Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: aldo_14 on April 17, 2006, 06:01:03 am
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4915868.stm
-
hey, it seems that with the entier government run by a terrorist organisation there able to get organised enough to manage a way around the fence finaly.
-
dude, Hamas and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade aren't the same group
-
hey, it seems that with the entier government run by a terrorist organisation there able to get organised enough to manage a way around the fence finaly.
Let's not get sucked back into the old HAMAS arguement, this is a different group.
-
To be fair, the initial link - when i posted it - had only a 'breaking news' headline and the briefest of information, so it wasn't clear who was responsible at that point. Of course, let's remember that Hamas might not have carried out this attack, and they may not wish to emperil their position by doing so whilst elected, but if they knowingly permit any terrorist group to operate in the territory they now govern, they still carry a burden of guilt for that.
-
Actually it's two different groups. Although they have carried out joint operations in the past.
-
Ma nishtana ha'laila ha'zeh, mi'kol ha'leilot? :rolleyes:
-
Speak English boay...
-
about the whole Iran thing...
how exactly would they employ a nuclear weapon so as to destroy israel and yet not harm the third holiest site in Islam, the Masjid Al-Aqsa, which is smack in the middle? I have a feeling that the reason that Iran wants nuclear weapons is the same reason that we wanted them during the Cold War. Its reeeeally bad for balance of power when one side has nukes and the other doesn't
-
about the whole Iran thing... blah blah blah
:wtf: How did we get onto Iran? It's a valid point, but go post it in the Iran's Nuclear Ambitions/US Nuclear strong-arming thread.
-
yeah I supose your right, muslums never bomb there own holy sites to get at the infedel...
-
about the whole Iran thing... blah blah blah
:wtf: How did we get onto Iran? It's a valid point, but go post it in the Iran's Nuclear Ambitions/US Nuclear strong-arming thread.
i guess i kinda went on a tangent in my mind
bombing israel -> israel is bad -> us support :( -> us ****ty foreign policy -> iraq -> iran
edit: i say many times that im not the biggest israel fan. the same is not true about israelis. i haven't met an israeli that i didnt like. of course i've only met two... but they were both nice people
-
about the whole Iran thing...
how exactly would they employ a nuclear weapon so as to destroy israel and yet not harm the third holiest site in Islam, the Masjid Al-Aqsa, which is smack in the middle? I have a feeling that the reason that Iran wants nuclear weapons is the same reason that we wanted them during the Cold War. Its reeeeally bad for balance of power when one side has nukes and the other doesn't
I'm all for peace, and I most definately don't want the US or Israel to start a war or destabilise the entire Middle East by attacking these sites, but Iran (rather, their ruling fundamentalists) and in particular Ahmadinejad are a bunch of anti-semitic loonies who would probably rather destroy a Muslim holy site than have 'infidels' anywhere near it. That is not to assume they want them for the purposes of nuking Israel; I think it's most likely Iran do want them and - like N.Korea - it's largely down to fear of a US invasion. But given what Ahmadinejad has said in the past about wanting to wipe Israel of the map, you can understand the worries there.
EDIT;
[q]Sami Abu Zuhri, the official spokesman for Hamas, said the attack was "a natural result of the continued Israeli crimes" against Palestinians.
"Our people are in a state of self-defence and they have every right to use all means to defend themselves," he added. [/q]
Bunch of arseholes. I know Israel have been shelling Gaza a lot (150 rounds a day IIRC), to add a bit of context to what's been happening and the claimed justification, but there's still no ****ing excuse for terrorism. What do they expect this sort of thing achieves? Violence begets violence - we've seen it for the last 4 or 5 decades - and they can at least be honest and admit it's all down to sectarian hatred and propagating the violence that gives them 'strength' rather than any desire to help people.
-
Bunch of arseholes. I know Israel have been shelling Gaza a lot (150 rounds a day IIRC), to add a bit of context to what's been happening and the claimed justification, but there's still no ****ing excuse for terrorism.
Mind you, we've been shelling the empty fields that the daily barrage of Kassam rockets have been fired from. You make it sound as if we're discriminately shelling Gaza up one side and down the other. I know you probably don't hear much - if anything - about the Kassam firings, since so far there's basically been no injuries or damage (who said they don't believe in miracles again?), but if you'd like, I could post every time I hear in the news of another Kassam falling in Ashkelon.
-
Bunch of arseholes. I know Israel have been shelling Gaza a lot (150 rounds a day IIRC), to add a bit of context to what's been happening and the claimed justification, but there's still no ****ing excuse for terrorism.
Mind you, we've been shelling the empty fields that the daily barrage of Kassam rockets have been fired from. You make it sound as if we're discriminately shelling Gaza up one side and down the other. I know you probably don't hear much - if anything - about the Kassam firings, since so far there's basically been no injuries or damage (who said they don't believe in miracles again?), but if you'd like, I could post every time I hear in the news of another Kassam falling in Ashkelon.
Hey, I'm not offering any sort of justification. i'm just saying, Israel has been firing artillery into farmland, fields, etc. And some people get killed (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4910810.stm). And they bomb you, you shell them, they fire rockets, you send in tanks, they blow up a bus, you send an airstrike... ultimately the first one to do it doesn't matter, because every individual act that results in an innocent death is wrong, regardless of intent or justification.
-
The first one to do it doesn't matter? Can I quote you on that next time there's a debate about the 1967 war?
-
The first one to do it doesn't matter because you have to go back 40 years to figure out who that is.
Someone has to not act like a big spoilt baby and be the first one not to do it.
-
The first one to do it doesn't matter? Can I quote you on that next time there's a debate about the 1967 war?
Yes. Try and remember the meaning behind it, too - there is no crime, no act, in the world that can justify the death of an innocent in response.
-
dude, Hamas and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade aren't the same group
doesn't matter really: they all want to kill jews and destroy israel.
-
dude, Hamas and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade aren't the same group
doesn't matter really: they all want to kill jews and destroy israel.
Hamas mostly does schools and hospitals actually. they just fund the fighters discreetly. they do alot more good than bad, believe it or not.
-
Ma nishtana ha'laila ha'zeh, mi'kol ha'leilot? :rolleyes:
Because on this night we can recline, knowing that all is well and people's lives are not in danger. :rolleyes:
It'll be interesting to see what happens now... there'll be Israeli troops in the West Bank in a big way for a while but this might just accelerate whatever sort of disengagement schedule Olmert is planning and bring about unilateral, final borders more quickly. Something to the effect of "Fine. Here's your state. We're building this wall. We're not letting you work in our country. Have a nice life."
-
Someone has to not act like a big spoilt baby and be the first one not to do it.
And then what happens? Does that party win a prize? A nice big UN Lollipop, perhaps? Ooh, I can't wait!
For the record, and sarcasm aside, Israel has decided not to respond in the past. It went largely unnoticed at the time.
-
You know, if they're going to let Hamas get in power, and then spout nonsense like that, I think the days of Palestinean self-government are rather numbered.
Tick, tick, tick...
-
dude, Hamas and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade aren't the same group
doesn't matter really: they all want to kill jews and destroy israel.
Hamas mostly does schools and hospitals actually. they just fund the fighters discreetly. they do alot more good than bad, believe it or not.
I know all that and the conclusion still is that they do more bad than good. Instead of just terrorists, they're terrorists with schools and hospitals... in short: with a Public Relations machine suckering the people in supporting them.
-
I know all that and the conclusion still is that they do more bad than good. Instead of just terrorists, they're terrorists with schools and hospitals... in short: with a Public Relations machine suckering the people in supporting them.
You have to remember the Pr machine if you want to truly remove them as a threat. When you have terrorists recruiting via the concept of martyrdom and revenge, clearly a bullet isn't going to solve it (unless you commit genocide).
-
For the record, and sarcasm aside, Israel has decided not to respond in the past. It went largely unnoticed at the time.
When?
-
Mah nishtanah, halaila hazeh, mi'ko-ol haleilot, mi'ko-ol haleilot...shebechol haleilot, anu ochlim, chame-ez umatza, chame-ez umatza...halaila hazeh, halaila hazeh, kuloh piguim...
Turambar, consider me the third Israeli you've sort-of met.
As to one side forgetting the whole 'they started' thing, Israel is getting better at that, but as I think sandwich said, people don't really notice that. I mean, what do you think 'unilateral' means?
And Hamas does more good than bad by setting up hospitals and schools...Right. So that the hospitals can treat and shelter terrorists, and the schools can educate everybody on how to be good little Muslim boys and girls who believe that Israel has no right to exist and its purpose is to torment all Muslims, and how to obey the perfect Muslim law to make sure that women have no chance of escaping whatever it is the men want to do to them, and how to take tips from that other paradise on earth known as Afghanistan, and execute people for not being Muslim.
-
well, the hospitals can also treat the 'collateral damage' from israel's 'retaliations,' all the children that accidentally catch IDF bullets, and all the bystanders that the IDF use as human shields.
and all the schools can teach math, science, and language, maybe or maybe not in addition to propaganda. i don't believe that israel has a right to exist either. unfortunately, you guys are set in and everyone's just going to have to deal with it.
they could be nicer about how they go around the place though, so maybe the palestinians would feel a little better about the people occupying their territory. stop doing things like cutting off power and water to villages, and cut down on the checkpoint harassment, maybe help with some social services.
i dunno, i don't live there, but i'm an idealist, which means that most of my ideas won't work anyways
Edit: and by met, i kinda meant -in person- buddies of mine, Tal and Eli.
-
You know, if they're going to let Hamas get in power, and then spout nonsense like that, I think the days of Palestinean self-government are rather numbered.
Tick, tick, tick...
Oh, tug tug. If they have to let Hamas get into power, then palestinean self governance is already gone.
-
I think by 'they' he was refering to the palistenians.
-
I think by 'they' he was refering to the palistenians.
Still applies, doesn't it. i mean, you can't claim to give people self-government and then complain because they elect someone you don't like. The concept of Hamas in government worries me as much as the next man, because it means there is no prospect of peace for a good few years, but the act of stepping and removing them would have the same effect anyways, so it's a classic catch-22. Better to give Hamas the chance to discredit themselves, than to reinforce them through more collateral damage and innocent deaths.
Mah nishtanah, halaila hazeh, mi'ko-ol haleilot, mi'ko-ol haleilot...shebechol haleilot, anu ochlim, chame-ez umatza, chame-ez umatza...halaila hazeh, halaila hazeh, kuloh piguim...
Turambar, consider me the third Israeli you've sort-of met.
As to one side forgetting the whole 'they started' thing, Israel is getting better at that, but as I think sandwich said, people don't really notice that. I mean, what do you think 'unilateral' means?
And Hamas does more good than bad by setting up hospitals and schools...Right. So that the hospitals can treat and shelter terrorists, and the schools can educate everybody on how to be good little Muslim boys and girls who believe that Israel has no right to exist and its purpose is to torment all Muslims, and how to obey the perfect Muslim law to make sure that women have no chance of escaping whatever it is the men want to do to them, and how to take tips from that other paradise on earth known as Afghanistan, and execute people for not being Muslim.
and what do you think the average Palestinian sees? A free hospital? Free school? And in a country/region/territory where the government has become synonymous with corruption. It's not as if they need much prodding to hate Israel (and for Israelis to hate Palestinians), after all, what with the whole bit about innocent people being killed.
-
For the record, and sarcasm aside, Israel has decided not to respond in the past. It went largely unnoticed at the time.
When?
The recent barrage of Kassam rockets fired at Israel from Gaza over the past few weeks initially went without retaliation: [q]In the last two weeks, the IDF refrained from responding to Qassam fire from Gaza and also avoided resorting to artillery fire at rocket launching sites. However, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz said Thursday Hamas was involved in at least two Qassam rocket attacks in the past week along with Fatah and Islamic Jihad.[/q]
From: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3210491,00.html
Remember back in 2001, the "Tenet Plan"? Yeah (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/tenet1.html):
[q] Below is a summary of both sides' implementation of the Tenet Plan:
Both parties will work to stabilize the security environment
Israel
* Israel refrained from responding to almost all of the more than 150 Palestinian attacks
* IDF operates under strict rules of engagement and has only responded to PA aggression
Palestinian Authority
* Palestinians planted four large bombs in major cities- one containing phosphorous, a chemical that causes severe burns [/q]
The list of how each side implemented the Tenet Plan goes on beyond that in the article, of course.
Another example, back in 2002 (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Speeches%20by%20Israeli%20leaders/2002/Briefing%20by%20Minister%20Tzipi%20Livni-%20Maj%20Gen%20Amos%20Gil) (quoted paragraphs 7-8):
[q]As noted, since the establishment of this government and since we adopted the Mitchell and then the Tenet reports, all possible attempts have been made on our part to calm the situation. To remind you, there was a unilateral cease-fire which ended after ten days with the attack at the Dolphinarium; a meeting between the Foreign Minister and Yasser Arafat at Dahaniya in an attempt to give extra content to the Tenet report in terms of a timetable; we adopted every suggestion made by General Zinni since his arrival in Israel.
Moving ahead to recent events, we held back and refrained from responding to the terrorist attack which took place in Jerusalem a few days before the Seder night, with the aim of trying to enable General Zinni to succeed in his mission, in the understanding that the primary interest is to achieve quiet in the region and that this is a common interest of Israel, the USA and the international community. As I said earlier, it is also a common interest for other countries in the region. It is a common interest of the Palestinian nation, too, although unfortunately not of its leader, Yasser Arafat, who is acting in a completely different way.[/q]
Now I'm not saying that Israel had made it any sort of policy not to resepond to attacks on her citizens. To do so would be suicide. But there have been definite times when we have specifically not responded to provocation, in the hope that perhaps we could break the cycle of violence. It never worked.
Just like the Gaza pullout. Instead of continuing the never-ending battle in that war-torn area, Sharon decided to finally disengage and retreat. Notice that those are both heavily military terms. We retreated. We awarded the Palestinian's use of terrorism. But forget about the message it sent to terrorists worldwide for the moment. We retreated - disengaged.
What was their response?
Kassams on a near-daily basis for the past number of weeks. A suicide bombing at a falafel stand in Tel-Aviv that killed 9... and what is Israel's response? Restraint (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-mideast19apr19,0,7679591.story?coll=la-home-world). Let's see what happens this time, eh? I'm not optimistic.
-
Well, where did storming in with the troops get you?
-
When not done half-heartedly? Operation Defensive Shield (which, for you newbies and semi-newbies, I participated in) succeeded in drastically reducing the number of terrorist attacks on Israelis. See the beginning of this article (http://www.jr.co.il/articles/politics/spring.txt):
[q]For a conflict that is ostensibely bereft of military solutions, Operation Defensive Shield has certainly shaken things up.
The IDF's military thrust has produced a number of significant results. The most obvious is the immediate and substantial reduction in terrorist attacks. But even more significant are three effects that none of those who counseled against "quick fix" operations seemed to anticipate.[/q]
...As well as the next-to-last point at the bottom of this article (http://www.jafi.org.il/education/hasbara/headlines/nb3.html):
[q]While the IDF is located in Palestinian towns, there has been a sharp reduction in terror attacks and the death toll of Israeli civilians. Yet, Israel has evidently given up on Palestinian intentions to police terrorism - so what mechanisms can ensure this de-escalation is maintained when Israel pulls out?[/q]
Perhaps most telling, however, are the graphs on this page (http://www.ict.org.il/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=439). I've attached the first one; there are dozens more. Two points I'd like to make note of regarding the graph. One, it is a cumulative record from Sept. 2000 to Feb. 2003 of the total fatalities on each side, not weekly or monthly. This means that the graph will either go up (when people are killed) or be completely level (when there are no killings) - it will never go lower. The second point is merely a reminder of when Operation Defensive Shield took place: March 2002.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
When not done half-heartedly? Operation Defensive Shield (which, for you newbies and semi-newbies, I participated in) succeeded in drastically reducing the number of terrorist attacks on Israelis.
that's the one that placed curfews, isn't it? Leading to complaints of collective punishment and denial of medical attention?
Um.... and did this actually result in an end to violence once it was over. I mean, it strikes me as obvious placing an entire region under curfew and occupation would rather reduce peoples ability to move and soforth, but it's scarcely a long term solution.
I looked at the wikipedia entry for terrorist attacks upon Israel in that year (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_against_Israel_in_2002) and there still seems to be attacks. Looking at the graph, the primary change seems to be having more Palestinians killed. For example, this graph;
(http://www.ict.org.il/graphics/GraphPics/Graph1_23.gif)
seems to show a sudden leap in non-coms killed on the Palestinian side.
The general fatality trend kind of shows something similar to what I expect would have happened. Big leap on deaths on one side followed by a leap on the other side, and continuing thereon.
(http://www.ict.org.il/graphics/GraphPics/Graph2_1.gif)
(http://www.ict.org.il/graphics/GraphPics/Graph2_2.gif)
This graph shows a general trend for fatalities on both sides to increase over the Mar-May 2002 period
(http://www.ict.org.il/graphics/GraphPics/Graph2_5.gif)
So I don't see any great achievement beyond people dying. Unless you want to carpet bomb the entire Palestinian territories, any short term operation just increases long term resentment.
-
More or less seconded.