|
On November 16 2012 00:39 Finrod1 wrote:
this thread is a good demonstration that the majority of the people are antisemtic. Nobody would name the headline; "USA bombs pakistan and kills al-Qaida leader".
Hamas/fatah declined so so many offers for a peacefull solution. They want to be seen as the ultimate victims in the world, and its working.
Actually, most of the headlines about the drone strikes have pretty much the same headline. Maybe an "assassinate" in there too.
|
On November 16 2012 01:12 Op wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:03 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 16 2012 01:00 Equity213 wrote:On November 16 2012 00:53 Op wrote:On November 16 2012 00:46 Gorsameth wrote:On November 16 2012 00:33 Op wrote:On November 16 2012 00:30 AttackZerg wrote:On November 16 2012 00:26 Op wrote:On November 16 2012 00:24 AttackZerg wrote:On November 16 2012 00:18 Feartheguru wrote:
[quote]
If the Hamas stops shooting rockets, Israel stops launching airstrikes. If Israel stops launching airstrikes, does Hamas stop shooting rockets? Unfortunately, looking for logical causation in this issue you will find none. Hamas is fighting a war for what they perceive to be their land. Backed with the tenets of adulterated faith and the compelling motivation of generations of revenge, then add in the conditions of squalor of Palestinian territories and the influence of outside organizations and you have a war the is 'lost' if peace is achieved. It is a total mindfuck. This is why they need some kind of outside intervention to help them come to a solution so the people can live & prosper in peace despite of their current leaders/hatred Outside intervention sounds good in theory, it really does and for a long time I shared this belief. This situation was created by outside intervention. There is no respectable outside agency capable of intervening. The money of the world backs Israel and the shadow organizations back Hamas. If peace is got for some, it leads to war for different reasons by others. You cannot apply logic to this problem. Unfortunately I am very afraid you're right, in the end the interest for peace is not big enough for those in power.. But what else ? I dont really believe Hamas has a vested interest in war. its just that when someone occupies your land and drives you from your homes you have very few reasons to stop fighting while they remain. Of course they think they are rightfully defending their land, but the other side also thinks they fight rightfully. Im genuinely asking, isnt Isreals claim to the land the fact that its written in their holy book, while the palestinian claim is that they have lived there for centurys? Yes. But the Palestinian claim goes further. You see, they claim that it is written in their Holy Book that it is their home. And the Israeli claim goes even further by saying that they lived there before the Palestinians. Nice, huh? I am not sure there is video material or other proof on whether the first person to put foot on the ground currently known as Jerusalem was an isreali or a palestinian, and even more unlikely (s)he identified as being one of those two......
To be honest it doesn't even matter now, its a justification used as propaganda in the war, nothing more.
|
On November 16 2012 00:44 silynxer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote:
There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel. This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation.
But it's not going to change in the short-term evidently, so if Hamas really wants the best for its people, why is it not trying to come to a compromise, or at the very least STOP ISRAELI RETALIATION STRIKES by not firing those damned rockets that aren't even hitting a thing?
Like I said, the incomparable suffering is TO THE CREDIT of Israel whom manages to protect its civilians with superior technology, while the continued suffering of civilians is in fact DUE TO THE ACTIONS of Hamas militants. (Note: I'm keeping the settlement issue separate, I do not agree with that at all). Think about it this way, if Israel did not have the required technology, and there were EQUAL casualties and suffering on both sides, is that not an even higher toll of human lives? I would rather the situation remain right now as it is than for there to be more human lives lost. This is being unfair to the Palestinians, but STILL.
I fault the militants as much as Israel, if not more, for the suffering of Palestinian civilians. If they had just a little bit of foresight, they would know to cut their damned losses before it gets even worse. What's worse is that they use human shields, taking cover in densely populated areas. At least the Vietcong guerrilla tactics were deployed in uninhabited jungles. When they devalue their own civilians' lives like that, I find it really hard to side with them. At least I respect how much the Israelis value their own people, like Gilad Shalit. If you're already being oppressed and yet still can't stand up for your own people, using them as shields or to generate propaganda.... sigh.
I don't believe that Israel should keep quiet even if rockets are raining down, even if most are being intercepted. It's still detrimental to their daily lives, the constant scurrying for bomb shelters and lack of rest. It isn't about being the bigger man when you can't just shrug off the attacks. Sure, Israel could do it. But are they obligated, even morally obligated to? I would think that's a resounding no.
But then again, the Palestinian people themselves seem to be in support of Hamas strikes. UGH.
EDIT: SP
|
On November 16 2012 01:11 Art.FeeL wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:00 Equity213 wrote:On November 16 2012 00:53 Op wrote:On November 16 2012 00:46 Gorsameth wrote:On November 16 2012 00:33 Op wrote:On November 16 2012 00:30 AttackZerg wrote:On November 16 2012 00:26 Op wrote:On November 16 2012 00:24 AttackZerg wrote:On November 16 2012 00:18 Feartheguru wrote:On November 16 2012 00:06 Jockmcplop wrote:
[quote]
You're both proving a point different to the ones you are trying to make.
Hamas shoots rockets. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. hamas shoots rockets in revenge. Israel launches airstrike in revenge. Hamas shoots rockets in revenge.
That's how it goes. If the Hamas stops shooting rockets, Israel stops launching airstrikes. If Israel stops launching airstrikes, does Hamas stop shooting rockets? Unfortunately, looking for logical causation in this issue you will find none. Hamas is fighting a war for what they perceive to be their land. Backed with the tenets of adulterated faith and the compelling motivation of generations of revenge, then add in the conditions of squalor of Palestinian territories and the influence of outside organizations and you have a war the is 'lost' if peace is achieved. It is a total mindfuck. This is why they need some kind of outside intervention to help them come to a solution so the people can live & prosper in peace despite of their current leaders/hatred Outside intervention sounds good in theory, it really does and for a long time I shared this belief. This situation was created by outside intervention. There is no respectable outside agency capable of intervening. The money of the world backs Israel and the shadow organizations back Hamas. If peace is got for some, it leads to war for different reasons by others. You cannot apply logic to this problem. Unfortunately I am very afraid you're right, in the end the interest for peace is not big enough for those in power.. But what else ? I dont really believe Hamas has a vested interest in war. its just that when someone occupies your land and drives you from your homes you have very few reasons to stop fighting while they remain. Of course they think they are rightfully defending their land, but the other side also thinks they fight rightfully. Im genuinely asking, isnt Isreals claim to the land the fact that its written in their holy book, while the palestinian claim is that they have lived there for centurys? Jews and Palestinians have been living together for centuries in that area. The problem started with the Balfour Declaration by which Jews gained a country.
Balfour declaration (wikipedia):
"His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
Interesting fact: At first the british proposed Uganda to the jewish community.
|
First of all the title of this article should be "kills Hamas leader" and not what it is as this was a targeted assassination and not a bombing, despite what OP is trying to make it look like.
The main thing that led to this was a huge increase in rocket attacks in the 2 days prior (around 120). Now the main reason that Hamas were doing this was to test Israels limits as the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt is a lot more anti Israel.
However it was still quite dumb as not only would no government accept such a massive assault on civilians but the elections are coming up so they wouldn't just stop at bombing a few weapon depots and went for their military chief.
Edit: it worth pointing out that tension has been rising over the past few weeks mostly from rockets fired by the smaller groups (Islamic jihad etc.) however Hamas didn't prevent it and as far as the Israeli government a few rockets fired by these smaller groups would be tolerable but they went way to far.
|
On November 16 2012 01:18 fluidin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 00:44 silynxer wrote:On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote:
There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel. This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation. But it's not going to change in the short-term evidently, so if Hamas really wants the best for its people, why is it not trying to come to a compromise, or at the very least STOP ISRAELI RETALIATION STRIKES by not firing those damned rockets that aren't even hitting a thing? Like I said, the incomparable suffering is TO THE CREDIT of Israel whom manages to protect its civilians with superior technology, while the continued suffering of civilians is in fact DUE TO THE ACTIONS of Hamas militants. (Note: I'm keeping the settlement issue separate, I do not agree with that at all). Think about it this way, if Israel did not have the required technology, and there were EQUAL casualties and suffering on both sides, is that not an even higher toll of human lives? I would rather the situation remain right now as it is than for there to be more human lives lost. This is being unfair to the Palestinians, but STILL. I fault the militants as much as Israel, if not more, for the suffering of Palestinian civilians. If they had just a little bit of foresight, they would know to cut their damned losses before it gets even worse. What's worse is that they use human shields, taking cover in densely populated areas. At least the Vietcong guerrilla tactics were deployed in inhabited jungles. When they devalue their own civilians' lives like that, I find it really hard to side with them. At least I respect how much the Israelis value their own people, like Gilad Shalit. If you're already being oppressed and yet still can't stand up for your own people, using them as shields or to generate propaganda.... sigh. I don't believe that Israel should keep quiet even if rockets are raining down, even if most are being intercepted. It's still detrimental to their daily lives, the constant scurrying for bomb shelters and lack of rest. It isn't about being the bigger man when you can't just shrug off the attacks. Sure, Israel could do it. But are they obligated, even morally obligated to? I would think that's a resounding no. But then again, the Palestinian people themselves seem to be in support of Hamas strikes. UGH.
Its easy to say that Hamas should stop so that the Palestinian people can get on with there lives but when your living in a land under foreign occupation it really changes how you look at things.
Just look at Europe in the second world war. A lot of people were trying to get on with there lives but a good part also did everything they could to stop/disrupt the German occupation and that was with an invader who didnt seek to replace your own population with there own.
|
On November 16 2012 01:18 fluidin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 00:44 silynxer wrote:On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote:
There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel. This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation. But it's not going to change in the short-term evidently, so if Hamas really wants the best for its people, why is it not trying to come to a compromise, or at the very least STOP ISRAELI RETALIATION STRIKES by not firing those damned rockets that aren't even hitting a thing? Like I said, the incomparable suffering is TO THE CREDIT of Israel whom manages to protect its civilians with superior technology, while the continued suffering of civilians is in fact DUE TO THE ACTIONS of Hamas militants. (Note: I'm keeping the settlement issue separate, I do not agree with that at all). Think about it this way, if Israel did not have the required technology, and there were EQUAL casualties and suffering on both sides, is that not an even higher toll of human lives? I would rather the situation remain right now as it is than for there to be more human lives lost. This is being unfair to the Palestinians, but STILL. I fault the militants as much as Israel, if not more, for the suffering of Palestinian civilians. If they had just a little bit of foresight, they would know to cut their damned losses before it gets even worse. What's worse is that they use human shields, taking cover in densely populated areas. At least the Vietcong guerrilla tactics were deployed in inhabited jungles. When they devalue their own civilians' lives like that, I find it really hard to side with them. At least I respect how much the Israelis value their own people, like Gilad Shalit. If you're already being oppressed and yet still can't stand up for your own people, using them as shields or to generate propaganda.... sigh. I don't believe that Israel should keep quiet even if rockets are raining down, even if most are being intercepted. It's still detrimental to their daily lives, the constant scurrying for bomb shelters and lack of rest. It isn't about being the bigger man when you can't just shrug off the attacks. Sure, Israel could do it. But are they obligated, even morally obligated to? I would think that's a resounding no. But then again, the Palestinian people themselves seem to be in support of Hamas strikes. UGH.
You did not read about how the 2008 ceasefire came to an end, right? Israel sets impossible to achieve standards for peace with the Hamas.
|
On November 16 2012 01:23 Goozen wrote:
First of all the title of this article should be "kills Hamas leader" and not what it is as this was a targeted assassination and not a bombing, despite what OP is trying to make it look like.
The main thing that led to this was a huge increase in rocket attacks in the 2 days prior (around 120). Now the main reason that Hamas were doing this was to test Israels limits as the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt is a lot more anti Israel.
However it was still quite dumb as not only would no government accept such a massive assault on civilians but the elections are coming up so they wouldn't just stop at bombing a few weapon depots and went for their military chief.
Okay, if this was a targeted assassination then your military is a joke. Dropping bombs at multiple locations across a major city is not a targeted assassination, it is precision guided bombing. An assassination did take place, but he was in a car, he was not in the houses and buildings that have been bombed.
It is okay to believe your country is in the right, that is none of my business but do not spread this propaganda shit, when the clear facts dispute your claim.
|
On November 16 2012 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:18 fluidin wrote:On November 16 2012 00:44 silynxer wrote:On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote:
There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel. This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation. But it's not going to change in the short-term evidently, so if Hamas really wants the best for its people, why is it not trying to come to a compromise, or at the very least STOP ISRAELI RETALIATION STRIKES by not firing those damned rockets that aren't even hitting a thing? Like I said, the incomparable suffering is TO THE CREDIT of Israel whom manages to protect its civilians with superior technology, while the continued suffering of civilians is in fact DUE TO THE ACTIONS of Hamas militants. (Note: I'm keeping the settlement issue separate, I do not agree with that at all). Think about it this way, if Israel did not have the required technology, and there were EQUAL casualties and suffering on both sides, is that not an even higher toll of human lives? I would rather the situation remain right now as it is than for there to be more human lives lost. This is being unfair to the Palestinians, but STILL. I fault the militants as much as Israel, if not more, for the suffering of Palestinian civilians. If they had just a little bit of foresight, they would know to cut their damned losses before it gets even worse. What's worse is that they use human shields, taking cover in densely populated areas. At least the Vietcong guerrilla tactics were deployed in inhabited jungles. When they devalue their own civilians' lives like that, I find it really hard to side with them. At least I respect how much the Israelis value their own people, like Gilad Shalit. If you're already being oppressed and yet still can't stand up for your own people, using them as shields or to generate propaganda.... sigh. I don't believe that Israel should keep quiet even if rockets are raining down, even if most are being intercepted. It's still detrimental to their daily lives, the constant scurrying for bomb shelters and lack of rest. It isn't about being the bigger man when you can't just shrug off the attacks. Sure, Israel could do it. But are they obligated, even morally obligated to? I would think that's a resounding no. But then again, the Palestinian people themselves seem to be in support of Hamas strikes. UGH. Its easy to say that Hamas should stop so that the Palestinian people can get on with there lives but when your living in a land under foreign occupation it really changes how you look at things. Just look at Europe in the second world war. A lot of people were trying to get on with there lives but a good part also did everything they could to stop/disrupt the German occupation and that was with an invader who didnt seek to replace your own population with there own.
First of all, since the Israeli withdrawal there is no occupation of land around Gaza. Secondly, firing rockets in to a civilian populace wont accomplish "disruption" only terrorizing the population.
|
|
|
On November 16 2012 01:30 AttackZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:23 Goozen wrote:
First of all the title of this article should be "kills Hamas leader" and not what it is as this was a targeted assassination and not a bombing, despite what OP is trying to make it look like.
The main thing that led to this was a huge increase in rocket attacks in the 2 days prior (around 120). Now the main reason that Hamas were doing this was to test Israels limits as the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt is a lot more anti Israel.
However it was still quite dumb as not only would no government accept such a massive assault on civilians but the elections are coming up so they wouldn't just stop at bombing a few weapon depots and went for their military chief. Okay, if this was a targeted assassination then your military is a joke. Dropping bombs at multiple locations across a major city is not a targeted assassination, it is precision guided bombing. An assassination did take place, but he was in a car, he was not in the houses and buildings that have been bombed. It is okay to believe your country is in the right, that is none of my business but do not spread this propaganda shit, when the clear facts dispute your claim.
The bombing was of ammunition depots in civilian areas. If you want some numbers, the army has bombed 227 targets in Gaza and so far killed 3 civilians, the rest were militants. So yes that is pretty precise.
|
On November 16 2012 01:32 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:On November 16 2012 01:18 fluidin wrote:On November 16 2012 00:44 silynxer wrote:On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote:
There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel. This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation. But it's not going to change in the short-term evidently, so if Hamas really wants the best for its people, why is it not trying to come to a compromise, or at the very least STOP ISRAELI RETALIATION STRIKES by not firing those damned rockets that aren't even hitting a thing? Like I said, the incomparable suffering is TO THE CREDIT of Israel whom manages to protect its civilians with superior technology, while the continued suffering of civilians is in fact DUE TO THE ACTIONS of Hamas militants. (Note: I'm keeping the settlement issue separate, I do not agree with that at all). Think about it this way, if Israel did not have the required technology, and there were EQUAL casualties and suffering on both sides, is that not an even higher toll of human lives? I would rather the situation remain right now as it is than for there to be more human lives lost. This is being unfair to the Palestinians, but STILL. I fault the militants as much as Israel, if not more, for the suffering of Palestinian civilians. If they had just a little bit of foresight, they would know to cut their damned losses before it gets even worse. What's worse is that they use human shields, taking cover in densely populated areas. At least the Vietcong guerrilla tactics were deployed in inhabited jungles. When they devalue their own civilians' lives like that, I find it really hard to side with them. At least I respect how much the Israelis value their own people, like Gilad Shalit. If you're already being oppressed and yet still can't stand up for your own people, using them as shields or to generate propaganda.... sigh. I don't believe that Israel should keep quiet even if rockets are raining down, even if most are being intercepted. It's still detrimental to their daily lives, the constant scurrying for bomb shelters and lack of rest. It isn't about being the bigger man when you can't just shrug off the attacks. Sure, Israel could do it. But are they obligated, even morally obligated to? I would think that's a resounding no. But then again, the Palestinian people themselves seem to be in support of Hamas strikes. UGH. Its easy to say that Hamas should stop so that the Palestinian people can get on with there lives but when your living in a land under foreign occupation it really changes how you look at things. Just look at Europe in the second world war. A lot of people were trying to get on with there lives but a good part also did everything they could to stop/disrupt the German occupation and that was with an invader who didnt seek to replace your own population with there own. First of all, since the Israeli withdrawal there is no occupation of land around Gaza. Secondly, firing rockets in to a civilian populace wont accomplish "disruption" only terrorizing the population.
You realize that the very house your sitting in can technically be considered Palestinian land right?
Not saying the resolution of this conflict lies in that but that is the way it is seen by a lot of Palestinians.
|
|
|
Not only is that not a reliable source (not the paper but their source), but you are forgetting that this was after the 120 rockets they fired so they were getting nervous about retaliation.
|
On November 16 2012 01:34 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:30 AttackZerg wrote:On November 16 2012 01:23 Goozen wrote:
First of all the title of this article should be "kills Hamas leader" and not what it is as this was a targeted assassination and not a bombing, despite what OP is trying to make it look like.
The main thing that led to this was a huge increase in rocket attacks in the 2 days prior (around 120). Now the main reason that Hamas were doing this was to test Israels limits as the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt is a lot more anti Israel.
However it was still quite dumb as not only would no government accept such a massive assault on civilians but the elections are coming up so they wouldn't just stop at bombing a few weapon depots and went for their military chief. Okay, if this was a targeted assassination then your military is a joke. Dropping bombs at multiple locations across a major city is not a targeted assassination, it is precision guided bombing. An assassination did take place, but he was in a car, he was not in the houses and buildings that have been bombed. It is okay to believe your country is in the right, that is none of my business but do not spread this propaganda shit, when the clear facts dispute your claim. The bombing was of ammunition depots in civilian areas. If you want some numbers, the army has bombed 227 targets in Gaza and so far killed 3 civilians, the rest were militants. So yes that is pretty precise.
Where did you get these numbers?
Because i could give you some numbers too, it doesn't make them true.
|
On November 16 2012 01:27 silynxer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:18 fluidin wrote:On November 16 2012 00:44 silynxer wrote:On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote:
There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel. This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation. But it's not going to change in the short-term evidently, so if Hamas really wants the best for its people, why is it not trying to come to a compromise, or at the very least STOP ISRAELI RETALIATION STRIKES by not firing those damned rockets that aren't even hitting a thing? Like I said, the incomparable suffering is TO THE CREDIT of Israel whom manages to protect its civilians with superior technology, while the continued suffering of civilians is in fact DUE TO THE ACTIONS of Hamas militants. (Note: I'm keeping the settlement issue separate, I do not agree with that at all). Think about it this way, if Israel did not have the required technology, and there were EQUAL casualties and suffering on both sides, is that not an even higher toll of human lives? I would rather the situation remain right now as it is than for there to be more human lives lost. This is being unfair to the Palestinians, but STILL. I fault the militants as much as Israel, if not more, for the suffering of Palestinian civilians. If they had just a little bit of foresight, they would know to cut their damned losses before it gets even worse. What's worse is that they use human shields, taking cover in densely populated areas. At least the Vietcong guerrilla tactics were deployed in inhabited jungles. When they devalue their own civilians' lives like that, I find it really hard to side with them. At least I respect how much the Israelis value their own people, like Gilad Shalit. If you're already being oppressed and yet still can't stand up for your own people, using them as shields or to generate propaganda.... sigh. I don't believe that Israel should keep quiet even if rockets are raining down, even if most are being intercepted. It's still detrimental to their daily lives, the constant scurrying for bomb shelters and lack of rest. It isn't about being the bigger man when you can't just shrug off the attacks. Sure, Israel could do it. But are they obligated, even morally obligated to? I would think that's a resounding no. But then again, the Palestinian people themselves seem to be in support of Hamas strikes. UGH. You did not read about how the 2008 ceasefire came to an end, right? Israel sets impossible to achieve standards for peace with the Hamas.
I wouldn't say impossible, but yeah, Israel screwed up on that one.
Still, I should think even if Hamas wants to 'attack' they should be looking at other avenues, and one of them would be to depict themselves as severe victims and appeal to the international community to pressure Israel WHILE NOT firing rockets into Israel and thus causing the death of more civilians while also depicting themselves in an unfavorable light to potential allies in the international community.
If the militants were smarter they would already have done that. Look at Israel, now they're using social media to relive international pressure on their actions. Would be good for Hamas to learn a thing or two from that. Beats using your own damned people as human shields, eh?
|
On November 16 2012 01:34 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:30 AttackZerg wrote:On November 16 2012 01:23 Goozen wrote:
First of all the title of this article should be "kills Hamas leader" and not what it is as this was a targeted assassination and not a bombing, despite what OP is trying to make it look like.
The main thing that led to this was a huge increase in rocket attacks in the 2 days prior (around 120). Now the main reason that Hamas were doing this was to test Israels limits as the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt is a lot more anti Israel.
However it was still quite dumb as not only would no government accept such a massive assault on civilians but the elections are coming up so they wouldn't just stop at bombing a few weapon depots and went for their military chief. Okay, if this was a targeted assassination then your military is a joke. Dropping bombs at multiple locations across a major city is not a targeted assassination, it is precision guided bombing. An assassination did take place, but he was in a car, he was not in the houses and buildings that have been bombed. It is okay to believe your country is in the right, that is none of my business but do not spread this propaganda shit, when the clear facts dispute your claim. The bombing was of ammunition depots in civilian areas. If you want some numbers, the army has bombed 227 targets in Gaza and so far killed 3 civilians, the rest were militants. So yes that is pretty precise.
The Israeli bomb-strikes killed the baby of BBC cameraman. Precise or not, it was a bombing. There is nothing biased or sensational about the thread title. Stop.
|
On November 16 2012 01:38 fluidin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:27 silynxer wrote:On November 16 2012 01:18 fluidin wrote:On November 16 2012 00:44 silynxer wrote:On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote:
There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel. This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation. But it's not going to change in the short-term evidently, so if Hamas really wants the best for its people, why is it not trying to come to a compromise, or at the very least STOP ISRAELI RETALIATION STRIKES by not firing those damned rockets that aren't even hitting a thing? Like I said, the incomparable suffering is TO THE CREDIT of Israel whom manages to protect its civilians with superior technology, while the continued suffering of civilians is in fact DUE TO THE ACTIONS of Hamas militants. (Note: I'm keeping the settlement issue separate, I do not agree with that at all). Think about it this way, if Israel did not have the required technology, and there were EQUAL casualties and suffering on both sides, is that not an even higher toll of human lives? I would rather the situation remain right now as it is than for there to be more human lives lost. This is being unfair to the Palestinians, but STILL. I fault the militants as much as Israel, if not more, for the suffering of Palestinian civilians. If they had just a little bit of foresight, they would know to cut their damned losses before it gets even worse. What's worse is that they use human shields, taking cover in densely populated areas. At least the Vietcong guerrilla tactics were deployed in inhabited jungles. When they devalue their own civilians' lives like that, I find it really hard to side with them. At least I respect how much the Israelis value their own people, like Gilad Shalit. If you're already being oppressed and yet still can't stand up for your own people, using them as shields or to generate propaganda.... sigh. I don't believe that Israel should keep quiet even if rockets are raining down, even if most are being intercepted. It's still detrimental to their daily lives, the constant scurrying for bomb shelters and lack of rest. It isn't about being the bigger man when you can't just shrug off the attacks. Sure, Israel could do it. But are they obligated, even morally obligated to? I would think that's a resounding no. But then again, the Palestinian people themselves seem to be in support of Hamas strikes. UGH. You did not read about how the 2008 ceasefire came to an end, right? Israel sets impossible to achieve standards for peace with the Hamas. I wouldn't say impossible, but yeah, Israel screwed up on that one. Still, I should think even if Hamas wants to 'attack' they should be looking at other avenues, and one of them would be to depict themselves as severe victims and appeal to the international community to pressure Israel WHILE NOT firing rockets into Israel and thus causing the death of more civilians while also depicting themselves in an unfavorable light to potential allies in the international community. If the militants were smarter they would already have done that. Look at Israel, now they're using social media to relive international pressure on their actions. Would be good for Hamas to learn a thing or two from that.
WW2 guilt stopped that from being ever being an option. Look for some of the more "severe" things Israel has done in the past while still retaining 100% backing of the international community.
|
On November 16 2012 01:35 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:32 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 01:24 Gorsameth wrote:On November 16 2012 01:18 fluidin wrote:On November 16 2012 00:44 silynxer wrote:On November 16 2012 00:37 Zandar wrote:
There is a thing I don't understand, I guess I should add that I'm someone who thinks both parties are equally wrong.
Why is there mass media attention when Israel fires a rocket, while there are often rockets going from gaza towards Israel. This attitude of both parties being equally wrong doesn't hold for me, when the people on one side suffer incomparably more (not only number of killed persons but in every way imaginable) and lack the capacity of changing their situation (again look at the events of 2008, the same holds for you Finrod1), while the other side can at least try to change the situation. But it's not going to change in the short-term evidently, so if Hamas really wants the best for its people, why is it not trying to come to a compromise, or at the very least STOP ISRAELI RETALIATION STRIKES by not firing those damned rockets that aren't even hitting a thing? Like I said, the incomparable suffering is TO THE CREDIT of Israel whom manages to protect its civilians with superior technology, while the continued suffering of civilians is in fact DUE TO THE ACTIONS of Hamas militants. (Note: I'm keeping the settlement issue separate, I do not agree with that at all). Think about it this way, if Israel did not have the required technology, and there were EQUAL casualties and suffering on both sides, is that not an even higher toll of human lives? I would rather the situation remain right now as it is than for there to be more human lives lost. This is being unfair to the Palestinians, but STILL. I fault the militants as much as Israel, if not more, for the suffering of Palestinian civilians. If they had just a little bit of foresight, they would know to cut their damned losses before it gets even worse. What's worse is that they use human shields, taking cover in densely populated areas. At least the Vietcong guerrilla tactics were deployed in inhabited jungles. When they devalue their own civilians' lives like that, I find it really hard to side with them. At least I respect how much the Israelis value their own people, like Gilad Shalit. If you're already being oppressed and yet still can't stand up for your own people, using them as shields or to generate propaganda.... sigh. I don't believe that Israel should keep quiet even if rockets are raining down, even if most are being intercepted. It's still detrimental to their daily lives, the constant scurrying for bomb shelters and lack of rest. It isn't about being the bigger man when you can't just shrug off the attacks. Sure, Israel could do it. But are they obligated, even morally obligated to? I would think that's a resounding no. But then again, the Palestinian people themselves seem to be in support of Hamas strikes. UGH. Its easy to say that Hamas should stop so that the Palestinian people can get on with there lives but when your living in a land under foreign occupation it really changes how you look at things. Just look at Europe in the second world war. A lot of people were trying to get on with there lives but a good part also did everything they could to stop/disrupt the German occupation and that was with an invader who didnt seek to replace your own population with there own. First of all, since the Israeli withdrawal there is no occupation of land around Gaza. Secondly, firing rockets in to a civilian populace wont accomplish "disruption" only terrorizing the population. You realize that the very house your sitting in can technically be considered Palestinian land right? Not saying the resolution of this conflict lies in that but that is the way it is seen by a lot of Palestinians.
And me living is also a offence to people who believe that, but that is irrelevant for this discussion as Hamas have never talked to Israel about peace (we only recognize the PLO) but the rockets Hamas fired would gain them nothing, Its also kind of a dumb mover when Gaza gets their water and electric supply from Israel
|
On November 16 2012 01:37 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 01:34 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 01:30 AttackZerg wrote:On November 16 2012 01:23 Goozen wrote:
First of all the title of this article should be "kills Hamas leader" and not what it is as this was a targeted assassination and not a bombing, despite what OP is trying to make it look like.
The main thing that led to this was a huge increase in rocket attacks in the 2 days prior (around 120). Now the main reason that Hamas were doing this was to test Israels limits as the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt is a lot more anti Israel.
However it was still quite dumb as not only would no government accept such a massive assault on civilians but the elections are coming up so they wouldn't just stop at bombing a few weapon depots and went for their military chief. Okay, if this was a targeted assassination then your military is a joke. Dropping bombs at multiple locations across a major city is not a targeted assassination, it is precision guided bombing. An assassination did take place, but he was in a car, he was not in the houses and buildings that have been bombed. It is okay to believe your country is in the right, that is none of my business but do not spread this propaganda shit, when the clear facts dispute your claim. The bombing was of ammunition depots in civilian areas. If you want some numbers, the army has bombed 227 targets in Gaza and so far killed 3 civilians, the rest were militants. So yes that is pretty precise. Where did you get these numbers? Because i could give you some numbers too, it doesn't make them true.
From the news, not just local.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
