Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: portej05 on December 30, 2008, 08:00:56 am
-
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/30/2456827.htm (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/12/30/2456827.htm)
Ouch.
-
Again?
-
And the cycle continues.
-
A bit late on this one, I'm actually kinda shocked nobody made a topic about it before now.
-
Well there's not really anything new to say about it. The Israelis are twats for attacking Gaza and the Palestinians are twats for attacking Israel.
Neither side actually cares about their people enough to stop acting in that fashion so why should we?
-
Neither side actually cares about their people enough to stop acting in that fashion so why should we?
QFT
In the end its the innocent folks who care very little about this whole thing and would rather just be able to walk down the street without bombs or rockets falling from the sky killing them.
-
Someone in the region should just invade both and just be done with it. Both states have demonstrated inability of coexisting with each other. Solution? They both stop existing.
-
These Guy's are fighting seance the beginning of History.
And I agree Ghostavo.
If they sign peace. They will attack later. And the cycle will continue.
-
Someone in the region should just invade both and just be done with it. Both states have demonstrated inability of coexisting with each other. Solution? They both stop existing.
Barring total genocide of one side or the other, it'd simply produce more discontented refugees and a breeding ground for future conflict.
-
To be honest they're not at the same level, at least in terms of casualties inflicted to the enemy's population.
Israel is killing much more than its counterpart...
-
But Palestinians are still killing people.
-
To be honest they're not at the same level, at least in terms of casualties inflicted to the enemy's population.
Israel is killing much more than its counterpart...
Such discussion is counterproductive. The fact is, more people are murdered in the US in a month than than have died in the current Isreali offensive. If this violence is to stop, both sides need to stop with the vengeance and the pride.
-
But Palestinians are still killing people.
Yes, of course, but Israeli counterattacks tend to do much more damage(on purpose), and that sucks...
Such discussion is counterproductive. The fact is, more people are murdered in the US in a month than than have died in the current Isreali offensive. If this violence is to stop, both sides need to stop with the vengeance and the pride.
We do now it's not going to stop, at least not now. It'd make much more sense to prevent Israel from exaggerating with its attacks. Obviously, both sides should stop killing people...but it's much more doable for the UN or another important authority to stop or relent Israel's exaggerate counterattacks.
-
Someone in the region should just invade both and just be done with it. Both states have demonstrated inability of coexisting with each other. Solution? They both stop existing.
:rolleyes:
I'm not sure how many nations would be willing to line up and fight the IDF; most middle eastern countries have tried it at one time or another and failed. Aside from the US, China, or Russia most nations would just get their ass kicked up between their ears and even the former probably couldn't do it without paying a stiff price in blood and treasure.
-
Someone in the region should just invade both and just be done with it. Both states have demonstrated inability of coexisting with each other. Solution? They both stop existing.
:rolleyes:
I'm not sure how many nations would be willing to line up and fight the IDF; most middle eastern countries have tried it at one time or another and failed. Aside from the US, China, or Russia most nations would just get their ass kicked up between their ears and even the former probably couldn't do it without paying a stiff price in blood and treasure.
Well, there's a nice coalition of forces (although I must admit I don't know how many remain there) just east of Israel. Of course I know it would be nigh impossible to convince them to do so.
-
You know, Israel is one of the best allies of the USA and...
Well, the rest is obvious. :P
-
Well, to be fair, you can say all you want about Isreal, but the fact they still exist is a testiment to their military prowess and willingness to fight dirty
-
I respect Israeli forces' successful attempts to defend their country in the past few decades but I obviously don't like the way things turned out to be...looks like the hunted became the hunters.
-
Hamas knows exactly what they're doing. They launch rockets at Israel and Israel's not going to stand by and let anyone do that without some sort of response. But Israel isn't going to send soldiers, that's asking for too much trouble for them in any regard (people would cry "Invasion!"). So they use airstrikes, the single most easiest way to attack. Its also the worst way to attack in an urban setting. Collateral damage is pretty much guaranteed, and anyone who dies from it is instantly a martyr and ratchets up sympathy from the world. It's win-win for Hamas.
-
It's disturbing but Axem's correct. It's no secret how the IDF is going to respond to attacks, so when Hamas launches a rocket out of some schoolyard they know exactly what will happen in the end. It's bad enough Israel is is killing innocents when it strikes back but the fact that Hamas is purposely sacrificing its own civilians is even more so.
-
The problem is both fight for their right to exist. I believe Israel has a firm right to exist, but that very existence brews thousands of years of armed conflict. What I found interesting is how Egypt is taking Israel's side. If the other Muslim countries did the same thing that Egypt did with Israel (acknowledge their right to exist), I think middle-east conflict would simmer down.
-
Egypt just doesn't want the IAF to blow up the Suez Canal like the threatened to all those years ago. It's not like their bombs are any weaker now :)
-
The million dollar question is...what should Israel do? They did try unsuccessfully for another cease fire agreement and it seems like Hamas just keeps firing rockets into Israel. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Take action, take inaction, try and negotiate....seems like these are all non starters.
-
Someone in the region should just invade both and just be done with it. Both states have demonstrated inability of coexisting with each other. Solution? They both stop existing.
You sound like a Shivan now... :drevil:
...then again, I share similar sentiments, only that I prefer the use of nukes if something as such was not so barbaric.
-
yeah cause using nuclear weapons are funny like cancer
To further expand i think Ghost was aiming for a third party to attempt to subjugate them into peace not that they needed to have a mass genocide of both parties which judging by your comment you seem to advocate if only nukes were so ... unclean
-
yeah cause using nuclear weapons are funny like cancer
Nukes are much funnier than cancer. :nod:
Israel will get nuked sooner or later though. It's just inevitable. Not neccesarily by a foreign country, but if I were a muslim terrorist with a rogue nuke, I know I'd have to think long and hard before I tried to smuggle it into the distant enemy (US) when I had those much closer and more direct enemies at my doorstep. The only thing that would stop that, of course, would be collateral damage to my friends and sacred sites, so I'd have to think hard.
But still, it's got a higher chance than pretty much any other country other than Pakistan and India IMO.
-
yeah cause using nuclear weapons are funny like cancer
Nukes are much funnier than cancer. :nod:
Only in fiction - in Real Life, nukes are not funny. :no:
-
The only thing that would stop that, of course, would be collateral damage to my friends and sacred sites, so I'd have to think hard.
then you'd think 'Tel Aviv'
-
This'll do wonders for recruitment.
-
The million dollar question is...what should Israel do? They did try unsuccessfully for another cease fire agreement and it seems like Hamas just keeps firing rockets into Israel. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Take action, take inaction, try and negotiate....seems like these are all non starters.
You have to remember that Israel are responsible for Hamas being in control in the first place. They had a much better chance with the PLO who are much more moderate and Who would have stomped on Hamas from a great height if they were in charge. Rocket attacks from Hamas would have been a challenge to their authority and if Israel had understood that they might have actually been able to broker a peace deal.
Instead they spent years and years trying to drive the PLO from power by hamstringing them only to have Hamas win the elections because the PLO were seen as ineffectual. :rolleyes:
-
To be honest they're not at the same level, at least in terms of casualties inflicted to the enemy's population.
Israel is killing much more than its counterpart...
Umm yes... this is the goal in war to kill them before they kill you. Unless you somehow envision WWII fighters sitting down and deciding that each side will lose 50 people on this particular day of fighting cause it's only fair. :doubt:
"Being militarily weak does not make the Palestinians right."
But Palestinians are still killing people.
Yes, of course, but Israeli counterattacks tend to do much more damage(on purpose), and that sucks...
Such discussion is counterproductive. The fact is, more people are murdered in the US in a month than than have died in the current Israeli offensive. If this violence is to stop, both sides need to stop with the vengeance and the pride.
We do now it's not going to stop, at least not now. It'd make much more sense to prevent Israel from exaggerating with its attacks. Obviously, both sides should stop killing people...but it's much more doable for the UN or another important authority to stop or relent Israel's exaggerate counterattacks.
Exaggerated counterattacks? You mean to say that “one of the most powerful armies in the world” has been bombing Gaza for days, deploying massive air power, dropping hundreds of bombs, and ultimately killing a grand total of 50 civilians or so in the “most crowded place on earth?”
There are two options here: A) The Israeli army is not targeting civilians, or B) Israeli pilots suck. We tend to go with option A.
Israel goes to incredible lengths to avoid civilian casualties, by deploying precise ammunition and specialized techniques. In fact, nobody in the world tries to do this harder than Israel. Even endangering the lives of her own soldiers.
The problem is both fight for their right to exist. I believe Israel has a firm right to exist, but that very existence brews thousands of years of armed conflict. What I found interesting is how Egypt is taking Israel's side. If the other Muslim countries did the same thing that Egypt did with Israel (acknowledge their right to exist), I think middle-east conflict would simmer down.
See this is where most people make the mistake. The people fighting Israel aren't fighting to exist. They are fighting to annihilate and they aren't ashamed of flaunting it. The fact that most the world chooses to ignore it is simply disturbing. Some of the people supporting the people fighting Israel are fighting for the right to exist because they forgot what they started fighting for (annihilation). Or they simply gave up on the prospect of wiping Israel off the map for the time being.
The million dollar question is...what should Israel do? They did try unsuccessfully for another cease fire agreement and it seems like Hamas just keeps firing rockets into Israel. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Take action, take inaction, try and negotiate....seems like these are all non starters.
You have to remember that Israel are responsible for Hamas being in control in the first place. They had a much better chance with the PLO who are much more moderate and Who would have stomped on Hamas from a great height if they were in charge. Rocket attacks from Hamas would have been a challenge to their authority and if Israel had understood that they might have actually been able to broker a peace deal.
Instead they spent years and years trying to drive the PLO from power by hamstringing them only to have Hamas win the elections because the PLO were seen as ineffectual. :rolleyes:
:eek2:
You are not serious! Hamas is on the top of the list of people Israel doesn't want anywhere near them. How could you predict that the ousting of the PLO would cause the Palestinian people, years down the line, to elect a terrorist organization into power? the Hamas rise to power? and thinking the PLO would have stopped Hamas? The PLO WAS in power. And they refused to stop the Hamas what makes you think they would act any differently now?
-
Israel goes to incredible lengths to avoid civilian casualties
I lol'd.
-
:eek2:
You are not serious! Hamas is on the top of the list of people Israel doesn't want anywhere near them. How could you predict that the ousting of the PLO would cause the Palestinian people, years down the line, to elect a terrorist organization into power? the Hamas rise to power? and thinking the PLO would have stopped Hamas? The PLO WAS in power. And they refused to stop the Hamas what makes you think they would act any differently now?
For the same reason Saddam stomped on Al-Qaeda from a great height. They were a threat to his power.
In the case of the PLO it was better to stick with the devil you knew. I saw the rise of Hamas coming. I could see that by constantly undermining Arafat the Israeli government were simply opening the door for extremists. If you didn't that hardly makes my analysis wrong.
And the simple fact is that I disagree with your claims that Israel wants peace. Hamas has actually made plenty of claims that it wants peace too. And until Israel respects the 1967 borders, I won't believe either of you.
BTW I lol'd at the line about electing a terrorist organisation. Perhaps you should check what your countries past leaders were up to when the British controlled Palestine.
-
Israel goes to incredible lengths to avoid civilian casualties
I lol'd.
You can laugh all you like but Sandy can even tell you that to avoid civilian casualties there was a group of like 8 or 12 soldiers that were blown to bits by booby traps because they went house to house instead of just napalming the whole place. And until someone has seen the situation for themselves to dogmatically judge according to what any certain media outlet or outlets want you to see is simply arrogance.
:eek2:
You are not serious! Hamas is on the top of the list of people Israel doesn't want anywhere near them. How could you predict that the ousting of the PLO would cause the Palestinian people, years down the line, to elect a terrorist organization into power? the Hamas rise to power? and thinking the PLO would have stopped Hamas? The PLO WAS in power. And they refused to stop the Hamas what makes you think they would act any differently now?
For the same reason Saddam stomped on Al-Qaeda from a great height. They were a threat to his power.
In the case of the PLO it was better to stick with the devil you knew. I saw the rise of Hamas coming. I could see that by constantly undermining Arafat the Israeli government were simply opening the door for extremists. If you didn't that hardly makes my analysis wrong.
And the simple fact is that I disagree with your claims that Israel wants peace. Hamas has actually made plenty of claims that it wants peace too. And until Israel respects the 1967 borders, I won't believe either of you.
BTW I lol'd at the line about electing a terrorist organisation. Perhaps you should check what your countries past leaders were up to when the British controlled Palestine.
Yes, but they didn't it's not a hypothetical situation. They had the power and they did nothing to stop them.
Arafat WAS an extremist. The whole first and second intifada started and ended under his leadership! There was no opening the doors for extremists by undermining Arafat. They were already there. Everyone was already in place and doing business. The only thing that has changed since then was that the Palestinian people chose to elect a faction with the ultimate goal of the annihilation of another people.
You can disagree with 'claims' but what about facts? Here is where you get it really REALLY wrong. Take Gilo for example. it's a neighborhood in Jerusalem with around 40 or 50 thousand people. to get from Gilo into Jerusalem proper you have to drive down the hill it's perched on and viola! your in J-town. On the way down the hill stretching on either side is a little neighborhood or town called beit tzafafa. When you look at this town you notice three things. 1. it is Arab Muslim town. there are about 4 mosques sticking up. 2. there is not an Israeli checkpoint IDF person police officer or even a measly security guard for as far as the eye can see... and this is between Gilo and Jerusalem... 3. They are doing great business. They live in nice houses. they own stores that all the Israelis go to all the time. And they are happy to live there.
These particular Muslim Arabs decided that they weren't going to be stupid like most of people living in Gaza and the West Bank. They decided they wanted to live in peace and accepted what Israel had to offer them in the way of economic growth and free trade etc... I work in an Israeli business where 80% of the employees are Arabs and most are making more money than me.
So if you want let the media feed you lies about how Israel will never accept the Arabs or Muslims or both there is not much more I can do about it. But in this day and age I would say trust no one. Everyone has their own agendas. Don't even believe what I have told you. Come see for yourself.
I have the uncanny feeling that most people in the world would agree that there is a slightly large difference between an organization whose stated goal was the liberation of it's people and it's country by targeting military infrastructure and an organization whose stated goal is the annihilation of a people and the targeting of civilians. just a hunch though :rolleyes::yes:
-
Hamas have actually stated that their goal is to get Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders. Which therefore makes them "an organization whose stated goal was the liberation of it's people and it's country by targeting military infrastructure "
Funny how quickly people forget when the boot is on the other foot. I've never seen a single Israeli claim that killing IDF members is legitimate. Are you going to tell me it is?
Fact is that both sides are a bunch of hypocrites.
And as for your claim about wanting peace. Give up the bar on the "Right to Return" and then tell me you do. You're happy to have Muslims in your country but only on your terms. Only if they are a minority (despite having been a majority before the formation of Israel).
-
for me the problem is the foundation of the Israel state was built on guilt ( the worlds guilt after the second world war) but its strange no territory was given to the gypsy's or the mentally ill , both were murdered in there millions , but then again they did not have god on there side .............
we have seen that Israel says that they have tried everything ..... everything except returning to the 1967 boundaries......
i do not say that the Palestinians have the right to attack the ppl of Israel , but when you take in to consideration that the ppl in gazza live in what can only be described as a concentration camp, were basic human rights are refused the act of rebellion and to "fight back" can only be seen as normal...
-
i do not say that the Palestinians have the right to attack the ppl of Israel , but
Sorry to pick on you in particular andicirk but I am sick of hearing comments like this from Palestinian sympathisers. Let's be clear about this, there is no "but". It doesn't matter what injustices the Palestinians have suffered, or how comparatively ineffective their weapons are, the Palestinians do not have a right to try and kill Israeli civilians. Only 30 or so people have been killed by these rockets in the last few years. So what! If I were living there maybe I would be one of the Israeli dead. Maybe one of my loved ones. The Israeli government do have a right to protect themselves. Are they being heavy handed about it? Damn right they are, but demonising them for trying to protect their population is shaky moral ground.
Of course the latest Isralei attempt to bring this to a conclusion will fail, as have all others. In the final analysis Ghostavo is right. These two populations clearly cannot co-exist in such close proximity. There will be no peace unless these populations are somehow separated, be it by destruction, displacement, or a third party. This is precisely the kind of harsh and inconvenient reality the international community must face if the human race is ever to achieve any measure of peace. After all Gaza is a comparatively small place making this a comparatively small problem.
-
Hamas have actually stated that their goal is to get Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders. Which therefore makes them "an organization whose stated goal was the liberation of it's people and it's country by targeting military infrastructure "
:rolleyes:
Hamas - Politics on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas#Politics)
The unexpurgated text of the Hamas Charter, first published in 1988
(http://www.palestinecenter.org/cpap/documents/charter.html)
I like article 13 allot but all of them are good. ;7:yes:
the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement.
There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. The initiatives, proposals and International Conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.
so "Hamas have actually stated that their goal is to get Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders. Which therefore makes them"... Liars. It's what they are best at and what they are told is allowed by their religion if it will give them the upper hand to allow them to destroy their enemies. Seriously I can't believe people actually think they know who these people are and what they intend to do in this world without understanding what they live and die for. "Article Eight: The Slogan of the Hamas
Allah is its goal, the Prophet its model, the Qur’an its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief."
Funny how quickly people forget when the boot is on the other foot. I've never seen a single Israeli claim that killing IDF members is legitimate. Are you going to tell me it is?
It's as legitimate as attacking any other nations armed forces. It's a legitimate deceleration of war. I think it's terrible what happened to the captured and dead soldiers in this conflict but that is what they are here for. And when I was in the army that's what I was there for. To Protect the citizens and if it's called for to lay down my life to sustain theirs.
And as for your claim about wanting peace. Give up the bar on the "Right to Return" and then tell me you do. You're happy to have Muslims in your country but only on your terms. Only if they are a minority (despite having been a majority before the formation of Israel).
Hey When the Palestinians have their own state they can let whoever they want into it. But until then why would Israel do about the dumbest thing it could possibly do and allow hundreds of thousands of refugees back into the West Bank and Gaza so that you can have even more hopelessly fanatical people who want to kill you in one place?
And you are Damn right Israel won't let Muslims in the country except under their terms! Just like they won't let anyone into Israel except under those terms. I would like to see one nation that says "hey come immigrate to our country and form your own laws and rules." So if Muslims want to come to Israel and become Israeli citizens then they will have to abide by the laws and rules of Israel.
And they are still a majority in the original plan for Israel. Lest we forget that 2/3 of what was going to be declared by the UN as Israel was given to the Arabs who were in the land (there were no 'Palestinians' back then) and is today called Jordan. But there were those who said they would rather live under Jewish rule in Israel than move. Understandable. But some of those that said that, lied. and they attacked and were beaten. And besides if you want to go back to who was here first then you will spend all your time going back and forth since Israel has changed owners more times than a.... well something that has many different owners.
-
Do I think that religion is overly abused here? :nervous:
-
I love how people seem be able to pull statistics and facts out of nowhere in this thread.
-
we have seen that Israel says that they have tried everything ..... everything except returning to the 1967 boundaries......
Would you agree with me that returning to the 1967 borders would be a process that would take some time. Israel would have to uproot a bunch of settlements and relocate thousands of citizens etc... it's doable but It takes time and there is always a first step right?
Well guess what? Israel already made the first steps. They pulled out of Gaza. Tore thousands of Israelis from their homes and gave control over Gaza to the Palestinians. What did the Palestinians do? Well instead of taking over the Farms and Internationally renowned farming innovations developed right there in gush katif to benefit them and their families and start building where things were left off they destroyed and ransacked EVERYTHING and then it gets really good. Then they started attacking Israel... more than they had before that.
You know why? because they saw that violence and destruction got them started on their way and so like any undisciplined child will do they "fussed" even more. Pulling out of Gaza was just about the dumbest thing Israel has even done.
So Israel has already taken the first steps towards peace and was spit on for it. It's the Palestinians turn. They need to prove themselves before anyone should ever trust them again.
Oh and the Gypsys and mentally ill are not a race
"Romani people, living worldwide
Lom people, in East Anatolia and Armenia
Lyuli, in Central Asia
Dom people, in South-West Asia
Various nomadic groups in South Asia, like Banjara
Irish Travellers, also known as Pavee, mostly in Ireland, Great Britain, and the United States
Sea Gypsies, a number of different peoples of Southeast Asia
Yeniche (people), mostly in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, France, and Belgium" These are all Gypsys. And I don't need to tell you that there are mentally ill in every nation on earth. And don't forget Israel was given BACK to the Jews.
-
Hoo boy.
Splinter, there's no point in getting angry on the Internet. Let's just all let it go.
-
To further expand i think Ghost was aiming for a third party to attempt to subjugate them into peace
Aye.
These two populations clearly cannot co-exist in such close proximity. There will be no peace unless these populations are somehow separated, be it by destruction, displacement, or a third party. This is precisely the kind of harsh and inconvenient reality the international community must face if the human race is ever to achieve any measure of peace. After all Gaza is a comparatively small place making this a comparatively small problem.
Exactly!
And don't forget Israel was given BACK to the Jews.
You do not want to open that can of worms... :doubt:
-
Israel was given to the Jewish people because Europe was tired of having them. And so, in keeping with early 20th century European SNAFU, they dumped their problem on the Middle East.
-
Argh. I want to argue, but its early and i don't feel like doing research and making long, multi-quote posts.
I'll post the simple version.
**** Zionists
Normal Israelis/Jews are fine.
And if the rockets were only hitting Zionists, "Settlers" and the like (through some miracle of guidance), I'd be there shooting them too.
-
Oh and the Gypsys and mentally ill are not a race
"Romani people, living worldwide
Lom people, in East Anatolia and Armenia
Lyuli, in Central Asia
Dom people, in South-West Asia
Various nomadic groups in South Asia, like Banjara
Irish Travellers, also known as Pavee, mostly in Ireland, Great Britain, and the United States
Sea Gypsies, a number of different peoples of Southeast Asia
Yeniche (people), mostly in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, France, and Belgium" These are all Gypsys. And I don't need to tell you that there are mentally ill in every nation on earth. And don't forget Israel was given BACK to the Jews.
israeal never existed before 1948
the jewish ppl have been nomadic and were through out history , living in all the places you mentioned above ,
please when you attack or take apart thre argument of some one else use "real facts and not ones that you have pulled out of the darker regions of your posterior...
and as for the race issue , jeudaism is a religion and israel is a state neither of which are a race , where as roma gypsies are a race, and many other ppl in these travbelling comunities have a single ethnic status where as the jewish ppl , are not orf one race but of many mixed races that all follow the same religion(including all factions of judaism)
as for the issue that returning to the boundries of 12967 will take some time , i agree but it should not take this much time and the only prime minister who ever tried to get towards this was assisinated by his own ppl ,
i whish to clarify that i am not anti jewish or pro palastinian i am against all forms of abuse and clearly the israeli posistion atm is inhuman and futile ,
it is time to move forward and return the lands and to stop hiding behind a religous doctorine to lay claim to the ancestoral home of so many ppl.....
-
Hamas have actually stated that their goal is to get Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders. Which therefore makes them "an organization whose stated goal was the liberation of it's people and it's country by targeting military infrastructure "
:rolleyes:
Hamas - Politics on Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas#Politics)
The unexpurgated text of the Hamas Charter, first published in 1988
(http://www.palestinecenter.org/cpap/documents/charter.html)
I like article 13 allot but all of them are good. ;7:yes:
the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement.
There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. The initiatives, proposals and International Conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.
From the very same page you posted.
Hamas omitted its call for the destruction of Israel from its election manifesto, calling instead for "the establishment of an independent state whose capital is Jerusalem." On 8 February 2006, Hamas head Khaled Mashal speaking in Cairo had clarified that "Anyone who thinks Hamas will change is wrong", stating that while Hamas is willing for a ceasefire with Israel, its long term goal remains: Israel must withdraw from all land occupied in 1967.
So you're quoting stuff from 20 years ago.
so "Hamas have actually stated that their goal is to get Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders. Which therefore makes them"... Liars. It's what they are best at and what they are told is allowed by their religion if it will give them the upper hand to allow them to destroy their enemies. Seriously I can't believe people actually think they know who these people are and what they intend to do in this world without understanding what they live and die for. "Article Eight: The Slogan of the Hamas
Allah is its goal, the Prophet its model, the Qur’an its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief."
Both sides are liars. That's my entire point. But if you honestly believe that they are, why not prove that they are liars and withdraw to the 1967 borders then? You'd definitely see any support from the rest of the world dry up immediately if you did that and they still continued to fight.
Hey When the Palestinians have their own state they can let whoever they want into it. But until then why would Israel do about the dumbest thing it could possibly do and allow hundreds of thousands of refugees back into the West Bank and Gaza so that you can have even more hopelessly fanatical people who want to kill you in one place?
Ah. So it's okay to dispossess people and steal their land because....?
Nope, sorry I can't see how you hope to justify that one.
And you are Damn right Israel won't let Muslims in the country except under their terms! Just like they won't let anyone into Israel except under those terms. I would like to see one nation that says "hey come immigrate to our country and form your own laws and rules." So if Muslims want to come to Israel and become Israeli citizens then they will have to abide by the laws and rules of Israel.
Funny how that didn't apply when the British let the Jews in after WWII.
And they are still a majority in the original plan for Israel. Lest we forget that 2/3 of what was going to be declared by the UN as Israel was given to the Arabs who were in the land (there were no 'Palestinians' back then) and is today called Jordan. But there were those who said they would rather live under Jewish rule in Israel than move. Understandable. But some of those that said that, lied. and they attacked and were beaten. And besides if you want to go back to who was here first then you will spend all your time going back and forth since Israel has changed owners more times than a.... well something that has many different owners.
I've already explained once how that nonsense results in Israel being owned by the Spanish. :p
However there are people alive now who actually remember living in Israel before it became a Jewish state. As far as I'm concerned, living memory is the dividing line when considering this sort of thing.
But do you really believe the choice was "Live happily under Jewish rule or leave and go elsewhere"? Do you claim that no Palestinians were forced to leave?
-
Anyone who uses events half a century or more in the past to justify violence in the present deserves to get either a rocket or a bomb dropped on their head. Frankly I don't care which. So by all means go over there and fight for your chosen cause! The world will be a better place without you. In fact right now I would imagine there are plenty of people in Israel and Gaza who would be happy to leave hostility in the past and live in peace. Why not trade places with one of them? They can live and you can die for/with your cause. Win, win situation :yes:
-
Guys, to be honest it'd be better to discuss something else on December 31st... :doubt:
-
Hoo boy.
Splinter, there's no point in getting angry on the Internet. Let's just all let it go.
uuuh... I'm not mad... I get a bit passionate maybe but I enjoy healthy discussion. And If I came across mad then I apologize.
Argh. I want to argue, but its early and i don't feel like doing research and making long, multi-quote posts.
I'll post the simple version.
**** Zionists
Normal Israelis/Jews are fine.
And if the rockets were only hitting Zionists, "Settlers" and the like (through some miracle of guidance), I'd be there shooting them too.
Believe it or not I have no love for allot of the settlers and most the ultra orthodox either. and neither does your average Israeli. Each for very different reasons though. I personally wouldn't go as far as launching rockets however. :p
israeal never existed before 1948
the jewish ppl have been nomadic and were through out history , living in all the places you mentioned above ,
The Jews enjoyed two periods of political autonomy in their national homeland, the Land of Israel, during ancient history. The first era spanned from 1350 to 586 BCE, and encompassed the periods of the Judges, the United Monarchy, and the Divided Monarchy of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, ending with the destruction of the First Temple. The second era was the period of the Hasmonean Kingdom spanning from 140 to 37 BCE. Since the destruction of the First Temple, the diaspora has been the home of most of the world's Jews.[11] Except in the modern State of Israel, established in 1948
There seems to be two distinct long periods of time in World history, before 1948, where there was...
please when you attack or take apart thre argument of some one else use "real facts and not ones that you have pulled out of the darker regions of your posterior...
I didn't see anyone attacking but you buddy so chill out eh? Have a cold one and let's continue discussing without getting all riled up. :yes:
and as for the race issue , jeudaism is a religion and israel is a state neither of which are a race , where as roma gypsies are a race, and many other ppl in these travbelling comunities have a single ethnic status where as the jewish ppl , are not orf one race but of many mixed races that all follow the same religion(including all factions of judaism)
A Jew (Hebrew: יְהוּדִי, Yehudi (sl.); יְהוּדִים, Yehudim (pl.); Ladino: ג׳ודיו, Djudio (sl.); ג׳ודיוס, Djudios (pl.); Yiddish: ייִד, Yid (sl.); ייִדן, Yidn (pl.))[10] is a member of the Jewish people, an ethnoreligious group originating from the Israelites or Hebrews of the ancient Middle East. The Jewish people and the religion of Judaism are strongly interrelated
As in, not the same. In fact most of the people in Israel are Jews but don't practice Judaism religiously. They will keep some traditions but for the most part it's a secular nation.
Jews include three groups: people who were born to a Jewish family regardless of whether or not they follow the religion, those who have some Jewish ancestral background or lineage (sometimes including those who do not have strictly matrilineal descent), and people without any Jewish ancestral background or lineage who have formally converted to Judaism and therefore are followers of the religion.
As you can see Jews does not only mean someone who follows Judaism it is a broad term encompassing mostly those people who are believed to be the descendants of Jacob (Israel)
as for the issue that returning to the boundries of 12967 will take some time , i agree but it should not take this much time and the only prime minister who ever tried to get towards this was assisinated by his own ppl ,
i whish to clarify that i am not anti jewish or pro palastinian i am against all forms of abuse and clearly the israeli posistion atm is inhuman and futile ,
it is time to move forward and return the lands and to stop hiding behind a religous doctorine to lay claim to the ancestoral home of so many ppl.....
So the return of Gaza wasn't a step towards returning Israel to the 1967 borders? It was a what? Why did Israel do it then if this wasn't a step in the direction the Palestinian people were fighting for them to take?
Forget the religious doctrine how about the legal right for Israel to exist no matter what mistakes were made by the UN and whomever else in it's formation. It's here now. It either has a right to exist or it doesn't. The Hamas say it doesn't. I tend to disagree with them.
-
Guys, to be honest it'd be better to discuss something else on December 31st... :doubt:
Nevermind...
-
Anyone who uses events half a century or more in the past to justify violence in the present deserves to get either a rocket or a bomb dropped on their head. Frankly I don't care which. So by all means go over there and fight for your chosen cause! The world will be a better place without you. In fact right now I would imagine there are plenty of people in Israel and Gaza who would be happy to leave hostility in the past and live in peace. Why not trade places with one of them? They can live and you can die for/with your cause. Win, win situation :yes:
Well on one hand we have the Palestinians using events from 50 years ago and on the other we have the Jews using events from 2000 years ago. :p
The Jews are only calm now cause they have the upper hand. If it were the other way round they'd be just as violent.
-
From the very same page you posted.
Hamas omitted its call for the destruction of Israel from its election manifesto, calling instead for "the establishment of an independent state whose capital is Jerusalem." On 8 February 2006, Hamas head Khaled Mashal speaking in Cairo had clarified that "Anyone who thinks Hamas will change is wrong", stating that while Hamas is willing for a ceasefire with Israel, its long term goal remains: Israel must withdraw from all land occupied in 1967.
So you're quoting stuff from 20 years ago.
Hey, when something says eternal and forever a few dozen times and then they continue throught history to do exactly what they said they would I tend to believe them. It's 20 years ago but today they are still doing the exact same thing they were 20 years ago. Preaching and practicing the death of Israel.
I know about that claim you quoted in 2006 but you know what I think? I think it's because their manifesto started being published they realized they would never get anyone to trust them and so they lied I know it's shocking but why would you put that beneath them when every country on earth has done it. So a terrorist organization wouldn't? Everywhere in their texts and their preaching and their doings you see them calling for the destruction of Israel up to this very day. So why should I trust them when they tell me that they have changed. How about they change and then we'll talk.
so "Hamas have actually stated that their goal is to get Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders. Which therefore makes them"... Liars. It's what they are best at and what they are told is allowed by their religion if it will give them the upper hand to allow them to destroy their enemies. Seriously I can't believe people actually think they know who these people are and what they intend to do in this world without understanding what they live and die for. "Article Eight: The Slogan of the Hamas
Allah is its goal, the Prophet its model, the Qur’an its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief."
Both sides are liars. That's my entire point. But if you honestly believe that they are, why not prove that they are liars and withdraw to the 1967 borders then? You'd definitely see any support from the rest of the world dry up immediately if you did that and they still continued to fight.
But don't you see that's exactly what Israel did and we all thought it would work exactly like you said. I will pose the question to you like I did the other guy. Do you agree that a withdrawal to 1967 borders would take time and that there is always a first step? Don't you think that by showing a little good will and taking that first step Israel should have been met with an equal first step of ending hostilities against it instead of an increase? We have tried already and it failed. So you want us to reward more body bags.
Hey When the Palestinians have their own state they can let whoever they want into it. But until then why would Israel do about the dumbest thing it could possibly do and allow hundreds of thousands of refugees back into the West Bank and Gaza so that you can have even more hopelessly fanatical people who want to kill you in one place?
Ah. So it's okay to dispossess people and steal their land because....?
Nope, sorry I can't see how you hope to justify that one.
I don't understand how you got that from what I said.
And you are Damn right Israel won't let Muslims in the country except under their terms! Just like they won't let anyone into Israel except under those terms. I would like to see one nation that says "hey come immigrate to our country and form your own laws and rules." So if Muslims want to come to Israel and become Israeli citizens then they will have to abide by the laws and rules of Israel.
Funny how that didn't apply when the British let the Jews in after WWII.
Let the Jews in where?
And they are still a majority in the original plan for Israel. Lest we forget that 2/3 of what was going to be declared by the UN as Israel was given to the Arabs who were in the land (there were no 'Palestinians' back then) and is today called Jordan. But there were those who said they would rather live under Jewish rule in Israel than move. Understandable. But some of those that said that, lied. and they attacked and were beaten. And besides if you want to go back to who was here first then you will spend all your time going back and forth since Israel has changed owners more times than a.... well something that has many different owners.
I've already explained once how that nonsense results in Israel being owned by the Spanish. :p
However there are people alive now who actually remember living in Israel before it became a Jewish state. As far as I'm concerned, living memory is the dividing line when considering this sort of thing.
But do you really believe the choice was "Live happily under Jewish rule or leave and go elsewhere"? Do you claim that no Palestinians were forced to leave?
What? The Spanish? What in the... lol
I don't claim that. There were people back then who did stupid terrible things just like there are today. But many times will hear about all sorts of stories of early Jewish settlers and Arabs working together to develop communities and farming lands and all sorts of stuff. Things just got really really messed up really really fast. 8 or 9 wars didn't help their cause either.
Anyone who uses events half a century or more in the past to justify violence in the present deserves to get either a rocket or a bomb dropped on their head. Frankly I don't care which. So by all means go over there and fight for your chosen cause! The world will be a better place without you. In fact right now I would imagine there are plenty of people in Israel and Gaza who would be happy to leave hostility in the past and live in peace. Why not trade places with one of them? They can live and you can die for/with your cause. Win, win situation :yes:
I don't want to have any miss-communications over nothing, were you addressing me directly or addressing people in general?
-
congratulations splinter you can copy and paste and quote
-
Well on one hand we have the Palestinians using events from 50 years ago and on the other we have the Jews using events from 2000 years ago. :p
I don't doubt it. Stupidity knows no boundaries of race or nationality.
-
I'm really starting side to with Israel on this stuff. They did pull out of Gaza (at least partially) only to be followed with more rockets. It would be fool-hardy to believe anything else would happen in future with similar events.
Though my judgement could be skewed by the peacekeepers that served there and were my superiors in the army back home. They had some interesting anecdotes and stories about the business in there.
Mika
-
How could you predict that the ousting of the PLO would cause the Palestinian people, years down the line, to elect a terrorist organization into power? the Hamas rise to power? and thinking the PLO would have stopped Hamas? The PLO WAS in power. And they refused to stop the Hamas what makes you think they would act any differently now?
The moderates in the Arab world have known for decades that religious extremists will grab power if given half a chance. That's why Egypt fights so hard against free and fair elections - to prevent the Muslim Brotherhood gaining the supremacy that their popular support could grant them (although I recognize they're a bad example, as their somewhat legitimate concerns about islamic extremists aqre used to prevent more liberal parties contesting the vote).
Hell, even a basic knopwledge of human nature and the Arab world (Which you people have decided to live in) would have told you what was inevitably going to happen:
Take one moderate government made effectively impotent by a hated neighbour.
Add a big spoonful of agression by that hated neighbour.
Add one cup of "plucky resistance fighter", who strikes back in basically ineffectual but highly public military displays. But make sure to combine this first with equally visible grass roots economic and social programs that do far more for local people than a weakened government can provide and a religous agenda that closely follows the views of a largely homogenous religious community.
And they just go crazy and elect these people when they stand in free and fair elections? No way! :eek:
Yeah. Wow. Didn't see that one coming. :doubt:
As for the Jewish rule of Israel, I've often wondered whether the average israeli jew would support Italy claiming the majority of Europe based on a 2000 year old mandate. Or, for that matter, claiming Israel due to the various periods of Roman-inspired crusader rule in the midle ages.
then you'd think 'Tel Aviv'
The problem's not blast damage so much as it is fallout. It's easy to forget how tiny Israel is.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:West_Bank_%26_Gaza_Map_2007_(Settlements).gif)
Tel Aviv would still be pretty much the prime target though, if someone decided to do it. Course, if it were me in that position, I'd nuke Medina, but for toally different reasons :D
-
Hey, when something says eternal and forever a few dozen times and then they continue throught history to do exactly what they said they would I tend to believe them. It's 20 years ago but today they are still doing the exact same thing they were 20 years ago. Preaching and practicing the death of Israel.
Yet I see people from Israel saying similar stuff about how the lands taken in 1967 eternally and forever belong to Israel.
And Israel is still doing much the same thing, consolidating it's hold on the occupied terratories. Yet you expect me to believe Israel wants to give them back and have peace?
So why should I trust them when they tell me that they have changed. How about they change and then we'll talk.
I've said numerous times before that it's a real pity that they don't take a leaf out of Ghandi's book and go for non-violent resistance instead. They'd probably have had more luck that way cause even the States couldn't turn a blind eye to them then.
But don't you see that's exactly what Israel did and we all thought it would work exactly like you said. I will pose the question to you like I did the other guy. Do you agree that a withdrawal to 1967 borders would take time and that there is always a first step?
How is withdrawing all your settlers and then closing the borders while building new settlements in the West Bank a first step? Let's face it. Israel didn't particularly want the Gaza Strip. It's more trouble than it's worth to keep it. The West Bank is what they want and there are no plans on the table to give that back at all.
Don't you think that by showing a little good will and taking that first step Israel should have been met with an equal first step of ending hostilities against it instead of an increase?
You really think giving back the West Bank was a measure of good will? From Ariel Sharon? After he campaigned against doing it?
Hey When the Palestinians have their own state they can let whoever they want into it. But until then why would Israel do about the dumbest thing it could possibly do and allow hundreds of thousands of refugees back into the West Bank and Gaza so that you can have even more hopelessly fanatical people who want to kill you in one place?
Ah. So it's okay to dispossess people and steal their land because....?
Nope, sorry I can't see how you hope to justify that one.
I don't understand how you got that from what I said.
They did have their own state. They got kicked off their land or left to avoid the war and now Israel holds that land and refuses to allow anyone who left during the war to come back in because they are worried about the Muslims having a majority.
I don't buy that as a response from people who "just want to live in peace" I don't believe that it is only on security grounds that you refuse them. It's more about the fact that Israel would cease to be a Jewish state if the right to return was allowed. A completely hypocritical position considering that Israel only exists in the first place due to the same right and then Israel continues to encourage Jews to return to a homeland which they haven't been a part of for 2000 years while denying the right to Muslims who were born there or are direct descendants of those who left in 1948.
Remember that the talks between Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak broke down on this very issue.
What? The Spanish? What in the... lol
Descended from the Carthaginians who themselves are descended from the Phoencians who are related to the Canaanites.
So therefore they have a blood claim that predates the Jews. :p
Stupid, yes. But no more stupid than the Jews claiming they have a right to it.
-
I don't see a problem with Israel refusing the decendents of the arab refugees returning (cause that is what we're really talking about! The original refugees are less than a million, very old and dying off). No state can be asked to let in people that have stated that one of their goals would be the disbanding of the nation they enter.
Then there is of course the aspect of reciprocity, the Right of Return cuts both ways: if the arabs want to talk about the return of refugees, then they need to talk about all the refugees. That means all the jews that were chased out of the muslim and arab countries during the 20th century because they were jews. Remember that not all jews in Israel come from Europe, many -if not most- are from the middle-eastern Sefardi stock. That are the groups which in some cases had been living in middle eastern countries for longer than there were arabs present (like in Iraq and the Magreb) or longer than there was Islam (like in the Arab Peninsula). No arab country is about to take these people back, so why should Israel take in more arabs? The better way would be to do a population-exchange. Israel gets to keep their jews, the arab countries get the Palestinians (and the billions of dollars worth -adjusted for inflation and such- of wealth stolen from the jewish when they were chased away). More than a fair trade considering the Right of Return as expressed by the Arabs/Muslims is a non-starter.
There is of course the reality of Israel being a jewish state. It's the only one in the world, and for some reason many people take umbrage at the fact that Israel declares itself to be a jewish state (wether or not officially). Whereas there are dozens of islamic states of all sorts, and even a few christian states (where some form of christianity is the official state religion). Yet this does not seem to be a problem. Smacks of hypocrisy to me since there's no difference between the three (remember that both Islam and Christianity purport to be a global brotherhood, where all members of the religion are one. Islam calls it the Ummah, Christianity usually calls it the oecomene -sp?-)
ah, the case of the bombardments and its inevitable civilian casualties, and the quetion of who is responsible.
First we must know that Hamas (and Hezbollah) expressly places their stockpiles and military instalations in the midst of civilian infrastructure, with the intent of using these civilians -with or without their agreement!- as living shields. This in order to use the resulting casualties and pictures thereoff as a propaganda-tool against Israel. This activity (also used by Saddam and Milosevic to use a few others) is expressly forbidden by the Conventions. Since Hamas engages in this activity with a strategical and tactical goal in mind it alone is responsible for the victims of their choice.
The disconnect between what the muslims/arabs claim about the Israelis and reality. No one is really claiming the the Israelis are saints. Thaey can't be given their situation: a fight for the very existance of their state and people against an enemy that has more than once stated its intent for genocide (Hamas, Hezbollah, the PLO in ages back, various Arab states since '48 and of course Iran's President when talking about his nukes he says they're not making), a few million people surrounded by a sea of humans that hate the very guts of jews (and have it validated in their religious books too). However, various anti-Israeli sources regularly ascribe to the Israeli state and the IDF in particular methods and goals that can be summed up as holocaust and genocide. Often enough Israel itself is compared to Nazi-Deutschland, a favourite in the demonization war.
The reality is of course very different: if the goals and methods of Israel were really like those of the nazis we'd have, by now, a region devoid of arabs either through plain old murder or expulsion. We all know that there are now more arabs in the region than there have ever been before.
We also know that when arab states deal with opposition in their own states, they do this in most brutal fashions. Remember the Syrians and the city of Hama, remember the war against the GIA in Algeria, remember the Saudi response to Shia demands, remember Saddam, remember the Lebanese response to the terrorists hiding in Palestinian refugeecamps last year and in 2007! Their methods were high in destruction and bodycount. Excessive even in the case of Algeria and Hama in Syria.
As such we can only conclude that the Arabs ascribe to the Israelis methods and motives that are basically those of the Arabs. In the same way that authoritarian states cannot really believe that non-authoritarian regimes do work as advertised. So while the Israelis aren't saints they try to minimise the effects of warfare the Arabs are incapable of grasping this because they innately believe that their enemy is really the same as they are. Hence their spurious claimes about "Nazi-Israel".
-
So just how many Jews do you think actually want to return to Iraq then? :p
Seriously though I don't think anyone is foolish enough to claim anyone in the region is a saint. However I do treat claims that Israel just wants peace with severe scepticism while they continue to build settlements in the occupied territories. Similarly while I have no problem with a Jewish state existing, I do have a problem with one existing by booting other religions out or harassing them so that they leave (and it's not just Muslims either (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,35016.0.html)). That kind of **** goes on all throughout the Middle East but I'd expect better from the Jews, especially since they base their right to Israel on the fact that they themselves were forced out 2000 years ago.
As for Nazi-Israel claims, they're completely ridiculous.
-
As for Nazi-Israel claims, they're completely ridiculous.
While Israel isn't currently an autocracy (which is what Nazi, Germany was REALLY about) nor a drive for genocide (which Nazi, Germany wasn't as much), they do appear to be going in that general direction. I wouldn't be surprised if they turned into genocidal autocrats within the next 10 years or so, based on the actions and escalations from the previous generation till now.
-
I think part of the problem is that the animosity has become more habit than anything else, they kill each other because that is what Palestinians and Jews do in Israel.
It's the same old circle, 'we attack them because they attack us', problem is, that argument could be applied to both sides.
Edit: Personally, I see developing a Peace in the Middle East as similar to developing Microsoft Windows, every problem you patch seems to create an opening for two more.
-
We do now it's not going to stop, at least not now. It'd make much more sense to prevent Israel from exaggerating with its attacks. Obviously, both sides should stop killing people...but it's much more doable for the UN or another important authority to stop or relent Israel's exaggerate counterattacks.
:rolleyes:
(http://staff.hard-light.net/sandwich/images/moz-screenshot-15.jpg)
It's disturbing but Axem's correct. It's no secret how the IDF is going to respond to attacks, so when Hamas launches a rocket out of some schoolyard they know exactly what will happen in the end. It's bad enough Israel is is killing innocents when it strikes back but the fact that Hamas is purposely sacrificing its own civilians is even more so.
(http://staff.hard-light.net/sandwich/images/moz-screenshot-17.jpg)
The only thing that would stop that, of course, would be collateral damage to my friends and sacred sites, so I'd have to think hard.
then you'd think 'Tel Aviv'
You forget/are unaware of the population of Jaffa, which has a high percentage of Arabs.
You have to remember that Israel are responsible for Hamas being in control in the first place.
Oh, right - us Israelis elected a terrorist organization into government. Oh, no, wait - that was the Palestinians who voted that way.
Honestly, one can't blame them - from a certain point of view: Arafat and the PLO were corrupt... hoarding finances for themselves that were meant to help the population. Meanwhile, Hamas was doing such things as giving away relative fortunes to families of suicide bombers as "compensation", running hate-propaganda filled schools, and fighting against the "Zionist regime". It was a no-brainer which way to vote, really.
Hamas have actually stated that their goal is to get Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders. Which therefore makes them "an organization whose stated goal was the liberation of it's people and it's country by targeting military infrastructure "
What military infrastructure are they targeting in the towns and cities of Sderot, Ashqelon, and Be'er Sheva?
I've never seen a single Israeli claim that killing IDF members is legitimate. Are you going to tell me it is?
Is that an intentional lie or merely something you've accidentally forgotten? I told you exactly that, two and a half years ago:
Why do you think it's called "terrorism", anyway? A soldier knows that (all other things being equal) he is a soldier, and his life is on the line in the defense of his country. Grandma Gertrude and her 3-year-old granddaughter Sheniquah aren't soldiers that just happen to be out of uniform, lounging around eating pizza in town.
I've said this before and I'll say it again: if the Palestinians targeted Israel's military forces and not Israel's civillian population, I would have no moral problem with that at all... and I say that as one of those who puts on that uniform and makes himself a valid target once a year.
congratulations splinter you can copy and paste and quote
Ooh. Meaningful post there. :rolleyes:
At least Splinter is trying to contribute by using external sources. Are you really really enjoying your attempt to make fun of that?
-
I don't know which one to say...
"WTF? Sandwich posting in a thread concerning IDF? He should know better!"
or
"Splinter alt spotted!"
I'm leaning toward the first option, considering you usually know well enough to stay as far away from the debacle as possible.
-
I have difficulty summoning pity for the Palestinians as whole, considering they self-determined their way into this situation. Yes, they had crappy options, but frankly this was obviously going to be crappier in the long run and they knew it. To reap the whirlwind is not surprising.
-
The thing is, no matter what way you look at it, Hamas, in its current form, might represent all the anger and frustration of the Palestinian people, but that doesn't mean that it is a good idea to put them in charge, much as, was often quoted post 9/11 by anti-American protesters, we put the people in power who did the damage to the Middle East, therefore we are just as responsible as them, if they want to play by those rules, then it works in both directions.
The real tragedy of it all is those who get caught in-between.
-
Hamas have actually stated that their goal is to get Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders. Which therefore makes them "an organization whose stated goal was the liberation of it's people and it's country by targeting military infrastructure "
What military infrastructure are they targeting in the towns and cities of Sderot, Ashqelon, and Be'er Sheva?
They aren't. My point is that they are still referred to as terrorists when they attack military targets. And anyone in Israeli prison who only attacked military targets is surely a POW not a criminal then.
Why do you think it's called "terrorism", anyway? A soldier knows that (all other things being equal) he is a soldier, and his life is on the line in the defense of his country. Grandma Gertrude and her 3-year-old granddaughter Sheniquah aren't soldiers that just happen to be out of uniform, lounging around eating pizza in town.
I've said this before and I'll say it again: if the Palestinians targeted Israel's military forces and not Israel's civillian population, I would have no moral problem with that at all... and I say that as one of those who puts on that uniform and makes himself a valid target once a year.
Fair enough.
-
Hey, when something says eternal and forever a few dozen times and then they continue throught history to do exactly what they said they would I tend to believe them. It's 20 years ago but today they are still doing the exact same thing they were 20 years ago. Preaching and practicing the death of Israel.
Yet I see people from Israel saying similar stuff about how the lands taken in 1967 eternally and forever belong to Israel.
And Israel is still doing much the same thing, consolidating it's hold on the occupied terratories. Yet you expect me to believe Israel wants to give them back and have peace?
Yeah the religious parties and the settlers... almost the entire rest of the country could care less about the West bank and Gaza and would love nothing more than to give it back if it meant peace but they won't agree to it being given back if it will not cease the violence.
If you are walking down the street and someone starts shooting at you yelling for you to give him your wallet so you agree and then he STOPS shooting so you can get up and give it to him without getting shot. If he keeps shooting you are going to continue to hunker down and protect yourself. Because he is either an insane man that doesn't realize you won't stand up and hand him something while being shot at or he is a man that wants you dead so he can take everything but he claims to be robbing you because if he's caught he wants to be charged with armed robbery and not attempted murder.
So why should I trust them when they tell me that they have changed. How about they change and then we'll talk.
I've said numerous times before that it's a real pity that they don't take a leaf out of Ghandi's book and go for non-violent resistance instead. They'd probably have had more luck that way cause even the States couldn't turn a blind eye to them then.
I agree %100
But don't you see that's exactly what Israel did and we all thought it would work exactly like you said. I will pose the question to you like I did the other guy. Do you agree that a withdrawal to 1967 borders would take time and that there is always a first step?
How is withdrawing all your settlers and then closing the borders while building new settlements in the West Bank a first step? Let's face it. Israel didn't particularly want the Gaza Strip. It's more trouble than it's worth to keep it. The West Bank is what they want and there are no plans on the table to give that back at all.
Believe me hardship in maintaining an area has never been a setback for Israel. The Gaza strip was very important to many people and the only reason people wanted to get rid of it was because they believed it was the first step to peace. And there were and ARE plans to give back the west bank and the only reason they were not put into effect was because we realized what a debacle handing back the Gaza strip was. Fool me once shame on you... fool me twice shame on me.
Don't you think that by showing a little good will and taking that first step Israel should have been met with an equal first step of ending hostilities against it instead of an increase?
You really think giving back the West Bank was a measure of good will? From Ariel Sharon? After he campaigned against doing it?
I don't remember what he campaigned for and I couldn't care less. What does it matter what he campaigned for. What did Israel do? They gave it back. So yeah I would say that was a big measure and a big first step.
Hey When the Palestinians have their own state they can let whoever they want into it. But until then why would Israel do about the dumbest thing it could possibly do and allow hundreds of thousands of refugees back into the West Bank and Gaza so that you can have even more hopelessly fanatical people who want to kill you in one place?
Ah. So it's okay to dispossess people and steal their land because....?
Nope, sorry I can't see how you hope to justify that one.
I don't understand how you got that from what I said.
They did have their own state. They got kicked off their land or left to avoid the war and now Israel holds that land and refuses to allow anyone who left during the war to come back in because they are worried about the Muslims having a majority.
I don't buy that as a response from people who "just want to live in peace" I don't believe that it is only on security grounds that you refuse them. It's more about the fact that Israel would cease to be a Jewish state if the right to return was allowed. A completely hypocritical position considering that Israel only exists in the first place due to the same right and then Israel continues to encourage Jews to return to a homeland which they haven't been a part of for 2000 years while denying the right to Muslims who were born there or are direct descendants of those who left in 1948.
Remember that the talks between Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak broke down on this very issue.
The Palestinians never had a state because they were never a real group of people. Way back on March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview with Palestine Liberation Organization executive committee member Zahir Muhsein:
The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.
For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.
the same day Arafat signed the Declaration of Principles on the White House lawn in 1993, he explained his actions on Jordan TV. Here's what he said:
Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish a sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel.
Palestine is no more real than Never-Never Land. The first time the name was used was in 70 A.D. when the Romans committed genocide against the Jews, smashed the Temple and declared the land of Israel would be no more. From then on, the Romans promised, it would be known as Palestine. The name was derived from the Philistines, a Goliathian people conquered by the Jews centuries earlier. It was a way for the Romans to add insult to injury. They also tried to change the name of Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina, but that had even less staying power.
Palestine has never existed -- before or since -- as an autonomous entity. It was ruled alternately by Rome, by Islamic and Christian crusaders, by the Ottoman Empire and, briefly, by the British after World War I. The British agreed to restore at least part of the land to the Jewish people as their homeland.
There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc.
And doesn't the right of return mean these people want to return to the West Bank and Gaza? Since the rest is pre1967 Israel. Well then they can do that. As soon as the West Bank and Gaza are a defined country with their own army and their own borders and passports and they can sustain themselves without depending on Israel.
What? The Spanish? What in the... lol
Descended from the Carthaginians who themselves are descended from the Phoencians who are related to the Canaanites.
So therefore they have a blood claim that predates the Jews. :p
Stupid, yes. But no more stupid than the Jews claiming they have a right to it.
A right to what? To Israel at all or to the West Bank and Gaza? do you believe that Israel has the right to exist as a nation at all? (serious question)
I don't know which one to say...
"WTF? Sandwich posting in a thread concerning IDF? He should know better!"
or
"Splinter alt spotted!"
A what? You think me and my brother are the same person? We don't even look alike. :p
(at least I don't think so.)
Hamas have actually stated that their goal is to get Israel to withdraw to the 1967 borders. Which therefore makes them "an organization whose stated goal was the liberation of it's people and it's country by targeting military infrastructure "
What military infrastructure are they targeting in the towns and cities of Sderot, Ashqelon, and Be'er Sheva?
They aren't. My point is that they are still referred to as terrorists when they attack military targets. And anyone in Israeli prison who only attacked military targets is surely a POW not a criminal then.
They are Referred to as terrorists because they attack Military targets in addition to attacking the civilians. They attack military targets only when those targets are in the way of getting to the civilians. And If you were to drive to the border of your country and attack a soldier I am sure they would imprison you too.
-
I don't know which one to say...
"WTF? Sandwich posting in a thread concerning IDF? He should know better!"
or
"Splinter alt spotted!"
I'm leaning toward the first option, considering you usually know well enough to stay as far away from the debacle as possible.
:wtf: Considering that I am often literally involved in the "debacle" on the ground as well as on HLP, your statement confuses me.
And that's my brother, all right. I bet he forgot his login and registered a new one. He typ(o)es just like my brother. ;) Good points, though. :p
They aren't. My point is that they are still referred to as terrorists when they attack military targets. And anyone in Israeli prison who only attacked military targets is surely a POW not a criminal then.
When have they only attacked military targets? If you're thinking of when suicide bombers explode at checkpoints, that's like saying that blowing (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2003/8/Suicide%20bombing%20of%20No%202%20Egged%20bus%20in%20Jerusalem%20-%201) up (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/02/AR2007100202075.html) a (http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKCOL65091520080226) public (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings) bus (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/children-killed-in-israel-suicide-bomb-609255.html) is attacking the bus company, not the civilians in the bus; that ramming a plane into a building (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pyLQbFLxF4&feature=related) is attacking the building's managing company, not the employees working there, or that ramming a jeep into the front gate of Glasgow airport (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/07/01/1966672.htm?section=justin) is an attack on the airline company, not the people traveling by plane that day. Aside from when the IDF is sent to deal with terrorists who were already causing trouble, and thus ended up getting attacked, or when the IDF spots an armed Palestinian attempting to sneak into somewhere he shouldn't be and tries to stop him, I cannot think of a single instance when a military location was the target.
FYI, a significant percentage (I don't know any exact statistics so I'm not going to make any up; I just know that it is a significant percentage) of the Palestinian prisoners were arrested for aiding terrorists (their operators, equippers, etc), suicide bombers that got caught pre-boom, terrorists who had been shooting at passing vehicles on a highway, or those who were lobbing mortars / rockets into towns and cities.
-
And that's my brother, all right. I bet he forgot his login and registered a new one. He typ(o)es just like my brother. ;) Good points, though. :p
What gives you that idea? I logged into the same account I have had for like 5 years or however long it's been. And why the heck is my post count stuck on 1?
suicide bombers that got caught pre-boom,
Pre-boom :lol:
-
I have to say that I admire Karajorma, Splinter, and Sandwich's ability to carry on a pretty heated debate without leaning too far towards personal attacks.
-
The Israeli government is doing some crowd pleasing, and giving the Palestinians something to fear a repeat of next time (if) they a) go to the ballot boxes, and b) they consider walking away from negotiations (or not compromising).
Also bear in mind they probably consider President Elect Obama an unknown quantity, and thus don't know whether the USA would support them if they did this later in the year.
-
Here's an honest question: how well can Hamas(/Islamic Jihad/etc) aim those rockets? Granted, they have a lot of practice, but from what I've seen and heard (not in person, granted), they seem pretty primitive. Are they actually targeting schools etc with them, or are they just aiming at populated areas? Not saying this excuses them, of course, but I wonder. Also, Israel's most recent air raids have targeted universities, claiming they are used to manufacture and store weapons and ammunition. Is there any evidence for this either way?
I've heard suggestions that both Israel and Hamas intend to return to a ceasefire, but not until getting something from the other side. To the best of my knowledge, Islamic Jihad continued firing rockets during the ceasefire, and so I would presume Israel wants to stop that. Gaza has remained in crushing poverty due to the blockade (it would seem that Israel thinks they are besieging a castle and can starve their enemy out), and Hamas wants that lifted. Thoughts from the more informed? How well did the ceasefire work?
Oh, and does anyone know of an English translation of the July ceasefire terms? All Google gives me is '[they] broke it lawl'. The Israeli government site and al-Jazeera don't seem to have it, and Hamas doesn't seem to have an English site.
-
The blockade, IMO, is one of the cruelest things a so-called civilized nation has done since World War 2. There have been nasty things done by individual soldiers in wars since then, and there've been some damned dodgy stuff done recently (The US's torture of terror suspects springs to mind) but nothing else I can think of has caused so much pain to so many people for so little gain .
-
Here's an honest question: how well can Hamas(/Islamic Jihad/etc) aim those rockets? Granted, they have a lot of practice, but from what I've seen and heard (not in person, granted), they seem pretty primitive. Are they actually targeting schools etc with them, or are they just aiming at populated areas? Not saying this excuses them, of course, but I wonder. Also, Israel's most recent air raids have targeted universities, claiming they are used to manufacture and store weapons and ammunition. Is there any evidence for this either way?
The fact that these rockets killed "only" four people suggests that they're simply intended to be launched on populated areas, hoping to inflict severe damage. Many hundreds of them have been launched and their poor achievements should be considered a valuable proof. They would have inflicted much more damaged had they been implemented with high-tech guidance components.
-
The fact that these rockets killed "only" four people suggests that they're simply intended to be launched on populated areas, hoping to inflict severe damage. Many hundreds of them have been launched and their poor achievements should be considered a valuable proof. They would have inflicted much more damaged had they been implemented with high-tech guidance components.
The other explanation is that they don't know how to actually aim them. One of the FDF officers told some stories about this, he mentioned that the boldest ones attempted to destroy a legitimate Israeli military target with some anti-tank missiles or rockets, I can't remember. In the aftermaths of the failed attempt (there were more regrettable aftermaths also), Palestinians threatened to kill him - which, in the hindsight, seemed to be a signal for him that he was doing something right.
Crazy stuff down there in the South. The worst enemy I have is the -20 degree frost at the moment.
Mika
-
Here's an honest question: how well can Hamas(/Islamic Jihad/etc) aim those rockets? Granted, they have a lot of practice, but from what I've seen and heard (not in person, granted), they seem pretty primitive. Are they actually targeting schools etc with them, or are they just aiming at populated areas?
They are, mostly, free-flight artillery rockets of WW2 or 50's vintage design, somewhat updated. The weapons were probably manufactured within the last ten years, but I'm not sure even Hamas knows this for sure. To some extent, they are not meant to fly entirely in a straight line, but to disperse somewhat because that is a useful thing for their original application. Still, they should be good for an error radius of something like a hundred meters from the aim point at absolute worst.
That sounds like a large number, but in functional terms it really isn't. A hundred meters is about the campus size of a large school, and it represents the worst-case scenario; most of the time I would imagine the error is down to twenty-five meters. They are not complicated weapons and do not require very much, if any, skill to operate.
I would assume that Hamas is most probably hitting what they mean to at least fifty percent of the time. Their lethality failure can be attributed to the fact that are using extended-range versions of the rocket with small warheads, and that the fuzing mechanism for the rockets has no delay. They go off on impact with any roof or wall, outside the building, where the majority of its explosive force is wasted.
-
The million dollar question is...what should Israel do? They did try unsuccessfully for another cease fire agreement and it seems like Hamas just keeps firing rockets into Israel. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Take action, take inaction, try and negotiate....seems like these are all non starters.
Question is why is Hamas attacking Israel in the first place? If people don't examine the motives behind a group of individuals how can either side ever come to a solution? Same with 9/11, people asked "who did it? Where as they? What did they do" etcetera but no one asked "why did they do it?".
And considering Obama firmly planted himself on the side of Israel when pre-election he stood in some town and declared US's solidarity with Israel re: the rocket attacks I doubt that Obama is going to broker any deal for the benefit of the palestinians. Maybe the french can do something as it seems the Israelis are over there talking with them.
-
Israel was given to the Jewish people because Europe was tired of having them. And so, in keeping with early 20th century European SNAFU, they dumped their problem on the Middle East.
Actually the Jewish action groups of the time wanted it, and in the process of getting it blew up British troops and even a British Member of Parliament in a terror campaign.
But of course none of this is about right and wrong; It's about winning or losing. That's all it's ever been about. The Zionist bull****, the Islamic Jihad noise... it's all just there to keep The People (TM) fighting and dying like good little proles.
And the way you lot argue about it (with notable exceptions) says you've all bought into it.
-
The million dollar question is...what should Israel do? They did try unsuccessfully for another cease fire agreement and it seems like Hamas just keeps firing rockets into Israel. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Take action, take inaction, try and negotiate....seems like these are all non starters.
Go back to the borders when Israel was first established. I bet that would help A LOT.
Let's face it - when Israel was just created, it had no legitimate reason or right to exist. Palestinians would have been well in their right to rise against it.
BUT, after a generation or two of israelis was born and raised in that new nation, it IS their home. That's all it takes for people to indentify with a nation/place. Just a generation or two.
So, the destruction of the state of Israel is not an option. But neither is for Israel (government and military) to continue to act like utter morons.
Personally, I really don't care who was there first historicly (cause you can ALWAYS go back even further in history to make stupid claims). I just care who lives there now and how he lives there.
MEh..I bet Nuke would just say - nuke em all! Then there will be peace. No man, no problem.
These days I find myself moving ever closer to his POW.
-
Exaggerated counterattacks? You mean to say that “one of the most powerful armies in the world” has been bombing Gaza for days, deploying massive air power, dropping hundreds of bombs, and ultimately killing a grand total of 50 civilians or so in the “most crowded place on earth?”
There are two options here: A) The Israeli army is not targeting civilians, or B) Israeli pilots suck. We tend to go with option A.
Israel goes to incredible lengths to avoid civilian casualties, by deploying precise ammunition and specialized techniques. In fact, nobody in the world tries to do this harder than Israel. Even endangering the lives of her own soldiers.
ROTFLOL
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Oh please....430 dead, 2000 injured in just a few days...all that over several rockets fired.
And you're telling me all those dead and injured are terrorists? Heck, if 10% of all casualties are actually terrorist, I'd be rather surprised.
There was a interview in the paper with a israeli girl, who condones the attack on palestinian civilians, cause they elected Haman, and brought this on themselves by supporting them. I recall hearing a similar argument about there being no real civilian..only it came from Osama Bin Laden!
-
So, the destruction of the state of Israel is not an option. But neither is for Israel (government and military) to continue to act like utter morons.
Personally, I really don't care who was there first historicly (cause you can ALWAYS go back even further in history to make stupid claims). I just care who lives there now and how he lives there.
MEh..I bet Nuke would just say - nuke em all! Then there will be peace. No man, no problem.
These days I find myself moving ever closer to his POW.
The Israelis seem to be saying that Hamas started it, so they're repaying the favour.
...and I believe you mean POV, TrashMan. POW is something quite different. ;)
-
Yeah how many Israelis have died to these rockets attacks? 10?? 12?? Certainly no where near 400 or whatever the hell.
And from what I've heard the Israelis were the ones violating the cease fire in the first place, launching raids and the like while World Attention was directed elsewhere (US Elections).
-
*UPDATE*
Israel is currently deploying ground forces into Gaza.
-
Exaggerated counterattacks? You mean to say that “one of the most powerful armies in the world” has been bombing Gaza for days, deploying massive air power, dropping hundreds of bombs, and ultimately killing a grand total of 50 civilians or so in the “most crowded place on earth?”
There are two options here: A) The Israeli army is not targeting civilians, or B) Israeli pilots suck. We tend to go with option A.
Israel goes to incredible lengths to avoid civilian casualties, by deploying precise ammunition and specialized techniques. In fact, nobody in the world tries to do this harder than Israel. Even endangering the lives of her own soldiers.
ROTFLOL
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Oh please....430 dead, 2000 injured in just a few days...all that over several rockets fired.
And you're telling me all those dead and injured are terrorists? Heck, if 10% of all casualties are actually terrorist, I'd be rather surprised.
There was a interview in the paper with a israeli girl, who condones the attack on palestinian civilians, cause they elected Haman, and brought this on themselves by supporting them. I recall hearing a similar argument about there being no real civilian..only it came from Osama Bin Laden!
ROTFLOL
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Not to mention the fact that the vast, vast majority of those killed in these attacks have been Hamas militants! About 1/4 of those killed are civilians--the rest are Hamas law-enforcement, security, and military. Overall, the IDF is doing a very precise job at targeting Hamas.
-
Here's an honest question: how well can Hamas(/Islamic Jihad/etc) aim those rockets? Granted, they have a lot of practice, but from what I've seen and heard (not in person, granted), they seem pretty primitive. Are they actually targeting schools etc with them, or are they just aiming at populated areas?
They are, mostly, free-flight artillery rockets of WW2 or 50's vintage design, somewhat updated. The weapons were probably manufactured within the last ten years, but I'm not sure even Hamas knows this for sure. To some extent, they are not meant to fly entirely in a straight line, but to disperse somewhat because that is a useful thing for their original application. Still, they should be good for an error radius of something like a hundred meters from the aim point at absolute worst.
That sounds like a large number, but in functional terms it really isn't. A hundred meters is about the campus size of a large school, and it represents the worst-case scenario; most of the time I would imagine the error is down to twenty-five meters. They are not complicated weapons and do not require very much, if any, skill to operate.
I would assume that Hamas is most probably hitting what they mean to at least fifty percent of the time. Their lethality failure can be attributed to the fact that are using extended-range versions of the rocket with small warheads, and that the fuzing mechanism for the rockets has no delay. They go off on impact with any roof or wall, outside the building, where the majority of its explosive force is wasted.
They work pretty much like WWII era V1 German rockets and can't be aimed carefully. Whoever launches them knows that the rockets will eventually hit a city and cause casualties.
The secondary objective - pardon the definition - simply is to scare people. The continuous threat of incoming rockets MUST have some kind of influence on the population.
-
Here's an honest question: how well can Hamas(/Islamic Jihad/etc) aim those rockets? Granted, they have a lot of practice, but from what I've seen and heard (not in person, granted), they seem pretty primitive. Are they actually targeting schools etc with them, or are they just aiming at populated areas?
They are, mostly, free-flight artillery rockets of WW2 or 50's vintage design, somewhat updated. The weapons were probably manufactured within the last ten years, but I'm not sure even Hamas knows this for sure. To some extent, they are not meant to fly entirely in a straight line, but to disperse somewhat because that is a useful thing for their original application. Still, they should be good for an error radius of something like a hundred meters from the aim point at absolute worst.
That sounds like a large number, but in functional terms it really isn't. A hundred meters is about the campus size of a large school, and it represents the worst-case scenario; most of the time I would imagine the error is down to twenty-five meters. They are not complicated weapons and do not require very much, if any, skill to operate.
I would assume that Hamas is most probably hitting what they mean to at least fifty percent of the time. Their lethality failure can be attributed to the fact that are using extended-range versions of the rocket with small warheads, and that the fuzing mechanism for the rockets has no delay. They go off on impact with any roof or wall, outside the building, where the majority of its explosive force is wasted.
They work pretty much like WWII era V1 German rockets and can't be aimed carefully. Whoever launches them knows that the rockets will eventually hit a city and cause casualties.
The secondary objective - pardon the definition - simply is to scare people. The continuous threat of incoming rockets MUST have some kind of influence on the population.
Pretty big influence it seems. Israel has been keeping schools out in the south (according to reports), which is good news and safer. A school was hit a few days ago by a rocket. Without warning, that could have killed dozens of children. Anyways--Israel's incoming-rocket warnings have kept most civilians safe.
-
Kassam rockets are generally inaccurate, whatever that means. They're aimed more or less in the general direction and launched. Over the past number of years, I've gotten around 3-4 SMS newsflashes per month about another Kassam that hit open land in the North-West Negev (the area where Gaza is situated).
But the inaccuracy doesn't bother the Hamas much - contrary to what Mobius said, terrorizing people is the primary objective, not the secondary one.
Another point I want to address is the comparisons between numbers of dead and injured. Israel is not particularly trying to respond with proportionate force - eye for an eye and all that. Between individuals that makes sense, but on a national level, it's a petty way of reacting to an offense. Israel's responding with the force necessary to get the job done.
That job is to stop the rocket fire on Israeli civilians. Everything is pointing to that - attacking manufacturing locations and launch facilities, erecting a blockade to prevent further smuggling of armaments into the Gaza Strip, and now sending in ground forces. If the ground operation is anything like what we did in Jenin in 2002 (the very effective Operation Defensive Shield), the soldiers will be going "from house to house", as it were, searching for explosives labs and weapons caches, and demolishing them.
-
Much as I hate to say it, because I dislike condoning any sides actions, Sandwich is right.
This isn't just a racial situation, it isn't just a religious situation, it's a political situation, you can be certain the Jewish people will only put up with so much before they start asking 'Why did we vote in these leaders who do nothing to protect us?'
By attacking Israel, Hamas force a response, they know this, it's what they are hoping for, because the more they can be viewed as persecuted, the more sympathy they get from surrounding nations.
Hamas know they couldn't last long if Israel really let loose, but Israel know that they have enemies on all sides, it's a very difficult equation to balance, but you can be assured that what Hamas want to happen is for lots of innocents to die for their cause, so that they can appeal to outside nations for help, that, to my mind, is what this provocation is all about.
I don't agree with what is going on in Gaza with regards to the blockade, but then, I think of all the responses possible, Hamas have deliberately picked the one most destructive to their own people, and I find that prety appalling, since it suggests to me that this is more about what Hamas want than what the Palestinian people(and, quite frankly, the entire area) need.
Israel is hardly Super Happy Fun Ball, and you definitely don't want to taunt it.
-
Israel is probably the most technologically advanced country in the Middle East, but it seems that most of the Arab nations do not accept its existence.
-
Israel is probably the most technologically advanced country in the Middle East, but it seems that most of the Arab nations do not accept its existence.
Thanks for the update!
Actually, some diplomatic progress on that front in recent years. More countries have official diplomatic ties to Israel nowadays.
-
*waits patiently for someone to give AE a "Captain Obvious" title*
-
*UPDATE*
Israel is currently deploying ground forces into Gaza.
I honestly believe they keep pummeling the infrastructure in Gaza deliberately, so it would remain undeveloped and less of a threat technology-wise.
Not to mention the fact that the vast, vast majority of those killed in these attacks have been Hamas militants! About 1/4 of those killed are civilians--the rest are Hamas law-enforcement, security, and military. Overall, the IDF is doing a very precise job at targeting Hamas.
Sez WHO?
Who exactly is a Hamas militant? Anyone on their payroll? Anyone who voted for them? It's a very, very slippery slope there, especially since foreign reporters have limited to no acess to those areas.
-
Not to mention the fact that the vast, vast majority of those killed in these attacks have been Hamas militants! About 1/4 of those killed are civilians--the rest are Hamas law-enforcement, security, and military. Overall, the IDF is doing a very precise job at targeting Hamas.
Sez WHO?
Who exactly is a Hamas militant? Anyone on their payroll? Anyone who voted for them? It's a very, very slippery slope there, especially since foreign reporters have limited to no acess to those areas.
This article gives some information on how they're deciding targets: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1230733158821&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull
EDIT: And this blog post sheds some interesting light on how religiously-oriented Hamas is, and how they will never be satisfied with Israel returning to pre-1967 borders: http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/01/nizar_rayyan_of_hamas_on_gods.php
-
I can't see why the international community tolerate this... such negligence caused WWII.
(OK, even though Europe or USA are far and this is none of their concern, I'd say that the locals should intervene)
-
Exaggerated counterattacks? You mean to say that “one of the most powerful armies in the world” has been bombing Gaza for days, deploying massive air power, dropping hundreds of bombs, and ultimately killing a grand total of 50 civilians or so in the “most crowded place on earth?”
There are two options here: A) The Israeli army is not targeting civilians, or B) Israeli pilots suck. We tend to go with option A.
Israel goes to incredible lengths to avoid civilian casualties, by deploying precise ammunition and specialized techniques. In fact, nobody in the world tries to do this harder than Israel. Even endangering the lives of her own soldiers.
ROTFLOL
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Oh please....430 dead, 2000 injured in just a few days...all that over several rockets fired.
And you're telling me all those dead and injured are terrorists? Heck, if 10% of all casualties are actually terrorist, I'd be rather surprised.
There was a interview in the paper with a israeli girl, who condones the attack on palestinian civilians, cause they elected Haman, and brought this on themselves by supporting them. I recall hearing a similar argument about there being no real civilian..only it came from Osama Bin Laden!
You know what is even funnier? When the target for an airstrike is in a heavily populated area the Airforce calls peoples houses to warn them away and then later drops a sound bomb over the target area they have also dropped leaflets warning people away from certain areas all this to give the civilians even more time to evacuate even though this also gives the Hamas time to get out. And also a pretty funny thing is how the ground forces are going through Gaza with Megaphones warning families to stay inside or clear the area but by doing so they are revealing their own position to the Hamas and putting thier lives on the line just on the off chance that they can save an innocent one. Hilarious. :lol:
:rolleyes:
-
you guys really should stop playing nice, it isn't getting you anywhere.
-
you guys really should stop playing nice, it isn't getting you anywhere.
To Israel's defense, this is what world has requested them to do. And now it should be quite clear that it didn't work, (which is what Israel assumed before pullout but did it anyway because of the international pressure) so the UN has to change their view. Putting too much pressure on neighboring Arab countries could cause them to start building-up their arsenals.
I cannot accept direct civilian targeting since then Isreali would be no better than terrorists, but I'm all for a reasonable response. Which is what Israel seems to be doing at the moment. Especially if they have started ground operations.
Although, I think there are quite a lot of UN mandates requesting Isreal to pull back to 1967 borders. And declaring Jerusalem as international city. But I suppose those occupied areas have been occupied because of military signifigance, making firing rockets downwards towards Isreali cities impossible. But I don't understand all the reasons behind that they were partially settled.
Sandwich, I recall the guy who told me about their little incident with some Palestinians said that those guys did have a weapon which should have hit the target if any of them knew how to aim. I'm sorry about being fuzzy about the details but I won't go any further describing the incident so that nobody can figure out the what took place and who were involved. I'm sure you'll understand.
Mika
-
I can't see why the international community tolerate this... such negligence caused WWII.
(OK, even though Europe or USA are far and this is none of their concern, I'd say that the locals should intervene)
If the locals intervene, then all that would happen is yet another middle-eastern war where Israel kills everyone. (Figuratively. See the 6 day war.)
Personally, I don't know enough about the situation to make any decisions. I've heard that people in Giza are starving to death, I've heard that Israel are deliberately targeting Mosques and Hospitals specifically to kill civillians, I've heard that Hamas is Hiding in Mosques and Hospitals so Israel bombs them and kills civilians, I've heard that everything is Israel's fault and they should all die, I've heard that Hamas don't actually have the best interest for people in mind, much less their own people...
-
boom... (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fd4_1231037255)
-
I've heard that people in Giza are starving to death, I've heard that Israel are deliberately targeting Mosques and Hospitals specifically to kill civillians, I've heard that Hamas is Hiding in Mosques and Hospitals so Israel bombs them and kills civilians, I've heard that everything is Israel's fault and they should all die, I've heard that Hamas don't actually have the best interest for people in mind, much less their own people...
The sad part is that all of the above is occurring. It's a sad day when two sides of the same coin are allowed to exist in a conflict. MAD in action can only lead to an irrecoverable reaction, like the mininuke Israel appears to have used... though it's more likely it was a highly compressed hydrocarbon storage (a quasi-nuke waiting to happen) because of the way it was burning afterward. But again, both may be true.
-
Mininuke? That was nowhere near nuke size.
-
Mininuke? That was nowhere near nuke size.
Or mininuke size. It probably hit a gasoline tank. One big bang of the fumes going up, then a sustained fire from the liquid fuming off.
-
My brother said that was probably a 1000 pound bomb they dropped.
-
It's also the mentality of the people. I mean, when a current adult was a kid, then his/her parents teach them the hate the Israelis. I mean, look. They aren't even scared to suicide to kill other people.
-
I've heard that people in Giza are starving to death, I've heard that Israel are deliberately targeting Mosques and Hospitals specifically to kill civillians, I've heard that Hamas is Hiding in Mosques and Hospitals so Israel bombs them and kills civilians, I've heard that everything is Israel's fault and they should all die, I've heard that Hamas don't actually have the best interest for people in mind, much less their own people...
The sad part is that all of the above is occurring. It's a sad day when two sides of the same coin are allowed to exist in a conflict. MAD in action can only lead to an irrecoverable reaction, like the mininuke Israel appears to have used... though it's more likely it was a highly compressed hydrocarbon storage (a quasi-nuke waiting to happen) because of the way it was burning afterward. But again, both may be true.
Definitely not a conventionally sized nuke (plus people would be going nuts because you can't just sneakily detonate a nuke...anywhere that has a sensitive radiation sensor would be liable to pick up some sort of increased radioactivity). That probably wasn't even a large bomb. Probably in the 1000lb to 2000lb range...the Luftwaffe and Royal Air Force were dropping those kinds of bombs on each other for years during WWII (historical fact...not attempting to set precedent or the like)...and none of those were anywhere close to the 22,000lb Grand Slam bomb or the 12,000lb Tallboy bomb of which one was likely responsible for capsizing the German battleship Tirpitz. Just because a blast is bright or looks large doesn't mean that:
1) the bomb was nuclear
2) the bomb was large in and of itself
-
Yeah, poor choice of wording on my part. I didn't mean to imply Israel used a tactical grade subterranean nuclear warhead (very uncommon, but that's beside the point). I was illustrating that it's just as likely that the IAF used a high grade warhead as if they hit a highly compressed hydrocarbon supply, which would be a hazard by just existing. I was just calling it what it appeared to be, not what I thought it was :blah:.
Someday I might learn to say what I mean without saying what I don't mean indirectly.
-
My guess is that whatever it was hit a large explosives lab.
...Stored in the back room of a gas station.
Or something like that. :p
-
...Stored in the back room of a gas station.
A mosque surely.
-
...Stored in the back room of a gas station.
A mosque surely.
Isn't it rather ... against the ruels to store any form of weaponry in a Mosque?
-
Since when has Hamas cared about the rules. (I say with the full understanding that it's a complicated issue.)
-
ah, the case of the bombardments and its inevitable civilian casualties, and the quetion of who is responsible.
First we must know that Hamas (and Hezbollah) expressly places their stockpiles and military instalations in the midst of civilian infrastructure, with the intent of using these civilians -with or without their agreement!- as living shields. This in order to use the resulting casualties and pictures thereoff as a propaganda-tool against Israel. This activity (also used by Saddam and Milosevic to use a few others) is expressly forbidden by the Conventions. Since Hamas engages in this activity with a strategical and tactical goal in mind it alone is responsible for the victims of their choice.
You got any proof of that except the local Israeli media? I find it hard to believe that UN schools, hospitals and mosks are major centers or terrorist activity. Even if they were, you know that they will be full of civilians because they are what they are. If you still insist on targeting them, you're not better than the worst war criminal.
bottom line - Israel is an advanced, western state - once would expect it to follow all the conventions and rules of warfare. Hamas is, by your own words, a terrorist organization - you can't really expect the same behavior from both of them.
I don't buy their excuses - from either side. But I believe Israel is a greater culprit cause it should know better.
-
You got any proof of that except the local Israeli media?
heres a link, see what you can make up of it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d85zIeHwFDY&watch_response
-
bottom line - Israel is an advanced, western state - once would expect it to follow all the conventions and rules of warfare. Hamas is, by your own words, a terrorist organization - you can't really expect the same behavior from both of them.
I don't buy their excuses - from either side. But I believe Israel is a greater culprit cause it should know better.
Fighting a war on some sort of nobler or more hands-off level than a desperate enemy doesn't do anything but get your own troops killed. (See: Vietnam) Ugly truth, perhaps, but the truth nonetheless. Israel's kind of damned whatever they do in this situation, so they might as well make the best of the opportunity.
-
You got any proof of that except the local Israeli media? I find it hard to believe that UN schools, hospitals and mosks are major centers or terrorist activity.
Rocket launchers placed in populated areas (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAokqVFMvWU&feature=channel_page), Mosque (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCVr7MBhgj0&feature=related)...s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwP_LusgPAw&feature=channel_page) being used to store weapons, Using civilian areas as cover for attacks (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHNk6eBw3ME&feature=channel_page), Un schools (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmXXUOs27lI) and Ambulances (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o61EHmEoD0) being used by Hamas etc... etc... etc...
Even if they were, you know that they will be full of civilians because they are what they are. If you still insist on targeting them, you're not better than the worst war criminal.
You bet that Israel or anyone would still target those locations. Civilians, even though that title can cause some people to assume so, are just like you and me. They are not a colony of mentally challenged people they are rational human beings with just as much brain capacity as the next person. The Hamas uses their buildings to fire weapons mortars and even rockets from. Have you ever been around any of these when they go off? You can't miss it. So knowing this would it not be prudent to say that they A. know that Hamas is using thier building and they are ignoring it because they want to be another death racked up to 'civilian' casualties and get 72 virgins? B. Know that Hamas is using the building and because they don't have the will or the means to stop them they leave the premises before the retaliation they KNOW is coming? C. Know that Hamas is using the building but they cannot leave because the Hamas has threatened them and their families and are using them as human shields (which has been reported BY the Palestinians themselves as being the case)
And even though it's fairly safe to say that this would be the case that is not enough and, as I pointed out before (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,60092.msg1186631.html#msg1186631), Israel has made a point of going to extreme measures to warn citizens whenever and however possible
bottom line - Israel is an advanced, western state - once would expect it to follow all the conventions and rules of warfare. Hamas is, by your own words, a terrorist organization - you can't really expect the same behavior from both of them.
I don't buy their excuses - from either side. But I believe Israel is a greater culprit cause it should know better.
And what are the rules of warfare in this situation? Does it say somewhere that if the enemy is hiding among a willing or unwilling civilian population that no action may be taken against them and you just have to deal with it? If so, then thank God they aren't following that rule and neither would anyone else.
-
Still... given that at least in the clips shown above the terrorists (yes.. i do call Hamas personnel as terrorists) fled very rapidly after firing the weapons it seems rather pointless to toss artillery shells at the firing location (like the UN school case). As the IDF has had to know - or then they really lack on the intelligence department - that a) terrorists have already fled, b) target area is UN school, c) non-combatants are sheltering there shelling the area seems to me to have been a stupid choice to begin with.
And after those news its kinda hard to believe that IDF strikes would actually have had any better than 10% rate on killing the actual Hamas (or other extremists) combatants. After all IDF has also succeeded in blue on blue incidents so it kinda leaves room for a thought wheather with that accuracy of information the IDF would be able to hit any actual combatants (hostile combatants that is)...
And besides as the Israeli are/were blocking international journalists (as reported by news agencies) from entering the Gaza i cant really say i would trust IDF reports on the incidents.
BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7815929.stm)
...
Casualty claims in Gaza cannot be independently verified.
Israel is refusing to let international journalists into Gaza, despite a supreme court ruling to allow a limited number of reporters to enter the territory. [/qoute]
-
Trash, I seem to remember you defending the Serbian conflict as merely something that needed doing. I think that Isreal is wrong to have attacked, but I'm confused at the apparent switch of opinion.
Still... given that at least in the clips shown above the terrorists (yes.. i do call Hamas personnel as terrorists) fled very rapidly after firing the weapons it seems rather pointless to toss artillery shells at the firing location (like the UN school case). As the IDF has had to know - or then they really lack on the intelligence department - that a) terrorists have already fled, b) target area is UN school, c) non-combatants are sheltering there shelling the area seems to me to have been a stupid choice to begin with.
Military will never be an effective tool against terrorists, I don't think.
-
I don't think anyone in their right mind is going to argue whether or not Israel is targeting schools, mosques, hospitals, etc specifically, or that they were firing artillery shells at rocket sites. I also don't think anyone in their right mind would dispute that Israel isn't taking responsibility for ANYTHING they are doing. And their 10:1 'collateral damage' policy really shows. I think that's what everyone is pissed off about.
The three hour (lol) humanitarian (again, lol) window wasn't in response to the school being blown up, it was in response to the outcry that came because of it.
-
Honestly, governments aren't ever really going to "care" responding to public outcry is something that not every government does, I think it counts for something. Also, why would Isreal target schools and Mosques for fun? It's not like it would help their image.
-
I'll say that the blatant disregard of human life on both sides is appalling. Frankly, I've seen enough of my middle-eastern friends swear revenge on Israel and call them "sub-human", and I don't like how people have been saying Israel keeps the Palestinians locked up in Gaza.
-
Honestly, governments aren't ever really going to "care" responding to public outcry is something that not every government does, I think it counts for something. Also, why would Isreal target schools and Mosques for fun? It's not like it would help their image.
Amen to that, if they don't shoot back their image drops and so does their reputation, thus if the IDF don't respond to a rocket attack because they know the terrorists would have fled, Hamas would just get bolder in their attacks
-
A question about the radical Islamist mentality. If I'm a Hamas fighter and I put civilians in the line of fire, and they get killed, have I done them a favour by turning them into martyrs?
-
A question about the radical Islamist mentality. If I'm a Hamas fighter and I put civilians in the line of fire, and they get killed, have I done them a favour by turning them into martyrs?
Well they would omit the part about putting them against their will into the line of fire
-
Seems like IDF is using Hamas tactics as well... Apparently both sides of the conflict use non-combatant Palestinians as human shields (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7817926.stm).
EDIT.... Also... seems that news & photos coming from journalists (which now are allowed to Gaza if embedded to IDF unit) are going through IDF censorship... IDF approach does not exactly instill trust in them as it seems to translate that journalists are shown what IDF wants them to see and any excess material is removed by censors.
Though i agree that IDF had to react to the rocket strikes this stuff just seems so odd that i can't help to wonder WTF is going on...
-
Latest UN report sez approx 50% of the causalities in Gaza are women and children.
And, UN claims with 100% certanty that the UN school bombed by Israel had no terrorists or rockets inside. They demand a investigation and punishment for those responsible...
-
Trash, I seem to remember you defending the Serbian conflict as merely something that needed doing. I think that Isreal is wrong to have attacked, but I'm confused at the apparent switch of opinion.
I what? :wtf:
-
Further news, translated by me (yeah my translations suck :> )
After attack on humanitarian aid convoy
UN stops humanitarian aid to Gaza.
The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) has stopped its activities in the gaza strip, reacting to an attack on one of its convoys by the Israelis army during the daily cease fire.
UNRWA spokesperson Adnan Abu Hasna confirmed that during the attack, two employees were killed: The driver of a truck was dead immediately, another employee died due to injuries later.
They were contractors (?) hired by the UNRWA.
The convoy was - according to the UNRWA - clearly marked with UN flags, the drivers wore UN wests.
The Israeli military was informed about the transport said Hasna.
He didn't give any comments if and when the humanitarian aid will be resumed. The reasons that lead to the attack are still unknown.
Cease fire not kept
The Israeli army resumed its attack before noon. The air force bombarded at least 20 targets in Gaza. According to the Israeli newspaper "ha'aretz" 4 palastines were killed, including 3 fighters of the organisation "islamic jihad".
ARD-correspondent Richard Schneider reported, that todays cease fire was no kept. Between 1 pm and 4 pm local time shots could be heard in the gaza strip. According to the israeli army missiles were fired at Israel from Gaza. At least four missiles impacted, the cities Aschkelon and Sderot were hit.
The international comitee of the red cross (IKRK (?) ) criticized Israel unusually harsh for the hindering of emergency medical services in the gaza strip.
After an attack on Gaza/Seitun the israeli army had refused palastine medics and IKRK-members access to injured for days.
Four starving children and a dead mother and at least eleven additional victims were found in a building at the end.
"They were to weak to stand alone" reported the IKRK.
Pierre Wettach, the responsible of the comitee for Israel and palestine areas reported:
"The isreali military must have know of the situation, but didn't help the wounded. They also didn't allow us or the palestine red crescent to help the injured."
This would be inacceptable and a violation of the public international duty to help wounded and transport them from the combat zone to safety.
Phosphor bombs in use?
The british newspaper "The Times" reported that the israeli army had used phospor bombs during fights in the gaza strip. On photos taken last week at the border to the gaza strip the bombs of US-production could clearly be recognized by the marking M825A1 reported the paper.
In addition there were reports about civil victims with burns (?).
A spokeswoman of the israeli army declined reports over the use of phosphor bombs. The M825A1 shells were not filled and were only used as target marker, as she said according to the "Times" report. "We don't use weapons that are banned due to international laws" quoted the paper her in addition.
Phosphor bombs aren't eplicitly banned, however, their use is according to the weapons convention of 1980 prohibited against civilians and in rural areas.
"(?)" notes were I were a little unsure about the translation, I also had problems translating a lot of the indirect speach.
Source: http://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/gaza560.html
I really wonder why the Israelis are trying so hard to keep foreign journalists out and under control...
P.S.: If you want to, I can translate additional articles about that matter in the future.
P.P.S.: Omg, so many typos and mistakes the Spellcheck didn't catch... -.-
-
While the BBC has had Palestinian producers reporting from Gaza, Israel only allowed Western TV crews to enter on Wednesday, embedded with its army.
which is, as the dutch found out, not a very good way to perform journalism. Embedded Journalism tends to turn into one-sided news.
-
...Stored in the back room of a gas station.
A mosque surely.
Isn't it rather ... against the ruels to store any form of weaponry in a Mosque?
something exploding does not mean weapons
for example, it could mean a garage or a kitchen
-
Its sad, I read an article witch said an extremely large percentage of Palestinian casualties are children.
-
Its sad, I read an article witch said an extremely large percentage of Palestinian casualties are children.
Weeeeell about 44% of Gazans are under 18% so if you just not quite randomly but without giving a **** about collaterals then you kill a lot of children
if israel really was intent on slaughtering everyone the casualties would more closely follow the demographics of gaza but honestly, the casualties tell that they don't really give a **** if innocent people die
-
44% of Gazans are under 18%
You need to chop off a % sign.
-
I laughed at that.
Hm... 40% is the correct number according to the news.
-
I say just let 'em fight. It isn't going to end any other way. But using phosphors bombs, thats extreme and wrong. Not like they care, though. Sad what the world has come to, isn't it? Genocide over petty issues.
-
Still... given that at least in the clips shown above the terrorists (yes.. i do call Hamas personnel as terrorists) fled very rapidly after firing the weapons it seems rather pointless to toss artillery shells at the firing location (like the UN school case). As the IDF has had to know - or then they really lack on the intelligence department - that a) terrorists have already fled, b) target area is UN school, c) non-combatants are sheltering there shelling the area seems to me to have been a stupid choice to begin with.
I have to challenge assertion A. It's well within the capablities of the IDF, and most modern militaries, to put fire on an enemy artillery posistion within five minutes of its actually firing. Counterbattery radar can generally determine an inbound rocket or round's point of origin before it actually lands, and a couple of minutes later your own guns are firing on that point. There is very good reason Hamas has learned to flee the scene; within the next five minutes it could be ground zero for an artillery barrage. At least some of the time in that situation you're not going to make it out. If you do escape, you probably had to abandon your weapon and it was destroyed by the return fire.
Perhaps more importantly, the retaliatory fire serves the purpose of ensuring these posistions are never going to fire more than a couple of times, which reduces them to irrevelancy. Weapons of the sort being employed by Hamas have to be used in large barrages to be effective; Israel is ensuring that they never will be.
So no, not pointless. Harsh, certainly, but unfortunately quite logical.
-
Unfortunately, if we do just let the two sides slug it out, its going to end badly and neither Hamas nor Israel are going to be the ones who pay the price. Israeli civilians hit by rocket attacks and, more apparently, Palestinians caught in the crossfire are going to be the real victims. As far as I've heard from CNN, BBC, Israeli media, and al-Jazeera, the IDF has been going to extreme lengths to keep civilians out of the conflict, but I'm afraid their efforts are for nothing.
The Israelis are screwed no matter what they do here. They pull back now, Hamas gets a treatment similar to Hezbollah at the end of the Lebanon conflict, seen by Palestinians as their great defenders and saviors, and, thanks to the Arab media (specifically al-Jazeera, "martyrs" my ass), the rest of the Arab world is going to do the same.
If Israel keeps going, the Palestinian body count will keep piling up. Civilians will be shamelessly used by Hamas as cover for their counterattacks, and more will be caught in the crossfire.
Regardless, Hamas as a military element needs to go. The Palestinians really do have a chance for peace with Abbas, but the division between Fatah and Hamas is simply ruining any hope for that.
-
I'd really like to see how far they take things this time.
-
They'll probably get far and have some kind of misunderstanding resulting in both sides in a stalemate, I highly doubt they're going to reach any kind of agreement until the next World War in which they'll have to take sides and annihilate each other
-
That'll be World War III... :nervous:
-
That'll be World War III... :nervous:
Are you sure?
-
I have to challenge assertion A. It's well within the capablities of the IDF, and most modern militaries, to put fire on an enemy artillery posistion within five minutes of its actually firing. Counterbattery radar can generally determine an inbound rocket or round's point of origin before it actually lands, and a couple of minutes later your own guns are firing on that point. There is very good reason Hamas has learned to flee the scene; within the next five minutes it could be ground zero for an artillery barrage. At least some of the time in that situation you're not going to make it out. If you do escape, you probably had to abandon your weapon and it was destroyed by the return fire.
Perhaps more importantly, the retaliatory fire serves the purpose of ensuring these posistions are never going to fire more than a couple of times, which reduces them to irrevelancy. Weapons of the sort being employed by Hamas have to be used in large barrages to be effective; Israel is ensuring that they never will be.
So no, not pointless. Harsh, certainly, but unfortunately quite logical.
Perhaps... Well it is certainly true that the harassing fire of IDF forces Hamas to spread out and fire only short bursts at a time. However having actually used mortars in the army i can say that should some of the safety protocols be ignored (and the with even lightly trained crew) they can fire the weapon couple of times and bolt with the weapon in way less than a minute. And if they wont bother recovering the launcher there is no way they would be present longer than (about - assuming two shots) ten seconds after the first shot is fired.
-
They had protests in Brisbane because of Israel declining to accept the cease-fire. :nod:
-
This just in - IDF to be charged for war crimes.
Apparently IDF soldiers brought a hundered Palestinians inside a house and bombed it later several times. 30 were killed and many wounded...
This just keeps getting messier.
-
Not to mention crazier.
I used to sympathise with the Israelis, but now I sympathise with all the civilians on both sides. :wtf:
-
This just in - IDF to be charged for war crimes.
Apparently IDF soldiers brought a hundered Palestinians inside a house and bombed it later several times. 30 were killed and many wounded...
This just keeps getting messier.
Who's going to charge them?
-
Perhaps... Well it is certainly true that the harassing fire of IDF forces Hamas to spread out and fire only short bursts at a time. However having actually used mortars in the army i can say that should some of the safety protocols be ignored (and the with even lightly trained crew) they can fire the weapon couple of times and bolt with the weapon in way less than a minute. And if they wont bother recovering the launcher there is no way they would be present longer than (about - assuming two shots) ten seconds after the first shot is fired.
I used mortars in the military, too. The problem with your statement is that mortars (the man-portable ones, at least) are short-range "artillery" - up to 3.5km or so on the larger 60mm variants, and around a kilometer on the 52mm ones - IIRC. Those aren't the kinds of artillery we're talking about here - think Kassams, Grads, etc - dozens of kilometers of range. ;)
-
I'm kinda surprised this thread died out so fast.... :nervous:
-
I apologize for being too busy to be controversial. :p
-
I'm kinda surprised this thread died out so fast.... :nervous:
I'd rather that it dies out fast. Issues like this just make me feel like sleeping. :nervous:
-
Some white phosphorous ought to make you wake up. (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gop8fpFpn70050VWD4GK3gZXLmiQD95L5L300)
-
So in case anyone was following that whole UN school bombing incident Israel released the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN9WzUc7iB0&feature=channel_page) showing a rocket launcher in the school yard... But I'm sure it's actually just a giant pencil sharpener.
Funny how everyone believed in an instant that Israel would target civilians for no reason and had such a hard time believing that a terrorist organization would use civilian people and locations as cover. Seriously? Why? Because some U.N. scum said he was 99.9% sure no one was using the school to stage attacks? We have already seen videos of the U.N. helping and covering for the Hamas before why should it be different now? The U.N. in Gaza are on the same scale as Hamas in my book.
-
The U.N. in Gaza are on the same scale as Hamas in my book.
:wtf:
-
The U.N. in Gaza are on the same scale as Hamas in my book.
:wtf:
Using their influence and connections to help transport protect and cover for terrorists while hiding behind the guise of international aid for the people of Gaza. If someone murders your child *knocks on wood* and then they escape because an international aid organization helped them and they did it again and again and again I would think you would have a healthy disdain for them if not a strong desire to hold them accountable. It's called aiding and abetting and it's quite illegal.
I will say it again. The U.N. in Gaza are no better than the Hamas.
-
No one - well, perhaps some very few - really believe that IDF would target civilians for no reason but it seems - at least around here - that IDF is seen as targeting anything regardless of the civilians. Same claim can of course be made of Hamas but that just kinda shows that both sides play dirty and disregard non combatant palestinians.
Its kinda difficult to agree with Israelis claiming to being victims and then getting reports that they are using white phosphorous on or very close to civilians...
-
So in case anyone was following that whole UN school bombing incident Israel released the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN9WzUc7iB0&feature=channel_page) showing a rocket launcher in the school yard... But I'm sure it's actually just a giant pencil sharpener.
Funny how everyone believed in an instant that Israel would target civilians for no reason and had such a hard time believing that a terrorist organization would use civilian people and locations as cover. Seriously? Why? Because some U.N. scum said he was 99.9% sure no one was using the school to stage attacks? We have already seen videos of the U.N. helping and covering for the Hamas before why should it be different now? The U.N. in Gaza are on the same scale as Hamas in my book.
I don't see anything on that video. It's fat too blurry and. the "rocket launcher" is behind the tree the whole time.
Heck, I couldn't even tell you where that video was taken (what building, what town)
Really, I'm not believing anyone without some GOOD, hard evidence.
And you equate UN with terrorists and are then appauled when someone equates the IDF with terrorists? It's all a matter of perspective I guess, but justifications and broken logic can be used to justify or attack anyone or anything..
-
So in case anyone was following that whole UN school bombing incident Israel released the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN9WzUc7iB0&feature=channel_page) showing a rocket launcher in the school yard... But I'm sure it's actually just a giant pencil sharpener.
I dont seem to find any information that this was a schoolyard of an UN school, care to help me?
Iirc also the building of the UN school was attacked, not the school yard. If there would have been such a precision strike on mortars or rocket launchers, it shouldnt have had such victims.
Funny how everyone believed in an instant that Israel would target civilians for no reason and had such a hard time believing that a terrorist organization would use civilian people and locations as cover. Seriously? Why? Because some U.N. scum said he was 99.9% sure no one was using the school to stage attacks? We have already seen videos of the U.N. helping and covering for the Hamas before why should it be different now? The U.N. in Gaza are on the same scale as Hamas in my book.
Certainly few people (and probably no one on HLP) think that Israel attacked the school just for fun, its more about not caring if it would even hit the right ones. It was fired because there might be some hamas fighters hidden, the following explanations and justifications from the Israeli side only further that impression: Civilians may be killed if there might be the chance that justified targets are also hit. In contrast to what was said earlier in this thread the Israeli military doesnt put that much effort into not hurting someone innocent. That would probably endanger their soldiers, and a sad but simple rule of PR is that 100 dead enemy civlians arent as bad as less than ten own soldiers. Sadly, it's not that different in Iraq and Afghanistan after all.
Also, that UN scum you talk about is the closest to independent information we - and you - will get from this war.
Not only the Hamas reports of the area are filled with - and full of - propaganda, the Israeli reports are as well. The situation might be far better if we could have our own journalists over there, but despite a decision of the Israeli (!) supreme court this is still not possible. (Latest info I got that some journalists may go embedded with the IDF, however the military got a veto right against who might be nominated... anything up to date..? )
So the Israeli military and politicians were and are certainly and definitely exercising information control, and as a result I have to distrust any Israeli information. Note that the Videos from "idfnadesk" all have their comments section disabled.
Silencing critical voices isnt very democratic you know...
-
regardless of the civilians.
I can understand why you and others would see it that way. I find this very often with many people from everywhere in the world and it's no one persons fault. People just seem to forget that no matter what they see hear or read there is always more to it. I don't trust the media especially after being in Lebanon war 2006 and seeing with my own eyes something and then hearing the media say something diffrent again and again and again. That's why I don't get into discussions about other places either, because I haven't been there and I don't know first hand. You couldn't have paid me to get involved in a discussion about the Russia Georgia conflict or the US Iraq/Afghanistan conflict because the only information I get is what other people have read heard and seen. Why should I believe them? Why should you believe me? Well I think you should but that hardly is a convincing argument. It's better just to see things for yourselves then come to your own conclusions.
Now, I am assuming that you have never been to Israel or if you have it was under very diffrent circumstances. I am also assuming you have never been in the military or if you have then you didn't get to see combat. Correct me if I'm wrong this is simply the case with most the people I talk to. That's why most the military people you can ask if Israel is disregarding civilians will tell you of course not. and you may ask well why is the civilian death toll so high? the answer is this is war not art. this is life not a fairy tale or a hollywood shoot em' up where people curve bullets and such. And Sh*t happens even to good people. To quote Golda Meir "When peace comes we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons." Anyway, here is Israel regarding some of the civilians (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=560_1231793744).
I don't see anything on that video. It's fat too blurry and. the "rocket launcher" is behind the tree the whole time.
Heck, I couldn't even tell you where that video was taken (what building, what town)
oh wow... Maybe to avoid international reprise Israel went to some building and recreated a scene where they blow up something that looks like a rocket launcher. I guess if that were the case why should any of the videos that we saw so far in this thread be real?
Your suspicion knows no bounds but considering everything I actually can't blame you. I just hope it flows both ways.
Heres a zoo and school wired to blow (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHhs9ihSmbU&feature=channel_page) (unless of course this is also staged or the soldiers planted these bombs right?)
And you equate UN with terrorists and are then appalled when someone equates the IDF with terrorists? It's all a matter of perspective I guess, but justifications and broken logic can be used to justify or attack anyone or anything..
Big difference I wasn't calling the UN in Gaza terrorists I said they were no better than and they were on the same scale BECUASE they were helping an internationally identified terrorist organization. If you or anyone else wants to compare the IDF to terrorists thats a whole other story and you have every right to do so however I would be appalled considering what I know first hand about them and considering your only basis for those claims would be based on other peoples observations since I assume (yeah I did it again but 95% it's the case) you have never been in Israel and been with the IDF in action.
In 2004 Peter Hansen, Commissioner General of UNRWA, admitted, "I am sure that there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll and I don't see that as a crime." from globalsecurity.org (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/hamas.htm)
I don't seem to find any information that this was a schoolyard of an UN school, care to help me?
Iirc also the building of the UN school was attacked, not the school yard. If there would have been such a precision strike on mortars or rocket launchers, it shouldnt have had such victims.
Aside from the UN saying we hit a schoolyard?
I think you are refferring to the other school that was hit. There was a mortar group shooting from the other school and a tank fired and missed and they ran away. They claimed there too that there was no terrorists but AP received two separate phone calls from Palestinians who wished to remain anonymous saying they saw the mortar team fire from the school. It's just sad that the tank missed I really do think it's tragic that 30 people paid the price for some cowardly terrorists using them as cover.
Certainly few people (and probably no one on HLP) think that Israel attacked the school just for fun, its more about not caring if it would even hit the right ones. It was fired because there might be some Hamas fighters hidden, the following explanations and justifications from the Israeli side only further that impression: Civilians may be killed if there might be the chance that justified targets are also hit. In contrast to what was said earlier in this thread the Israeli military doesn't put that much effort into not hurting someone innocent. That would probably endanger their soldiers, and a sad but simple rule of PR is that 100 dead enemy civilians aren't as bad as less than ten own soldiers. Sadly, it's not that different in Iraq and Afghanistan after all.
This is basically what I addressed earlier in this post.
Also, that UN scum you talk about is the closest to independent information we - and you - will get from this war.
Not only the Hamas reports of the area are filled with - and full of - propaganda, the Israeli reports are as well.
I have shown time and time again how 'independent" the UN in Gaza is in this whole situation. (notice every time I say UN in Gaza because I know not all UN is like that of course)
The situation might be far better if we could have our own journalists over there, but despite a decision of the Israeli (!) supreme court this is still not possible. (Latest info I got that some journalists may go embedded with the IDF, however the military got a veto right against who might be nominated... anything up to date..? )
So the Israeli military and politicians were and are certainly and definitely exercising information control, and as a result I have to distrust any Israeli information. Note that the Videos from "idfnadesk" all have their comments section disabled.
Silencing critical voices isnt very democratic you know...
And there is a simple reason for that. first let me say that the supreme court rules that we let 4 BBC journalists in on an imbed. Now, the reason we don't let any journalists just come and go as they please like we did in the past is because we learned from Hezbollah in 2006 that they were able to study and prepare and attack more effectively because they watched the news and could see what type of tactics people and equipment was being deployed against them. In fact Israel even blocked Fox News from entering (http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=3419010&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/world/mideast/index.html#) because it's not about right or left wingers going in its about the safety of the troops.
-
The U.N. in Gaza are on the same scale as Hamas in my book.
:wtf:
Using their influence and connections to help transport protect and cover for terrorists while hiding behind the guise of international aid for the people of Gaza. If someone murders your child *knocks on wood* and then they escape because an international aid organization helped them and they did it again and again and again I would think you would have a healthy disdain for them if not a strong desire to hold them accountable. It's called aiding and abetting and it's quite illegal.
I will say it again. The U.N. in Gaza are no better than the Hamas.
Hamas rocket attacks have killed less than half a dozen Israelis, and I seem to recall much the same thing being said about 5th Columnists for protecting the Jews. What the UN are trying to do is minimise casualties, they aren't perfect, they just don't neccesarily agree that killing several citizens who may not even have a say in the matter, purely to kill one Terrorist is neccesarily a fair trade.
Now, whilst I'll admit the UN has a habit of 'act first, think later', I think blanket assumptions like 'The UN troops in Gaza are no better than the Hamas' are the kind of statement to led to all the sectarian violence there in the first place, all Palestinians are no better than Terrorists, all UN Troops are no better than Terrorists, you dilute the word to the point where it no longer has any relevant meaning, anyone who does something you don't like it 'no better than Terrorists'.
-
Hamas rocket attacks have killed less than half a dozen Israelis, and I seem to recall much the same thing being said about 5th Columnists for protecting the Jews. What the UN are trying to do is minimise casualties, they aren't perfect, they just don't necessarily agree that killing several citizens who may not even have a say in the matter, purely to kill one Terrorist is necessarily a fair trade.
Where did you get that number? you mean since the start of the Gaza Op? Minimise casualties by making them and their facilities legitimate targets for protecting and helping terrorists? I think not. What most people forget about the UN in Gaza is that aside from upper management most the workers ARE Gazans. Some of them really have no problem using their connections to help Hamas. It's not like you have a bunch of Sweeds driving a UN ambulance packed with gunmen.
Now, whilst I'll admit the UN has a habit of 'act first, think later', I think blanket assumptions like 'The UN troops in Gaza are no better than the Hamas' are the kind of statement to led to all the sectarian violence there in the first place, all Palestinians are no better than Terrorists, all UN Troops are no better than Terrorists, you dilute the word to the point where it no longer has any relevant meaning, anyone who does something you don't like it 'no better than Terrorists'.
There are no UN troops in Gaza. That aside you are completely missed my point if you think that's how I label everyone. Why would I label all Palestinians as no better than terrorists? Do they all support Hamas and want to eradicate all Jews in the name of Islam? No, of course not. We hear many of them saying all we want is peace etc etc. I gave that label specifically to the UN in Gaza because they facilitate the Hamas. That's it.
-
They are working as a relief organisation, their job is to provide relief, sometimes insurgents take advantage, should that mean that the UN should just pull out and let everyone suffer instead? If they were 'as bad as Hamas', they'd be attacking Israel.
This whole 'X are as bad as Y' situation is getting ridiculous, it's like Godwins law all over again.
-
Aside from the UN saying we hit a schoolyard?
I think you are refferring to the other school that was hit. There was a mortar group shooting from the other school and a tank fired and missed and they ran away. They claimed there too that there was no terrorists but AP received two separate phone calls from Palestinians who wished to remain anonymous saying they saw the mortar team fire from the school. It's just sad that the tank missed I really do think it's tragic that 30 people paid the price for some cowardly terrorists using them as cover.
I am a little confused, I thought you posted that video as a proof that hamas fighters were in the UN school that was attacked, however, that video doesn't say it shows an UN school - so this video and the incident "everyone talked about" may be two completely different places. And probably are, given that the PR guy who posted that video would have labeled it specifically as UN school if it were one.
I found a second video at his channel, showing an attack from a specifically named UN school in October 2007, but nothing thats new.
Certainly few people (and probably no one on HLP) think that Israel attacked the school just for fun, its more about not caring if it would even hit the right ones. It was fired because there might be some Hamas fighters hidden, the following explanations and justifications from the Israeli side only further that impression: Civilians may be killed if there might be the chance that justified targets are also hit. In contrast to what was said earlier in this thread the Israeli military doesn't put that much effort into not hurting someone innocent. That would probably endanger their soldiers, and a sad but simple rule of PR is that 100 dead enemy civilians aren't as bad as less than ten own soldiers. Sadly, it's not that different in Iraq and Afghanistan after all.
This is basically what I addressed earlier in this post.
To answer the question directed at wanderer first, in my case I havent been in Israel, I have been in the military but not in actual combat, only manouvers.
I certainly know that war isnt pretty, but I also know a little about human nature. And this knowledge says, if someone is allowed to break the rules, many of those will use this allowance as much as possible - meaning as long as the government, the population, the one responsible for PR or whoever is not behind keeping out civilians, some military guys will quite certainly stop to care.
I can easily account the incidents you cite as "done because the PR guy wanted that to be done" - or, to be more friendly, that the army consists of people, and different people in this army have different believes about handling enemy civilians, and you only get the info about the guys who know to behave. But it should be the responsibility of the politicians to directly and the responsibility of the civilians to indirectly ensure that those who dont know to behave to be kept in line. Part of this is also harsh (and public) response to unnecessary civilian casualities caused by your own soldiers. However, the reaction is mostly not criticizing malfunctioning parts of the own military, but justifying it. Here is limited information very annoying, because it makes those justifications so much easier..
Also, that UN scum you talk about is the closest to independent information we - and you - will get from this war.
Not only the Hamas reports of the area are filled with - and full of - propaganda, the Israeli reports are as well.
I have shown time and time again how 'independent" the UN in Gaza is in this whole situation. (notice every time I say UN in Gaza because I know not all UN is like that of course)
I said "closest to..". I know that really independent is something different, but the Israeli military and Hamas certainly dont qualify (you might argue about "close to the truth" for the IDF, but "independent"? Not really. ) Because I know that the UN and even the ICRC arent totally reliable either, I am so *ing annoyed the no foreign journalists are in there.
And there is a simple reason for that. first let me say that the supreme court rules that we let 4 BBC journalists in on an imbed. Now, the reason we don't let any journalists just come and go as they please like we did in the past is because we learned from Hezbollah in 2006 that they were able to study and prepare and attack more effectively because they watched the news and could see what type of tactics people and equipment was being deployed against them. In fact Israel even blocked Fox News from entering (http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=3419010&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/world/mideast/index.html#) because it's not about right or left wingers going in its about the safety of the troops.
Well, in fact the reason given by Daniel Seaman, director of the Israeli press agency/mass media agency (dont know the right translation -.-), during a talk with the news agency AP was that Hamas could show Israel in a bad light with questionable reports.
source: http://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/journalistengaza102.html ( I can translate the whole text or only the relevant paragraph if you wish)
-
oh wow... Maybe to avoid international reprise Israel went to some building and recreated a scene where they blow up something that looks like a rocket launcher. I guess if that were the case why should any of the videos that we saw so far in this thread be real?
You really think this is out of the question or difficult to make? Heavens knows goverments or the military never tried to cover up stuff before :rolleyes:
Israel itself was partially founded by terrorist and covert activities itself, so I wouldn't put it past them to lie.
Big difference I wasn't calling the UN in Gaza terrorists I said they were no better than and they were on the same scale BECUASE they were helping an internationally identified terrorist organization. If you or anyone else wants to compare the IDF to terrorists thats a whole other story and you have every right to do so however I would be appalled considering what I know first hand about them and considering your only basis for those claims would be based on other peoples observations since I assume (yeah I did it again but 95% it's the case) you have never been in Israel and been with the IDF in action.
Actually, these days I'm totally not concerned what is "internationally indentified" and what is not.
Nor am I saying I trust the UN - God knows they f*** up in the war here, they were impotent, incapable and were flat out lying in several cases.
I find it ironic that for instance, General Gotovina is charged for war crimes because of "overshelling of Knin" (which the prosecution can't prove, their whole case is currently crumbling in Haague), while at the same time the shelling of Gaza is all fine and dandy.
What I'm saying is that if you want to have standard, them everyone should be equal in front of them.
I think you are refferring to the other school that was hit. There was a mortar group shooting from the other school and a tank fired and missed and they ran away. They claimed there too that there was no terrorists but AP received two separate phone calls from Palestinians who wished to remain anonymous saying they saw the mortar team fire from the school. It's just sad that the tank missed I really do think it's tragic that 30 people paid the price for some cowardly terrorists using them as cover.
I really think ti's tragic that you're using artillery to kill a guy, when snipers would do the job MUCH more precisely. Seriously, if anything Israel has the $$$ to equip half their military with high-precision sniper rifles. It would be a far better tactic than to level the whole town and then say "I'm sorry".
If a crook takes a hostage and the police officer uses the bazooka to blow them both to bits, you wouldn't be trying to justify the cop, now would you.
-
Wait, what? Artillery and snipers aren't at all equivalent.
How do you expect the IDF to position snipers nearly as quickly as they can fire artillery? I'm sure they have a strong sniper corps, but a sniper is a tactical instrument. There'd be no way to cover every potential rocket launch point, or to engage pop-up targets before they could move.
I'm not taking sides here, mind, just pointing out a bit of an absurdity.
-
Whoa. This thread didn't stop yet, and I haven't been following it.
There are a couple of things I know from the people who have been in the UN forces there.
In 2004 Peter Hansen, Commissioner General of UNRWA, admitted, "I am sure that there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll and I don't see that as a crime." from globalsecurity.org
Unfortunately, I have heard the same also. I recall some of the peacekeepers (from our country, definately not HAMAS) complaining about crazy "to check the cargo and when absolutely not to check" rules there were in place. There actually were certain conditions when they were instructed not to check cargo, which is crazy if you think about the situation in there. And it is also very effective in destroying the peacekeepers sense of duty.
About using the Air Forces in Gaza, if you think the casuality rates are too high, why not support the ground operation then? This is actually why I actually welcome the ground operations in Gaza area. From purely militaristic point of view, I would go for full occupation & policing until those people can be trusted to do it themselves. Though I would expect to hear lots of screaming about "occupation" and "ethnic cleansing". They were demonstrating even here last weekend against the unprovoked Isreali aggression towards the suffering people of Gaza.
The only question I have left for Splinter is does he know why the Finnish peacekeeper died in bunker 2006? The only information I remember from that incident was that the UN peacekeepers had instructed IDF multiple times they were shelling the UN position and there were people inside. They had declared the area on the IDF before the campaign and confirmed it in the beginning of the campaign, and according to Finnish newspapers, IDF should have known that it was UN position.
Mika
-
Hamas rocket attacks have killed less than half a dozen Israelis
Merely firing one is a declaration of war.
-
Indeed, I don't have a problem with Israel protecting their security, what I do have a problem with is people calling an aid group, sent in to relieve the innocents 'as bad as Hamas'.
People can dislike them all they want, but they are NOT the ones launching rockets over Israel's border and to describe them as equal to the people who do is a wholly unfair comparison.
-
Got to wonder how bombing a health care clinic helps combating Hamas - especially, assuming the news (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7825215.stm) is even remotely correct, that it was deliberately targeted due 'nearby terrorist actions' and warned before the strike... Of course it is easier to hit from the air as its marked with red cross on white background but beyond that...
As for question of having been in Israel.. yeah, been there, years ago though. And same for military, served my time in there but no combat action (no real surprise there.. only way to 'get some' would be to volunteer to UN missions abroad - and even then it would be very unlikely)
The only question I have left for Splinter is does he know why the Finnish peacekeeper died in bunker 2006? The only information I remember from that incident was that the UN peacekeepers had instructed IDF multiple times they were shelling the UN position and there were people inside. They had declared the area on the IDF before the campaign and confirmed it in the beginning of the campaign, and according to Finnish newspapers, IDF should have known that it was UN position.
What i have heard from a couple of people serving as officers in the military... IDF shelled at that UN position deliberately knowing it was there.. Hezbollah was known to use sites very close to the use UN observation posts as rocket firing sites so IDF shelled the area. Unarmed UN observers (who had no way of preventing Hezbollah from doing anything) were just acceptable collateral damage to IDF.
-
I can understand why you and others would see it that way. I find this very often with many people from everywhere in the world and it's no one persons fault. People just seem to forget that no matter what they see hear or read there is always more to it. I don't trust the media especially after being in Lebanon war 2006 and seeing with my own eyes something and then hearing the media say something diffrent again and again and again. That's why I don't get into discussions about other places either, because I haven't been there and I don't know first hand. You couldn't have paid me to get involved in a discussion about the Russia Georgia conflict or the US Iraq/Afghanistan conflict because the only information I get is what other people have read heard and seen. Why should I believe them? Why should you believe me? Well I think you should but that hardly is a convincing argument. It's better just to see things for yourselves then come to your own conclusions.
Now, I am assuming that you have never been to Israel or if you have it was under very diffrent circumstances. I am also assuming you have never been in the military or if you have then you didn't get to see combat. Correct me if I'm wrong this is simply the case with most the people I talk to. That's why most the military people you can ask if Israel is disregarding civilians will tell you of course not. and you may ask well why is the civilian death toll so high? the answer is this is war not art. this is life not a fairy tale or a hollywood shoot em' up where people curve bullets and such. And Sh*t happens even to good people. To quote Golda Meir "When peace comes we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons." Anyway, here is Israel regarding some of the civilians (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=560_1231793744).
This is bull****. All of it. Wall-to-wall, far as the eye can see, complete and utter bull****. This is the same argument used to claim that only Jews can give Jews a fair trial, and only followers of Islam can understand Islam. To claim that only firsthand experience provides knowledge defies the foundations of human science and progress. It flies in the face of learning and langauge. This is a failure of logic so serious it renders anything further said suspect.
You failed to address the point in any meaningful way. Indeed, in the end, you seem to be agreeing with Wanderer in your closing statements instead of refuting him!
oh wow... Maybe to avoid international reprise Israel went to some building and recreated a scene where they blow up something that looks like a rocket launcher. I guess if that were the case why should any of the videos that we saw so far in this thread be real?
Your suspicion knows no bounds but considering everything I actually can't blame you. I just hope it flows both ways.
I call bull****. Again. Trash raised legitimate points, shocking as that might be, which you have utterly failed to answer. Nobody even insuinated that the video is fake, or even made by Israelis, but your persecution complex abruptly assumed both were intended. If I were more cynical than I actually am, I would accuse you of having a guilty conscience. As it stands, I'm going to accuse you of the Chewbacca Defense and attempting to hide the (lack of) evidence, because who made the video and anything else is moot compared to the fact that for all that can be deduced from it it was made in 1962 somewhere in South Vietnam. It's utterly useless as evidence for anything.
Your persecution complex is interesting though, and worthy of addressing at more length then I really feel like doing so when I just finished showering. Perhaps another time.
Big difference I wasn't calling the UN in Gaza terrorists I said they were no better than and they were on the same scale BECUASE they were helping an internationally identified terrorist organization. If you or anyone else wants to compare the IDF to terrorists thats a whole other story and you have every right to do so however I would be appalled considering what I know first hand about them and considering your only basis for those claims would be based on other peoples observations since I assume (yeah I did it again but 95% it's the case) you have never been in Israel and been with the IDF in action.
Again with the first-hand fallacy. But more to the point, if you're going to leave the damn petard standing around unused don't be surprised if I hoist you by it. When was the last time you were in UN service in the Gaza Strip, so that you have the right to judge them by your own broken standards?
Aside from the UN saying we hit a schoolyard?
No dammit, aside from the fact that you can't actually prove this is that school and that scene on that date, or any place on any date.
I have shown time and time again how 'independent" the UN in Gaza is in this whole situation. (notice every time I say UN in Gaza because I know not all UN is like that of course)
No, actually you haven't shown anything, you've just made unsupported statements and cited suspect, and out-of-date, sources, against your own specifc efforts to enforce a "you can't judge, you haven't walked a mile in their shoes" thing.
-
Wait, what? Artillery and snipers aren't at all equivalent.
How do you expect the IDF to position snipers nearly as quickly as they can fire artillery? I'm sure they have a strong sniper corps, but a sniper is a tactical instrument. There'd be no way to cover every potential rocket launch point, or to engage pop-up targets before they could move.
I'm not taking sides here, mind, just pointing out a bit of an absurdity.
Don't you think I know that? I know very well snipers can't be deployed fast and the artillery response will always be faster (unless you have a sniper already there)
But I'm not talking about the speed of response, I'm talking about precisions strikes. And you can't beat a sniper when it comes to that. A sniper wont' kill 30 civies by accident. Plus, I'm not talking about that specific case, I'm talking in general. IDF uses artillery everywhere, not just to shoot at mortars/missiles.
-
(without reading a single post in this thread)
**** Gaza, the White House ****ing cat just died!!
-
The White House has a cat?
-
Not any more.
-
Not any more.
Well done :cool:
-
They are working as a relief organisation, their job is to provide relief, sometimes insurgents take advantage, should that mean that the UN should just pull out and let everyone suffer instead? If they were 'as bad as Hamas', they'd be attacking Israel.
This whole 'X are as bad as Y' situation is getting ridiculous, it's like Godwins law all over again.
Look I'll say it again. Most the UN workers in Gaza are Palestinians from Gaza. They don't need a gun to be put to their head to help Hamas. (I'm not saying that because of their race I'm saying that because of what they have historically done and continue to do) The only people being taken advantage of are the upper UN management there who really DO want to help the people and the people themselves. You can find countless articles online about the Hamas using UN vehicles and buildings to hid in and use to attack the minimum the UN could do if they really had a problem with it and were being 'taken advantage of' is to try and get rid of them tell them to bugger off or to tell Israel that they are being used. (you might say they can't tell Israel they are being threatened by the hamas that are there) well then why not after the incident? at least tell the world that Hamas was using them and taking advantage instead of every single time saying "no there was no one here Israel just felt like killing more people they hadn't met their quota for today." As I said the only people being taken advantage of are the upper UN management
there who really DO want to help the people and the people themselves.
from Forbes.com (http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2009/01/07/gaza-hamas-unrwa-oped-cx_cr_0108rosett.html) UNRWA employs more than 24,000 staffers...
At UNRWA, more than 99% of the staff are local Palestinians...
This past September, Democratic Rep. Steve Rothman, with a bipartisan group of five co-sponsors, submitted a concurrent resolution noting that "UNRWA has employed staffers affiliated with terrorism."
The resolution cited specific examples of UNRWA ambulance and schools having been used to abet terrorism and mentioned a number of figures, including Awad al-Qiq, headmaster of an UNRWA school in Gaza, "who also led Islamic Jihad's engineering unit that built bombs and Qassam rockets."...
I am a little confused, I thought you posted that video as a proof that Hamas fighters were in the UN school that was attacked, however, that video doesn't say it shows an UN school - so this video and the incident "everyone talked about" may be two completely different places. And probably are, given that the PR guy who posted that video would have labeled it specifically as UN school if it were one.
I found a second video at his channel, showing an attack from a specifically named UN school in October 2007, but nothing thats new.
Okay at first I was thinking you mean it didn't say it was a school. Yeah your right they don't say anywhere that it is a UN school. I just assumed because a few days ago when I posted it I was linked to it from a site that said UN school. That's my fault. Sorry. So I guess they haven't released a vid of the incident "everyone talked about". I really wish they would because when I first heard about the incident I was pretty mad I thought maybe the guy in the tank had gone trigger happy. Then I heard they were returning fire... well they always say that and they are usually right but that's not good enough for most people and also the 2 Palestinians who contacted the AP and said they saw the Mortar team at the UN school. But I still wanted to wait for the vid... I guess I am still waiting.
To answer the question directed at wanderer first, in my case I havent been in Israel, I have been in the military but not in actual combat, only manouvers.
I certainly know that war isnt pretty, but I also know a little about human nature. And this knowledge says, if someone is allowed to break the rules, many of those will use this allowance as much as possible - meaning as long as the government, the population, the one responsible for PR or whoever is not behind keeping out civilians, some military guys will quite certainly stop to care.
I can easily account the incidents you cite as "done because the PR guy wanted that to be done" - or, to be more friendly, that the army consists of people, and different people in this army have different believes about handling enemy civilians, and you only get the info about the guys who know to behave. But it should be the responsibility of the politicians to directly and the responsibility of the civilians to indirectly ensure that those who dont know to behave to be kept in line. Part of this is also harsh (and public) response to unnecessary civilian casualities caused by your own soldiers. However, the reaction is mostly not criticizing malfunctioning parts of the own military, but justifying it. Here is limited information very annoying, because it makes those justifications so much easier..
Oh don't get me wrong. I know that there are people who really don't give a crap about the Palestinians. There are bad apples in every country and in every army. Forget about keeping them in line if the army can find them before they join they don't even let them in. You know what a surefire way of avoiding mandatory military service in Israel is (even a desk job)? Tell them you just want to shoot the Palestinians. I know someone who said that (not because he meant it but because he didn't want to serve) he regrets it to this day. They don't try and get these people it's really not good for anyone. What advantage could Israel have in letting it's soldiers kill civilians without consequences? Nothing. The IDF may be reacting to these people we just wouldn't know because there is "bigger news" than Israel punishing a couple of soldiers. I can tell you the civilian reaction to these incidents are usually sorry and frustration each one felt twice because Israelis a frustrated at the IDF for killing the civilians and frustrated that the IDF had to be put into the position where they killed civilians.
Well, in fact the reason given by Daniel Seaman, director of the Israeli press agency/mass media agency (dont know the right translation -.-), during a talk with the news agency AP was that Hamas could show Israel in a bad light with questionable reports.
source: http://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/journalistengaza102.html ( I can translate the whole text or only the relevant paragraph if you wish)
I can't answer for him. You want my opinion? It's no secret probably 95% of the main European and US media groups are heavily oriented to the Left. In fact CNN shortly after the beginning of the 2001 intifada was found to be lying so much about what was going on in Israel they were taken of the satellite packages you got in Israel and had to be specially requested. BBC was close behind. I was too young then to follow much of that but needless to say Israel has a very bad history with Media groups and side from what I already said about not wanting troop movements and stuff revealed on public TV I can imagine some people are pretty happy about not having to listen to what they believe is constant media bias against them. But again I can't answer for him I don't know.
You really think this is out of the question or difficult to make? Heavens knows goverments or the military never tried to cover up stuff before :rolleyes:
Israel itself was partially founded by terrorist and covert activities itself, so I wouldn't put it past them to lie.
I don't know what to tell you... I can't argue with conspiracy theory because I would have to have first hand access to the evidence to disprove a theory right? And since I obviously don't I don't know what to tell you. Long live Zenu... the American government is hiding aliens in area 51... I know who killed JFK etc etc etc.
Actually, these days I'm totally not concerned what is "internationally indentified" and what is not.
Nor am I saying I trust the UN - God knows they f*** up in the war here, they were impotent, incapable and were flat out lying in several cases.
I find it ironic that for instance, General Gotovina is charged for war crimes because of "overshelling of Knin" (which the prosecution can't prove, their whole case is currently crumbling in Haague), while at the same time the shelling of Gaza is all fine and dandy.
What I'm saying is that if you want to have standard, them everyone should be equal in front of them.
I have never heard of this General or of Knin or of what happened there. Can I ask who charged him? The Government? The reason I ask is because it's these people that are setting the standard you want us all to be held accountable to. So unless it's an international rules of war people setting the standard how will that apply to any country except the one wherever this general did that thing.
I really think ti's tragic that you're using artillery to kill a guy, when snipers would do the job MUCH more precisely. Seriously, if anything Israel has the $$$ to equip half their military with high-precision sniper rifles. It would be a far better tactic than to level the whole town and then say "I'm sorry".
If a crook takes a hostage and the police officer uses the bazooka to blow them both to bits, you wouldn't be trying to justify the cop, now would you.
No I wouldn't justify the cop but that's a bad analogy. It doesn't take into account Distance, danger to the police man, danger to the people behind the police man, the people in between the police man and the crook besides the hostage, etc etc etc... however I like how it points out nicely how the Palestinians are hostages of the Hamas.
The only question I have left for Splinter is does he know why the Finnish peacekeeper died in bunker 2006? The only information I remember from that incident was that the UN peacekeepers had instructed IDF multiple times they were shelling the UN position and there were people inside. They had declared the area on the IDF before the campaign and confirmed it in the beginning of the campaign, and according to Finnish newspapers, IDF should have known that it was UN position.
Hadn't heard much about it before just that there was Hezbollah fire coming from there... Here (http://www.mererhetoric.com/archives/11272369.html) is what I found at just a glance... maybe I will search out a big more about it later right now, as you can see, I am replying to a horde of responses. :P
This is bull****. All of it. Wall-to-wall, far as the eye can see, complete and utter bull****. This is the same argument used to claim that only Jews can give Jews a fair trial, and only followers of Islam can understand Islam. To claim that only firsthand experience provides knowledge defies the foundations of human science and progress. It flies in the face of learning and langauge. This is a failure of logic so serious it renders anything further said suspect.
You failed to address the point in any meaningful way. Indeed, in the end, you seem to be agreeing with Wanderer in your closing statements instead of refuting him!
Ah saving the best for last. You come across as a very pleasant person you know?
Who said only Jews can give Jews a fair trial and only Muslims understand Islam? What do trials have to do with this anyway? And understanding Islam? go visit a Muslim country or neighborhood and study the Koran then you have first hand knowledge. You don't have to be a Muslim for that. Understanding a race or a religion is not that different from understanding a situation. To understand a race you can study them in books and online but to really get to know them you would go visit them and talk to them yourselves. To understand a religion you can study books about it but again to really get to know them you would go visit their place of worship and read their teachings. But you don't have to BE one. Just like a situation to understand it you have to go to where it is occurring. I'm sorry you think ideas that don't match yours are rubbish.
I call bull****. Again. Trash raised legitimate points, shocking as that might be, which you have utterly failed to answer. Nobody even insuinated that the video is fake, or even made by Israelis, but your persecution complex abruptly assumed both were intended. If I were more cynical than I actually am, I would accuse you of having a guilty conscience. As it stands, I'm going to accuse you of the Chewbacca Defense and attempting to hide the (lack of) evidence, because who made the video and anything else is moot compared to the fact that for all that can be deduced from it it was made in 1962 somewhere in South Vietnam. It's utterly useless as evidence for anything.
Your persecution complex is interesting though, and worthy of addressing at more length then I really feel like doing so when I just finished showering. Perhaps another time.
Let's break this down step by step to see where you missunderstood. Trash indicated that from the video he could not make out what was really going on or even where it was taken. You accuse me of not responding to his questions by not... what? using my high tech hacking skills to hack the IDF network steal the original video and then refine the quality so we can all see the missile? Of course I know Trash is smarter than to think I could do that which means his remarks were intended to indicate that there was no proof the video wasn't a fake. Which is exactly what you continued to indicate in your post as well (marked in bold). Making my response perfectly acceptable. But thanks for your concern.
As for a persecution complex and chewbacca If every person here defending their view is going to be labeled having a "persecution complex" then I accept... otherwise you just talking out your rear... ewok... bantha... jar jar... yoda...
Again with the first-hand fallacy. But more to the point, if you're going to leave the damn petard standing around unused don't be surprised if I hoist you by it. When was the last time you were in UN service in the Gaza Strip, so that you have the right to judge them by your own broken standards?
Why UN service? Why not IDF service? or Hamas service? or Palestinian civilian in the area? or Israeli civilian in the area? All would have first hand access to information.
No, actually you haven't shown anything, you've just made unsupported statements and cited suspect, and out-of-date, sources, against your own specifc efforts to enforce a "you can't judge, you haven't walked a mile in their shoes" thing.
Aside from quoting the UN and others and showing videos what more was I supposed to do? Download my memories of the things I saw into a video and show you? the best I could do is tell you I saw this and heard this and read this. And why would you believe me? You don't even believe me when I give you videos of gunmen driving off in a UN ambulance. Which is why I told you you don't have to take my word for it come over and get your own information. It's funny how I am arguing what you have read I usually know something to the opposite effect but I can't just type it up and say well this is what happened. You will ask where I know that from. Well I know it because I am here but you need proof. So I go look for the articles about whatever it is and post those instead. But you don't believe those either. Why? Because at the end of the day they are written by man, and man lies (except if he is agreeing with you right?). Which just brings us back full circle you need to be and to see for yourself. I have been in the middle of the whole situation here for 20 years straight I have some first hand experience as a civilian, as a soldier, as a civilian dealing with Palestinians, as a soldier dealing with Palestinians, with Lebanese, with the UN, with war, and with peace, with rockets overhead, and with clear skies. So maybe I was privy to some information you were not but instead of coming off like an arrogant prick know it all and just stating what I saw as fact and expect you to believe me I try to find the sources online to back it up. Well now I have just repeated myself. hah...
Holy crap this was a long post...
-
Maybe all you should try condensing your basic points down into a few sentences and presenting them that way. I imagine it's difficult to respond to an opponent's salient points with all these text-walls hurtling about. (I admit I've definitely lost track of who exactly is pushing what.)
-
The only question I have left for Splinter is does he know why the Finnish peacekeeper died in bunker 2006? The only information I remember from that incident was that the UN peacekeepers had instructed IDF multiple times they were shelling the UN position and there were people inside. They had declared the area on the IDF before the campaign and confirmed it in the beginning of the campaign, and according to Finnish newspapers, IDF should have known that it was UN position.
Hadn't heard much about it before just that there was Hezbollah fire coming from there... Here is what I found at just a glance... maybe I will search out a big more about it later right now, as you can see, I am replying to a horde of responses.
Well, I don't find the writing style too convincing in that blog, though the information he offers is probably correct. I cross-checked this with some Finnish sources, and yes, it seems to be more close to what actually happened. Also, it appears that the same thing has happened in 1970s; the location is called OP Khiam (you might find more information better this way). Back then no peacekeepers were killed, though they had to retreat in to a bomb shelter for 20 days. It is most likely that the peacekeepers were actually killed because they were held as human shields.
Also, the same source reports of the recent incident that a Canadian observer has been complaining about Hezbollah digging in and storing weapons to the proximity of the post, but international community has not reacted on that.
This seems more clear now.
Mika
-
I don't know what to tell you... I can't argue with conspiracy theory because I would have to have first hand access to the evidence to disprove a theory right? And since I obviously don't I don't know what to tell you. Long live Zenu... the American government is hiding aliens in area 51... I know who killed JFK etc etc etc.
Reductio ad absurdum does nothing to diminish what I said. Informational warfare does very much exist, and you think Israel (or any country) will not use a good and effective weapons if it has one?
As for the first part, I was reffering to the fact that Israel was basicely founded by terrorist activity. The first leadership was composed mostly of terrorists. Heck, there are a few still in there. So yea, Israels behaviour and history don't lead me to trust them much.
I have never heard of this General or of Knin or of what happened there. Can I ask who charged him? The Government? The reason I ask is because it's these people that are setting the standard you want us all to be held accountable to. So unless it's an international rules of war people setting the standard how will that apply to any country except the one wherever this general did that thing.
Who? Haag accused him. The international war crimes court. The irony is that they don't know jack s***.
Wikipedia has some basic info.
Luckily, as things are going now, the Defense is ripping the Persecution a new one, so he should be set free.
No I wouldn't justify the cop but that's a bad analogy. It doesn't take into account Distance, danger to the police man, danger to the people behind the police man, the people in between the police man and the crook besides the hostage, etc etc etc... however I like how it points out nicely how the Palestinians are hostages of the Hamas.
Some maybe. Some are hostages of IDF.
Either way, it's the IDF pulling the trigger in the end. That's what matters.
Why UN service? Why not IDF service? or Hamas service? or Palestinian civilian in the area? or Israeli civilian in the area? All would have first hand access to information.
But all are not giving out the same information....that's the crux of the matter, isn't it.
-
Oh don't get me wrong. I know that there are people who really don't give a crap about the Palestinians. There are bad apples in every country and in every army. Forget about keeping them in line if the army can find them before they join they don't even let them in. You know what a surefire way of avoiding mandatory military service in Israel is (even a desk job)? Tell them you just want to shoot the Palestinians.
Well, "I just want to shoot someone" is a very good way to avoid service in any military, not just the Israel one. ;)
But, many who want to get there know this, and wont tell this.
What advantage could Israel have in letting it's soldiers kill civilians without consequences?
It's far easier to concentrate on fighting an enemy if he can simply be seen as evil, and oneself as good. It's more difficult if you are constantly struggling and criticizing your own side. So, while killing civilians (nearly) doesn't yield any advantages for Israel, avoiding consequences for such incidents probably does. It makes the whole fighting part a lot easier, here good, there bad. We only shot with reason cause we are good, they only shoot without reason cause they are bad.
Admitting failures seems like justifying their cause, and no one really wants to present justifications for the enemy - even if it is probably the right thing to do.
The IDF may be reacting to these people we just wouldn't know because there is "bigger news" than Israel punishing a couple of soldiers.
Well, there shouldn't be "bigger news" in a way that has as a result that you dont know about reactions, after all, for the good guys to do sth unhuman, it should be a huge scandal!
Always assuming, that they really DO get punished (I am not asking for proof for this one, because even if they do get punished, the problem in the media still remains)
I can't answer for him. You want my opinion? It's no secret probably 95% of the main European and US media groups are heavily oriented to the Left. In fact CNN shortly after the beginning of the 2001 intifada was found to be lying so much about what was going on in Israel they were taken of the satellite packages you got in Israel and had to be specially requested. BBC was close behind. I was too young then to follow much of that but needless to say Israel has a very bad history with Media groups and side from what I already said about not wanting troop movements and stuff revealed on public TV I can imagine some people are pretty happy about not having to listen to what they believe is constant media bias against them. But again I can't answer for him I don't know.
So, basically you are confirming it as censorship? oO
I mean, what you said boils down to "Yes, we want to keep them our because they say things we dont like". Of course, a little justification with lies and bias, but that has done anyone who censored. China did/does it, Russia did it, well, anyone who ever censored (Germany does as well btw, but you probably could agree for not allowing Nazi staff over here :> Still, I even see this censorship as problematic...)
Well, I have another question, maybe I have been a little lazy for the research, why did this conflict escalate in november?
In october only one missile was fired into Israel (well, still one more than should be, but..), but after that, hamas started a nearly "full out" attack. Somehow it's not that easy to gain more information why exactly they did that.
-
According to what I hear (from a palestianitan, so I wouldnt' know how accurate this is), Israel didn't honor it's part of the ceasefire, as it wasn't letting trough enough aid (something about only letting trough 1/7 of the arranged amount), so Hamas didn't want to extend the ceasfire any longer.
Oh, this just in - IDF bombed the UNRWA headquaters in Gaza!
-
According to what I hear (from a palestianitan, so I wouldnt' know how accurate this is), Israel didn't honor it's part of the ceasefire, as it wasn't letting trough enough aid (something about only letting trough 1/7 of the arranged amount), so Hamas didn't want to extend the ceasfire any longer.
Oh, this just in - IDF bombed the UNRWA headquaters in Gaza!
Didn't they just make a public apology for that, or do I have to keep a closer eye on this conflict
-
I wonder if they did it on purpose... :doubt:
-
I wonder if they did it on purpose... :doubt:
But why? What are they to gain by doing that?
-
I wonder if they did it on purpose... :doubt:
But why? What are they to gain by doing that?
Well, the UN does keep on feeding all those pesky Palestinians that they want to just die.
They'd kill them all at once, but that might make even the US consider stopping all the support.
-
But why? What are they to gain by doing that?
What does either side really have to gain by such anal actions? Nothing really. You don't have to be able to actually gain something to act like a prick...just the idea that you might is enough. and of course, there are those that simply are pricks for sakes sake.
-
Well, ceasefire declared, but here's an interesting speech from a source you wouldn't expect...
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=y9Ar7XgFAQY&feature=related
-
Wow..... Now THAT has got to have some impact..not to mention it ought to carry some weight
-
Well, ceasefire declared, but here's an interesting speech from a source you wouldn't expect...
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=y9Ar7XgFAQY&feature=related
He pretty much nailed most of the points I've made over a 5 year period in 5 minutes. Next time I'll just link to that speech as a starting point. :D
-
WW2: Oh, puh-leeze... How many Jewish attacks on Germans were there before WW2? :rolleyes:
This is a very interesting first-hand presentation by Brigit Gabriel, a Lebanese Christian woman living in the USA, giving insight into what happened in Lebanon/Israel/Palestinian circles in the late 70's and early 80's, as well as what is happening in the USA today: http://multimedia.heritage.org/content/wm/Lehrman-092706a.wvx
-
Personally, I'm not there, and I'm not going to jump to definite conclusions about it, but I'm sure Israel are just as sure that Palestine 'started it' as Palestine are sure that Israel 'started it', when, if the real truth be known, neither of them started it.
The saddest fact is that it seems both sides are convincing themselves that the only way to finish it is with blood and fire, and after all that killing, rockets are still hitting Israel, and the Israeli navy is still shelling the beaches.
I'm against radicalism as much as the next guy, but to quote an Israeli citizen who was interviewed during the advance, 'I fear Israel is just teaching another generation of Palestinians to hate and fear us', and so the cycle will continue.
As long as hatred is bred into both sides of the conflict, there is risk, of a radical getting their hands of a nuclear device, or Israel doing the unthinkable and using its own nuclear Arsenal, the only way to reduce that threat is make peace and start a dialogue. Hamas may refuse to talk to Israel (and Israel may not want to talk to Hamas), but recent events have vastly reduced the odds of any political group in the area being able to talk to Israel without being rejected by their own people.
-
My mum says they've been at it for years.
To tell you the truth, I don't even pay attention anymore.
:blah:
-
WW2: Oh, puh-leeze... How many Jewish attacks on Germans were there before WW2? :rolleyes:
This is a very interesting first-hand presentation by Brigit Gabriel, a Lebanese Christian woman living in the USA, giving insight into what happened in Lebanon/Israel/Palestinian circles in the late 70's and early 80's, as well as what is happening in the USA today: http://multimedia.heritage.org/content/wm/Lehrman-092706a.wvx
20 minutes in, and I have to see as a typical one sided hatred speech, the viewpoints themselves are more like, what is the problem "down there" - you surely can find similar palestines complaining about Israel that way. (That would be, of course, also a one sided hatred speech)
Especially after I saw after some research what facts she left out.. very interesting, what people let out...
Well, but I wanted to restate my question and direct it this time at sandwich/splinter, why did the hamas not continue with the ceasefire?
I have some info, but it is not definite enough that I am sure it is not one sided, so I want to hear what's the reason in your oppinion/the info you got about that.
[edit]
"Stop buying New York Times, it's spreading lies"
Honestly, suggesting to REDUCE someones available information and take away an additional view (instead of adding it) is such a ... idea..
[edit2]
The answer to the question about "how to prevent the isolation of the USA" is just hilarious.
"Eurabia" :D
-
Well, but I wanted to restate my question and direct at this time at sandwich/splinter, why did the hamas not continue with the ceasefire?
Because Gaza had been blockaded by IDF forces (During the cease-fire and before), preventing food,water, medical supplies, humitarian aid,etc to go to Gaza. Hence, Hamas breaked the cease fire, demanding the blockade to be gone.
As usual, Israël overplayed their hand, as we saw. Hence, international pressure went so high that the huge big wall trough gaza will be gone. Thank the gods.
-
Wait, are you implying Hamas cares about other Palestinians?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
-
Are you implying they don't?
Why help build schools and help with supplies, food and other stuff if they don't care about the people? Now you'll probably say "so they can attract recruits".
However, you could accuse any government of the same thing - they only do X to get Y, who cares about the people.
-
They certainly don't care if their own civilians get killed as a result of their strikes.
-
Hamas was more or less directly responsible for the attack on Gaza. Instead of giving up the failed and impossible ideas of liberating all of Palestine and having a comparatively level head on its shoulders as Fatah has in Abbas, they choose instead to get high off the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. They chose to use Gaza not as a platform for talks on the West Bank, Jerusalem, or a Palestinian state, but instead as a platform for launching rockets.
Egypt, Jordan, and indeed most countries in the Arab world have figured out Israel cannot be stopped through military force. Hell, even most other Palestinians are more interested in talking than bombing! Yet Hamas holds onto the defunct ideology of total liberation of Palestine, even rejecting Israeli offers to talk on the creation of a Palestinian state coexisting with Israel.
It's not as simple as "Hamas builds schools, therefore, they care". It might be true if education was the single all-important issue facing the existence and safety of Gazans, but that is just undeniably false. If Hamas truly gave a damn about the Palestinian people, they'd lay down their weapons and come to the table with Fatah and the other not-so-bat****-crazy Palestinians to discuss coexistence with, and not the destruction of, Israel. Until then, as long as Gaza launches rockets into Israeli towns, the Palestinian civilians in Gaza will be paying the consequences through Israeli retribution.
-
Israel is preparing to defend itself against charges of war crimes following the cessation of hostilities. (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jZ6hcZquoA-VdCfBfa4z913S4CzQ)
-
Personally, I think Hamas has lost control of its radical elements, but is terrified to admit that because it would mean admitting they could no longer function as an effective Government. Sometimes it's better to say 'Yes, we did it, and we're proud' than say 'Ummm... We don't know how to stop them.'
-
The best part of this whole thing is that what they are fighting over at this point largely consists of rocks and shrubs. The 'Promised Land' hasn't had any milk or honey for centuries.
Anyway, does anyone really care at this point? Both sides are complete idiots and I wish they would just shut up. Jews (I'm sorry, 'Israelis'), your claim to the area is several thousand years out of date, and it wasn't your land to begin with, you acquired it through conquest when Moses led you there and you proceeded to rape and butcher your way through the various city states that resided there (it's amusing that the story of Jericho has come to us as a story of the good guys triumphing. What, exactly, did the people of the city do to warrant being wiped out?).
And Palestinians have even less of a claim and it largely consists of 'well, my family has had tents on this land for generations!'. Why don't you just move? What little good land there was has long since been turned into a crater. Scrap some money together and get a ride up north. Or get on a boat and head west. And I know they have money, they keep using it to buy mortars to blow of Jews with.
-
Wait, are you implying Hamas cares about other Palestinians?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
yeah they just happen to put, what, around 90% of their annual budget towards infrastructure and social projects
clearly it's just smoke and mirrors, i mean it's not like this information wasn't freely available and quite widely known
http://www.cfr.org/publication/8968/
...or maybe you don't know jack ****
edit: oh yeah the good old thing. clearly israel cannot be held responsible when they bomb people. it's the other guy's fault. and when the other guy bombs israel? it's his fault again
srsly though why should hamas give a rat's ass about israel right now, why should they negotiate? because israel refuses to negotiate with them? what?
-
Yeah, you're right. Hamas cares so much about the Palestinians that they'll put 90% or whatever portion of their income into infrastructure, then start launching rockets into Israel and have it all blown away when Israel retaliates. I'm not saying Israel shouldn't be held responsible, but for the love of God, hasn't Hamas figured out by now that Israel won't be quiet about it when rockets are being heaved at it.
So, you've either got A) Hamas does care and is just stupid, or B) Hamas doesn't care and is doing exactly what it intends to do. I honestly just don't care which it is, because regardless, Hamas is simply furthering disunity in Palestine and detracting from the efforts of Palestinians who do wish to negotiate (ie. Fatah and Abbas).
I'm willing to bet, just maybe, if Hamas were to lay down arms, Israel wouldn't be blockading, invading, or bombing Gaza. I'm pretty sure those actions are only the result of Hamas launching the rockets in the first place.
-
Any organization, no matter how much money they funnel toward charitable causes, which sponsors sustained attacks on civilian targets in a neighboring territory with full foreknowledge of the consequences of said attacks cannot be said to care about its populace in any real sense. It's like sticking a fistful of ground beef repeatedly into a lion's mouth...you're losing that hand sooner or later, and you both know it. I would never go so far as to call Israel's response in this particular situation, or in past ones, entirely proportional, but the cold hard truth remains that Hamas knew exactly what would happen when those rockets continued to be fired. In fact, I'd bet anything that they were counting on it, since it allows them to easily portray themselves as the victims in the whole affair. And all the while, it's their own citizens that suffer bombings and occupations and disease and starvation. Hamas, care for anything except self-aggrandizing their own fanatical cause? Don't make me gag.
Why should Hamas give a rat's ass about negotiating with Israel? Because it's the only way that the citizens living in Gaza will ever get any sort of respite from the hell that is their lives. Until that day comes, the rest of the world has every right to view them as the complete hypocrites they truly are.
(Gah, I got beat, but I'm not one to waste a simile.)
-
I think Flipside has his finger on the problem. Hamas doesn't actually control all of the people firing rockets in it's name. During the previous ceasefire the number of rockets fired was very heavily reduced but didn't completely stop. However Hamas can't stop the other extremists without gaining concessions from Israel, and none were forthcoming. Israel had a block on everything but humanitarian aid before the ceasefire and Israel had a block on everything but humanitarian aid during the ceasefire. It's rather hard to go after the radical elements in your own government when you have absolutely nothing to show them as the reason why they should stop.
However I do agree that revoking the ceasefire was stupid in the extreme. But we all know that Hamas is unable to realise that non-violent resistance would get them to their end much faster. Similarly Israel could have avoided the whole problem had they relaxed the blockade after Hamas stopped shooting the stuff it did control and told Hamas to deal with the ones it didn't.
So basically the situation we are left with is one where neither side is willing to take the steps that would actually result in peace due to the need to show strength to their population. Both act as if making any sort of concession would make them look weak and so neither is able to break the cycle of violence.
The real irony is that Israel should have learned it's lesson. The only reason Hamas are in charge in the first place is because Israel did the exact same thing to Fatah. They continually blamed them for Hamas's rocket attacks and kept them from basically having any say in how Gaza was run. Small wonder that Hamas won the election. Now that Hamas are in charge they are left with two choices. Look as ineffectual as Fatah did or prompt an invasion every once in a while so that they can tell the people "Look who is really to blame!"
Which basically means that this ceasefire won't hold either.
-
It's not as simple as "Hamas builds schools, therefore, they care". It might be true if education was the single all-important issue facing the existence and safety of Gazans, but that is just undeniably false. If Hamas truly gave a damn about the Palestinian people, they'd lay down their weapons and come to the table with Fatah and the other not-so-bat****-crazy Palestinians to discuss coexistence with, and not the destruction of, Israel. Until then, as long as Gaza launches rockets into Israeli towns, the Palestinian civilians in Gaza will be paying the consequences through Israeli retribution.
You could say the same thing about Israel then. If they care about their own civilians they will lay down their arms and give back the territories.
Doesn't work that way, sorry. What you're using is Guilt Transfer - A is guilty for B's actions because A "made" B do it. I don't believe in that crap. Everyone is responsible for his own action and his action ONLY.
-
You say that, TrashMan, but that really is what's happening out there. If they weren't using guilt transfer or tit-for-tat, there would never have been any rocket attacks in either country.
-
Yeah, you're right. Hamas cares so much about the Palestinians that they'll put 90% or whatever portion of their income into infrastructure, then start launching rockets into Israel and have it all blown away when Israel retaliates. I'm not saying Israel shouldn't be held responsible, but for the love of God, hasn't Hamas figured out by now that Israel won't be quiet about it when rockets are being heaved at it.
What should they do, sit there and starve?
I don't like Hamas. I don't think they have a monopoly on force in Gaza. But seriously, what is there to do? There is nothing to do in Gaza. Hamas is dependent on anti-Israel feelings.
So, you've either got A) Hamas does care and is just stupid, or B) Hamas doesn't care and is doing exactly what it intends to do. I honestly just don't care which it is, because regardless, Hamas is simply furthering disunity in Palestine and detracting from the efforts of Palestinians who do wish to negotiate (ie. Fatah and Abbas).
Hamas does not like Fatah. Hamas was funded and founded to dig the earth from under the feet of PLO, they have had a short civil war with Fatah (which Hamas won), they essentially view Fatah as collaborators with the enemy regime.
"They should just let it be and negotiate" is a stupid thing to say when the immensely more powerful opponent refuses to negotiate at all.
I'm willing to bet, just maybe, if Hamas were to lay down arms, Israel wouldn't be blockading, invading, or bombing Gaza. I'm pretty sure those actions are only the result of Hamas launching the rockets in the first place.
Look at this you goddamnit
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/Israelis_killed_by_Palestinians_in_Israel_and_Palestinians_killed_by_Israelis_in_Gaza_-_2008.png
look at it
you could also read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip#Attempt_at_easing_restrictions
"Oh they just have to sit there and take in the ass, maybe one day we will do something about it."
And you swallow that idiocy hook, line and sinker.
-
hasn't Hamas figured out by now that Israel won't be quiet about it when rockets are being heaved at it.
On the other hand if they don't take steps to destroy the Zionist entity they aren't fulfilling their manifesto pledge. It's a pickle and no mistake.
-
Janos, your link doesn't work...typos man...typos
-
After the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, Israel has said it will allow in some humanitarian aide, but will continue its economic blockage as Israel claims that this action will weaken the power of Hamas.
Which basically means that this ceasefire won't hold either.
See?
Israel claim that they are willing to negotiate with Fatah now. That's a ****ing lie. When Fatah were in power they didn't want to negotate with them either. And they used the same excuses they used for not negotiating with Hamas now. If Fatah did come to power again we'd hear the same bull**** a second time.
As I keep saying both sides are uninterested in peace. They'll say they want it to their people but neither side considers peace even remotely as important as staying in power. In order to have peace in Gaze you need leaders who are willing to be unpopular. You need someone who is so willing to have peace that they don't care if their actions get them regarded as traitors by the same kind of right wing nut cases who shot Rabin or who comprise most of Hamas. Unfortunately those sort of people aren't in power in either country and thus you won't have peace.
-
Personally, I still don't get it what's so difficult in keeping those rockets at bay for, say, two years to allow things to change.
Luckily there is talk about a special delegation being sent to solve the conflict. But I doubt even Ahtisaari could solve that mess.
In the end, it all goes back to question, does Isreal have a right to exist?
Mika
-
Sorry I have been out of this for a bit lots of work and real life goings on. I am not responding to specific posts here I am just throwing a few things on the flames.
International law states that occupying land is not illegal in itself, during war it's allowed to temporarily occupy land, but once the hostilities are over, occupied territory has to be left completely. You show me when Palestinians have ceased hostilities since 1967? If they would put half the effort of destroying Israel into building a country of their own they would have had one 40 years ago.
From another forum:
"Another amusing thing is that, now all the Arabs are calling for the 1967 borders, why is then that before 1967 they were all so determined to do away with Israel anyway ? So they lost the wars... and now they want to make peace by trading it for what they lost when they lost the war ? thats hilarious."
"After they lost [in 1948], Jordan and Egypt illegally occupied Judea, Samaria and Gaza from 1948 through 1967. And in all those years there was no movement by the Arabs to liberate from Jordan and Egypt those lands."
Here is an interesting report from a doctor in Gaza (http://www.honestreporting.com/articles/45884734/critiques/new/Gaza_Doctor_Says_Death_Toll_Inflated.asp) in the article they quote from ynet (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3660423,00.html) it's interesting how even the IDF dosn't agree with his low figures on the death toll. Is the doctor lying? Is he uninformed? Or does the IDF want people to belive the death toll was higher as a scare tactic? Woud be interesting to know.
Here are some videos (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TejVJWSTTpY&eurl=http://www.honestreporting.com/) on how much Hamas cares about the Palestinians. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2G1TZKerTo&feature=related) They can shove that %90 of their budget straight up their asses for this. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBYtij4Q7sE&feature=related) It goes on (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTGbP55HGi8&feature=related) and on (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLIdxF-GHWw&feature=related) and on (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uPEF7pdRD0&feature=related)... It's sad that I didn't even have to try and find this stuff it's all right there dozens of videos on youtube alone.
In the last few days I have been thinking allot about what kind of differences there are in upbringings and culture that makes people so very different in every way. I also ran across the following while reading a novel the other day I thought it described what I was thinking about.
"The problem with you Americans (I would say most of western civilization) is that you don't believe in evil. The CIA and FBI and definitely the guys at State don't properly anticipate horrible, catastrophic events because they don't really believe in the presence of evil, the presence of a dark and wicked and nefarious spiritual dimension that drives some men to do the unthinkable. Saddam Hussein, for example. Saddam tells the world for years that he has a territorial claim on Kuwait. Builds up his armed forces. Develops weapons of mass destruction. moves troops to the border. Signals everyone he's going in. But all the boys and girls and the CIA and DIA say Saddam won't do it. Just wants to drive up the price of oil. Just saber rattling. Just flexing his muscles. Couldn't possibly invade. Why would he? It would make no sense. It would be irrational. No Arab nation has ever invaded another Arab nation. Why start now? On the one hand you say that Saddam is a rational person but a liar. He says he'll invade Kuwait, but you say he doesn't mean it. He's just lying. He's just bluffing. He's just playing with our heads. But then when he did invade you decided he was a lunatic - crazy, Unpredictable, irrational, a nut case. Saddam Hussein was not a lunatic and, in that case, he wasn't a liar. He was rational and calculating and evil. So he told the world what he was going to do - commit an act of evil, not and act of madness - and then he did it. It took a bunch of highly paid analysts with Harvard degrees to completely miss the simplicity of the moment. I believe Saddam Hussein is (was) both capable of and prone to acts of unspeakable evil, and you don't. I'm right and you're wrong. It's not because I know more than your government. I don't. I know less. But I believe that evil forces make evil men do evil things."
I believe this speaks straight to the issue at hand because we can all argue this thing into the ground but at the end of the day we see this whole thing very differently. I believe that many of these people, especially Hamas (who are in charge), are evil. They have stated it, they have prepared for it, they have done it, and they don't hide it. So many people I talk to about this situation believe that Hamas has somehow fallen from their original goals of the destruction of Israel and that all they want now is the 1967 borders and a place to call Palestine because there is no way a terrorist organization with the will means and history of evil would ever lie cheat steal murder and deceive the whole world if they could to achieve their goals because after all they are only human beings right? :rolleyes:
Well ladies and gents. There is such a thing as evil human beings and if you wouldn't put it past these people to do one of the most horrific of human actions and intentionally murder innocent people how can you put it past them to do one of the most basic human actions that every man woman and child alive has done, lie.
-
Christ and Hunter, this just keeps getting worse. There is peace along the Gaza strip for now, but for how long? Check out this 60 Minutes Clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KG6sAjgVoj4).
I sense another long-simmering prelude to explosive conflict.
-
Somehow, I find people looking for a single side of this issue to place all of the blame on ridiculous. Frankly enough, these people have been at each other's throats for long enough that any reasonable clear cut solution isn't viable.
If Israel up and up apologized for its actions and genuinely administered as much humanitarian aid as it could, I still can't see the Palestinians being content with that. Somehow, I just think they'd take advantage of the situation and try and (figuratively) rape Israel. And this is what the Israeli government is probably thinking.
If the Palestinians and Hamas just stopped launching rockets and being offensive, Israel would have less of a justified reason to bomb them. But Israel would find an excuse to tighten the chain and go hunting for terrorists. And that why Hamas hasn't stopped fighting; because they're probably think that once they stop hostilities, Israel will (figuratively) rape Gaza and its populace.
Past that, I don't know enough about the situation to propose a viable solution. My first thought would be to have a third party just move in with force, and put Hamas in charge of Israel and Israelis in charge of Gaza. Neither side would have too much authority, though, because the third party would be making sure that people didn't launch rockets at each other or bomb people. After that, all I could think of is some kind of large-scale re-education of everyone to try and make them hate each other less. It may take a couple generations, but eventually, the third-party would be able to pull out. That's the problem. It'd be much more expensive and long-lasting then the Iraqi conflict is for the US, but its goal might be a little clearer, and the third party would go in with intent to rebuild, not remove from power. But this isn't doable because it would probably cost more lives than this conflict, and Palestinians and Israelis already doesn't want anyone meddling.
I really hope someone knows how to fix this, because I sure don't.
-
Exactly, Israel needs to release it's chokehold, but it can't until Hamas proves that it can be trusted not to try and use that gesture to obtain more means to attack Israel, and Palestine cannot do anything to divert it's people's hatred away from Israel when there is nothing left to live for but vengeance for crimes of the past.
I'm tempted to drop into Babylon 5 references, the situation is all too close, two peoples losing their humanity for the sake of vengeance and a blood-soaked form of 'justice', so consumed by hatred for each other that they cannot see that they are destroying everything they are in their pursuit of it.
-
Sorry I have been out of this for a bit lots of work and real life goings on. I am not responding to specific posts here I am just throwing a few things on the flames.
International law states that occupying land is not illegal in itself, during war it's allowed to temporarily occupy land, but once the hostilities are over, occupied territory has to be left completely. You show me when Palestinians have ceased hostilities since 1967? If they would put half the effort of destroying Israel into building a country of their own they would have had one 40 years ago.
Ha! Trying to justify an occupation under such pretenses is laughable.
So if I were to invade your country and fuel some resistance against me, then I could hold your land for eternity, as long as there is someone who opposes me?
I believe this speaks straight to the issue at hand because we can all argue this thing into the ground but at the end of the day we see this whole thing very differently. I believe that many of these people, especially Hamas (who are in charge), are evil. They have stated it, they have prepared for it, they have done it, and they don't hide it. So many people I talk to about this situation believe that Hamas has somehow fallen from their original goals of the destruction of Israel and that all they want now is the 1967 borders and a place to call Palestine because there is no way a terrorist organization with the will means and history of evil would ever lie cheat steal murder and deceive the whole world if they could to achieve their goals because after all they are only human beings right? :rolleyes:
Well ladies and gents. There is such a thing as evil human beings and if you wouldn't put it past these people to do one of the most horrific of human actions and intentionally murder innocent people how can you put it past them to do one of the most basic human actions that every man woman and child alive has done, lie.
Yes, there are pretty evil human beings. Problem is, they're not all neatly packed on one side of the border for you to point at. I consider half of Israeli leadership worse than any Hamas member, for various resons.
As for the needed defense..
Tell me, why did the IDF bomb food and clothing factories, water planets, and even the biggest mill in the region? Now the palestinians have to import flour from ISRAEL at 50% higher prices. Nothing strange about that? nooooooooo :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
-
Ha! Trying to justify an occupation under such pretenses is laughable.
So if I were to invade your country and fuel some resistance against me, then I could hold your land for eternity, as long as there is someone who opposes me?
You can take it up with international law. They started a war they lost but they are still fighting so the war isn't over and Legally Israel doesn't need to withdraw it's troops. Now this doesn't mean I don't think they should. And it certainly doesn't encompass building settlements which IS illegal you will get no argument from me. But under these terms the military occupation and control of that area is legal and it doesn't really matter what you or I think about it.
I found it especially amusing because this little tidbit was brought up in another forum by a Muslim guy who really really dislikes Israel and thinks everything is a conspiracy.
Yes, there are pretty evil human beings. Problem is, they're not all neatly packed on one side of the border for you to point at. I consider half of Israeli leadership worse than any Hamas member, for various resons.
I didn't say they were only on one side and you completely dodged the whole point. And you and I know why. It's because you and everyone who thinks about it will know it is true. There is no way anyone can say for sure what they do or do not intend but what they are capable of is a proven historical fact therefore their sudden revocation of their 'constitution' and willingness to make peace on the 1967 borders can certainly and logically be seen with a great deal of doubt and cynicism.
Politicians talk and talk but at the end of the day no one can truly take them at their word and they are judged by their actions. Shouldn't that at the very least be the same standard we hold a radical terrorist organization to? You say no, only because you can sit there in your safe house and say "Well you should believe them they have turned over a new leaf." because if you are wrong it's not the blood of your children being spilled so why should you care right? It's all so easy from far away. They aren't evil they are simply desperate human beings or lunatics.
"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"
Tell me, why did the IDF bomb food and clothing factories, water planets, and even the biggest mill in the region? Now the palestinians have to import flour from ISRAEL at 50% higher prices. Nothing strange about that? nooooooooo :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I don't know what incidents you are referring too... if you would provide a link that would help. If you wanted me to simply guess I would say weapons caches. You have to understand a terrorist isn't stupid. They know they cannot win in a direct military conflict. Therefore they give everything a dual purpose. An unassuming building that serves civilians used as a weapons cache will either avoid detection because of it's obscure placement or when it is found and destroyed it serves as a humanitarian crisis depriving the civilians of whatever that building used to provide causing international media outrage and a win win situation for the bad guys. (did you like those videos of the Hamas firing rockets from civilian buildings and using children as human shields?) This again requires you to believe in evil. Not just idiotic lunatics but calculating smart people who believe what they are doing is fulfilling their gods will. But unfortunately the media and the rest of the world fall hook line and sinker for this ploy every time again and again.
-
You can take it up with international law. They started a war they lost but they are still fighting so the war isn't over and Legally Israel doesn't need to withdraw it's troops. Now this doesn't mean I don't think they should. And it certainly doesn't encompass building settlements which IS illegal you will get no argument from me. But under these terms the military occupation and control of that area is legal and it doesn't really matter what you or I think about it.
It's a hole in the law Israel exploits, that much we all gathered.
I didn't say they were only on one side and you completely dodged the whole point. And you and I know why.
We do? :wtf:
It's because you and everyone who thinks about it will know it is true. There is no way anyone can say for sure what they do or do not intend but what they are capable of is a proven historical fact therefore their sudden revocation of their 'constitution' and willingness to make peace on the 1967 borders can certainly and logically be seen with a great deal of doubt and cynicism.
Politicians talk and talk but at the end of the day no one can truly take them at their word and they are judged by their actions. Shouldn't that at the very least be the same standard we hold a radical terrorist organization to? You say no, only because you can sit there in your safe house and say "Well you should believe them they have turned over a new leaf." because if you are wrong it's not the blood of your children being spilled so why should you care right? It's all so easy from far away. They aren't evil they are simply desperate human beings or lunatics.
I think about it and I came to a different conclusion.
If you're judging based only on actions, then by that logic half of Israel should have been nuked ages ago, together with all the other warmongering idiots in Plastine.
Tell me, why did the IDF bomb food and clothing factories, water planets, and even the biggest mill in the region? Now the palestinians have to import flour from ISRAEL at 50% higher prices. Nothing strange about that? nooooooooo :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I don't know what incidents you are referring too... if you would provide a link that would help. If you wanted me to simply guess I would say weapons caches. You have to understand a terrorist isn't stupid. They know they cannot win in a direct military conflict. Therefore they give everything a dual purpose. An unassuming building that serves civilians used as a weapons cache will either avoid detection because of it's obscure placement or when it is found and destroyed it serves as a humanitarian crisis depriving the civilians of whatever that building used to provide causing international media outrage and a win win situation for the bad guys. (did you like those videos of the Hamas firing rockets from civilian buildings and using children as human shields?) This again requires you to believe in evil. Not just idiotic lunatics but calculating smart people who believe what they are doing is fulfilling their gods will. But unfortunately the media and the rest of the world fall hook line and sinker for this ploy every time again and again.
It's always weapons chaches or terrorist. Everywhere. Under every rock. Level the whole damn country while you're at it.
Even if there were weapon chances in the mill (and I've seen no proof whatsoever there ever was anything in there, like the UNWRA headquaters), given the importance of that structure to the whole civilian population, you shouldn't destroy it. Send troops to search it or size it.
But cutting millions of people from water and food is easier right...and not genocidal?
-
It's a hole in the law Israel exploits, that much we all gathered.
A hole in the law would be doing something it doesn't directly address. This is exactly what it addresses for these exact purposes so that when a country is under attack they can occupy an area of the enemy. The only holes here are the 7 you and I both posses and the one in your argument.
I think about it and I came to a different conclusion.
If you're judging based only on actions, then by that logic half of Israel should have been nuked ages ago, together with all the other warmongering idiots in Plastine.
Again you go off ignoring the point. The whole point was simply to point people to the fact that just because this group says something doesn't make it truth especially considering their history.
And yet again I WILL address what YOU said because it's just common courtesy.
If you want to talk about actions in the way of seeking peace (which is what I was talking about with Hamas) Then I will introduce you to Jordan and Egypt both enjoying lasting peace with Israel. I will also introduce you to my 10,000 Arab Muslim neighbors in Beit Tzafafa who don't live behind any checkpoints or military siege. I would also introduce you to the 90% of the 500 people at my work who are Arab Muslims.
So again, because of their history I am cynical about Hamas' claims for peace. I hope I don't have to repeat this again because I don't know how to make this any simpler.
It's always weapons chaches or terrorist. Everywhere. Under every rock. Level the whole damn country while you're at it.
Even if there were weapon chances in the mill (and I've seen no proof whatsoever there ever was anything in there, like the UNWRA headquaters), given the importance of that structure to the whole civilian population, you shouldn't destroy it. Send troops to search it or size it.
But cutting millions of people from water and food is easier right...and not genocidal?
I have yet to see proof that there was a mill at all. would you please link to stories you are talking about? I have no doubt there is but how can you expect anyone to guess at what was going on?
And there ARE weapons caches or terrorist hideouts or rocket or mortar launchers everywhere. You laugh but you actually don't have any idea how true it is what you are so flippantly saying.
Depending on the location you may be right about the air strike or you may be wrong. If it was in a field far away from the city or residential areas where ambushes could easily be laid and lots of civilian targets I would say sure send an incursion of ground troops in to the mill. However if it was in the middle of Gaza city the risk to the soldiers and other human life would be to great for just one target. You send in troops and there will be gunfights and people caught in the crossfire and in such a densely populated area such as that... better to use a precision air strike and take out the building.
Yeah it's a shame that it was a building that was meant for the good, but when it is used for evil are you going to blame the people who made it evil or the people who destroyed the evil? The media doesn't report on it so I wouldn't expect you to know this but the Palestinians blame Israel and or Hamas for their troubles. They all blame someone sometimes both but after this last war the amount of people who laid the blame solely on Hamas GREW precisely for the reasons YOU just stated. For the mills and water plants for the houses and schools because unlike you they are under no illusion that hamas does and WANTS to use these facilities to illicit exactly the response you are giving them.
I hope the media figures this out one day that it's partially because they have played into Hamas hands that the Palestinian children and civilians are being put in harms way. Sickening.
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7853803.stm
Here we go again. See what I mean? Absolutely itching for a chance to kill each other at every step, one blows up a soldier, the other starts dropping bombs, and when those bombs stop falling, another soldier will die and it will start all over again.
Sometimes I could just weep for the general bloodthirstiness of humanity.
-
Nothing in the world could have prepared me for those children shows, and I do have fought one against four in the street (me being alone) and seen and stopped a suicide attempt and served in the Defence Forces where the armored vehicle where I was sitting went out of the road around 80 km/h (lucky that it was armored at least)... I simply cannot escape the feeling is that stuff for real? Seriously?! Not some kind of sick joke from Israeli side? It is very hard to believe my eyes on this case since it is so god-damn blatant and I simply don't believe anyone from UN wouldn't have seen that!
Why the hell they never show that stuff here? I don't accept this nation spending a single cent as foreign aid towards Middle East. I'm glad I saw those videos through YouTube at least, not on location, that would have been far worse.
Mika
-
This is stupid.
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7853803.stm
Ten days only! Good gracious!
That has got to be the shortest ceasefire ever. What the Hell is going on over there? One attack and the book gets thrown all over the place! Again!
-
It's a hole in the law Israel exploits, that much we all gathered.
A hole in the law would be doing something it doesn't directly address. This is exactly what it addresses for these exact purposes so that when a country is under attack they can occupy an area of the enemy. The only holes here are the 7 you and I both posses and the one in your argument.
pffft. You're arguments have bigger holes than the Titanic.
It's always weapons chaches or terrorist. Everywhere. Under every rock. Level the whole damn country while you're at it.
Even if there were weapon chances in the mill (and I've seen no proof whatsoever there ever was anything in there, like the UNWRA headquaters), given the importance of that structure to the whole civilian population, you shouldn't destroy it. Send troops to search it or size it.
But cutting millions of people from water and food is easier right...and not genocidal?
I have yet to see proof that there was a mill at all. would you please link to stories you are talking about? I have no doubt there is but how can you expect anyone to guess at what was going on?
And there ARE weapons caches or terrorist hideouts or rocket or mortar launchers everywhere. You laugh but you actually don't have any idea how true it is what you are so flippantly saying.
Depending on the location you may be right about the air strike or you may be wrong. If it was in a field far away from the city or residential areas where ambushes could easily be laid and lots of civilian targets I would say sure send an incursion of ground troops in to the mill. However if it was in the middle of Gaza city the risk to the soldiers and other human life would be to great for just one target. You send in troops and there will be gunfights and people caught in the crossfire and in such a densely populated area such as that... better to use a precision air strike and take out the building.
Yeah it's a shame that it was a building that was meant for the good, but when it is used for evil are you going to blame the people who made it evil or the people who destroyed the evil? The media doesn't report on it so I wouldn't expect you to know this but the Palestinians blame Israel and or Hamas for their troubles. They all blame someone sometimes both but after this last war the amount of people who laid the blame solely on Hamas GREW precisely for the reasons YOU just stated. For the mills and water plants for the houses and schools because unlike you they are under no illusion that hamas does and WANTS to use these facilities to illicit exactly the response you are giving them.
I hope the media figures this out one day that it's partially because they have played into Hamas hands that the Palestinian children and civilians are being put in harms way. Sickening.
I do believe there are plenty of weapon chaches and that Hamas is indeed spread around - but I do not, even for a second, believe that they manage to turn EVERY FRIGGING MOSK, SCHOOL OR OTHER IMPORTANT STRUCTURE into a nests of terrorism. I also believe that Israels response was overblown, incorrect and their methodology is flawed.
More buildings were leveled then there are supposed Hamas fighters. Who the heck where they killing?
Why is it that Israel levels almost all of the infrastructure every few years? It's like the friggin want those people to starve and remain poor and live in terrible conditions. Have they learned nothing?
-
pffft. You're arguments have bigger holes than the Titanic.
I'm glad you had something to say to back that up with too, Napoleon Dynamite, otherwise it would have just looked sill... oh wait :lol:
I at least tried to explain why your argument was flawed... I guess I am just wrong for more obvious reasons right? :rolleyes:
I do believe there are plenty of weapon chaches and that Hamas is indeed spread around - but I do not, even for a second, believe that they manage to turn EVERY FRIGGING MOSK, SCHOOL OR OTHER IMPORTANT STRUCTURE into a nests of terrorism. I also believe that Israels response was overblown, incorrect and their methodology is flawed.
More buildings were leveled then there are supposed Hamas fighters. Who the heck where they killing?
Why is it that Israel levels almost all of the infrastructure every few years? It's like the friggin want those people to starve and remain poor and live in terrible conditions. Have they learned nothing?
Did I say "every frigging mosk"? No. Did anyone say that Israel struck every mosque in Gaza today? No. Why would you assume that they have hit every single infrastructure building belonging to Palestinians? You do realize that no one is going to report on a building that had nothing happen to it right? "Todays headline - Gaza, Israel: 99.98% of all infrastructure buildings were not hit by bombs today and no one was injured."
So you believe there are weapons caches. Do you believe that Hamas are A: Smart, evil and desperate. Or B: Dumb, irrational and bored? Do you understand that they purposefully put their influence whether it be themselves or their weapons or their staging grounds in these highly sensitive positions on purpose so that it if there is no response because of the significance of the location or structure they win and if there is a response it is also a win for them? There has never been a real life scenario that I have witnessed that more perfectly imbibes the phrase "damned if you do, damned if you don't". So if you were president which 'win' would you give them? Would you let them use the structure to rain death down on your civilian population and fold your arms in front of your chest and say "that's not fair you stop that right now" while completely breaking the oath you took to uphold the most important role of that office the preservation of your citizens lives? Or would you go for denying them usage of that facility and having to wade through international condemnation for being too aggressive? I don't know maybe in the rest of the world they don't love their families enough to decide that their lives are more important than the ones trying to kill them... :doubt:
How many buildings were leveled? How many Hamas fighters are there 'supposedly'? And where the hell are those links to the stories that started your rant on this in the first place. Seriously man this is ridiculous. I don't care if it's on Al Jazeera website just give me something show me some report about:
Tell me, why did the IDF bomb food and clothing factories, water planets, and even the biggest mill in the region? Now the palestinians have to import flour from ISRAEL at 50% higher prices. Nothing strange about that?
-
- There has never been a real life scenario that I have witnessed that more perfectly imbibes the phrase "damned if you do, damned if you don't".
- I don't know maybe in the rest of the world they don't love their families enough to decide that their lives are more important than the ones trying to kill them...
- Would you let them use the structure to rain death down on your civilian population and fold your arms in front of your chest and say "that's not fair you stop that right now" while completely breaking the oath you took to uphold the most important role of that office the preservation of your citizens lives?
rock solid
also today has nothing to do with yesterday.
-
You cannot find peace in Middle East by digging up what has happened before. That will not help the case at all and I think it has never helped in any conflict. It is much more constructive to start with clean tables. And by that I mean both sides must start with clean tables. I don't care what happened and who started what, it has to end, on both sides. That way the primitive trust on both sides is achieved, after which things should start to happen automatically.
Sometimes I wonder if it was a good idea for UN to really ENFORCE the peace there. If people don't behave, get enough Peacekeepers (non-participant countries) for policing to root out the non-behaving people. Apply same rules on both ways. In any incident where cease fire or peace is broken, declare it as a violation against international law and take the participants found in such action to international criminal court and jail them for sufficiently long time. Equally on both sides.
From all the videos linked I see Israeli officials on the border working with considerable restraint, behaving nicely given the circumstances. That might have been different in 1960s, but again, what does it matter any more?
Mika
-
You cannot find peace in Middle East by digging up what has happened before. That will not help the case at all and I think it has never helped in any conflict. It is much more constructive to start with clean tables. And by that I mean both sides must start with clean tables. I don't care what happened and who started what, it has to end, on both sides. That way the primitive trust on both sides is achieved, after which things should start to happen automatically.
Sometimes I wonder if it was a good idea for UN to really ENFORCE the peace there. If people don't behave, get enough Peacekeepers (non-participant countries) for policing to root out the non-behaving people. Apply same rules on both ways. In any incident where cease fire or peace is broken, declare it as a violation against international law and take the participants found in such action to international criminal court and jail them for sufficiently long time. Equally on both sides.
From all the videos linked I see Israeli officials on the border working with considerable restraint, behaving nicely given the circumstances. That might have been different in 1960s, but again, what does it matter any more?
Mika
But history and current events are not unrelated! They don't happen in vacuum! Conflict in 15th January 2009 is very relevant when discussing conflict in 25th January 2009. Gaza conflict and the latest Intifada, as well as Lebanon war to a smaller degree, are extremely important while trying to solve the entire mess. Things get forgotten, age will heal many wounds, but if Israel bombs Gaza ten days after the ceasefire it simply cannot be dealt with without tying it to the prevailing political climate and situation there.
UN Peacekeepers would be a good idea, but they can only work if a framework for peace is accomplished, the people are ready for them and their presence is guaranteened by nasty things if the sides do not cooperate. Trying to force Hamas and Israel, both of them, to peace? Right now, the idea of anyone sending any forces to Gaza is outlandish.
-
I'm thinking a little bit different peacekeeping. Backed by a couple of aircraft carriers for example would be a good start. Dozen missile cruisers and destroyers offshore along with 1000 aircraft operating in the airspace, with about one million peacekeepers in the area should equalize the situation. Add in a comment like "If you can't fix that mess yourselves, then we will do it for you - with our rules. We grew tired to watch that stuff any more!"
I see that the problem is that UN doesn't have anything to back up their words at their disposal there. The another problem is that UN is being used as a cover by terrorists and on the either hand, is belittled by Israel which causes it to become a laughing stock by both sides. Deployment of that kind of force would make things a little bit more equal and maybe they would start to listen what they say a little bit carefully. The condition for that is that there will be no participants from Arabic countries or from Israel in that force, nor the people can have any connections towards either of them. Maybe NATO would be better equipped to do this? EU and USA could actually solve this if they decided so.
Mika
-
I'm thinking a little bit different peacekeeping. Backed by a couple of aircraft carriers for example would be a good start. Dozen missile cruisers and destroyers offshore along with 1000 aircraft operating in the airspace, with about one million peacekeepers in the area should equalize the situation. Add in a comment like "If you can't fix that mess yourselves, then we will do it for you - with our rules. We grew tired to watch that stuff any more!"
who would do it
against a potent military with nuclear weapons
this is so far out there that, well.
I see that the problem is that UN doesn't have anything to back up their words at their disposal there. The another problem is that UN is being used as a cover by terrorists and on the either hand, is belittled by Israel which causes it to become a laughing stock by both sides. Deployment of that kind of force would make things a little bit more equal and maybe they would start to listen what they say a little bit carefully. The condition for that is that there will be no participants from Arabic countries or from Israel in that force, nor the people can have any connections towards either of them. Maybe NATO would be better equipped to do this? EU and USA could actually solve this if they decided so.
Mika
UN is a discussion forum for nations of the world.
-
who would do it
against a potent military with nuclear weapons
this is so far out there that, well.
The only participants that I believe who could do this are USA and EU, so basically NATO.
About nukes then, well you simply launch more nukes yourself there if that becomes a problem. Besides, that would only be assured destruction to Israeli side, so them starting it doesn't make sense to me at all. Besides, why should it matter at all? USA went to Iraq knowing that if dictator had nukes or WMDs he would have used them. But that didn't stop them at all. So why now?
About the potency of the war machine then, why is that even relevant? Why would they want to stop that kind of peace process? Yeah, Israel could surely mount casualities, but in the end they would be doomed and they would also know it. Unlike Arabs, EU and USA can actually stop Israeli war machine (and also the country) from running without firing a single shot. So why they would start it in the first place?
The main purpose is simply to kick start the peace by policing the area until termination of hostilities, and I suppose even the Israeli would be happy to see that IDF doesn't need to handle that any more. I don't see this as far out but maybe we should consult Israelis here.
I have given my solution to problem and I stand by it. You don't have to think the same way.
Mika
-
Problem is, we are talking about governments who give every impression that watching the world burn is worth it for the sake of getting their own way, some of them even look forward to it.
-
So the message caused by amassing troops there should say "We burn YOU if you even think about it!"
Mika
-
How many buildings were leveled? How many Hamas fighters are there 'supposedly'? And where the hell are those links to the stories that started your rant on this in the first place. Seriously man this is ridiculous. I don't care if it's on Al Jazeera website just give me something show me some report about:
I'm drawing from my memory here, but I read about hunderds of thousands people that lost their home, with Hamas having a esitmated 20 000 armed fighters.
You believe what you want Janos, but one has to be pretty blind not to see that Israel has gone apsh** insane. (IMHO)
You also have to be pretty gullible that every important structure Israel did hit was a nest of terrorism, when you got reports of the contrary.
-
It is my belief that you are not in a position to comment on gullibility and blindness.
-
The main purpose is simply to kick start the peace by policing the area until termination of hostilities, and I suppose even the Israeli would be happy to see that IDF doesn't need to handle that any more. I don't see this as far out but maybe we should consult Israelis here.
I couldn't agree more. I would like nothing more than an international peacekeeping force in Gaza finding out first hand what is going on there and then the world can see what THEY have to say about it.
Side note: UN peacekeeping forces historically and presently (Lebanon) don't block Israels operations... well they learned not to. If I remember correctly there was an incident with an APC of theirs firing it's machine gun on an IDF tank. Needless to say we gave the gunner of the APC the Israeli Darwin award that year. Never mind... after further research I was remembering the incident (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/823212.html) correctly but substitute UN for Lebanese Army. They got it wrong though. It was an APC that fired warning shots into the air over IDF soldiers searching for mines and the tank blew the thing away. Weird that it wasn't reported that way.
Here is a video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I19wFunD4k0) of Finnish UN peace keepers in Lebanon trying to block an Israeli heavy APC and tank from getting to wherever they were going... kinda funny. For the Finish members here Israelis actually like the Finish they are suckers for societies with predominantly blond women :P but in this case it really didn't matter WHO was in the UN trucks... the IDF just had to get through. Nothing personal yay Finland :pimp:
My point however is that this peacekeeping force would actually have to stop the rocket and mortar attacks because it would take one hell of an international force to stop the IDF from responding... again this is based on history not on "thus sayeth me such and such will happen."
I'm drawing from my memory here, but I read about hunderds of thousands people that lost their home, with Hamas having a esitmated 20 000 armed fighters.
You believe what you want Janos, but one has to be pretty blind not to see that Israel has gone apsh** insane. (IMHO)
I read about Zenu and his galactic cruisers. I also read that Apes replaced human beings in the future. I read that Frodo destroyed the ring and I read that Aslan is a freaking talking lion.
How about the "massacre" in operation defensive shield in Jenin? you read about that? What was discovered in the end? not 500 people massacred and half the town destroyed like they claimed. It was "52 to 56 Palestinians, of whom 5-26 may have been civilians. 23 IDF soldiers were also killed in the fighting." from the Wiki article on the Battle of Jenin.
you know what is even sadder then the lie of a 500 person massacre? The fact that media worldwide ate it up immediately without checking into it and all over the world people still believe that is what happened you know why? it's because of something even sadder. Because when the truth came out no media outlet had the balls to admit they were wrong. And they never do.
The media will jump on any juicy story and when it turns out sometimes to be false they won't retract it because it's old news and it's not interesting to hear that something juicy didn't happen. (see my previous point about buildings that weren't destroyed) and it's not good for ratings and credibility either.
So drawing from MY memory I read about hundreds of thousands of people who lied about the situation just to get some sympathy.
I am not denying that Israel has a policy of destroying the homes of terrorists and that many homes have been destroyed. I am simply saying that to base your entire argument on memory of things you have read that you either can't find or can't be bothered to look for. Do a little research present the facts that are available to you so that you not only bolster you and your arguments credibility but you also provide the most accurate information available to you for those who are learning about the situation from right here in this thread. Because to you this may be some far off effed up situation but to me and 7+ million others this is life.
You also have to be pretty gullible that every important structure Israel did hit was a nest of terrorism, when you got reports of the contrary.
You have to be pretty gullible if you believe every report you read. Although that is the information that is available to you so why would you believe any different? Well just know that every story has two sides and the side that has been proven more often than not to be exaggerating and lying to the media and the world is the terrorists (see Jenin) because they have the most to gain from it. Again most of this is simple logic that eludes most, even brilliant, people.
I am not saying every single report you read is a biased exaggerated lie however you need to really test these things ESPECIALLY if you get your news from the BBC... *shudder* Al Jazeera has had more unbiased and honest reporting regarding Israel than whatever low life writes for the mid east section of the BBC. They are so bad that the Israeli SNL did a little skit about their reporting (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sWcAawkvM0). It's funny but kinda sad how close to the truth it is.
-
Just ran across this and I couldn't help myself.
(http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4092/51254578og9dl9.th.jpg) (http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4092/51254578og9dl9.jpg)
-
:lol: @ the skit
-
Interestingly enough ATM BBC is being blamed for being too neutral/pro-Israel (ie. not participating in the charity appeal).. So i bit more inclined to believe BBC reporting to be far closer to the truth than the other sources.
That is I don't believe a word claimed coming from Hamas or IDF - both sides just try to glorify and polish their deeds while trying to downplay the war crimes. Given that IDF for example first blatantly lied about the use of white phosphorous and then changed their story to 'not having used it against civilians' while shelling WP at urban areas.. yeah... right... And how much do i trust their numbers on the killed Hamas combatants... given that they already lied.. hmm.. none?
As for IDF bullying over peacekeepers.. Its kinda easy to play rough when going with tank (or APC converted from a tank) against light APC... After that UN forces in Lebanon actually got tanks (French with Leclercs) and they stopped IDF on their tracks.
-
[size=9]STAY STRONG, BBC![/size]
-
I am not denying that Israel has a policy of destroying the homes of terrorists and that many homes have been destroyed. I am simply saying that to base your entire argument on memory of things you have read that you either can't find or can't be bothered to look for. Do a little research present the facts that are available to you so that you not only bolster you and your arguments credibility but you also provide the most accurate information available to you for those who are learning about the situation from right here in this thread. Because to you this may be some far off effed up situation but to me and 7+ million others this is life.
What makes you think I'm drawing all my arguments from memory? What makes you think I read from only one source?
There never is a 100% guarantee that what you read is true, but when sufficient evidence mounts up, chances for story 1 being true are greately increased.
Besides, the numbers speak for themselves.You can say what you want but a response of this caliber, with this much destruction and death, all over a few rockets fired? Wrong, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
-
Hmm... maybe cause you aren't citing any sources? :nervous:
-
Interestingly enough ATM BBC is being blamed for being too neutral/pro-Israel (ie. not participating in the charity appeal).. So i bit more inclined to believe BBC reporting to be far closer to the truth than the other sources.
That's rather odd. Blamed by whom may I ask?
That is I don't believe a word claimed coming from Hamas or IDF - both sides just try to glorify and polish their deeds while trying to downplay the war crimes. Given that IDF for example first blatantly lied about the use of white phosphorous and then changed their story to 'not having used it against civilians' while shelling WP at urban areas.. yeah... right... And how much do i trust their numbers on the killed Hamas combatants... given that they already lied.. hmm.. none?
The only story I had ever heard them say over here was that it was not used against people specifically civilians since it would be ludicrous to claim it was not used at all since many military forces use it and it is considered common place. "White phosphorus (WP) is a flare- and smoke-producing incendiary device[1] or smoke-screening agent that is made from a common allotrope of the chemical element phosphorus. The main utility of white phosphorus munitions is to create smokescreens to mask movement from the enemy, or to mask his fire. In contrast to other smoke-causing munitions, WP detonates immediately causing an instant bank of smoke. As a result of this, WP munitions are very common -- particularly as smoke grenades for infantry; loaded in defensive grenade dischargers on tanks and other armored vehicles; or as part of the ammunition allotment for artillery or mortars.
White phosphorus weapons are controversial today because of their potential use against civilians. While the Chemical Weapons Convention does not designate WP as a chemical weapon, various groups consider it to be one. In recent years, the United States, Israel, and Russia have used white phosphorus in combat."
Every incident where I can see direct quotes from the IDF by news agency's here and listening to what they say in Hebrew it is always either "no comment" "we are investigating the use of phosphorus as a weapon" "wishes to reiterate that it uses weapons in compliance with international law, while strictly observing that they be used in accordance with the type of combat and its characteristics." Like I said WP is commonplace with many armies and the claim that it was never used would have been preposterous and simply silly because it's use is not illegal therefore what use would it be to claim it was never used? Of course I shouldn't expect anyone who reads the BBC to have heard that anyway. Don't feel as if I am attacking you personally... I'm not I simply wish everyone could have seen what I have seen in these conflicts and seen how close to the truth that skit really was. I said it earlier in this thread and I will say it again. You have no idea what it is like to watch yourself or your friends do one thing then hear later someone lie about what you did to the whole world making the whole outraged at you calling you Nazis etc... but I can't attack you personally for this... this is what you have heard so this is what you know and until you hear otherwise from a source more reliable (which if you consider the BBC reliable then the only source you would consider more reliable would be a friend or yourself) you will most likely continue to know only what they tell you and have no reasonable excuse why NOT to believe them.
As for IDF bullying over peacekeepers.. Its kinda easy to play rough when going with tank (or APC converted from a tank) against light APC... After that UN forces in Lebanon actually got tanks (French with Leclercs) and they stopped IDF on their tracks.
This was before Sarkozy... the French never stopped anything in it's tracks before him. :lol: Sorry couldn't resist and to any French who took offense... don't. I meant nothing by it and I know that's a false stereotype about the fine men and women of the French military.
Back on track. The Tanks arrived just the same time as everyone else. And they have been there ever since and it has still not "stopped the IDF on their tracks" wishful thinking though. They actually play guard dog sometimes for our operations across the fence. I have no idea what promoted the whole Finnish UN IDF incident but it was a one time or very rare occurrence. After the 2006 war if I were to tell you how many times we crossed the fence and operated under the UNs knowledge(although still technically Israeli territory since we built the fence back from the border.) you would fall off your seat. My point is that they don't usually, or from my recollection in recent history, have ever tried to stop the IDF from doing whatever it was it deemed necessary save that clip I just showed you and therefore the point still stands that you would need a very massive weapons free UN force in Gaza to stop the IDF. Period.
What makes you think I'm drawing all my arguments from memory? What makes you think I read from only one source?
There never is a 100% guarantee that what you read is true, but when sufficient evidence mounts up, chances for story 1 being true are greately increased.
Well ummm... This? I'm drawing from my memory here, but I read about hunderds of thousands people that lost their home, with Hamas having a esitmated 20 000 armed fighters.
After asking you repeatedly to produce links about the story or stories you were referencing you responded with this therefore I assumed you were not lying to me and that you were drawing your argument from memory. Are you saying I should have assumed you were deceiving me? :wtf:
Who said you were reading only one source? Why do you keep making assumptions about what I think? I think I have been pretty clear about what I think there is no need to assume. If I had good reason to think you were getting all your info from Sky News I would have said so.
Besides, the numbers speak for themselves.You can say what you want but a response of this caliber, with this much destruction and death, all over a few rockets fired? Wrong, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I'll address this in 2 parts. The one where you believe numbers on a page are talking to you. The other is where you really REALLY are crying out for a reality check.
1. I have shown you already past president, means, cause and even intent as to why number would lie in these situations. Not only that I have shown you an incident in the past where I would put good money most the world still believes the original figures stated by reliable eye witnesses and trusted news correspondents. And even if this weren't the case. All that aside. Since when has war been "You killed ten of my guys so I will kill ten of yours and then we are even." What you are saying is you would have been happier if you had read the numbers were closer together like 500 to 450. or even if it were low numbers they had killed one in response we killed 5 you would have been more satisfied if they had killed 3 more and made it 4 cause it's more fair. Life isn't fair. War is definitely not fair. And for the love of God I pray you are never in a foxhole next to me in a war because if we start winning the war you would stand up say it's not fair and get us both killed to "even it out".
2. "all over a few rockets fired" I really think you should have reconsidered that statement before writing it. "From 2001 until December, 2008, there have been over 4048 rockets and 4040 mortars fired at Israeli targets". These numbers vary drastically even on Wikipedia this is actually one of the lower estimates and doesn't include the rockets fired during the recent Gaza war which between 27th of Dec and the 5th of Jan was already up to 500. Since you are into numbers I guess it seems insignificant because not many people died. only 15 people died and only 433 wounded between 2001-2007 and another 8 dead in 2008 (no numbers on wiki of the wounded). So I guess if it's so few I invite you to go to southern Israel speak to these 433 wounded and the hundreds more wounded in 2008 and the families of the 23 dead you would tell them to stop crying over "a few rockets fired". Imagine for a moment that a group of people indigenous to wherever you live develop a goal to eradicate your kind and then, after blowing you and your people up for years they are finally blockaded and all attempts to attack again are foiled by your military. But they decide it's not enough reason to stop the targeting of civilians and seek peace they decide they will come up with new ways to attack. Not quite as heavy on the death toll but much heavier on the psyche. Raining death down wherever the wind carries it no one can know where it will land all they have is 15 seconds to run to shelter. Playground are not built with bomb shelters in the shape of caterpillars that kids can climb into. Keep this up for 8 years and then come tell me its just "a few rockets fired." If I was a lesser man I would wish this on you just so you could eat your own words and beg to be relived of the constant agony living under that kind of threat. But thank God I'm not and thank God you will most likely never have to find out. All I can do is wish you gain a little clarity as to what life like that would be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUBX8ROqLwE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIZ3gHCuFBc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkZebJAd_68&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHhXINu6mCc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggKOjY_daiM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0GElGPDsL0
-
Interestingly enough ATM BBC is being blamed for being too neutral/pro-Israel (ie. not participating in the charity appeal).. So i bit more inclined to believe BBC reporting to be far closer to the truth than the other sources.
That's rather odd. Blamed by whom may I ask?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7857904.stm - and the related articles
As for IDF bullying over peacekeepers.. Its kinda easy to play rough when going with tank (or APC converted from a tank) against light APC... After that UN forces in Lebanon actually got tanks (French with Leclercs) and they stopped IDF on their tracks.
Back on track. The Tanks arrived just the same time as everyone else. And they have been there ever since and it has still not "stopped the IDF on their tracks" wishful thinking though. They actually play guard dog sometimes for our operations across the fence. I have no idea what promoted the whole Finnish UN IDF incident but it was a one time or very rare occurrence. After the 2006 war if I were to tell you how many times we crossed the fence and operated under the UNs knowledge(although still technically Israeli territory since we built the fence back from the border.) you would fall off your seat. My point is that they don't usually, or from my recollection in recent history, have ever tried to stop the IDF from doing whatever it was it deemed necessary save that clip I just showed you and therefore the point still stands that you would need a very massive weapons free UN force in Gaza to stop the IDF. Period.
I was actually meaning it in more literal sense... Merkavas being stopped by Leclercs
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3309378,00.html
As for the phosphorus... hmm.. for example..
http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_military_confirms_the_use_of_white_phosphorus_bombs_in_the_Gaza_Strip&oldid=757677
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_(weapon)#2008.2F9_Israel.E2.80.93Gaza_conflict
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7848768.stm
Besides.. very few would have complained had IDF used WP somewhere where civilians aren't in the way... However.. it is incendiary weapon... And using incendiary weapons against civilians...
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7857904.stm - and the related articles
Refusal to air the charity appeal because if they did they would have probably come under criticism about why they are not running the charity appeals for rocket attack victims in southern Israel. I think it's silly for them not to have run it because their "image" of "impartiality" has not only been tainted it has been digested by all four stomachs of each cow in a herd of a million before being sh*t out by the last one smeared on a rotting corpse to alleviate the smell and then burned... with white phosphorous why not. But this is far from any bias towards Israel.
I was actually meaning it in more literal sense... Merkavas being stopped by Leclercs
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3309378,00.html
I recant. They did stop an IDF mission in it's tracks. What do you know? Although if it was an important mission they A. did it later or B. did it by air. They would still have needed a hell of a lot more if the IDF had decided to go through anyway. But why shoot the good guys right? :P
The way you put that "merkavas being stopped by leclercs" made it sound like they went bumper to bumper and pushed or actually duked it out to see what tank was superior or some silly thing like that. I stopped a merkava IV with my foot once... although it may have been on the brake pedal at the time. :P
As for the phosphorus... hmm.. for example..
http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_military_confirms_the_use_of_white_phosphorus_bombs_in_the_Gaza_Strip&oldid=757677
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_(weapon)#2008.2F9_Israel.E2.80.93Gaza_conflict
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7848768.stm
Besides.. very few would have complained had IDF used WP somewhere where civilians aren't in the way... However.. it is incendiary weapon... And using incendiary weapons against civilians...
With those links they use nice word games to make it sound like White phosphorus weaponized shells and bombs (bombs? where the hell did they get phosphorus bombs from?) were used. Haaretz is a left wing news agency in Israel but even they don't report utter bull like the BBC in this incident. This link was used as one of the references for the wikinews article http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057361.html . Again what we find is that all these shells are legal shells they are not weaponized incendiary white phosphorous rounds. We find that there was one incident where 20 shells were fired into a residential area and those targets were confirmed hostile (as far as the shooters knew--if this was not the case then bad intel is another story which also cost the lives of 4 soldiers because a tank commander shot the house they were in these things happen in war and not just to one side.) and the only boo boo was the GPS glitch which ended up wounding 2 Israeli officers as well.
-
You have no idea what it is like to watch yourself or your friends do one thing then hear later someone lie about what you did to the whole world making the whole outraged at you calling you Nazis etc... but I can't attack you personally for this... this is what you have heard so this is what you know and until you hear otherwise from a source more reliable (which if you consider the BBC reliable then the only source you would consider more reliable would be a friend or yourself) you will most likely continue to know only what they tell you and have no reasonable excuse why NOT to believe them.
I have a pretty good idea of what you mean. There was a war here too.
Yet what if I told you I have a palestinian friend who tells different things? Why should I trust you and not him? Both Israel and Haman have a history of being total dicks, so I don't really trust either.
I'd just wish they nuked eachother and let the world have some peace.
What makes you think I'm drawing all my arguments from memory? What makes you think I read from only one source?
There never is a 100% guarantee that what you read is true, but when sufficient evidence mounts up, chances for story 1 being true are greately increased.
Well ummm... This? I'm drawing from my memory here, but I read about hunderds of thousands people that lost their home, with Hamas having a esitmated 20 000 armed fighters.
After asking you repeatedly to produce links about the story or stories you were referencing you responded with this therefore I assumed you were not lying to me and that you were drawing your argument from memory. Are you saying I should have assumed you were deceiving me? :wtf:
AHEM. Bolded word is the key. I did take those numbers from memory (altough a fresh memory. The newspaper was in the other room and my sister was reading them at that time, so I didn't bother with fetching them when I read them just a few hours ago)
Besides, the numbers speak for themselves.You can say what you want but a response of this caliber, with this much destruction and death, all over a few rockets fired? Wrong, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I'll address this in 2 parts. The one where you believe numbers on a page are talking to you. The other is where you really REALLY are crying out for a reality check.
1. I have shown you already past president, means, cause and even intent as to why number would lie in these situations. Not only that I have shown you an incident in the past where I would put good money most the world still believes the original figures stated by reliable eye witnesses and trusted news correspondents. And even if this weren't the case. All that aside. Since when has war been "You killed ten of my guys so I will kill ten of yours and then we are even." What you are saying is you would have been happier if you had read the numbers were closer together like 500 to 450. or even if it were low numbers they had killed one in response we killed 5 you would have been more satisfied if they had killed 3 more and made it 4 cause it's more fair. Life isn't fair. War is definitely not fair. And for the love of God I pray you are never in a foxhole next to me in a war because if we start winning the war you would stand up say it's not fair and get us both killed to "even it out".
2. "all over a few rockets fired" I really think you should have reconsidered that statement before writing it. "From 2001 until December, 2008, there have been over 4048 rockets and 4040 mortars fired at Israeli targets". These numbers vary drastically even on Wikipedia this is actually one of the lower estimates and doesn't include the rockets fired during the recent Gaza war which between 27th of Dec and the 5th of Jan was already up to 500. Since you are into numbers I guess it seems insignificant because not many people died. only 15 people died and only 433 wounded between 2001-2007 and another 8 dead in 2008 (no numbers on wiki of the wounded). So I guess if it's so few I invite you to go to southern Israel speak to these 433 wounded and the hundreds more wounded in 2008 and the families of the 23 dead you would tell them to stop crying over "a few rockets fired". Imagine for a moment that a group of people indigenous to wherever you live develop a goal to eradicate your kind and then, after blowing you and your people up for years they are finally blockaded and all attempts to attack again are foiled by your military. But they decide it's not enough reason to stop the targeting of civilians and seek peace they decide they will come up with new ways to attack. Not quite as heavy on the death toll but much heavier on the psyche. Raining death down wherever the wind carries it no one can know where it will land all they have is 15 seconds to run to shelter. Playground are not built with bomb shelters in the shape of caterpillars that kids can climb into. Keep this up for 8 years and then come tell me its just "a few rockets fired." If I was a lesser man I would wish this on you just so you could eat your own words and beg to be relived of the constant agony living under that kind of threat. But thank God I'm not and thank God you will most likely never have to find out. All I can do is wish you gain a little clarity as to what life like that would be.
[/quote]
I'm no stranger to war, so you're barking at the wrong three with that "you can't understand it" schtik. Also I'm not saying that Israel shouldn't have done nothing.
I'm saying that what it DID do, it did wrong. Epic Fail, as someone would say.
-
Here is a video of Finnish UN peace keepers in Lebanon trying to block an Israeli heavy APC and tank from getting to wherever they were going... kinda funny. For the Finish members here Israelis actually like the Finish they are suckers for societies with predominantly blond women but in this case it really didn't matter WHO was in the UN trucks... the IDF just had to get through. Nothing personal yay Finland
My point however is that this peacekeeping force would actually have to stop the rocket and mortar attacks because it would take one hell of an international force to stop the IDF from responding... again this is based on history not on "thus sayeth me such and such will happen."
I know. But this is not the only incident which has happened between Finnish companies in UN and IDF. I suppose those guys were given assignment to stop IDF from entering a certain area and they will carry out the order with the standard Finnish way. Doing everything they can within rules of engagement. I recall some of the peacekeepers were kidnapped and held hostage by the now defunct Isreali front army in Lebanon. Then released peacekeepers supposed that had something to do with them preventing IDF doing something.
Then again, Finns get the same kind of treatment from the Palestinians also. This tends happen because I don't think we give up very easily on situations like that. I notice also that at least a couple of these guys are from Southern Finland, and also that they curse quite a lot in the clip.
The point about the international force is that it has to be that massive. It has to be able to affect the decision making in IDF in such way that it can't really take matters into its own hands, or it doesn't even need to. And also, then Arabs cannot complain about letting Israeli off easy and about unfair treatment based on religion. The command system has to be flexible enough to push troops there where they are needed, so if Israeli stay calm there is no need to have that much of troops there and vice versa. Orthodox settler shooting to the other side of the fence with a rifle cannot trust in IDF providing him protection, and on the other hand every resistance "warrior" firing mortars from the other side should fear more UN capturing them than IDF response.
Besides even I prefer blondes. But then again Germans thought I was Italian or Spanish...
Mika
-
As for the phosphorus... hmm.. for example..
http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Israeli_military_confirms_the_use_of_white_phosphorus_bombs_in_the_Gaza_Strip&oldid=757677
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_(weapon)#2008.2F9_Israel.E2.80.93Gaza_conflict
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7848768.stm
Besides.. very few would have complained had IDF used WP somewhere where civilians aren't in the way... However.. it is incendiary weapon... And using incendiary weapons against civilians...
With those links they use nice word games to make it sound like White phosphorus weaponized shells and bombs (bombs? where the hell did they get phosphorus bombs from?) were used. Haaretz is a left wing news agency in Israel but even they don't report utter bull like the BBC in this incident. This link was used as one of the references for the wikinews article http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057361.html . Again what we find is that all these shells are legal shells they are not weaponized incendiary white phosphorous rounds. We find that there was one incident where 20 shells were fired into a residential area and those targets were confirmed hostile (as far as the shooters knew--if this was not the case then bad intel is another story which also cost the lives of 4 soldiers because a tank commander shot the house they were in these things happen in war and not just to one side.) and the only boo boo was the GPS glitch which ended up wounding 2 Israeli officers as well.
Having actually been using WP (granted - in controlled environment) for couple of things my own personal opinion is that any person firing that **** anywhere near civilians should be hanged from his balls and be left to rot until crows finish the job. The amount of the phosphorus does not really matter - and iirc even the 'smoke screen' WP shells are generally considered to be incendiary weapons. So... When shelling target close to a populated targets there are no legal WP shells - only ones that exists are figments of some ones propaganda trying to downplay their deeds.
And as seen from the casualty count.. neither side in conflict cared the least bit about non-combatant Palestinians - also keeping in mind the human shields (be they voluntary or not). So on a basic level IDF had to know there were civilians on the target site and still they fired WP shells there..
-
Oh, Willie Pete stuff is at least used in target marking rockets by air forces.
Could be a pilot marking a target (as per his instructions) and not realizing he is firing WP to a populated area. Unfortunately, in my eyes this would actually be a war crime, or a case for court-martial, be it a genuine accident/mistake or not.
Then you should drag those w***ers to court (preferably from their balls) for crimes against humanity if they keep teaching their children stuff like in those TV shows.
Mika
-
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1874539,00.html (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1874539,00.html)
Yaser Alwadeya wanders past a field strewn with the remnants of gaily painted ice cream carts, which were shredded by a blizzard of shrapnel. He enters the blackened innards of the Al Ameer factory, which once manufactured Gaza's tastiest ice cream and popsicles. Shaking his head, he says, "I can't figure out why the Israelis thought that Hamas had anything to do with ice cream."
The ice cream plant, which had been owned by Alwadeya's family for 55 years, was far from the only factory destroyed in Israel's 22-day assault on the Palestinian enclave. All along Gaza's factory row — which produced everything from biscuits to cement to wooden furniture — hardly a single building remains standing. It's as if a tsunami of fire had roared through Gaza's industrial district, leaving in its wake a tide of twisted metal and smashed buildings.
Israeli war planners had vowed to destroy the "infrastructure of terror" in Gaza, but many Gazans — even those opposed to Hamas — believe the operation was directed against general infrastructure. It certainly demolished much of Gaza's economy and civil society.
The Israeli military targeted tunnels, arms caches, police stations and the hideouts of several Hamas military commanders. But Israeli attacks also destroyed more than 230 factories, according to the Palestinian Industries Federation. Nearly 50 schools and 23 mosques were damaged as well as scores of government buildings, including the Presidential Compound and the Assembly building, which Gazans saw as the symbolic foundation for an eventual Palestinian state.
"The Israelis want to keep us poor and ignorant," says Amar Hamad, chairman of the Palestinian Industries Federation. "Businessmen were the last layer of society who believed that prosperity would bring peace with Israel. Now they don't believe that."
The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) says it chose its targets carefully, to minimize destruction to surrounding property and human lives. And the IDF accuses Hamas of putting ordinary Gazans in harm's way by firing rockets at Israel from within crowded neighborhoods. But several businessmen interviewed by TIME insist that no militants were taking refugee inside the factories bombed by Israel. "They're targeting factories to make us dependent on the Israeli economy," claims Hamad.
Gazans are also baffled as to why Israeli planes rocketed the American International School, an institution that served the sons and daughters of wealthy Palestinians and which, until recently, flew the U.S. flag. "Our students learned American geography and history," says Sharhabe el Alzaeem, a trustee. "We sent kids to Harvard and Yale." Asked if militants might have been using the grounds to fire rockets, Alzaeem retorted, "We had high walls and good security. Our guard asked if he could bring his family to stay with him because the school was safer than his neighborhood. Would he be sending for his family if there were militants running around inside the school?" The caretaker was killed when an Israeli aircraft fired several rockets at the facility, regarded as Gaza's finest school.
In addition, Gaza's housing stock took a hammering in the hostilities. Initial estimates of the Public Works Ministry point to more than 2,100 houses destroyed and another 45,000 left in need of major repairs. A key sewage plant, whose construction with international funding had the backing of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, was also hit, causing nearly $200 million in damages. Maintenance experts say a crumbling wall around a sewage lake is now in danger of spilling tons of fetid waste into the streets and alleys of northern Gaza.
Total reconstruction costs for Gaza as a result of the three-week offensive are estimated by the United Nations to be more than $1.5 billion — but the channeling of reconstruction aid into the territory is a contentious political issue. Israel and some international donors are reluctant to send funds through Hamas, which governs Gaza, for fear of "legitimizing" the Islamists, as Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert says. One Hamas spokesman told TIME that the group's primary concern was rebuilding Gaza from the rubble. "We want to rebuild houses, not our military capacity," he said. But other Hamas commanders said they would continue bringing weapons into Gaza to enable their "resistance" against Israel.
With the conflict unresolved, Israel is pressing for a continuation of the 18-month economic siege imposed on the 1.5 million people of Gaza by Israel, the U.S. and certain European and Arab allies. But John Ging, head of the U.N. Relief and Works Agency, warned of the danger of keeping the crossings into Gaza closed for political reasons. "This isn't about keeping the people of Gaza alive on a drip of medicine and subsistence aid. That allows extremism to ferment in Gaza," he says. Indeed, with few factories left, there are no jobs, no ice cream and plenty of new recruits for Hamas.
"Well yeah, we kinda bombed the place to ashes, but at least we're blockading them now"
And the goddamn WP use:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/01/200912284850930973.html (http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/01/200912284850930973.html)
http://planetirf.blogspot.com/2009/01/newsvideo-more-on-gaza-white-phosphorus.html (http://planetirf.blogspot.com/2009/01/newsvideo-more-on-gaza-white-phosphorus.html)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVY4NUKowzg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVY4NUKowzg)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/73k/3214920599/in/set-72157612781299737/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/73k/3214920599/in/set-72157612781299737/)
This was clearly to protect troops/to shield movement/definitely not used in close proximity to civilians/carefully targetted/human mistake/perhaps a lie.
Why can't people just say that "OK, Israel used WP pretty indiscriminately, well, yeah." Why to come up with such lunatic
Also hey Splinter what does the term "unproportional response" mean
-
"They're targeting factories to make us dependent on the Israeli economy," claims Hamad.
This. Coupled with other reports about things the palestinians now have to import from Israel (and at far higher prices), it's the most truthful thing I heard in a long time.