since WWII.
THAT is what keeping this conflict "hot"
What keeps the conflict hot is that nothing is being done to resolve it. No matter how many bombs Israel drops in Gaza, it's not going to resolve the problem unless they go full genocide. If Israel had a plan for what they were going to do to resolve the conflict, people would probably lighten up on them, but Israel doesn't really have a plan and has shown no interest in developing one or accepting ones others have proposed.
There are countless plans proposed that don't involve dealing with Hamas as a body, but Israel can always fall back to the "we'll do it if Hamas agrees" line which Hamas will never agree to anything more than cease fires so they get to wave their arms and say "we tried guys see!"
Or could it be that the radical Palestinians are flaming these sectarian issues as well?
It's hard to tell which Palestinians are radical and which ones are just angry about being bombed. Current Israeli policy produces a big overlap. The bigger problem in that field is Israel's approach to the population in Gaza, which is to create a enemy population and then cry foul when that population falls into the hands of terrorist organizations.
You keep talking about proportionate use of force, yet when pressed on it you keep declining to state what force you believe to be reasonable.
I've explained why I think their force is disproportionate. Turning that around and asking what I think is proportionate is just dodging the point and claiming its wrong by asking a different question while never addressing the first.
and at the same time complain about targeted strikes against terrorist cells/leaders.
Carpeting Gaza in artillery shells and air bombs and rolling tanks through the area isn't a targeted strike. it's the opposite of a targeted strike.
You managed to insert a response to Seaward in the middle of our exchange.
So many quote boxes XD
You're avoiding the question. You keep talking about a proportionate response to hundreds of rockets, but you cannot actually elaborate on what you mean by disproportionate.
This is why Asia is beating us in Math scores people.
Israel should just ignore hundreds of rockets fired at it.
Again. Who said they should do nothing? It's a fairly vast sea between "you're response is disproportionate" and "don't do anything."
Their offensives that don't help? Other than kill Hamas leaders, thus losing expertise and skills, destroying stockpiles of weapons so they are not used against Israel, and the fact that Cast Lead stopped rocket attacks from the Lebanon. That level of not helping?
It's not helping because Hamas will just do it again in a few years. One of the criteria of Just War is that the goal must be achievable. Israel's goals in their offensives are laughable. They don't even improve the short term security of their state. They don't falter Hamas at all because really, saying Hamas leaders are dying is like tell the Giants they'll never win a game because a few line backers broke their ankles. Hamas cells have an angry and captive population to pull new line backers from. israel's done an excellent job giving them that.
Really? Tally says otherwise;
Government; 1
Israel; 21 on this page alone
Excellent deductions there Dread. You really have me on the ropes now.
So no actual examples of Israel discriminating, just a series of generalizations.
"I'm ignorant of what goes on in this part of the world and choose to just repeat talking points I've heard from other ignorant people and the internet without doing any relevant reading or research and demand that other people do it for me and if they don't they're wrong."
A fine argument.
I'm just curious as to what definition LordofHats is working from
The one that gets ignored whenever Israel and Russia are involved (which is the one we apply to most everyone else in the world as posted by Ensis Ferrae). Cause like, when's the last time anyone talked seriously about Chechnya?
LordofHats wrote: Carpeting Gaza in artillery shells and air bombs and rolling tanks through the area isn't a targeted strike. it's the opposite of a targeted strike.
Are you really going to argue the Israelis are 'carpeting Gaza in artillery shells and air bombs'?
Come on, that just isn't close to honest or accurate. You're better than that.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
CptJake wrote: Come on, that just isn't close to honest or accurate. You're better than that.
It's a little hyperbolic yeah, but all this 'Israel uses targeted strikes" nonsense deserves a hyperbolic answer.
One of the greatest feats in Israel's history is tricking so much of the world into thinking they're strikes are targeted. There is so much unexploded ordnance in Gaza that it makes western France look like candy land. Two to three dozen Palestinians are killed every year from undetonated ordnance (and are left out of casualty figures). UN teams have been in the country around the clock since 2006 trying to get rid of all of it. You don't get that many explosives in a country because you're being appropriately discriminate in your attacks..
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/07/15 01:28:02
The best way to prevent further conflict on Israels' part would have been to have agreed to the peace proposal hammered out in the 90's with Fatah. Fatah even agreed to not have the Palestinian capital as Jerusalem proper but in an out lying suburb. Instead Israel did what it normally does and dither at the table till it can assassinate some "terrorist" leader thereby starting the rocket attacks again and keep expanding the illegal settlements (which are built on land confiscated from Palestinians - everyone seems to forget that aspect).
Fatah was seen as powerless by the Palestinians and therefore voted in Hamas, in a few years I am wondering who they will vote in next.
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
Unlikely to ever happen. The most likely outcome would be that the upper echelons of Hamas would be deposed by the lower ones, but as some have shown well, Israel keeps killing the lower echelon leaders and leaving the core leaders untouched, almost like they want to keep Hamas in power A more cynical man might even suggest that certain parties in Hamas are telling Israel who to kill to keep the lower ends from getting to ornery.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/15 01:52:25
LordofHats wrote: Unlikely to ever happen. The most likely outcome would be that the upper echelons of Hamas would be deposed by the lower ones, but as some have shown well, Israel keeps killing the lower echelon leaders and leaving the core leaders untouched, almost like they want to keep Hamas in power A more cynical man might even suggest that certain parties in Hamas are telling Israel who to kill to keep the lower ends from getting to ornery.
Better to face the enemy I know than the enemy I don't know... ehh?
And my new Deadpool avatar is making my comments so much worse than they otherwise should be
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/07/15 03:45:47
Israel has some tough border controls, but it's never stopped anyone from getting Hamas and other terror groups what they want. It has left Palestinians at the mercy of these organizations who see them as puppets in their PR war.
A more cynical man might even suggest that certain parties in Hamas are telling Israel who to kill to keep the lower ends from getting to ornery.