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.
Any word how close to completing their (Israel) mission on shutting down the tunnels on Gaza/Israel side? Up to 60+ tunnels or did I misheard? Total count of missiles fired by Hamas? Cost per missile?
Edit
Spelling
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/03 21:26:58
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
Yes. There are no Hamas missiles. There are no infiltration tunnels designed to have people pop out and kill civilians.
Let's put some context into this however.
Thus far, Hamas' rockets have killed exactly 1 Israeli civilian. Another one was killed by mortar fire on an Israeli military checkpoint. There have been a total of ~65 Israeli dead, a majority of those are IDF that entered Gaza. Thus far every emergence from a tunnel into Israeli territory has been either immediately noticed and destroyed, or have only thus far engaged IDF targets.
Meanwhile there have been 1200-1800 Gazan's killed, with most sources considering the bulk of those as civilian casualties, even the IDF won't confirm a majority of those killed aren't civilians.
I mean, I'm not saying Hamas aren't some serious scumbags, they are, but ah...something is off here.
You make it a mission of your country to exterminate an entire country, said country is far superior to you in military technology, yet, they cry when they lose the war. I'm sorry, civilian deaths are certainly tragic and I don't agree with a lot of things Israel does. Taking out rockets, mortars and tunnels aren't those things.
If you look at the general statements made by anti-Israel people they should just roll over and get murdered by the surrounding Islamic countries, because that's pretty much the only other option they have.
Yes. There are no Hamas missiles. There are no infiltration tunnels designed to have people pop out and kill civilians.
Let's put some context into this however.
Thus far, Hamas' rockets have killed exactly 1 Israeli civilian. Another one was killed by mortar fire on an Israeli military checkpoint. There have been a total of ~65 Israeli dead, a majority of those are IDF that entered Gaza. Thus far every emergence from a tunnel into Israeli territory has been either immediately noticed and destroyed, or have only thus far engaged IDF targets.
Meanwhile there have been 1200-1800 Gazan's killed, with most sources considering the bulk of those as civilian casualties, even the IDF won't confirm a majority of those killed aren't civilians.
I mean, I'm not saying Hamas aren't some serious scumbags, they are, but ah...something is off here.
You make it a mission of your country to exterminate an entire country, said country is far superior to you in military technology, yet, they cry when they lose the war. I'm sorry, civilian deaths are certainly tragic and I don't agree with a lot of things Israel does. Taking out rockets, mortars and tunnels aren't those things.
If you look at the general statements made by anti-Israel people they should just roll over and get murdered by the surrounding Islamic countries, because that's pretty much the only other option they have.
Concur...
FYI... Hamas fired 119 rockets against Israel. That's 119 attempts to kill Israeli.
Yes. There are no Hamas missiles. There are no infiltration tunnels designed to have people pop out and kill civilians.
Let's put some context into this however.
Thus far, Hamas' rockets have killed exactly 1 Israeli civilian. Another one was killed by mortar fire on an Israeli military checkpoint. There have been a total of ~65 Israeli dead, a majority of those are IDF that entered Gaza. Thus far every emergence from a tunnel into Israeli territory has been either immediately noticed and destroyed, or have only thus far engaged IDF targets.
Meanwhile there have been 1200-1800 Gazan's killed, with most sources considering the bulk of those as civilian casualties, even the IDF won't confirm a majority of those killed aren't civilians.
I mean, I'm not saying Hamas aren't some serious scumbags, they are, but ah...something is off here.
There's nothing wrong with arguing that Israel should possibly exercise greater caution when targeting their counterstrikes. There's nothing wrong with querying whether or not Israel perhaps should take more of a humanitarian approach due to their clear overall military competence and far more effective defence system. But then again I could illustrate further context to what you've put above, from the psychological effect of children having to hide in shelters three times a day, the number of missiles fired (it numbers in the thousands), the amount of economic damage to Israel from lost productivity and physical missile and mortar damage, the pure luck in the fact that only IDF targets have been hit in tunnels (and it has been luck, the intention was to get civilians), and so on.
I'm not sure which side in that debate I'd bat for, because frankly, I can see both sides, and I'm not arrogant enough to presume that my opinion would be the morally correct one in what is an inherently morally messy minefield of bad choices and worse choices.
What I object to is the lazy thinking that portrays Israel as some sort of Cobra Commander-esque outfit determined to butcher as many innocent civilians under the pretext of patriotic expansionism/nationalism/racism as they can.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/08/03 21:47:38
Da Boss wrote: Ah come on Ketara. That's a very unfair characterisation of the arguments against Israeli policy here.
You want to talk about psychological effects, okay, but it all swings both ways.
I'm talking specifically about one fellow's posts there with that remark about lazy thinking, namely BaronIveaghs (and perhaps one or two posts made back in the last thread a week ago by various people). Not yours, or Vaktathi's.
Apologies if that wasn't evident.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2014/08/03 23:04:44
Da Boss wrote: Ah come on Ketara. That's a very unfair characterisation of the arguments against Israeli policy here.
You want to talk about psychological effects, okay, but it all swings both ways.
I'm talking specifically about one fellow's posts there with that remark about lazy thinking, namely BaronIveaghs (and perhaps one or two posts made back in the last thread a week ago by various people). Not yours, or Vaktathi's.
Apologies if that wasn't evident.
Sometimes you have to consider the source.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/04 00:35:41
Fair enough on that one, although I'm not entirely sure that ignoring airspace rights quite equates to occupying Gaza.
Because its policy to overfly Gaza at low altitude at supersonic speeds, this os not permitted in most countires under most circumstances. Israel also does this even when there are no rockets being fired.
They only send in troops when they have to, aka when Hamas starts firing off missiles into Israel. Bad things tend to happen to Israeli squads that wander around backstreets in Gaza. Troops are not a constant presence there, except when hostilities have been engaged in.
It is a bit rich to say that Israel is reacting to Hamas, it is more the other way around.
Whenyou look at the shortlist of goods on the embargo list, when you consider the level of bombing and devastation and total overreaction it is unfair to say that Israel is only retaliating to agrterssion, they are aggressors too.
- stop blockading the region of essential goods, and Israel still maintains a blockade list of goods it will not allow into Gaza, most of which are harmless like paper.
See, I still sort of agree with the Israelis on this one. The people were free to elect a Government, and they elected a Government dedicated to the overthrow of Israel. But that action had consequences, because being an openly hostile Government to your neighbours means that sometimes they enact blockades. If you don't want a blockade, don't elect a hostile Government.
Have you considered the possibility that Gaza is hostile because its under embargo. The oppression did not begin with the election of Hamas.
Also ask how you would feel if stuff like perfume and chocolate and parer were considered too good for you, how about toothpaste. The Israelis even banned wheelchairs, refridgerators (in a hot country!)
Take a look:
According to Amnesty International, the Economist, Haaretz and UN reports, prior to June 2010, the following was banned or restricted:
Food. According to a UN report, importation of lentils, pasta, tomato paste and juice has been restricted.[15] Pasta has since been allowed. Sugar has always been allowed.[14] Soda, juice, jam, spices, shaving cream, potato chips, cookies and candy are now permitted.[16] Fruit, milk products in small packages and frozen food products are also allowed.[14] Dry food,[17] ginger and chocolate were at one point barred.[18]
Household items. A4 paper,[18] crayons, stationary, soccer balls, and musical instruments have been, at times, banned for import.[17] According to AFP other banned goods include toilet paper,[4] though the BBC lists it as permitted.[3] According to the Haaretz the following items were banned in 2009: books, candles, crayons, clothing, cups, cutlery, crockery, electric appliances such as refrigerators and washing machines, glasses, light bulbs, matches, musical instruments, needles, sheets, blankets, shoes, mattresses, spare machine and car parts, and threads.[14]
Reconstruction materials. Amnesty International and other organisations report that cement, glass, steel, bitumen, wood, paint, doors, plastic pipes, metal pipes, metal reinforcement rods, aggregate, generators, high voltage cables and wooden telegraph poles are high priority reconstruction materials currently with no or highly limited entry into Gaza through official crossings.[19] A UN report by Kevin M. Cahill said reconstruction was halted because of lack of steel, cement or glass, among other building materials.[15]
Fuel. Fuel had not been imported from Israel since 2008. While fuel is available from Egypt, in contrast to Israeli fuel, it damages the newer cars in Gaza and causes malfunctions. Israel allowed only limited amounts of industrial fuel into Gaza prior to June 2010.[14]
Agriculture and fishing. According to Gisha, fishing ropes and rods, ginger and chocolate, hatcheries and spare parts for hatcheries, were at one point barred.[18]
Medical material. Batteries for hearing aids have been restricted.[15] Wheelchairs, at various times, have been banned.[17]
According to the Haaretz, the number of items allowed into Gaza, as of May 2010, is about 100. Before the blockade, some 4,000 items were allowed. Gisha states that a large Israeli supermarket holds 10,000-15,000 items.
The only reason to ban most of these items is to oppress the people, and oppressed people lash out.
Israel hasn't left Gaza, its merely pulled the settlers out
Wait, what? They've pulled out all their guys, but they haven't left?
Ok, lets take 'Ketara logic' to its full conclusion.
The US and UK did not occupy Iraq because we didn't move in settlers.
It doesn't matter how many or how few Israeli settlements there are, what matters is how many soldiers there are and how much the Israeli state dictates what Gaza can have.
Israel will have pulled out of Gaza when Gaza is free,
They rule themselves. So they're free in that regard.
They rule tyhemselves so long as they build no infraastructure, own negligible property and don't import items too good for them. Come on, think it through.
when people can come and go and trade without Israeli interference.
I think you need to differentiate between a 'blockade' and an 'occupation'. The two are different things. The Israelis left Gaza. Just because they continue to have an effect on the economy of Gaza doesn't mean they own or occupy Gaza.
Israel occupies Gaza by exercising direct control over Gaza. Due to modern technology the boots on the ground dont need to be on the same ground, thery just need to control the same ground.
Extensive item bans are direct control, infrastructure dismantling is control, let alone assassination or kidnapping of those individuals capable of trying to build said infrastructure. As what happened to the technical manager of Gazas only working power station.
Look Gaza might have their own electricity.... kidnap the person behind it, and put him on trail in a kangaroo court.
You should know from your experiences with Zanu PF that you don't need to be present to occupy, you just need to be a short drive away and every now and then come back and take anything needed to stabilise an infrastructure. Only in Israelis case the policy is well through out, not random acts of state looting.
It takes a lot of infrastructure to build a viable community with modern technology, Gaza is systematically denied this, and whatever is built is knocked down.
We know this is true because of the targets Israel chooses. Unlike Hamas rockets Israel has pinpoint accuracy, yet still manages to bomb Un shelters, even twice bombed a centre operated by the Chinese government. This was most likely a message.
When Israel stops blocking the Gazan's and other Palestinian's right to representation and sovereign status.
See, I'm against Israel continuing to block Palestine being recognised independently at the UN. I just don't equate that with Israel occupying Gaza. I just see it as.....well, Israel blocking recognition of Palestine at the UN.
Gaza would be part of the Palestinian state.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
I can't answer for some of the other stuff on that list, but after seeing pictures of what those tunnels were made of, I can understand why this would be controlled:
Reconstruction materials. Amnesty International and other organisations report that cement, glass, steel, bitumen, wood, paint, doors, plastic pipes, metal pipes, metal reinforcement rods, aggregate, generators, high voltage cables and wooden telegraph poles are high priority reconstruction materials currently with no or highly limited entry into Gaza through official crossings.[19] A UN report by Kevin M. Cahill said reconstruction was halted because of lack of steel, cement or glass, among other building materials.[15]
Jihadin wrote: Any word how close to completing their (Israel) mission on shutting down the tunnels on Gaza/Israel side? Up to 60+ tunnels or did I misheard? Total count of missiles fired by Hamas? Cost per missile?
Edit
Spelling
not sure about cost per missile, but america seems to be willing to fund the attacks by sending $225 Million to Israel. Hey look the republicans finally stopped deciding to filibuster everything and actually pass a bill.
The roadblocks arte between Gaza strip, and are under Israeli supervision, even the ones with Egypt. They enforce the embargo of goods.
So...are you talking about border guards? If not, then I'm afraid you need to be more specific (as I'm not following), and if so, then that would be silly, because every country has the right to stick guards/border control points along their border.
Because its policy to overfly Gaza at low altitude at supersonic speeds, this os not permitted in most countires under most circumstances. Israel also does this even when there are no rockets being fired.
First time I've heard this one, and if it is the case, I would be opposed to it as unnecessary on the part of the Israelis.
It is a bit rich to say that Israel is reacting to Hamas, it is more the other way around.
Whenyou look at the shortlist of goods on the embargo list, when you consider the level of bombing and devastation and total overreaction it is unfair to say that Israel is only retaliating to agrterssion, they are aggressors too.
Errr...if the chain of events is 'Hamas fires missiles' and the subsequent result is 'invasion by Israeli troops', then it is Israel reacting to Hamas. That's the immediate point of conflict that sparks the initiation of Israeli ground offensives. I mean, sure you can say, 'Ahh, but the point before that is the blockade', but then I can respond with 'That's because they elected Hamas, a hostile Government', to which you respond with, 'Yes but historical event x', and I do the same, ad infinitum until you end up in the figurative Garden of Eden.
To make any kind of meaningful statement about causation here, you kind of have to assume that there's free will involved, and look for where it could have occurred differently. Israel ONLY launches ground offensives when they are physically attacked. The blockade is in place all year round, and for the vast majority of the time, having the blockade in place does not force Hamas to fire missiles. Those are one off events, and occur more in relation to a combination of other factors coinciding, as opposed to purely the blockade.
Have you considered the possibility that Gaza is hostile because its under embargo. The oppression did not begin with the election of Hamas.
The blockade began due to the election of Hamas and the battle for Gaza. I think that Israel behaved unacceptably during several key points of that election, but the initiation of the blockade was mainly instituted because Hamas gained control. Now whilst you can do the same as above, and point to another historical event prior to that one as the ultimate cause of events in an attempt to make the Israeli's aggressors, like above again, I can keep pointing to prior events to that back to the start of the Universe.
Gaza was hostile to Israel prior to embargo. But Israel launched the embargo primarily in response to the takeover of power by Hamas (legally and illegally). Which as stated, I can understand, and don't fully disagree with. It's attempting to use economic pressure to force a change in circumstance desirable to you (as is being done with Russia). At this point, I'd say it hasn't been nearly as effective as hoped up until this point(missiles still got over the border), and indeed, if the situation were still the same, would be ready to recommend them attempting other means by about now.
However, this entire round of the conflict has been sparked by the fact that Hamas is being strangled. World circumstances have changed, and Syria/Iran no longer fund them. Therefore this whole blockade may have actually achieved it's objectives after all (the deposition of Hamas) when combined with current Israeli military movements. Whether that will spawn a new group is difficult to say at this stage, but with the elimination of Hamas, progress may finally be possible.
Ok, lets take 'Ketara logic' to its full conclusion.
The US and UK did not occupy Iraq because we didn't move in settlers.
We moved in soldiers who were there 24/7 a day and ruled directly. So your weird twisted version of my logic is factually inaccurate from the word go.
It doesn't matter how many or how few Israeli settlements there are, what matters is how many soldiers there are
There are no soldiers stationed directly there. Soldiers existing in potentia are not soldiers occupying in reality. This is a case of grammar I'm afraid.
They rule tyhemselves so long as they build no infraastructure, own negligible property and don't import items too good for them. Come on, think it through.
You could argue that due to American sanctions on Iran, Iran is currently occupied by America using this logic. I'm sorry, but it doesn't work.
Economic restrictions imposed from outside the border are not the same thing as an occupation. An occupation is
'the action, state, or period of occupying or being occupied by military force.' And this is clearly not the case with Gaza. Groundpounders are only present at a time of direct conflict and hostilities.
Israel occupies Gaza by exercising direct control over Gaza.
So does Russia occupy Europe by exercising economic control over their gas supply? Does my local government occupy my house by influencing my ability to buy bombs and military grqade munitions on the open market? Exercising control does not equate to a military occupation. I can't ram this home any more forcefully. If that is your usage of the term 'military occupation', your usage is incorrect.
You should know from your experiences with Zanu PF that you don't need to be present to occupy, you just need to be a short drive away and every now and then come back and take anything needed to stabilise an infrastructure. Only in Israelis case the policy is well through out, not random acts of state looting.
Zanu PF does not occupy. They're the Government. Technically, every Government occupies its own country, which is why it would be silly to claim that Zanu PF occupies Zimbabwe. It's like accusing America of being occupied by America. Or indeed, Gaza of being occupied by Hamas.
It takes a lot of infrastructure to build a viable community with modern technology, Gaza is systematically denied this, and whatever is built is knocked down.
Okay. This is still not military occupation.
We know this is true because of the targets Israel chooses. Unlike Hamas rockets Israel has pinpoint accuracy, yet still manages to bomb Un shelters, even twice bombed a centre operated by the Chinese government. This was most likely a message.
Correct. The message is, 'If you set up your mortar next to a UN facility, we will still target counterbattery fire at you'. Whether this is the right choice is debatable, but its something of a murky grey area.
Gaza would be part of the Palestinian state.
I'm not convinced it would be any more. Fatah claims authority, but has little in Gaza. For all intents and purposes, Gaza has become a separate entity. Perhaps it would be better to treat it as such.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/08/04 06:59:10
Two girls with a sign that reads "Hating Arabs is not racism, it’s values." (Photo from The People of Israel Demand Vengeance/Facebook via)
In Israel, racism and extremism are exploding. It began shortly after the kidnapping of three Israeli boys – Naftali, Gilad and Eyal – in Gush Etzion, that led to the assault in Gaza which has seen over 1,000 killed. A Facebook page calling for the murder of Palestinians went viral. In one photo, a soldier posed broodingly with his gun, the word "vengeance" written on his chest. In another two teenage girls smiled happily with a banner saying, “Hating Arabs is not racism, it’s values.”
A few days later, at the boy’s funeral in Modiin, the Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu fanned the flames. “May God avenge their blood,” he said to the mourners that had gathered. “Vengeance for the blood of a small child, Satan has not yet created,” he tweeted later.
Bibi got his wish. Over the weeks that followed, videos began to emerge almost daily of right-wing mobs roving across cities from Jerusalem to Beer Sheva, waving Israeli flags and screaming “Death to Arabs!”
Many ended in physical assaults. Last Thursday two Palestinian men were attacked on Jaffer Street in West Jerusalem as they delivered food to a grocery market. The following day two more Palestinians men, Amir Shwiki and Samer Mahfouz, were beaten unconscious in the Eastern part of the city by a gang of 30 young Israelis wielding sticks and metal bars.
Nationalistic Israelis have also turned on Israelis who disagree with them. Photographs have even emerged of pro-war protestors dressed in t-shirts with “Good Night Left Side” prints, a slogan usually used by European neo-Nazis. Violence from these groups has reached unprecedented levels. Last week in Haifa, a city usually presented as a model of liberal co-existence, an anti-war rally was attacked by 700 people carrying weapons.
The worst is reserved for Palestinians. Four weeks ago in East Jerusalem, a group of Israeli men, acting in revenge, poured petrol down the throat of Mohammed Abu Khdeir and burnt him alive. For some his death, just like Jamal’s, was an aberration, an act without precedent from some mad fringe of Israel’s far-right. “What have we become?” an Israeli relative of mine asked that evening, shocked that somebody with “Jewish values” could commit such a crime.
But while the recent spate can be partly seen as a visceral reaction to the tragic killing of the three boys, this kind of violence is not really that new. Take the story of Jamal Julani. He was walking along a street near Zion Square when a group of young Jewish Israelis, one as young as 13, kicked him in the head over and over. "A Jew is a good soul, an Arab is a son of a bitch," overheard one bystander.
There were hundreds standing in Zion Square that evening in September, but nobody, not even a duty officer on the scene chose to intervene. When paramedics did arrive, it took ten minutes of defibrillation and constant CPR to restore the dying boy’s pulse. He had been so badly beaten that police at the scene had assumed he was already dead.
“Abu Khdeir’s murderers are not 'Jewish extremists’” said an editorial in Haaretz – Israel's answer to the Guardian. “They are the descendants and builders of a culture of hate and vengeance that is nurtured and fertilised by the guides of 'the Jewish state'."
Israel has never been the kind of free and open society it has tried so hard to project. Racism did not begin with the murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir or the beating and attempted lynching of Jamal Julani. “Zionist doctrine has always pushed society in a very particular direction,” the academic Marcelo Svirsky told me on the phone two days ago. But it is getting worse. “There is a phenomenon happening right now across Israeli cities that I have not seen before, having lived in Israel for 25 years.”
One of the most striking aspects of this “phenomenon” is how young the people taking part appear to be. Those posting on social media, running amok in lynch mobs and crashing leftist rallies with sticks, chains and brass knuckles are, for the most part, young people – many in their mid-twenties, some in their teens.
Three weeks ago the activist and journalist David Sheen published an article on Storify called “Terrifying Tweets of Pre-Army Israeli Teens”, after he searched the word “Aravim”, Hebrew for Arab, into Twitter. What he found was a harrowing amount of morbid bile presented in the form of grotesque selfies from teenage girls.
Other quotes included "I spit on you, you stinking Arabs", "From the bottom of my heart, I wish for Arabs to be torched" and "Arabs may you be paralyzed & die with great suffering!"
What is going on? For anyone familiar with Israeli politics, the answer should be obvious. In the past month alone the stream of racism coming from politicians and religious authorities has been relentless. Take Avigdor Lieberman, the Foreign Minister, who called on Israelis to boycott Palestinians that don't support the war. Or take Ayelet Shaked, the Jewish Home party politician and member of the Knesset (Parliament) who recently called for the murder of Palestinian mothers. “They should follow their sons,” she said. “Nothing would be more just”.
“Those words the girls said are not in any way strange to the discourse in Israel,” Sheen told me. “When you translate it into English you realise how horrific it is, but in the Israeli context there's nothing shocking about it.”
"Price Tag attacks" on people taking action against settlers have grown in number without the police really trying to stop them. Vigilante patrols lead by extreme organisations like the state-funded Lehava have cropped up across the entire country to stop Jews and Arabs having romantic relationships. Perhaps the biggest victims of this fanaticism have been refugees from sub-Saharan Africa. Locked up in detainment centres, they’ve faced abuse from almost every part of the Israeli establishment. From the hundreds of Rabbis banning Jews from renting flats to Africans, to politicians like Eli Yishai, the ultra-orthodox Interior Minister who in 2012 said “until I can deport them I’ll lock them up to make their lives miserable.”
“Both governments under Netanyahu have been responsible for inciting racism,” Svirsky said. “They’ve put in place a long list of anti-equality and anti-Palestinian legislation in all areas of life. That’s why it’s become normal in political discourse to express extreme ideas towards Palestinians. The obsession with a state only for Jews has bought Israeli society into a racist abyss.”
For Israeli youth, things might have got marginally better in 2013 if a proposal by the left-wing Zionist party Meretz to have anti-racist education included in schools hadn’t been voted down by the Knesset. The bill had been submitted by the Arab-Israeli MK Issawi Freij after a theme park in Rishon Letzion admitted renting out its facilities on separate days to Jewish and Arab schools to “avoid conflict”.
Issawi’s fear that racism was growing in Israel’s schools echoed what others had been saying for years. In a recent study by Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, half of all Jewish Israeli high school students said Arab-Israelis should not receive the same set of rights as Jews. Of those that identified as religious, half said the now familiar slogan “Death to Arabs” was legitimate.
In 2010 a group of concerned teachers sent a petition to the education ministry explaining precisely these fears. “We cannot remain silent in light of the increasing presence within the walls of schoolhouses of expressions of racism,” they said. “We see ourselves as educators who must issue a warning. The prevalence of racism and cruelty is growing among young people in Israel.”
According to Sheen many Israeli teachers, particularly those that teach civics, have become afraid to even broach the issue of human rights in the classroom. Earlier in the year Adam Verete, a teacher that dared to call the IDF an “immoral army”, was hauled before a tribunal and later fired after a pupil complained about his “extreme leftist” views. “They can't even bring up the topic without inciting in their students rage and racism,” Sheen said.
Of course, militarism and nationalism have always been part of the Israeli education system; embedded in history books, on maps on the walls, in cartoons of Palestinians on camel backs. But under Netanyahu’s watch, things seem to have gone further. The first major change of the former education minister Gideon Sa’ar, a man who described teachers as “lifelong draftees”, was to enlarge a programme designed to inspire even more enthusiasm for the army.
“Service in the IDF is not only an obligation but a privilege and a social value,” Sa’ar said at the time. “The connection between the school system and the IDF will become stronger in the context of the programme that I initiated." The budget for civic education, a rare space for critical debate on Israel and its “democratic values”, was cut in favour of an orthodox Jewish studies curriculum. Heritage tours to Hebron were introduced as a way of increasing support for settlements and the idea of Greater Israel. And whatever passing reference to an alternative Palestinian narrative that remained in school textbooks, was quickly removed.
“During the 1990s and early 2000s there was some kind of attempt to be more factual,” Nurit Peled-Elhanan, a professor of language and education at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem told me. “There was an effort to be more academic and scientific, to speak about Palestinians, even if the ideology was the same. Today it’s back to simplified stories and sheer indoctrination. It’s going backwards.”
Though Israel remains a multicultural place, for the most part Palestinians and Israelis live deeply separate lives. Within the 1948 borders just five non-segregated schools are available for young children to meet and learn about one another. Within the occupied territories, physical barriers introduced after the Second Intifada mean contact is almost non-existent.
“There used to be so many more casual opportunities for Israelis and Palestinians to get to know each other,” Sheen said. “Now you have a whole generation – the terrifying-tweets cohort – that has never even known a Palestinian.”
Beyond the physical barriers the mental walls are perhaps even stronger. “I grew up without knowing any Palestinians,” Peled-Elhanan said. “All I had to do was cross to the other side of the city but the thought never occurred to me. This was the kind of education we got – that Palestinians if they exist at all, exist as an obstacle.”
Israel likes to use its status as the region’s only European-style democracy to fudge criticism of its occupation and siege. Usually this works. There is, particularly in the Jewish diaspora, a monumental gap between how Israel is represented and what is actually happening. But in the present conflict, with over 1,000 dead in Gaza and youngsters pouring through Israel in violent mobs, these delusions may finally be coming undone.
For those that live in Israel that do not support the war or the right-wing government, it is becoming more difficult to voice an opinion, and some people are weighing up their options. “Two nights ago there was big protest in Tel Aviv,” Sheen said. “A long-time leftist was holding up a sign that said ‘flee while you can’. In conversations I’ve had with hard-core activists, everyone has said they are preparing an escape plan. For people that have children or want to have children, this is no place to raise them.”
“[Israel should] designate certain open areas on the Sinai border, adjacent to the sea, in which the civilian population will be concentrated, far from the built-up areas that are used for launches and tunneling. In these areas, tent encampments will be established, until relevant emigration destinations are determined.”
And for those who don’t leave:
“[Gaza should be] shelled with maximum fire power. The entire civilian and military infrastructure of Hamas, its means of communication and of logistics, will be destroyed entirely, down to their foundations.”
To ensure maximum misery of the Palestinian people, he also adds that all electricity and water should be cut off from Palestinian use.
All bodes well for the future then eh ?
Concentration camps and mass exterminations .....?!?
Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/04 08:30:53
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
I found those links interested so I poked a little deeper into them. The first article, which you quoted, comes from a chap called Phillip Kleinfeld.
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/israeli-racism-gaza-kleinfeld-511?utm_source=vicefbuk He's an aspiring journalist specialising in anti-facism, but if you scroll through his Twitter/Tumblr, you find that he's almost exclusively 95% about anti-Israel stuff on Palestine. That in no way invalidates anything he says necessarily, but I do feel it's necessary to set some context about the author of the piece.
It should also be recognised that he very deliberately sets a narrative with that piece. There are some very important points raised about the discrimination against Palestinians within Israel, and the slow rise of the nationalistic right wing. A lot of the writing is hyperbolic though, and examples very clearly cherry picked to give a specific image, in a way that I could do here to try and prove that facism was on the rise in the UK, or communism, or suchlike. It's not a bad piece, he conducts a lot of the interviews himself, but his writing is far from the impartiality a good journalist should strive for.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/08/01/israeli-newspaper-when-genocide-is-permissable/ With regards to the second link, the article being slated has been removed from the main newspapers website, and the author forbidden from publishing anymore using that platform. The blogger's article was in no way vetted by the newspaper, and was effectively a self-publication.
The Times of Israel maintains an open blog platform: Once we have accepted bloggers, we allow them to post their own items. This trust has rarely been abused. We are angry and appalled that it was in this case, and will take steps to prevent a recurrence.
So yes, I'm not sure the article proves anything except that occasionally a controversial post or piece gets published by online bloggers occasionally, God only knows I've seen enough of them put up on the Daily Mail/Guardian/wherever websites over the years.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/07/08/israeli-lawmaker-calls-for-genocide-of-palestinians-gets-5000-facebook-likes/ Pertaining to the third article, the woman in question who made the post under discussion represents the far right religious Zionist party 'Jewish Home'. She is a member of Knesset, which is disgusting, but then again, we have George Galloway here in the UK, they have Marine Le Pen in France, and so on. Unfortunately, there are usually enough nasty people on any countries political scene, and due to the political system set up in Israel, the religious far right can wield excessive power (something I believe they should change). It also doesn't help that in terms of social dynamics, the far right in Israel seems to have far more children, and it's beginning to affect the balance of power between secular and religious there. I don't believe it's such a big issue right now, but it may well be in a quarter of a centuries time.
The post he made that's being slammed was actually not quoted in entirety in that original link (again, a spot of cherry picking). It's still a very controversial post, but not quite so damning. There's a lot of throwing around of the terms 'concentration camps' and 'genocide' in the article, but those phrases are actually somewhat misleading, and several crucial points are left out altogether or rearranged to inspire shock/horror/disgust. His original op-ed piece and facebook post basically lay out the following as his solution for the situation:
1. Accept that as things stand, Gaza is a mess, the two state solution is not working.
2. Temporarily remove the population of Gaza to specifically established camps (run in strict accordance with international law, so with international observers, etc), level Gaza (as it's a dump), and rebuild it. Treat those who refuse to co-operate as Hamas fighters. Make their situation untenable by killing them or cutting off essentials whilst the resettlement/rebuilding in Gaza is in progress.
3. Officially absorb Gaza as part of Israel. Make the Gazans into official Israeli citizens after a short period of time and rehouse them in the newly rebuilt cities(after winnowing out the Hamas fighters). Alternatively, as many Gazans simply just want to get out of Gaza, offer them generous resettlement immigration grants and help to relocate them elsewhere in the world depending on where they want to go.
Now this is highly controversial, and is worrying on several humanitarian fronts(mainly with regards to Palestinians who disagree and don't want to co-operate). But let's be honest, placing people in temporary camps established in line with international law, before proceeding to grant them Israeli citizenship or resettlement packages isn't quite chucking them all in 'concentration camps' or committing 'genocide' as the article so gleefully portrays and misdirects.
This message was edited 8 times. Last update was at 2014/08/04 11:25:01
I found those links interested so I poked a little deeper into them. The first article, which you quoted, comes from a chap called Phillip Kleinfeld.
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/israeli-racism-gaza-kleinfeld-511?utm_source=vicefbuk He's an aspiring journalist specialising in anti-facism, but if you scroll through his Twitter/Tumblr, you find that he's almost exclusively 95% about anti-Israel stuff on Palestine. That in no way invalidates anything he says necessarily, but I do feel it's necessary to set some context about the author of the piece.
It's almost likfe this has been in the news a lot or is an ongoing event worth commenting on.
It should also be recognised that he very deliberately sets a narrative with that piece. There are some very important points raised about the discrimination against Palestinians within Israel, and the slow rise of the nationalistic right wing.
I'm not convinced it's been that slow as such -- merely accelerated by recent events globally, but MMV there.
A lot of the writing is hyperbolic though
I guess he should link to more youtube videos......
, and examples very clearly cherry picked to give a specific image, in a way that I could do here to try and prove that facism was on the rise in the UK, or communism,
Well firstly I think your use of the term "cherry picking" is misleading and hyperbolic. He's constructing an argument or a narrative, sure, and to that end he points out or lists events/actions that he believes support or show X/Y/Z but in terms of the point he's making he's not ignoring or omitting key statistics or the like.
.... I wish you every success in trying to prove that Communism is on the rise in the UK.
Communards might be due a comeback though, this 80s revival appears to be showing no signs of ending soon, alas.
or suchlike. It's not a bad piece, he conducts a lot of the interviews himself, but his writing is far from the impartiality a good journalist should strive for.
Fair enough, I don't see it as being as different in that regards as the rhetoric coming from the other side and that's ignoring all the professional outrage/click bait merchants like Hannity et al referenced earlier.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/08/01/israeli-newspaper-when-genocide-is-permissable/ With regards to the second link, the article being slated has been removed from the main newspapers website, and the author forbidden from publishing anymore using that platform. The blogger's article was in no way vetted by the newspaper, and was effectively a self-publication.
I'm more astonished/horrified a ( presumably) professional outlet saw fit to publish it.
One would suggest he " he very deliberately sets a narrative with that piece" , that " A lot of the writing is hyperbolic though" and uses " examples very clearly cherry picked to give a specific image" which is fine ..? No complaints or outrage over that.
The Times of Israel maintains an open blog platform: Once we have accepted bloggers, we allow them to post their own items. This trust has rarely been abused. We are angry and appalled that it was in this case, and will take steps to prevent a recurrence.
So yes, I'm not sure the article proves anything except that occasionally a controversial post or piece gets published by online bloggers occasionally, God only knows I've seen enough of them put up on the Daily Mail/Guardian/wherever websites over the years.
YMMV here but I don't recall any of the publications you mention publishing pieces arguing for genocide.
.. except in the housing market perhaps.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/07/08/israeli-lawmaker-calls-for-genocide-of-palestinians-gets-5000-facebook-likes/ Pertaining to the third article, the woman in question who made the post under discussion represents the far right religious Zionist party 'Jewish Home'. She is a member of Knesset, which is disgusting, but then again, we have George Galloway here in the UK, they have Marine Le Pen in France, and so on. Unfortunately, there are usually enough nasty people on any countries political scene, and due to the political system set up in Israel, the religious far right can wield excessive power (something I believe they should change). It also doesn't help that in terms of social dynamics, the far right in Israel seems to have far more children, and it's beginning to affect the balance of power between secular and religious there. I don't believe it's such a big issue right now, but it may well be in a quarter of a century's time.
How much power does Galloway have ? Le Pen has a bit more influence -- one notes the horrific scenes in Paris t'other weekend which was appalling in scope and nature and can't help but wonder ....
We're broadly agreed , ish, on the why this is happening but I still don't think that excuses a Govt. minister saying that and not -- AFAIK -- being sacked or censured.
... makes our politics look so dull in comparison.
Or sensible, it's so easy to get those two confused.
The post he made that's being slammed was actually not quoted in entirety in that original link (again, a spot of cherry picking). It's still a very controversial post, but not quite so damning. There's a lot of throwing around of the terms 'concentration camps' and 'genocide' in the article, but those phrases are actually somewhat misleading, and several crucial points are left out altogether or rearranged to inspire shock/horror/disgust. His original op-ed piece and facebook post basically lay out the following as his solution for the situation:
1. Accept that as things stand, Gaza is a mess, the two state solution is not working.
2. Temporarily remove the population of Gaza to specifically established camps (run in strict accordance with international law, so with international observers, etc), level Gaza (as it's a dump), and rebuild it. Treat those who refuse to co-operate as Hamas fighters. Make their situation untenable by killing them or cutting off essentials whilst the resettlement/rebuilding in Gaza is in progress.
3. Officially absorb Gaza as part of Israel. Make the Gazans into official Israeli citizens after a short period of time and rehouse them in the newly rebuilt cities(after winnowing out the Hamas fighters). Alternatively, as many Gazans simply just want to get out of Gaza, offer them generous resettlement immigration grants and help to relocate them elsewhere in the world depending on where they want to go.
Now this is highly controversial, and is worrying on several humanitarian fronts(mainly with regards to Palestinians who disagree and don't want to co-operate). But let's be honest, placing people in temporary camps established in line with international law, before proceeding to grant them Israeli citizenship or resettlement packages isn't quite chucking them all in 'concentration camps' or committing 'genocide' as the article so gleefully portrays and misdirects.
We disagree entirely here.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/04 10:39:08
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Da Boss wrote: What that is (moving people under threat of force from one location to another) is ethnic cleansing, and it is against international law.
"We come to the question: how is it with the women and the children? I have resolved even here on a completely clear solution. That is to say I do not consider myself justified in eradicating the men - so to speak killing or ordering them killed - and allowing the avengers in the shape of the children to grow up for our sons and grandsons." - Heinrich Himmler
Considering some of the other things Israel has done lately, I don't think international law is a concern of theirs. (Which is a state of affairs I find deeply ironic)
Further, we have a country under embargo, you know what most tunnels are used for, I'm willing to bet? Smuggling. Same as along the US boarder. How do you think they've been able to get enough goods into the place to keep from dying en mass?
The UN reported a year or two ago that Gaza would be uninhabitable by human beings by 2017 due to Israels sanctions.
The other issue I have with all this is: if Hamas has been firing 'thousands' of rockets, then where is the damage? Where are the civilians dead? Iron Dome was tested under ideal conditions and had an 80% success rate (IIRC). Which is actually very good for a missile intercept system. So if thousands of rockets have been fired, hundreds must be getting through.
But clearly arn't.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/08/04 11:09:26
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
It's almost likfe this has been in the news a lot or is an ongoing event worth commenting on.
I thought that might be the case, so I did actually go a bit further back then than two weeks or so. He did a tour of some rallies in France, but generally speaking, 95% of his stuff from within the last year or so is on Palestine.
Well firstly I think your use of the term "cherry picking" is misleading and hyperbolic. He's constructing an argument or a narrative, sure, and to that end he points out or lists events/actions that he believes support or show X/Y/Z but in terms of the point he's making he's not ignoring or omitting key statistics or the like.
By cherry picking, I'm saying that he's only selecting facts which support the 'Young Israeli's are racists/anti-Palestinian' narrative. For example, there's nothing regarding this story, or similar ones:-
That's not to say that there isn't some substance to his article, but it does cherry pick, in that there's nothing there with regards to Israeli/Palestinian youths getting along at all (because it doesn't fit the narrative).
.... I wish you every success in trying to prove that Communism is on the rise in the UK.
I couldn't prove it, but I could write a similar article talking about the number of University students who join communist societies whilst they're at university, espouse left wing politics, make up the majority number in left wing protests/rallies, etc. It would be a load of rubbish, but the point I was making was that by assembling certain 'facts' in certain ways, you can write a story on practically anything that seems legitimate at face value.
I'm more astonished/horrified a ( presumably) professional outlet saw fit to publish it.
One would suggest he " he very deliberately sets a narrative with that piece" , that " A lot of the writing is hyperbolic though" and uses " examples very clearly cherry picked to give a specific image" which is fine ..? No complaints or outrage over that.
The blogger had previously published an acceptable piece, which meant that he could automatically upload/publish pieces by himself to their website. So he uploaded his new piece, there was an outcry, the newspaper actually looked at it, realised what he'd put up, and removed it. It's really no more outrageous than someone posting a racist rant here on Dakka, it doesn't mean Dakka necessarily endorses it or reviewed it beforehand.
How much power does Galloway have ? Le Pen has a bit more influence -- one notes the horrific scenes in Paris t'other weekend which was appalling in scope and nature and can't help but wonder ....
We're broadly agreed , ish, on the why this is happening but I still don't think that excuses a Govt. minister saying that and not -- AFAIK -- being sacked or censured.
... makes our politics look so dull in comparison.
I agree totally. Its never a good thing when extremists start getting traction in mainstream politics.
It again more or less states the same thing (although the translation is a little botched and reads worse if you can't read Hebrew). Like I said, it's a controversial view, and one I wouldn't agree with on several ethical grounds. But it isn't quite 'concentration camps and genocide'.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/08/04 11:23:43
By cherry picking, I'm saying that he's only selecting facts which support the 'Young Israeli's are racists/anti-Palestinian' narrative. For example, there's nothing regarding this story, or similar ones:-
That's not to say that there isn't some substance to his article, but it does cherry pick, in that there's nothing there with regards to Israeli/Palestinian youths getting along at all (because it doesn't fit the narrative).
I fail to see how stories about holiday camps that occur outside of the ME/area of conflict actually disprove his argument that there's been a trend of rascist/discriminatory legislation over the past few years that -- and this in his opinion -- "has" fanned the flames of hatred amongst the local inhabitants , most of whom never or rarely get to meet anyone from the opposition and certainly don't get invited to summer camps in North America.
.
I couldn't prove it, but I could write a similar article talking about the number of University students who join communist societies whilst they're at university, espouse left wing politics, make up the majority number in left wing protests/rallies, etc. It would be a load of rubbish,
Yes it would as none of those people are actually in power or enacting legislation.
but the point I was making was that by assembling certain 'facts' in certain ways, you can write a story on practically anything that seems legitimate at face value.
Obviously.
The blogger had previously published an acceptable piece, which meant that he could automatically upload/publish pieces by himself to their website. So he uploaded his new piece, there was an outcry, the newspaper actually looked at it, realised what he'd put up, and removed it. It's really no more outrageous than someone posting a racist rant here on Dakka, it doesn't mean Dakka necessarily endorses it or reviewed it beforehand.
The difference being of course Dakka isn't a news site -- toy soldiers/geekery aside of course -- and isn't publishing articles on situations in the ME. Given that the topic is obviously a little bit ... firey ... with regards to inflammatory rhetoric and calls for mass murder of Z/X/Y with monotonous regularity it's beyond a joke that this was permissible from a serious site.
If this had been an equally -- if not more -- hate filled rant from a Muslim site or publication I think it fair to say it would have been bandied about all over the place as "proof" of blah blah blah.
I did click through to the original article and again -- even with talk of "resettlement packages" -- still think it's a horrific piece that does indeed invoke concentration camps and the spectre of genocide and actually makes what he said worse.
Especially
Subsequent to the elimination of terror from Gaza, it will become part of sovereign Israel and will be populated by Jews. This will also serve to ease the housing crisis in Israel.
.
which is pretty much a call for Lebensraum.
Take your word for it with regards to the hebrew version.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
“[Israel should] designate certain open areas on the Sinai border, adjacent to the sea, in which the civilian population will be concentrated, far from the built-up areas that are used for launches and tunneling. In these areas, tent encampments will be established, until relevant emigration destinations are determined.”
And for those who don’t leave:
“[Gaza should be] shelled with maximum fire power. The entire civilian and military infrastructure of Hamas, its means of communication and of logistics, will be destroyed entirely, down to their foundations.”
To ensure maximum misery of the Palestinian people, he also adds that all electricity and water should be cut off from Palestinian use.
All bodes well for the future then eh ?
Concentration camps and mass exterminations .....?!?
Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss. The abyss gazes also into you
If you're making a serious point addictinginfo is not the best way to substantiate it
And you may want to read the Op-Ed itself instead of cherry picked quotes taken out of context -http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/15326#.U9989fldWLE
Ultimatum – One warning from the Prime Minister of Israel to the enemy population, in which he announces that Israel is about to attack military targets in their area and urges those who are not involved and do not wish to be harmed to leave immediately. Sinai is not far from Gaza and they can leave. This will be the limit of Israel’s humanitarian efforts. Hamas may unconditionally surrender and prevent the attack.
Attack – Attack the entire ‘target bank’ throughout Gaza with the IDF’s maximum force (and not a tiny fraction of it) with all the conventional means at its disposal. All the military and infrastructural targets will be attacked with no consideration for ‘human shields’ or ‘environmental damage’. It is enough that we are hitting exact targets and that we gave them advance warning.
Siege – Parallel to the above, a total siege on Gaza. Nothing will enter the area. Israel, however, will allow exit from Gaza. (Civilians may go to Sinai, fighters may surrender to IDF forces).
Defense – Any place from which Israel or Israel’s forces were attacked will be immediately attacked with full force and no consideration for ‘human shields’ or ‘environmental damage’.
Conquer – After the IDF completes the "softening" of the targets with its fire-power, the IDF will conquer the entire Gaza, using all the means necessary to minimize any harm to our soldiers, with no other considerations.
Elimination- The GSS and IDF will thoroughly eliminate all armed enemies from Gaza. The enemy population that is innocent of wrong-doing and separated itself from the armed terrorists will be treated in accordance with international law and will be allowed to leave. Israel will generously aid those who wish to leave.
Sovereignty – Gaza is part of our Land and we will remain there forever. Liberation of parts of our land forever is the only thing that justifies endangering our soldiers in battle to capture land. Subsequent to the elimination of terror from Gaza, it will become part of sovereign Israel and will be populated by Jews. This will also serve to ease the housing crisis in Israel. The coastal train line will be extended, as soon as possible, to reach the entire length of Gaza.
According to polls, most of the Arabs in Gaza wish to leave. Those who were not involved in anti-Israel activity will be offered a generous international emigration package. Those who choose to remain will receive permanent resident status. After a number of years of living in Israel and becoming accustomed to it, contingent on appropriate legislation in the Knesset and the authorization of the Minister of Interior, those who personally accept upon themselves Israel’s rule, substance and way of life of the Jewish State in its Land, will be offered Israeli citizenship
No mention of concentration camps, instead he wants a mas evacuation of civilians and non-combatants from Gaza to prevent them getting caught in the cross fire so that Israel can combat Hamas with less risk to civilians. His proposal even outlines Israel providing food, water, shelter, electricity, and other aid for the civilians.
You cannot in good faith claim that this was an argument for " Concentration camps and mass exterminations"
If you're making a serious point addictinginfo is not the best way to substantiate it
If you wish to contribute to the thread in a serious manner then it's probably worth you reading what the other posters say.
That way when they say
I did click through to the original article and again
And then go on to reference and quote from that piece that means they have actually read it.
And then you go on to try and make a point about cherry picking and taking things out of context.
Thanks
You cannot in good faith claim that this was an argument for " Concentration camps and mass exterminations"
I can, look :
instead he wants a mas (sic)_ evacuation of civilians and non-combatants from Gaza
so where are they going to put them then ? Is there some vast and currently unoccupied area -- with full amenities -- just waiting for a displaced ?????? people ?
They won't be able to go back to where they were "evacuated" from as
Subsequent to the elimination of terror from Gaza, it will become part of sovereign Israel and will be populated by Jews.
And anyone who doesn't leave -- be it through stubbornness, religious devotion, maybe being held by cowards to be used as human shields against their will....
targets will be attacked with no consideration for ‘human shields’ or ‘environmental damage’....After the IDF completes the "softening" of the targets with its fire-power, the IDF will conquer the entire Gaza, using all the means necessary to minimize any harm to our soldiers, with no other considerations.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/08/04 13:35:04
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Maybe Hamas and the IDF just need a Phelps Swim Spa. Then they could chill out already.
-"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!
You cannot in good faith claim that this was an argument for " Concentration camps and mass exterminations"
I can, look :
instead he wants a mas (sic)_ evacuation of civilians and non-combatants from Gaza
so where are they going to put them then ? Is there some vast and currently unoccupied area -- with full amenities -- just waiting for a displaced ?????? people ?
If you read the Op-Ed and the Facebook post you would have noticed references to the Sinai, and also setting up full amenities. It seems somewhat strange to criticize one poster for allegedly not reading something, then ignoring the actual content yourself
reds8n wrote: Subsequent to the elimination of terror from Gaza, it will become part of sovereign Israel and will be populated by Jews.
That part I do disagree with
reds8n wrote: And anyone who doesn't leave -- be it through stubbornness, religious devotion, maybe being held by cowards to be used as human shields against their will....
targets will be attacked with no consideration for ‘human shields’ or ‘environmental damage’....After the IDF completes the "softening" of the targets with its fire-power, the IDF will conquer the entire Gaza, using all the means necessary to minimize any harm to our soldiers, with no other considerations.
That would be out of context again. The military action you are quoting was advocated as taking place after civilians and non-combatants have left the area.
So still nothing to substantiate concentration camps (refugee camps yes), much less mass exterminations. Unless of course there is an attempt at Israel=Nazi Germany false equivalence
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/04 13:51:25
I think a cessation in the hostilities -- from both sides -- would be an excellent idea.
I can totally understand why Israel undertakes (some) of its actions --- and one is all too aware it's very easy indeed to say that "they should do X/Y/Z" when sat somewhere nice and safe not under threat of rocket attack or suicide bombing.
But -- and all nations have ( or will no doubt) --- step over the line at times, especially when at war.
But too much of this is just.... too far.
One does note -- referring to a point raised by Mr Ketara ( I think, apologies otherwise) -- that the other, mainly Islamic, nations in that area are not exactly falling over to help their brethren. As per usual.
I appreciate that some of the nations - Egypt for example -- have some issues of their own to work through, and there's odd reports today/recently about Saudi Arabia and Isis worries.
But -- and I admit to being no scholar here on this topic -- one would suggest that any deity is more likely to look favourably on those who send help or offer shelter to those in need than those who, I dunno... host football tournaments.
*shrugs*
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
reds8n wrote: I think a cessation in the hostilities -- from both sides -- would be an excellent idea.
Agreed. I would hope that itt opens up the possibility for displays of good faith, rather than an opportunity to reload
reds8n wrote: But -- and all nations have ( or will no doubt) --- step over the line at times, especially when at war.
But too much of this is just.... too far.
Out of curiosity what do you think is "too far"?
reds8n wrote: One does note -- referring to a point raised by Mr Ketara ( I think, apologies otherwise) -- that the other, mainly Islamic, nations in that area are not exactly falling over to help their brethren. As per usual.
One school of thought is that this is now a proxy war between various Middle Eastern countries - not just between Hamas and Israel
No other ME nation wants the Gazans because they are viewed as extreme trouble.
Even if Israel opened up the air and water, they would still be microscopic, surrounded by two other nations that have no interest in letting them in.
To be feasible, the only way to end this is annexation, by either Egypt or Israel. The West Bank is similar, but could be annexed by Jordan.
-"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!
Frazzled wrote: No other ME nation wants the Gazans because they are viewed as extreme trouble.
Even if Israel opened up the air and water, they would still be microscopic, surrounded by two other nations that have no interest in letting them in.
To be feasible, the only way to end this is annexation, by either Egypt or Israel. The West Bank is similar, but could be annexed by Jordan.
This is the solution most likely to result in a lasting peace (i.e., other Arab countries annexing the territories).
I should add that the above article was written by Moshe Feiglin, a hardline extremist whose views are basically repackaged Meir Kahane slogans. He's pretty much the Israeli equivalent of Ann Coulter, and a big name in the settler community. His views do not even come close to approximating the views of most Israelis.
so where are they going to put them then ? Is there some vast and currently unoccupied area -- with full amenities -- just waiting for a displaced ?????? people ?
If you read the Op-Ed and the Facebook post you would have noticed references to the Sinai, and also setting up full amenities. It seems somewhat strange to criticize one poster for allegedly not reading something, then ignoring the actual content yourself
I'll say again :
so where are they going to put them then ? Is there some vast and currently unoccupied area -- with full amenities -- just waiting for a displaced ?????? people ?
There's not like an abandoned city there just waiting for inhabitants.
It''ll be in camps.
That would be out of context again. The military action you are quoting was advocated as taking place after civilians and non-combatants have left the area.
Actually it's "if" they can leave. Otherwise it's all gloves are off, in the area then you're a target.
So still nothing to substantiate concentration camps (refugee camps yes)
, No, refugee camps are set up to receive those who are displaced by conflict, drought or perhaps have fled an area to seek better employment opportunities.
Concentration, or internment camps if you prefer " The American Heritage Dictionary defines the term as: "A camp where persons are confined, usually without hearings and typically under harsh conditions, often as a result of their membership in a group the government has identified as suspect."
seems to fit the bill.
And note that these would be camps ran by the Govt. which has the aforementioned members therein which are calling for the deaths of Palestinian mothers.
Would you walk off quietly with them then ?
One would suggest that history shows that groups that do so rarely do well.
, much less mass exterminations
Except the for the untold numbers of those who'd be left behind.
I'm sure it'd be dead easy to move the best part of 2 million people around that region.
Piece of cake.
. Unless of course there is an attempt at Israel=Nazi Germany false equivalence
Not at all.
I do not think it at all plausible or even in the realms of sanity that Israel believes in a 1000 year Reich, Aryan supremacy or that Jewish people are subhuman.
It's as intellectually lazy as throwing out accusations of anti semitism against any/all critiques of Israel or jewish folks.
Well for starters suggesting forcing the best part of 1.8 million people into camps and then .......
I should add that the above article was written by Moshe Feiglin, a hardline extremist whose views are basically repackaged Meir Kahane slogans. He's pretty much the Israeli equivalent of Ann Coulter, and a big name in the settler community. His views do not even come close to approximating the views of most Israelis.
That's somewhat reassuring.
.. about Israel anyway, is soemwhat horrific with regards to human nature perhaps but that's a whole other thread.
I just worry that -- whilst it's obviously never been flowers and polite applause -- this sort of rhetoric appears to be gaining a lot more traction and even viewed as not being that ridiculous.
Which -- and it's very limited -- isn't the Israel I know/remember.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/08/04 14:14:59
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
It's as intellectually lazy as throwing out accusations of anti semitism against any/all critiques of Israel or jewish folks.
Really? I would have thought that a critique of black folks would be considered racist.
It's amazing, the mental hula hoops people can jump through to claim that you are not anti-semites. It's not Jew-hating, it's Zionist-hating or Israel-hating. They're all the same thing. Over 90% of Jews are Zionists, and Israel is the only Jewish state in the world. End of story.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/08/04 14:16:27
