TheIronRuler: ...You have no idea about the military significance this has. You're reading articles and the like, but what do you know? Only what they are telling you....
So you could say that i am being met with propaganda. Which is funny because i am in no way a part of this conflict. Why would i be met with propaganda?
But then lets look at Israel and Palestine. They are both sides in this conflict. It is only logical that people in those countries would have more propaganda put in front of their faces. That means that, chances are - you are met with even more propaganda then I.
I live in the Netherlands, a country that is pro-Israel, so dont tell me that i hear a lot about it because "the world is against it". I hear a lot about it because it does shitload of questionable things. Like USA, even more so.
I still do not see why you consider shelling densely populated areas with wp shells to be something to be even considered. You say that i have no idea about military significance of this action. You are right. That is my point, I do not. Neither do the civilians who get to see this. Then along comes some terrorist organisation that says that it is "because Israel hates us and want us to be destroyed". In a way, Israel military is not only making propaganda posters for them, they are hanging them around the whole area.
TheIronRuler: ...You have no idea about the military significance this has. You're reading articles and the like, but what do you know? Only what they are telling you....
So you could say that i am being met with propaganda. Which is funny because i am in no way a part of this conflict. Why would i be met with propaganda?
But then lets look at Israel and Palestine. They are both sides in this conflict. It is only logical that people in those countries would have more propaganda put in front of their faces. That means that, chances are - you are met with even more propaganda then I.
I live in the Netherlands, a country that is pro-Israel, so dont tell me that i hear a lot about it because "the world is against it". I hear a lot about it because it does shitload of questionable things. Like USA, even more so.
I still do not see why you consider shelling densely populated areas with wp shells to be something to be even considered. You say that i have no idea about military significance of this action. You are right. That is my point, I do not. Neither do the civilians who get to see this. Then along comes some terrorist organisation that says that it is "because Israel hates us and want us to be destroyed". In a way, Israel military is not only making propaganda posters for them, they are hanging them around the whole area.
. These were the official goals of the operation. I assumed you weren't even aware of it from the media you consume.
Israel bomb 3 story home killing 10 from same family, including 5 children.
"Health ministry officials in Gaza said at least nine members of the same family - five of them children - were among 10 people killed when an Israeli missile destroyed a family home in Gaza City."
Reports are conflicting as to the target of the attack. Some say it was a Hamas official, others that it was a rocket maker and otehrs that there was a mistake.
I suppose these children's deaths will be dismissed as another case of the 'terrorists using human shields', even though it was the families' home.
neonit: I still do not see why you consider shelling densely populated areas with wp shells to be something to be even considered. You say that i have no idea about military significance of this action. You are right. That is my point, I do not.
I looked up one specific instance of it, since that made photo's of apparent civilians running away as the bits of a smokescreen shell fell around them, was a UN building built in a semi-square form in Beit Haniya, which are known to be used as Hamas strongholds, with a wall around it with only one gate, being used by Hamas.
Now Israeli infantry were fighting their way towards the building as a few hours later the IDF spokesperson desk released footage of soldiers showing the various boobytraps the building had been rigged with.
The shape of the building lends itself perfectly for creating a killzone. You barricade the way in, place 2-4 guys at the central entrance, and most of your fighters on either side of the building. People coming through the main gate need to run through a crossfire to make it to the door if they want to enter the building, being completely exposed along the way. Not one in ten soldiers attacking the building would get through alive.
So what do you do? You call in the artillery to fire phosphorus shells at the square, which obscures it in a dense fog. You sneak in under the cover over that, break a few windows on the side of the complex, enter the building and clear it out.
That's perfectly normal military use of such shells, it's what they were designed for.
And why civilians were apparently hanging around in the secluded private square of a Hamas-controlled stronghold... Well, some things are just a stupid idea, and that's one of them. Tough shit if any of them got hit.
Pallywood propagandists present that like some kind of atrocity, while if you look at what has happened, it's perfectly legit and ethnical use of munitions.
Even Human Rights Watch didn't seem to care about the details and didn't go any furhter than 'I could see the shells exploding over civilian areas". Well no shit Einstein, but check what the targets were before making wild assumptions... And that was their 'senior military advisor' speaking, imagine how ignorant the rest of that organisation must be... But it merely being over an apparent civilian area doesn't make it illegal. What's illegal is specifically targeting civilians with such munitions. Nobody ever agreed that any fighting inside an area and proper use of ammunitions in those is forbidden. And I don't suppose there'd be anything wrong with using the shells as incendiary devices too, and try to set a military target like a Hamas-occupied building on fire with them.
Same story for a secondary incident, the fighting at the Al Fakhura school. Hamas mortar teams and gunmen were using the building, so it was a valid military target. Yet people were taking up refuge there apparently in a not-so-smart move.
In addition a Hamas rocket launcher was stationed in the courtyard next to the building. The initial idea was to launch a smart missile at the adjacent courtyard, but there was a technical problem. The next idea was to use mortar shells with GPS for accurate fire. How accurate? Well, the Dutch army doesn't have those let me tell you. Still they have a 30 metre error radius according to the IDF spokesperson desk, and during the destruction of the rocket launcher, the UNRWA building was also hit. Bodies of known Hamas operatives were found at the scene when Israeli soldiers secured the building.
Of course the UN didn't think and parroted the Pallywood propaganda which exagerated the number of deaths by fourfold and conveniently ignored the presence of Hamas military assets, but even they were forced to change their tune later when it turned out there was nothing wrong with the fighting around the Al Fakhura school, and the cause of any civilian deaths was in the use of human shields by Hamas.
TechNoFear: Sunday is deadliest day in Gaza with 29 killed. Israel bomb 3 story home killing 10 from same family, including 5 children. "Health ministry officials in Gaza said at least nine members of the same family - five of them children - were among 10 people killed when an Israeli missile destroyed a family home in Gaza City." Reports are conflicting as to the target of the attack. Some say it was a Hamas official, others that it was a rocket maker and otehrs that there was a mistake. I suppose these children's deaths will be dismissed as another case of the 'terrorists using human shields', even though it was the families' home. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-19/hamas-official-and-family-killed-by-air-strike/4378718
Why do you quote this little bit, leave out more essential parts and delibately try to trick us into thinking that is what the media report said? Are you trying to lie about it and manipulate the reader into thinking it was a reckless strike?
Also from the same article: Israel's chief military spokesman Yoav Mordechai said Yihia Abayah, a senior commander of rocket operations in the Gaza Strip, had been the target. He did not confirm whether Abayah was killed but told Israel's Channel 2 television "the outcome was that there were civilian casualties". Other reports said the dead were a Hamas official named as Mohamed Dalou and his family.
NOS News reports the house right next to Abayah's house was struck. Considering the foundation of the adjacent house looked some 6 metres wide at most, that's pinpoint accuracy for as far as that's possible with airstrikes.
Is there ever a case when these two images won't perfectly sum up the Israel-Palestine? I hope there will be a point in the future where they don't, but for the moment no, they cover it perfectly.
The conflict has been going on for decades now and both sides are engaged in despicable attacks on the other.
The only difference is that Israel is involved in systematic subjugation, discrimination and apartheid which it refuses to stop, Israel has killed far more Palestinians than vice versa and Israel has the capacity to perform precision attacks but chooses to engaged in warfare which results in large civilian casualties while Palestine doesn't have that option.
Also, Nelson Mandela was still considered a terrorist up until a couple of years ago for his anti-apartheid guerilla activities back in the day while guerilla groups involved in awful humans rights violations like the Contras were considered allies and supported by the US government without nary a hint of terrorist name calling. Being a terrorist has more to do with opposing USA interests than a propensity for immoral acts, so Hamas being considered terrorist is not in itself a startling condemnation of the group.
Overhead: The only difference is that Israel is involved in systematic subjugation, discrimination and apartheid which it refuses to stop, Israel has killed far more Palestinians than vice versa and Israel has the capacity to perform precision attacks but chooses to engaged in warfare which results in large civilian casualties while Palestine doesn't have that option
And if you stopped being utterly closedminded, closedeyed, stopped mindlessly drinking propaganda and thought for yourself for a moment, you'd realise that ability to execute precision strikes is being used right now.
You can even look up specific incidents and see the munitions used. Like the Al Fakhura school. Mortars shells with GPS targeting. Most western armies don't even have that sort of accuracy available.
That's why a report says "Nine Palestinians killed" instead "Ninehundred Palestinians killed". If Israel wasn't using surgical precisions, the death toll would've be at least a hundred times higher. But is that what you want to hear? Or don't you want to hear such inconvenient details because it would stop you from screaming cool things like "Those horrible Jews are doing apartheid!!1!!"?
I guess we'll see when you respond either defensively, denying and closedminded, or by looking up the details of various strikes you talk about eh?
Overhead: The only difference is that Israel is involved in systematic subjugation, discrimination and apartheid which it refuses to stop, Israel has killed far more Palestinians than vice versa and Israel has the capacity to perform precision attacks but chooses to engaged in warfare which results in large civilian casualties while Palestine doesn't have that option
And if you stopped being utterly closedminded, closedeyed, stopped mindlessly drinking propaganda and thought for yourself for a moment,
Then grab a link that says what you want to say. You want me to dig through it instead? Otherwise don't just vomit up a whole page of citations at me. You sent me to a general Nato statistics wikipedia page. That's a bit vague. Asking for something just a little bit more focused is not outrageous.
The UN estimate that there has been an average three-to-one ratio of civilian to combatant deaths in such conflicts worldwide. Three civilians for every combatant killed. That is the estimated ratio in Afghanistan: three to one. In Iraq, and in Kosovo, it was worse: the ratio is believed to be four-to-one. Anecdotal evidence suggests the ratios were very much higher in Chechnya and Serbia. In Gaza, it was less than one-to-one.
From that same page i vomited upon you as you so bluntly claim.
Well you could have linked directly to the cited reference (a UN youtube video0. In which it does mention the use of civilians by Hamas but at no point mentions the one to one ratio quote on the wikipedia page. THAT is why I do not use wikipedia for specifics.
Math? there are plenty of sources about the quotation that give various figures, all of them result in a casualty ration of less than 1 to 1, which is still better than any NATO track record.
Blablahb: Why do you quote this little bit, leave out more essential parts and delibately try to trick us into thinking that is what the media report said? Are you trying to lie about it and manipulate the reader into thinking it was a reckless strike?
You quoted it so I assume you read my post but failed to comprehend it, so I will post it again;
TechNoFear: Reports are conflicting as to the target of the attack. Some say it was a Hamas official, others that it was a rocket maker and otehrs that there was a mistake.
How is it deceptive when I summarise the SAME infomation you later post?
You quoted it so I assume you read my post but failed to comprehend it, so I will post it again;
Construct a Venn diagram entitled "The Israel-Palestine Issue". Draw upon it two circles, one labelled "Reality" and the other "Blahblahb's Opinion". Ensure those circles have zero overlap. Then, whenever you think about what he is talking about, refer to the diagram.
Or, to requote the delightfully incisive comment above:
Here is a question, why is it that those of us that do not support Israel 100% are portrayed to be supporting Hamas? The way Israel supporters have posted show that they assume this to be the case.
I will let you in on something, no one here supports Hamas. Everyone here thinks Hamas are acting like a bunch of dicks and they should be held accountable for attacks against Israel. However, we also think it takes two to tango. Israel are not exactly nice to the Palestinian people. You can deny it all you want but the fact is Palestinians are oppressed by Israel. As far as Israel is concerned they are second class citizens, they are beneath them.
You cannot oppress an entire group of people and expect none of them to seek revenge. Regardless of how it started, the Palestinians of today seek revenge because they see Israel as the oppressors, and rightly so.
The over the top retaliation by Israel only makes matters worst. Hamas kill 1 so Israel kill 5, Hamas kill 5 so Israel kill 50. Revenge only results in more revenge. At some stage one of the parties has to be the bigger man, so to speak. Since Israel are the ones that hold pretty much all the cards, they are in the prime position to take the lead on a path to a resolution.
I will say it once again, Israel and Hamas are the problem. If you cannot see that both parties are at fault you have been blinded by propaganda.
pyrate: Here is a question, why is it that those of us that do not support Israel 100% are portrayed to be supporting Hamas? The way Israel supporters have posted show that they assume this to be the case.
I will let you in on something, no one here supports Hamas. Everyone here thinks Hamas are acting like a bunch of dicks and they should be held accountable for attacks against Israel. However, we also think it takes two to tango. Israel are not exactly nice to the Palestinian people. You can deny it all you want but the fact is Palestinians are oppressed by Israel. As far as Israel is concerned they are second class citizens, they are beneath them.
You cannot oppress an entire group of people and expect none of them to seek revenge. Regardless of how it started, the Palestinians of today seek revenge because they see Israel as the oppressors, and rightly so.
The over the top retaliation by Israel only makes matters worst. Hamas kill 1 so Israel kill 5, Hamas kill 5 so Israel kill 50. Revenge only results in more revenge. At some stage one of the parties has to be the bigger man, so to speak. Since Israel are the ones that hold pretty much all the cards, they are in the prime position to take the lead on a path to a resolution.
I will say it once again, Israel and Hamas are the problem. If you cannot see that both parties are at fault you have been blinded by propaganda.
. This isn't 'not supporting Israel 100%'. This is something else. This is messages like these:
Cat On The Roof: Gee, another HASBARA thread justifying the assault on the largest open air-prison by the "strongest army in the Middle-East".
Don't you Zionists ever get tired of brainwashing the goyim (who cannot merry Jews inside the boundaries of the colonialist theocracy of Israel unless they become Jews / the Jew loses their "Right of Return" by converting) into parroting whatever happens to be the official Zionist version of the events?
Now let's see: the Zionists claim that the current session of violence all begun when Hamas fired an anti-tank missile. This Zionist lie has to be exposed: on the 8th of November, after a few weeks of relative quite, the IDF illegally murdered a twelve year old child in Gaza FOR NO REASON. It is only in response to this that Hamas has exercised its right to retaliate by shooting some anti-tank missile.
You murder children; you get slapped with anti-tank rockets. Clear?
Now that we've established that the criminal theocracy of Israel, the last militarized and the only nuclear colony on Earth, is fully responsible for this situation, let's examine what the child-murderers (no, I don't generalize all Israelis, just those who are IDF criminals) have done today: 20 months old Ahmad Najib died today near Qalandia because the brave IDF soldiers (who just can't stop murdering children / mentally-ill people) exterminated him with a tear gas canister. He burned to death.
Was it necessary? Can't the blood-thirsty Zionist occupiers release their fury via video-games instead of burning little babies to death for no reason?
Disclaimer: I in no way believe Hamas has the moral high ground, in fact, they are as bas as the Zionist colonialists, if not worse. Hope innocents on both sides survive and criminal-soldiers of both sides drown in rivers of blood and filth.
Or messages like these:
Overhead: Is there ever a case when these two images won't perfectly sum up the Israel-Palestine? I hope there will be a point in the future where they don't, but for the moment no, they cover it perfectly.
The conflict has been going on for decades now and both sides are engaged in despicable attacks on the other.
The only difference is that Israel is involved in systematic subjugation, discrimination and apartheid which it refuses to stop, Israel has killed far more Palestinians than vice versa and Israel has the capacity to perform precision attacks but chooses to engaged in warfare which results in large civilian casualties while Palestine doesn't have that option.
Also, Nelson Mandela was still considered a terrorist up until a couple of years ago for his anti-apartheid guerilla activities back in the day while guerilla groups involved in awful humans rights violations like the Contras were considered allies and supported by the US government without nary a hint of terrorist name calling. Being a terrorist has more to do with opposing USA interests than a propensity for immoral acts, so Hamas being considered terrorist is not in itself a startling condemnation of the group.
. This isn't about looking at the situation and saying we need to fix it somehow, it's calling Israel a bunch of baby killers. An apartheid state. Telling that Israel discriminates against Palestinians and oppresses them, while in fact this is plain wrong. I can't talk with these people because they don't want to listen. They have already bought into what they believe in and nothing will change it. They call me names and call me a murderer.
It's not long till I'm a soldier too. It's not long till they will be calling me a baby killer. There's criticizing Israel and its actions, and there's that. I won't stop you from holding your opinions, but I will try and change them.
Blablahb: And if you stopped being utterly closedminded, closedeyed, stopped mindlessly drinking propaganda and thought for yourself for a moment, you'd realise that ability to execute precision strikes is being used right now.
You can even look up specific incidents and see the munitions used. Like the Al Fakhura school. Mortars shells with GPS targeting. Most western armies don't even have that sort of accuracy available.
That's why a report says "Nine Palestinians killed" instead "Ninehundred Palestinians killed". If Israel wasn't using surgical precisions, the death toll would've be at least a hundred times higher. But is that what you want to hear? Or don't you want to hear such inconvenient details because it would stop you from screaming cool things like "Those horrible Jews are doing apartheid!!1!!"?
I guess we'll see when you respond either defensively, denying and closedminded, or by looking up the details of various strikes you talk about eh?
They have the ability to use precision strikes and sometimes they use it, sometimes they don't and sometimes that pinpoint accuracy is used to deadly effect.
Take for instance the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict which states that Israel has a deliberate policy of targetting civilians as well as claiming that both sides are responsible for war crimes and maybe crimes against humanity.
They don't have to be killing civilians by the thousands to be guilty of causing needless civilian deaths, so your comparison is invalid. Dropping bombs on a police cadet graduation ceremony, for instance, is a despicable thing to do.
This isn't about looking at the situation and saying we need to fix it somehow, it's calling Israel a bunch of baby killers. An apartheid state. Telling that Israel discriminates against Palestinians and oppresses them, while in fact this is plain wrong. I can't talk with these people because they don't want to listen. They have already bought into what they believe in and nothing will change it. They call me names and call me a murderer.
It's not long till I'm a soldier too. It's not long till they will be calling me a baby killer. There's criticizing Israel and its actions, and there's that. I won't stop you from holding your opinions, but I will try and change them.
It is looking at the situation and trying to fix it. You're just presumably coming at it from the point of view of "Both are roughly equally bad, so we just need to smooth things out" and so any focus on Israel as the greater villain of the affair smacks to you of a needless attack.
The problem is that countless activists, human rights groups, UN inspectors, etc have pointed out the systematic discrimination faced by the Palestinians from the Israel apartheid state. Their greater casualties and lower standard of living are easily sourceable fact. Their lack of power and agency to effect change even if they want to is obvious enough compared to Israel.
Both sides are bad but while Israel continues to suppress Palestine and stifle the lives of it's people as a daily matter of course and engage in what amounts to ethnic cleansing, I don't see how any peace is possible. Israel needs to be focused on because it's the biggest impediment and causes the most harm.
This isn't about looking at the situation and saying we need to fix it somehow, it's calling Israel a bunch of baby killers. An apartheid state. Telling that Israel discriminates against Palestinians and oppresses them, while in fact this is plain wrong.
Whilst calling Israel baby killers isn't fair, saying that it oppresses and discriminates against the Palestinians is.
Ultimately, Israel is an occupying power over territories it does not legally own and despised by those territories' inhabitants. It could, unilaterally and any time it so wished, relinquish both its control and any potential claims. It does not because it is not in its perceived best interests to do so.
Needing to control a hostile population against its will, and a population with more than a few active paramilitary groups, necessarily involves a certain degree of oppression and discrimination. Restrictions, control, and occasional iron-fisted enforcement. An argument that this is not oppression is an exercise in futility - it certainly is oppression. The argument is whether and how much oppression is justified for the good of the Israeli state and its people.
The only acceptable justification for oppression should be self-defence: Israel cannot be expected to give up these territories if it imperils the Israeli state and its citizens. That a substantial chunk is controlled by an outright terrorist group with a constitutional aim of destroying Israel is pretty much justification alone for continued occupation. After that, oppression should be proportional to the circumstances.
This isn't about looking at the situation and saying we need to fix it somehow, it's calling Israel a bunch of baby killers. An apartheid state. Telling that Israel discriminates against Palestinians and oppresses them, while in fact this is plain wrong.
Whilst calling Israel baby killers isn't fair, saying that it oppresses and discriminates against the Palestinians is.
Ultimately, Israel is an occupying power over territories it does not legally own and despised by those territories' inhabitants. It could, unilaterally and any time it so wished, relinquish both its control and any potential claims. It does not because it is not in its perceived best interests to do so.
Yeah... that happened in Gaza. suffice to say that the results of that bit of idiocy will ensure no such mistakes happen in the future.
This isn't about looking at the situation and saying we need to fix it somehow, it's calling Israel a bunch of baby killers. An apartheid state. Telling that Israel discriminates against Palestinians and oppresses them, while in fact this is plain wrong.
Whilst calling Israel baby killers isn't fair, saying that it oppresses and discriminates against the Palestinians is.
Ultimately, Israel is an occupying power over territories it does not legally own and despised by those territories' inhabitants. It could, unilaterally and any time it so wished, relinquish both its control and any potential claims. It does not because it is not in its perceived best interests to do so.
Needing to control a hostile population against its will, and a population with more than a few active paramilitary groups, necessarily involves a certain degree of oppression and discrimination. Restrictions, control, and occasional iron-fisted enforcement. An argument that this is not oppression is an exercise in futility - it certainly is oppression. The argument is whether and how much oppression is justified for the good of the Israeli state and its people.
The only acceptable justification for oppression should be self-defence: Israel cannot be expected to give up these territories if it imperils the Israeli state and its citizens. That a substantial chunk is controlled by an outright terrorist group with a constitutional aim of destroying Israel is pretty much justification alone for continued occupation. After that, oppression should be proportional to the circumstances.
. Do you know how the settlements started cropping up in the west bank and in gaza? I'm curious because whenever I talk to people about this they aren't even aware of it.
Blablahb: And if you stopped being utterly closedminded, closedeyed, stopped mindlessly drinking propaganda and thought for yourself for a moment, you'd realise that ability to execute precision strikes is being used right now.
You can even look up specific incidents and see the munitions used. Like the Al Fakhura school. Mortars shells with GPS targeting. Most western armies don't even have that sort of accuracy available.
That's why a report says "Nine Palestinians killed" instead "Ninehundred Palestinians killed". If Israel wasn't using surgical precisions, the death toll would've be at least a hundred times higher. But is that what you want to hear? Or don't you want to hear such inconvenient details because it would stop you from screaming cool things like "Those horrible Jews are doing apartheid!!1!!"?
I guess we'll see when you respond either defensively, denying and closedminded, or by looking up the details of various strikes you talk about eh?
They have the ability to use precision strikes and sometimes they use it, sometimes they don't and sometimes that pinpoint accuracy is used to deadly effect.
Take for instance the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict which states that Israel has a deliberate policy of targetting civilians as well as claiming that both sides are responsible for war crimes and maybe crimes against humanity.
They don't have to be killing civilians by the thousands to be guilty of causing needless civilian deaths, so your comparison is invalid. Dropping bombs on a police cadet graduation ceremony, for instance, is a despicable thing to do.
This isn't about looking at the situation and saying we need to fix it somehow, it's calling Israel a bunch of baby killers. An apartheid state. Telling that Israel discriminates against Palestinians and oppresses them, while in fact this is plain wrong. I can't talk with these people because they don't want to listen. They have already bought into what they believe in and nothing will change it. They call me names and call me a murderer.
It's not long till I'm a soldier too. It's not long till they will be calling me a baby killer. There's criticizing Israel and its actions, and there's that. I won't stop you from holding your opinions, but I will try and change them.
It is looking at the situation and trying to fix it. You're just presumably coming at it from the point of view of "Both are roughly equally bad, so we just need to smooth things out" and so any focus on Israel as the greater villain of the affair smacks to you of a needless attack.
The problem is that countless activists, human rights groups, UN inspectors, etc have pointed out the systematic discrimination faced by the Palestinians from the Israel apartheid state. Their greater casualties and lower standard of living are easily sourceable fact. Their lack of power and agency to effect change even if they want to is obvious enough compared to Israel.
Both sides are bad but while Israel continues to suppress Palestine and stifle the lives of it's people as a daily matter of course and engage in what amounts to ethnic cleansing, I don't see how any peace is possible. Israel needs to be focused on because it's the biggest impediment and causes the most harm.
. How would you know when someone is using a precision strike and when they aren't? That knowledge comes from the IDF and not from any speculations that would arise after an attack.
Had the people of Gaza not elected a political party that has its goal as 'Overthrowing the Zionist regime from Palestine", and had Hamas not continued with its promise of violent war against Israel then you wouldn't have had this predicament of a blockade in Gaza. The building materials that the world cried out to give to the people were used to build houses - and they were used to make rockets, and mortars, and military fortifications. Fatah normalized its relationship with Israel and was one of the groups who returned the idea of the two state solution into the equation. before that you had nobody to talk to besides militants that wanted to kill all Jews and get them out of their Palestine. Can the same happen with Hamas? Can they turn from a terrorist organization into a legitimate ruler of Gaza strip? Yes they can.
The conditions the people living in the west bank are far from the conditions their brothers living in Israel face. They have limited funds, the infrastructure isn't comparable, Jewish settlements keep cropping up all over the place. They are dependent on Israel for many, many things. Cutting and running away is an option Israel can use but will be seen as despicable. They aren't equal to Israelis - specifically because they aren't citizens of Israel. the services they may get from Israel are limited or none, but it doesn't mean that when a Palestinian is injured Israel won't treat him/her in their hospital. How many kids from Gaza and the West Bank did Israel save because they don't have the necessary equipment and personal for treating these illnesses? Apparently not enough for people to notice. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/world/middleeast/10patients.html http://www.jewishfederations.org/page.aspx?id=170934 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Save_a_Child's_Heart
The laws they are governed under are different. However human rights of these people aren't a thing Israel breaks every day. When you read about settlers committing violence against Palestinians, do you think that it is Israel who does that? When the IDF evicts people from their homes, do they do that for shits and giggles or is it according to an agreement with the PLO and the laws of the country?
Do you think that people want to continue this till the end of times? The last time we had negotiations with the PLO it was Olmert who was the PM of Israel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annapolis_Conference Hamas and Iran boycotted the conference. Zionists, as some like to use as slurs, have their name come from a word in the Hebrew language - Zion, is in fact, one of the 70 names Israel has in the Hebrew Bible. You can therefore see how many in the state of Israel will not allow the seperation of Jerusalem. Other issues were discussed as well - the settlements, which were in the beginning a means for the safety of the people inside the green line. The security issues that will come from this and the refugee issue of the Palestinian people. The UN had given the Palestinian refugees a special status and agency to deal with them. The UN fucked up the '47 partition plan and the Arab nations nearby weren't willing to absorb the refugees and would instead prefer to re-conquer Israel and put them back there, the nation which succeeds will be seen as their savior and a star in the Arab world. These issues cannot be compromised if one side won't budge, and at the moment the most generous offer for a Palestinian state came from PM Olmert, which they rejected. Still, lets call it an apartheid. The growing movement against Israel is a weapon the Palestinians have to pressure them and their population to give up on some or all of their demands.
Yeah... that happened in Gaza. suffice to say that the results of that bit of idiocy will ensure no such mistakes happen in the future.
Israel never surrendered ultimate control of Gaza. It handed it autonomy.
It was a good idea, as the Palestinians needed to develop the systems of government, and Israel was as well to devolve policing to the Palestinians themselves and get their guys out there. That Hamas took it over was an unforeseen and unfortunate development; Fatah, whilst incompetent and corrupt, were at least somewhat co-operative.
Do you know how the settlements started cropping up in the west bank and in gaza? I'm curious because whenever I talk to people about this they aren't even aware of it.
To the best of my knowledge, it was/is land that has no registered private owner, and thus people have been free to claim/apply and build on it. The Israeli government during my lifetime seems to have had varying attitudes to it depending on the politics of the time: sometimes encouragement, sometimes disinterest, sometimes resistance and removal.
Clearly, it is within the power of the Israeli government to end it.
Either way, the continued settlement (particularly the eating away at Palestinian East Jerusalem) I think is a serious problem for three reasons. It's a major source of aggravation, injurious to Israel's global reputation by making the occupation look like modern colonialism and land-grabbing, and increasingly reduces the viability of a potential Palestinian state.
I think the other very sizeable "public image" problem Israel has is the lack of threat from its neighbours. Having become rich, handily won all those wars, developed nukes, and the risk of conflict receded so much, many Westerners consider Israel the local powerhouse rather than a state in mortal danger. Thus the occupation starts to look like bullying rather than self-defence.
This shows that there isn't a correlation between an election in Israel and operations in Gaza. Do notice that even though there isn't statistics for rockets fired from Gaza on Israel at the start of the chart, at the heat of the second Intifada they had other things in their arsenal.
Do you know how the settlements started cropping up in the west bank and in gaza? I'm curious because whenever I talk to people about this they aren't even aware of it.
To the best of my knowledge, it was/is land that has no registered private owner, and thus people have been free to claim/apply and build on it. The Israeli government during my lifetime seems to have had varying attitudes to it depending on the politics of the time: sometimes encouragement, sometimes disinterest, sometimes resistance and removal.
Clearly, it is within the power of the Israeli government to end it.
Either way, the continued settlement (particularly the eating away at Palestinian East Jerusalem) I think is a serious problem for three reasons. It's a major source of aggravation, injurious to Israel's global reputation by making the occupation look like modern colonialism and land-grabbing, and increasingly reduces the viability of a potential Palestinian state.
I think the other very sizeable "public image" problem Israel has is the lack of threat from its neighbours. Having become rich, handily won all those wars, developed nukes, and the risk of conflict receded so much, many Westerners consider Israel the local powerhouse rather than a state in mortal danger. Thus the occupation starts to look like bullying rather than self-defence.
. Ok, this will be interesting. Listen well - Before '47 (and WW2 for the most part) there was Zionist immigration into the mandate of Palestine. In order to train willing immigrants from Europe, Russia and other countries you had more than a few Jewish organizations that were responsible for organizing Jewish immigration into the mandate of Palestine. This involved collecting funds from donors (usually rich Jews who support the practice, like Baron de Rothschild, a french Jew himself.), organizing the buying of land in the mandate territory (usually from locals themselves) and organizing the immigration there. In order to prepare new immigrants into this new lifestyle (which was basically shit in mandatory Palestine no matter how you cut it or compare it to where they lived at the time) they trained them in many things - agriculture was most important, with it was the new language - Hebrew, dealing with farm animals, building wells, roads, etc. Since Jews were religiously not allowed to work any land and be farmers outside of the promised land, this was rather new to all of the Jews who wished to be immigrants in mandatory Palestine. Among these groups, there were youth groups that organized youth who wanted to immigrate to the holy land, and they also operated within mandatory Palestine and organized them and others in their age there. During the '47-'49 war, all of these organizations that organized Jewish immigration in mandatory Palestine and continued to support them in the holy land had to come together into one organization. Remains of these organizations still remain, like Beitar which nowadays is more associated with the youth as are scouts in the USA and with promoting and supporting sports. These groups were merged into what was called 'Nahal', one group to include all of the ones from the Zionist youth groups who participated in the '47-'49 war. These soldiers were trained and later stationed in different settlements throughout Israel (pre-'67 within Israel itself) where they worked in agriculture, building roads, houses, etc. and developing the "frontier". Israel hoped that those who were in this group would become residents of those far-away settlements that were hard to live in. About a third or so did remain, but it wasn't what they expected. Do note that this wasn't just about settling the land - it also had security reasons in it. Many settlements were built near the borders of Israel so they could stop any infiltration attempts through the border or serve as the first line of engagement of the enemy enters Israel. The soldiers first started the settlements and later the youth groups hauled into them and started working there. Wiki says 35 new settlements were formed in this way before '67 by Nahal. After '67 war and the change in the borders this continued within the new borders of Israel, called the green line. In the beginning the goal was to settle the truce line with Syria, so that there could be Israeli presence in the Golan Heights. Later in the 70s more settlements cropped up in the Jordan valley and in western the edges of the west bank - they were more 'forts' than anything else. Many were placed in strategic locations on hilltop, etc.
Now, the change came after an Israeli supreme court of Justice case. Up until that point no civilian was allowed to just waltz into these territories (the west bank, for example) and set up camp. It was military men and those who left their service and stayed in these settlements. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Moreh Then the flood-gates opened. Civilian organizations that support this organize continued settling of that land. These strongholds then turned into civilian towns and cities. With the Oslo accords with the PLO and the laws Israel has regarding this, it didn't became impossible to start up settlements with the approval of the state.
Danny Ocean: Seems this Iron Dome thing is super-effective. Those rockets barely even do anything any more.
What a threatened nation this regional power is. Sarcasm.
. Iron dome isn't a 100% percent effective. Those three dead in Israel didn't die out of a heart attack caused by excitement when they saw it at work. Hamas missiles fly through and still strike Israeli civies. About 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 get through its defenses. Those sirens too demand people drop everything they're doing and run to cover. That journalist is an idiot for risking her life during the siren. Just wait for a minute, damn it.
Danny Ocean: Seems this Iron Dome thing is super-effective. Those rockets barely even do anything any more.
What a threatened nation this regional power is. Sarcasm.
The Iron Dome is effective but it does not really matter, it might save lives but it wont stop the 800,000 people who are running for their lives to shelters countless times of day and waken in the middle of the night by air raid sirens.
This single post just proves how twisted your state of mind is, if some one is shooting while you're wearing a ballistic vest they are still shooting at you, the fact that you are protected does not decrease the severity of that action by even one bit, Israel as any other sovereign state is responsible to ensuring the safety of it own citizens first, the true impact on it's security or existence does not matter one bit the financial damages and the psychological effects are sufficient enough to turn Gaza into a parking lot, and i assure you that any other major power would've done that by now. ;)
Wonder how the UK would dealt with Scotland if they would be lobbying missiles over the border non-stop, we remember how it dealt with Argentina...
NEW-UPDATE: The 'peace' talks are getting somewhere - finally Israel responds and issues its formal conditions to a truce - No more rocket fire to Israel for the next 24 hours, a guarantee to stop the arming of Hamas and move of weapons to the strip which all factions within the Gaza strip and Egypt will uphold. If the truce is honored then the negotiations can continue. At this point the IDF air-force has run out of 'safe' targets to hit with minimal chances of hurting civies. For the last two days (day and a half) they have been also targeting Hamas brass and smuggling tunnels in the Egyptian border.
how did "shield wall" in hebrew get turned into "defensive shield" in english.
. How did 'Pillar of Cloud' get turned into 'Pillar of Defense'? ...I blame the IDF. For some reason they can't translate this properly into English.
whatever. i just saw the most surreal thing I've ever witnessed. you have Israeli TV giving the 8 O'clock show that involves discussing the events. at the same time, you have Hamas's Al Aqsa TV broadcasting the Israeli show live, and the Hamas commentator translating the Israeli show into Arabic. at which point, the Israeli commentator about Arab affairs starts talking DIRECTLY to the Al-Aqsa TV commentator and they start arguing with each other on live TV.
I've heard about televised debates, but this was the first time I've actually watched a debate between televisions. this war is just plain damn weird.
how did "shield wall" in hebrew get turned into "defensive shield" in english.
. How did 'Pillar of Cloud' get turned into 'Pillar of Defense'? ...I blame the IDF. For some reason they can't translate this properly into English.
whatever. i just saw the most surreal thing I've ever witnessed. you have Israeli TV giving the 8 O'clock show that involves discussing the events. at the same time, you have Hamas's Al Aqsa TV broadcasting the Israeli show live, and the Hamas reported translating into Arabic. at which point, the Israeli commentator about Arab affairs starts talking DIRECTLY to the Al-Aqsa TV commentator and they start arguing with each other on live TV.
I've heard about televised debates, but this was the first time I've actually watched a debate between televisions.
. I saw it too! I have it recorded, but I don't think I can move it from the YES recorder to the internet. Such a shame... It was really cool!
TheIronRuler: Iron dome isn't a 100% percent effective. Those three dead in Israel didn't die out of a heart attack caused by excitement when they saw it at work. Hamas missiles fly through and still strike Israeli civies. About 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 get through its defenses. Those sirens too demand people drop everything they're doing and run to cover. That journalist is an idiot for risking her life during the siren. Just wait for a minute, damn it.
Still, though, if you're a military tech fetishish (such as myself), you looked at those Iron Dome interceptions like they were the world's best porn...
TheIronRuler: NEW-UPDATE: The 'peace' talks are getting somewhere - finally Israel responds and issues its formal conditions to a truce - No more rocket fire to Israel for the next 24 hours, a guarantee to stop the arming of Hamas and move of weapons to the strip which all factions within the Gaza strip and Egypt will uphold. If the truce is honored then the negotiations can continue. At this point the IDF air-force has run out of 'safe' targets to hit with minimal chances of hurting civies. For the last two days (day and a half) they have been also targeting Hamas brass and smuggling tunnels in the Egyptian border.
Good to hear. Most outside commentators have stated that while retaliatory missile strikes and artillery fire are acceptable to some, an actual ground invasion of Gaza would not be within Israel's strategic and diplomatic interests.
TheIronRuler: Iron dome isn't a 100% percent effective. Those three dead in Israel didn't die out of a heart attack caused by excitement when they saw it at work. Hamas missiles fly through and still strike Israeli civies. About 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 get through its defenses. Those sirens too demand people drop everything they're doing and run to cover. That journalist is an idiot for risking her life during the siren. Just wait for a minute, damn it.
Still, though, if you're a military tech fetishish (such as myself), you looked at those Iron Dome interceptions like they were the world's best porn...
TheIronRuler: NEW-UPDATE: The 'peace' talks are getting somewhere - finally Israel responds and issues its formal conditions to a truce - No more rocket fire to Israel for the next 24 hours, a guarantee to stop the arming of Hamas and move of weapons to the strip which all factions within the Gaza strip and Egypt will uphold. If the truce is honored then the negotiations can continue. At this point the IDF air-force has run out of 'safe' targets to hit with minimal chances of hurting civies. For the last two days (day and a half) they have been also targeting Hamas brass and smuggling tunnels in the Egyptian border.
Good to hear. Most outside commentators have stated that while retaliatory missile strikes and artillery fire are acceptable to some, an actual ground invasion of Gaza would not be within Israel's strategic and diplomatic interests.
. You should get to know Nautilus. A better version of this could stand to replace/stand next to Iron Dome in the years to come.
Israel failed in uprooting Hamas last time. A ground invasion won't help it, which is why they're now systematically killing off Al-Qassam brigades brass.
Because Israel cares about its civilians, it's in the wrong? In a war, you first care about your civilians, then about your soldiers, then about the enemy's civilians.
Because it has less dead Israel is wrong in what its doing? Hamas itself proved to us that it values Israeli lives a thousand times more than the lives of their fellow Palestinians.
You can't have a relationship of acknowledge Hamas as it is a terrorist organization out to destroy Israel. If you can get that into your head, I don't know if I can continue talking with you - Israel had never talked directly with Hamas. It had always used negotiators from the Egyptian side or another side, (and in the case of the prisoner exchange with Cpl. Shalit a private individual with lots of connections to terrorist organizations). It can't negotiate with it directly because Hamas wishes death to all of Israel and that they will leave this land. It doesn't recognize it as a country, yet Israel needs to recognize this Hamas as a country? Are you even listening to yourself? You're blaming Israel and its people for not lowering their weapons and allowing the enemy to massacre them. First the relationship needs to be normalized, and now Hamas thinks it has the upper hand and won't agree to any of the suggestions made by the truce brokers in Cairo. Hell, they're even talking with Islamic Jihad which is even more extreme than Hamas.
How many rockets are still going over the borders? Hamas has plainly stated they won't stop shooting rockets until Israel stops bombing them. By continuing to bomb them they aren't stopping the rockets they are still coming. Bombing won't stop it soon, it will however increase the tensions your average Palestinian feels towards Israel. How does that help when you know the people near the bombings are just gonna join the effort against Israel, that goes back to my point you have to either get rid of them all or reduce your effort.
It's that kind of attitude that is just asking to be questioned by the Palestinians themselves. But as long as more people are getting killed over Palestine border will they ever realize it? I doubt it.
So Hamas is the controlling political party correct? Basically you want relations to be normalized without them. So either kill all of Hamas, which won't happen easily as I'm sure you know, or find a way to piece.
"Hell, they're even talking with Islamic Jihad which is even more extreme than Hamas."
Using your words, assuming this is Israel your talking about and not Cairo, Israel is trying to negotiate with more extreme elements than Hamas, but won't talk to Hamas. Hamas the less extreme party that has ruling power Palestine. You understand why this doesn't make any sense right? Why bother talking to these other groups when Hamas holds the keys to power AND they are less extreme using your words. What does Hamas want? To be recognized as the governing party in Palestine. I'm not saying Israel should lower it's weapons just act in a more subdued manner, I mean what did assassinating that Hamas leader accomplish... Israel has more rockets coming their way and most likely more terrorist attacks at some point.
As long as Israel and Hamas keep talking past each other like the other doesn't exist there will be a problem, it's not like there is some imaginary hand throwing bombs at each other.
neonit: I still do not see why you consider shelling densely populated areas with wp shells to be something to be even considered.
The fault here lies with Hamas and their tactics, and not with Israel. This aerial photo shows what they do. THey intentionally place launchers in populated, residential areas. They frequently store and create weapons in factories hidden in schools, hospitals and mosques. By firing rockets aimed at murdering Israeli civilians, the IDF are often forced to retaliate. However, they have gone to unsurpassed efforts to protect civilians in the war zone by dropping leaflets by air and making tens of thousands of phone calls to warn them to leave the area.
Hamas use their civilian population as they know it gives the IDF pause. However rockets being fired into Israel paint the palce a military target despite whatever its other use was. This frequently means homes and schools get destroyed, people are hurt or killed and the propaganda machine says "Israel destroyed our homes".
Hamas tactics: Spokseman says it's what the civvies are there for - Clicky Terrorist calls children to help him leave a house - Clicky New report about this topic - Clicky The efforts the IDF goes to to prevent harm to civilians - Clicky Report to the UN about the IDF efforts in this regard - Clicky
Agema: Either way, the continued settlement (particularly the eating away at Palestinian East Jerusalem) I think is a serious problem for three reasons. It's a major source of aggravation, injurious to Israel's global reputation by making the occupation look like modern colonialism and land-grabbing, and increasingly reduces the viability of a potential Palestinian state.
The settlements aren't really the issue here. They are not the reason for this battle and can be observably seen to have very little impact on the reason for the fighting. Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005. They removed every home, military building, citizen and military personnel, everything. However instead of helping pave the road to peace, Hamas seized control in 2007 (with no sign of allowing another election any time soon) and the rocket and suicide attacks increased. If Israeli settlements was such an issue, why then did the attacks not decrease following the withdrawal? The reason for the war is the same as it ever has been.
Hamas is a terrorist organization that has waged war for decades to destroy Israel. Hamas, an Iranian proxy, is a terrorist group whose founding charter calls for murdering Jews, "obliterating" Israel, and replacing it with an Islamist theocracy. How do you compromise or find peace when the founding ideology behind the enemy is your complete annihalation?
Because Israel cares about its civilians, it's in the wrong? In a war, you first care about your civilians, then about your soldiers, then about the enemy's civilians.
Because it has less dead Israel is wrong in what its doing? Hamas itself proved to us that it values Israeli lives a thousand times more than the lives of their fellow Palestinians.
You can't have a relationship of acknowledge Hamas as it is a terrorist organization out to destroy Israel. If you can get that into your head, I don't know if I can continue talking with you - Israel had never talked directly with Hamas. It had always used negotiators from the Egyptian side or another side, (and in the case of the prisoner exchange with Cpl. Shalit a private individual with lots of connections to terrorist organizations). It can't negotiate with it directly because Hamas wishes death to all of Israel and that they will leave this land. It doesn't recognize it as a country, yet Israel needs to recognize this Hamas as a country? Are you even listening to yourself? You're blaming Israel and its people for not lowering their weapons and allowing the enemy to massacre them. First the relationship needs to be normalized, and now Hamas thinks it has the upper hand and won't agree to any of the suggestions made by the truce brokers in Cairo. Hell, they're even talking with Islamic Jihad which is even more extreme than Hamas.
How many rockets are still going over the borders? Hamas has plainly stated they won't stop shooting rockets until Israel stops bombing them. By continuing to bomb them they aren't stopping the rockets they are still coming. Bombing won't stop it soon, it will however increase the tensions your average Palestinian feels towards Israel. How does that help when you know the people near the bombings are just gonna join the effort against Israel, that goes back to my point you have to either get rid of them all or reduce your effort.
It's that kind of attitude that is just asking to be questioned by the Palestinians themselves. But as long as more people are getting killed over Palestine border will they ever realize it? I doubt it.
So Hamas is the controlling political party correct? Basically you want relations to be normalized without them. So either kill all of Hamas, which won't happen easily as I'm sure you know, or find a way to piece.
"Hell, they're even talking with Islamic Jihad which is even more extreme than Hamas."
Using your words, assuming this is Israel your talking about and not Cairo, Israel is trying to negotiate with more extreme elements than Hamas, but won't talk to Hamas. Hamas the less extreme party that has ruling power Palestine. You understand why this doesn't make any sense right? Why bother talking to these other groups when Hamas holds the keys to power AND they are less extreme using your words. What does Hamas want? To be recognized as the governing party in Palestine. I'm not saying Israel should lower it's weapons just act in a more subdued manner, I mean what did assassinating that Hamas leader accomplish... Israel has more rockets coming their way and most likely more terrorist attacks at some point.
As long as Israel and Hamas keep talking past each other like the other doesn't exist there will be a problem, it's not like there is some imaginary hand throwing bombs at each other.
. Today the number of rockets fired at Israel plummeted to a few dozens, unlike the three hundred and more it was a few days ago. A lot of their military capabilities were hit, and now Egypt&friends are trying to convince them to give up and go into negotiations.
Israel isn't talking with Hamas or Islamic Jihad. It can't negotiate with them because of their status. Had you listened and not assumed that Israel is always evil you would have known that it was not Israel who talked with World Jihad. It's negotiations done between Egypt(&Turkey&Qatar) and Hamas in Gaza. That organization has the same military capabilities - if not more, than Hamas itself. It's more extreme than Hamas and it really doesn't give a damn about the civilian casualties. It's literally a proxy of Iran working in Gaza strip.
I wrote THIS:
You can't have a relationship of acknowledge Hamas as it is a terrorist organization out to destroy Israel. If you can get that into your head, I don't know if I can continue talking with you - Israel had never talked directly with Hamas. It had always used negotiators from the Egyptian side or another side, (and in the case of the prisoner exchange with Cpl. Shalit a private individual with lots of connections to terrorist organizations). It can't negotiate with it directly because Hamas wishes death to all of Israel and that they will leave this land.
I'm amazed, AMAZED, that you wrote this paragraph..
Using your words, assuming this is Israel your talking about and not Cairo,Israel is trying to negotiate with more extreme elements than Hamas, but won't talk to Hamas. Hamas the less extreme party that has ruling power Palestine. You understand why this doesn't make any sense right?
Do you understand why this doesn't make any sense? Do you? Did you stop for a moment and think - 'Hmm, this doesn't make any sense... Oh wait! Israel is the problem here, so this must be true!".
Why bother talking to these other groups when Hamas holds the keys to power AND they are less extreme using your words. What does Hamas want? To be recognized as the governing party in Palestine.
Hamas wants the destruction of the Zionist occupiers and the liberation of Palestine.
I'm not saying Israel should lower it's weapons just act in a more subdued manner, I mean what did assassinating that Hamas leader accomplish... Israel has more rockets coming their way and most likely more terrorist attacks at some point.
As long as Israel and Hamas keep talking past each other like the other doesn't exist there will be a problem, it's not like there is some imaginary hand throwing bombs at each other.
What the fuck? Really? How could you be reading what I wrote to you and come up with this? I mean... WOW. How could you have come to that ludicrous conclusion that I have no idea HOW MANY leaps of logic you took?
I..I..I need to calm down. Really, I really do need to relax. This conversation is tiring me. Are you even trying here? I am seriously trying here, and you're repeating the same two arguments again and again. 'Israel should be the better man' , 'It's Israel's fault for the Hamas existing and hating it'. Well no shit Sherlock, of course it's responsible for Hamas because it exists according to the freaking charter of Hamas itself.
So you could say that i am being met with propaganda. Which is funny because i am in no way a part of this conflict. Why would i be met with propaganda?
But then lets look at Israel and Palestine. They are both sides in this conflict. It is only logical that people in those countries would have more propaganda put in front of their faces.
That means that, chances are - you are met with even more propaganda then I.
I live in the Netherlands, a country that is pro-Israel, so dont tell me that i hear a lot about it because "the world is against it". I hear a lot about it because it does shitload of questionable things. Like USA, even more so.
I still do not see why you consider shelling densely populated areas with wp shells to be something to be even considered. You say that i have no idea about military significance of this action. You are right. That is my point, I do not. Neither do the civilians who get to see this. Then along comes some terrorist organisation that says that it is "because Israel hates us and want us to be destroyed". In a way, Israel military is not only making propaganda posters for them, they are hanging them around the whole area.