|
On November 16 2012 02:11 Leporello wrote:
If one side of this strife showed genuine prolonged restrain, what would happen? Would they just lose their land and lives while the world watched? Or would their earnest efforts toward peace -- even in the face of violence -- warrant intervention on their behalf?
It's very easy to sit on your couch and philosophy what would happen if Israel would just not respond to attacks. Somehow, the Islamic doctrine of not having infidels on their territory would just go away... People who love death, martyrdom is their greatest achievement - the way to get the 72 virgins in afterlife, people who butcher one another throughout the Arab world without any Israeli involvement (Egypt, Syria, Irak, Afganistan and so on) would magically become peaceful for the first time in their history...
We know history. Never in history this attitude gave results, other than defeat and ultimately destruction of the ones doing it. We tried this on a very wide scale during the Holocaust, during pogroms... Somehow, the nazis didn't become peaceful... Tell me, in school, when there is a gang bullying a small kid who doesn't respond back, the gang stops bullying?
And still Israel tried this. This year more than 800 rockets were fired from Gaza toward Israeli towns. (BTW, people don't seem to recognize how much of a War Crime this is, to fire rockets on towns with no military importance whatsoever). For five days prior to the elimination of the Hamas military chief, there were dozens of rockets fired, with Hamas claiming responsibility (even though there was a truce in effect). For five days, Israel did nothing. How much you would have them wait?
|
On November 16 2012 02:31 Op wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:26 Derez wrote:On November 16 2012 02:23 GoTuNk! wrote:
Some fact check request, not opinions. So has this escalated from the initial atack? Yes. Attacks on Gaza and on Israel have intensified with reports of rockets near Tel Aviv. Most major newspapers are speculating that a ground invasion of Gaza is at least likely. Guardian summary from about 4 hours ago:
• Israeli airstrikes continued in Gaza today following the attack yesterday that killed Hamas’s military chief Ahmed al-Jabari. The attack came after a series of rocket attacks from Gaza into southern Israel over recent days. The Israeli army said 156 targets were hit in Gaza, 126 of them rocket launchers. Thirteen people were killed in Gaza yesterday including a pregnant woman with twins, an 11-month old boy and two infants, with 130 wounded, according to Gaza’s health ministry. A truce was not on the agenda, Israeli military spokeswoman Avital Leibovitz said. Hamas’s leader, Khaled Meshaal, vowed to “continue the resistance”. Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, who rules the West Bank but not Gaza, cut short a European trip to return to the West Bank in response to the crisis.
• Three Israelis were killed by a rocket attack from Gaza, the first Israeli fatalities in the present conflict. The deaths came when a four-storey building was hit in the town of Kiryat Malachi, 15 miles (25km) north of Gaza; a four-year-old boy and two babies were also wounded. Israel said 200 rockets had struck Israel since yesterday, 135 since midnight. Eighteen rockets had been shot down today by Israel’s “iron dome” counter-missile missile system, Israel said. Hamas claimed it had fired a one-tonne rocket at Tel Aviv, but there were no reports of an impact in the city.
• Hamas declared a state of emergency in Gaza and Israel did the same in the country’s south. There were reports Hamas was barring foreigners from leaving.
• Egypt’s president, Mohamed Morsi, called Israel’s attacks on Gaza "unacceptable” and said he stood by the Gazan people. The Muslim Brotherhood, with which Morsi is aligned, called for Egypt to sever diplomatic ties with Israel. Egypt has officially requested a meeting of the UN security council to discuss what it described as Israeli aggression on Gaza, the foreign ministry said. After 33 years of peace, the relationship between Israel and Egypt has cooled since the ousting of dictator Hosni Mubarak and this is the first test of relations between Israel and a semi-democratic Egypt. Qatar, Jordan, Iran and Syria also condemned the Israeli operation.
Side-note: why did the Guardian talk about "semi-democratic" Egypt ? Some specific reason, or they just don't like the result of the democratic elections ?
Because the army is still very powerful in Egypt although it seems their power is getting less.
|
On November 16 2012 02:35 TheFrankOne wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:23 GoTuNk! wrote:
Some fact check request, not opinions. So has this escalated from the initial atack? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20346545+ Show Spoiler +Three Israelis have been killed by rocket fire from Gaza, while 15 Palestinians have been killed in two days of Israeli attacks on Gaza...
Many of the 15 Palestinians killed were members of militant groups, but civilians - including four children - were also among the dead. They included 11-month-old Omar, the son of Jihad Misharawi, a BBC Arabic picture editor Israel has killed more children than the Hamas rocket strikes have killed people.
Please. Do I have to explain Iron Dome & human shield tactics again?
Amount of casualties is irrelevant and misleading. A better indication of aggression would be the targeting and volume of rockets.
|
On November 16 2012 02:42 ECHOZs wrote:Show nested quote +
Both Israel and Hamas had decided months ago not to take action on my proposed ceasefire option, which included within it a mechanism that would prevent Israeli pre-emptive actions and would enable Hamas to prove that it was prepared to prevent terror attacks against Israel. Both sides responded very seriously to the proposal, but without any signal that there was an openness on the other side, neither was willing to advance the possibility for testing it.
Several weeks ago, I decided to try once again and, through my counterpart in Hamas, we both began speaking to high level officials on both sides. A few days ago I met my counterpart in Cairo and we agreed that he would draft a new proposal based on our common understanding of what was required to make it work.
Yesterday morning, hours before Israel assassinated Ahmed Jaabari, my counterpart in Hamas presented the draft to Jaabari and to other Hamas leaders. Senior Hamas leaders on the outside had already seen it and had instructed him to check the reactions to it in Gaza. I was supposed to receive the draft yesterday evening to present to Israeli officials who were waiting for me to send it to them.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/11/15/assassinating-the-chance-for-calm.htmlGreat article by one of the negotiators of the conflict, gives some good insight to how the negotiations were going and where they currently stand. It seems like any chance of peace is over and its going to escalate into Cast Lead II, but hopefully if Egypt's prime minister visits Gaza something productive could occur.
The article makes it seem like he was assassinated out of the blue, had the border not heated up in the past week he would probably still be alive.
|
What Israel should do is re-occupy Gaza with ~100,000 troops or so and annihilate Hamas. There is absolutely no chance for a peace agreement where Palestine becomes an independent, sovereign nation while Hamas exists.
Organizations like Hamas are no different from the Nazi Party or the military leadership of Japan during the 1930s and WWII. The only thing that stops them is the destruction of their physical ability to act. Hamas is never going to try to stop killing Jews. Unless they are physically unable to do so. Israel could fully withdraw from the West Bank tomorrow like it did from Gaza in 2005 - including all settlements - and could give East Jerusalem to the PLO and even agree to a right of return for Palestinian refugees, and Hamas would still try to kill Jews.
Not that the PLO deserves such concessions, as just like Hamas it still wishes to destroy the entire state of Israel and drive the Jews into the sea. Sorry, but your public declarations that you wish to co-exist with Israel make absolutely no sense when your maps label the entire area that is now Israel as "Palestine" and you teach your children that "Palestine" is not just the West Bank and Gaza but the entirety of Israel as well.
Regular Palestinians may want peaceful coexistence, but their leadership - whether it is Hamas, the PLO, Islamic Jihad, the PFLP, whatever - is still intent on the fantasy of taking over the entire country and driving all the Jews out in the process. Until this changes - until Palestinians actually acknowledge Israel's right to exist consistently, until their media is no longer a fever swamp of Der Sturmer-style anti-Semitism, until they lay down their arms, there is absolutely no reason for Israel to engage them on any level but militarily.
|
On November 16 2012 02:43 RezJ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:35 TheFrankOne wrote:On November 16 2012 02:23 GoTuNk! wrote:
Some fact check request, not opinions. So has this escalated from the initial atack? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20346545+ Show Spoiler +Three Israelis have been killed by rocket fire from Gaza, while 15 Palestinians have been killed in two days of Israeli attacks on Gaza...
Many of the 15 Palestinians killed were members of militant groups, but civilians - including four children - were also among the dead. They included 11-month-old Omar, the son of Jihad Misharawi, a BBC Arabic picture editor Israel has killed more children than the Hamas rocket strikes have killed people. Please. Do I have to explain Iron Dome & human shield tactics again? Amount of casualties is irrelevant and misleading. A better indication of aggression would be the targeting and volume of rockets.
Sorry bad post... Emotional subject
|
Israel is a contradiction in many ways. I do not support their hard-line military responses and believe that they could be just as effective covertly. However, we have to remember that they are one of the few true democracies in the region. Women have equal rights, people can criticize the government, homosexuals do not have to fear death or imprisonment and elections are fair. Overall, Israel deserves our support but it should come with harder preconditions.
|
Oh great, this discussion is devolving into senseless **** again.
This conflict, ugh.
(No, I don't think a large scale occupation is advisable at this stage, and no, he wasn't saying the amount of children killed is irrelevant. ZZZ )
|
On November 16 2012 02:45 DeepElemBlues wrote:
What Israel should do is re-occupy Gaza with ~100,000 troops or so and annihilate Hamas. There is absolutely no chance for a peace agreement where Palestine becomes an independent, sovereign nation while Hamas exists.
Organizations like Hamas are no different from the Nazi Party or the military leadership of Japan during the 1930s and WWII. The only thing that stops them is the destruction of their physical ability to act. Hamas is never going to try to stop killing Jews. Unless they are physically unable to do so. Israel could fully withdraw from the West Bank tomorrow like it did from Gaza in 2005 - including all settlements - and could give East Jerusalem to the PLO and even agree to a right of return for Palestinian refugees, and Hamas would still try to kill Jews.
Not that the PLO deserves such concessions, as just like Hamas it still wishes to destroy the entire state of Israel and drive the Jews into the sea. Sorry, but your public declarations that you wish to co-exist with Israel make absolutely no sense when your maps label the entire area that is now Israel as "Palestine" and you teach your children that "Palestine" is not just the West Bank and Gaza but the entirety of Israel as well.
Regular Palestinians may want peaceful coexistence, but their leadership - whether it is Hamas, the PLO, Islamic Jihad, the PFLP, whatever - is still intent on the fantasy of taking over the entire country and driving all the Jews out in the process. Until this changes - until Palestinians actually acknowledge Israel's right to exist consistently, until their media is no longer a fever swamp of Der Sturmer-style anti-Semitism, until they lay down their arms, there is absolutely no reason for Israel to engage them on any level but militarily.
Do you really think by going in killing Hamas members and have another humiliating occupation that the Palestinians will suddenly start to love the Israeli's and are more likely to want to make a peace deal with them ?
You have to look at things from both points of views. Try to put yourselves in the shoes of a Palestinian wanting to defend what he rightfully thinks is his land (not saying their claims are better/worse than the ones from the israeli's, just that this is their point of view, and you would probably do the same if you would be in their shoes)
|
On November 16 2012 02:43 RezJ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:35 TheFrankOne wrote:On November 16 2012 02:23 GoTuNk! wrote:
Some fact check request, not opinions. So has this escalated from the initial atack? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20346545+ Show Spoiler +Three Israelis have been killed by rocket fire from Gaza, while 15 Palestinians have been killed in two days of Israeli attacks on Gaza...
Many of the 15 Palestinians killed were members of militant groups, but civilians - including four children - were also among the dead. They included 11-month-old Omar, the son of Jihad Misharawi, a BBC Arabic picture editor Israel has killed more children than the Hamas rocket strikes have killed people. Please. Do I have to explain Iron Dome & human shield tactics again? Amount of casualties is irrelevant and misleading. A better indication of aggression would be the targeting and volume of rockets.
Sorry no, the number of casualties is never irrelevant, I don't even know how a human can think that way and no, number of rockets is not a good measure of anything: One rocket with nuclear warhead targeted at whomever in any city is worse than all the 12000 rockets of Hamas and when comparing Israeli weapons to the rockets fired by Hamas the destructiveness must be taken into consideration as well.
"We didn't target your kids" is not an excuse for a family in grief. Any moral that does not look at the outcome at all is an inhumane one. A good indicator for aggression would incorporate non military aggression as well (taking of land and resources, blockades). Again I don't really care who the "worse aggressor" or whatever is but the picture is so very lopsided that every Israeli should put his government under extreme scrutiny.
|
On November 16 2012 02:40 Goozen wrote:Good thing this isn't a numbers game then. Silly demagogic statements like this are dumb and add nothing to this discussion. Also "Woman pregnant with twins killed - location unknown" is shoddy reporting from a reputable website. There have been many fake claims before and with a lack of names and locations this seems very questionable.
Yeah man, there's no reason there to questions Israel's behavior at all. You can call it demagogic but its really just a true statement. Can you really not see the equivalence between the behavior on both sides? One side attacks the other damaging infrastructure and killing civilians, then the other retaliates doing the exact same thing.
Like you said, its not a numbers game, how many rockets vs artillery shells is not really relevant and that civilians have been killed on both sides is more important than how many, it just sows the seeds of more violence.
Maybe they are lying about death statistics but some of them have been confirmed and "its not a numbers game" which is good because if it was the kill ratio looks kind of damning for Israel. (Look up stats yourself, I'm having trouble finding particularly precise ones, but the closest estimate I've seen is 1 Israeli to 5 Palestinians and some going closer to 1:60.)
|
On November 16 2012 02:43 RezJ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:35 TheFrankOne wrote:On November 16 2012 02:23 GoTuNk! wrote:
Some fact check request, not opinions. So has this escalated from the initial atack? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20346545+ Show Spoiler +Three Israelis have been killed by rocket fire from Gaza, while 15 Palestinians have been killed in two days of Israeli attacks on Gaza...
Many of the 15 Palestinians killed were members of militant groups, but civilians - including four children - were also among the dead. They included 11-month-old Omar, the son of Jihad Misharawi, a BBC Arabic picture editor Israel has killed more children than the Hamas rocket strikes have killed people. Please. Do I have to explain Iron Dome & human shield tactics again? Amount of casualties is irrelevant and misleading. A better indication of aggression would be the targeting and volume of rockets.
He wasn't talking about aggression, he was talking about casualties and he is correct when making that statement.
Also, 'human shields' are not the reason civilians died so far. Civilians died because Israel knowlingly accepted the amount of casualties that can occur when you bomb a car with a missile from an airplane in a busy street.
|
On November 16 2012 02:53 fluidin wrote:
Oh great, this discussion is devolving into senseless **** again.
This conflict, ugh.
Hopefully some mods will deal with those who are just doing the bad posts as overall this is one of the more civil threads on the subject i have seen on TL.
|
i am astounded at the amount of people that say its ok to asassinate foreign elected government officials, imagine germany would order a hit on the swiss minister of defense... the uproar that would happen, but in isreal, business as usual..
|
On November 16 2012 02:42 bonse wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:11 Leporello wrote:
If one side of this strife showed genuine prolonged restrain, what would happen? Would they just lose their land and lives while the world watched? Or would their earnest efforts toward peace -- even in the face of violence -- warrant intervention on their behalf?
It's very easy to sit on your couch and philosophy what would happen if Israel would just not respond to attacks. Somehow, the Islamic doctrine of not having infidels on their territory would just go away... People who love death, martyrdom is their greatest achievement - the way to get the 72 virgins in afterlife, people who butcher one another throughout the Arab world without any Israeli involvement (Egypt, Syria, Irak, Afganistan and so on) would magically become peaceful for the first time in their history... We know history. Never in history this attitude gave results, other than defeat and ultimately destruction of the ones doing it. We tried this on a very wide scale during the Holocaust, during pogroms... Somehow, the nazis didn't become peaceful... Tell me, in school, when there is a gang bullying a small kid who doesn't respond back, the gang stops bullying? And still Israel tried this. This year more than 800 rockets were fired from Gaza toward Israeli towns. (BTW, people don't seem to recognize how much of a War Crime this is, to fire rockets on towns with no military importance whatsoever). For five days prior to the elimination of the Hamas military chief, there were dozens of rockets fired, with Hamas claiming responsibility (even though there was a truce in effect). For five days, Israel did nothing. How much you would have them wait?
You completely missed my point. My point was that if Israel would continue to endure Islamic violence, even without any of their retaliations, then the world would have a clearer cause to intervene on Israel's behalf and decisively end the conflict.
I thought I made that pretty clear. I mentioned Gandhi. The point with Gandhi isn't that he instilled "peace, love and understanding" into people, the point with Gandhi is he was politically savvy. He understood how to really play the victim card, and he won his cause against the British by enduring violence without retaliation. It is idealistic, and not something Israel is completely in position to emulate, but there is a lesson there that Israel should look at.
But really, I was lamenting. That ship has sailed, people now recognize Israel as a highly-defensive military force that won't hesitate to kill.
|
On November 16 2012 02:58 Maxhster wrote:
i am astounded at the amount of people that say its ok to asassinate foreign elected government officials, imagine germany would order a hit on the swiss minister of defense... the uproar that would happen, but in isreal, business as usual..
Why would they. They're neutral anyway. 
|
On November 16 2012 02:54 Op wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:45 DeepElemBlues wrote:
What Israel should do is re-occupy Gaza with ~100,000 troops or so and annihilate Hamas. There is absolutely no chance for a peace agreement where Palestine becomes an independent, sovereign nation while Hamas exists.
Organizations like Hamas are no different from the Nazi Party or the military leadership of Japan during the 1930s and WWII. The only thing that stops them is the destruction of their physical ability to act. Hamas is never going to try to stop killing Jews. Unless they are physically unable to do so. Israel could fully withdraw from the West Bank tomorrow like it did from Gaza in 2005 - including all settlements - and could give East Jerusalem to the PLO and even agree to a right of return for Palestinian refugees, and Hamas would still try to kill Jews.
Not that the PLO deserves such concessions, as just like Hamas it still wishes to destroy the entire state of Israel and drive the Jews into the sea. Sorry, but your public declarations that you wish to co-exist with Israel make absolutely no sense when your maps label the entire area that is now Israel as "Palestine" and you teach your children that "Palestine" is not just the West Bank and Gaza but the entirety of Israel as well.
Regular Palestinians may want peaceful coexistence, but their leadership - whether it is Hamas, the PLO, Islamic Jihad, the PFLP, whatever - is still intent on the fantasy of taking over the entire country and driving all the Jews out in the process. Until this changes - until Palestinians actually acknowledge Israel's right to exist consistently, until their media is no longer a fever swamp of Der Sturmer-style anti-Semitism, until they lay down their arms, there is absolutely no reason for Israel to engage them on any level but militarily. Do you really think by going in killing Hamas members and have another humiliating occupation that the Palestinians will suddenly start to live the Israeli's ? You have to look at things from both points of views. Try to put yourselves in the shoes of a Palestinian wanting to defend what he rightfully thinks is his land (not saying their claims are better/worse than the ones from the israeli's, just that this is their point of view, and you would probably do the same if you would be in their shoes)
No, I think that a decimating defeat will wake Palestinians up to the fact that despite their fanaticism, they cannot win their jihad and it is time to give it up. I view the situation in Israel / Palestine as no different from the situation facing the Allies in World War II in the sense that the enemy will not give up unless it is facing annihilation.
I have no wish to look at things from the point of view of anti-Semites, which is what the majority of the Palestinian population is. Anti-Semitism is universal among the Palestinian leadership. If the average Palestinian feels he is trying to defend what is rightfully his, it is too bad for him that his efforts are being twisted by his genocidal, racist leaders.
Who is the main source of medicine and food for Gaza and the West Bank? Israel.
Who transfers tens of millions of dollars to the PLO annually? Israel.
Who treats Palestinians in their own hospitals? Israelis.
Who sent guns and trainers and advisers into the West Bank, into the hands of the PLO, post-1994 as part of the Oslo agreement, in an attempt to turn the PLO into a real governing organization that could effectively rule the West Bank? Israel.
Would the Palestinians ever do any of these things for the Jews of Israel? No. We know what Palestinians do to Jews in their power: they are tortured and mutilated and murdered.
As such, I care not one fig for the feelings of the Palestinians or view any of their claims as being at the moment legitimate. When they cease their genocidal jihad, then their claims to self-determination will be legitimate to me.
You completely missed my point. My point was that if Israel would continue to endure Islamic violence, even without any of their retaliations, then the world would have a clearer cause to intervene on Israel's behalf and decisively end the conflict.
I thought I made that pretty clear.
No matter how clear you made it, this would never happen. ~60 countries in the world are run by Muslim governments and every single one of them is anti-Semitic to a greater or lesser degree. Any attempt at foreign intervention would result in another oil embargo and a serious diplomatic crisis between the "Muslim" and "non-Muslim" "worlds."
The only party that can decisively end the conflict is Israel, and they cannot do so precisely because Muslim countries and the feckless, stupid rulers of Europe would go into an apoplexy over it.
|
On November 16 2012 02:55 TheFrankOne wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:40 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 02:35 TheFrankOne wrote:On November 16 2012 02:23 GoTuNk! wrote:
Some fact check request, not opinions. So has this escalated from the initial atack? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20346545Israel has killed more children than the Hamas rocket strikes have killed people. Good thing this isn't a numbers game then. Silly demagogic statements like this are dumb and add nothing to this discussion. Also "Woman pregnant with twins killed - location unknown" is shoddy reporting from a reputable website. There have been many fake claims before and with a lack of names and locations this seems very questionable. Yeah man, there's no reason there to questions Israel's behavior at all. You can call it demagogic but its really just a true statement. Can you really not see the equivalence between the behavior on both sides? One side attacks the other damaging infrastructure and killing civilians, then the other retaliates doing the exact same thing. Like you said, its not a numbers game, how many rockets vs artillery shells is not really relevant and that civilians have been killed on both sides is more important than how many, it just sows the seeds of more violence. Maybe they are lying about death statistics but some of them have been confirmed and "its not a numbers game" which is good because if it was the kill ratio looks kind of damning for Israel. (Look up stats yourself, I'm having trouble finding particularly precise ones, but the closest estimate I've seen is 1 Israeli to 5 Palestinians and some going closer to 1:60.)
The rockets are aimed at civilian populations, whereas the Israeli attacks are aimed at militants and sadly hit civilians. As far as numbers, remember that Hamas traded 1 Israeli hostage for 1000 prisoners, so this shows their regard for human life and reminded us their mindset with where they place weapons and use human shields.
|
On November 16 2012 02:45 DeepElemBlues wrote:
What Israel should do is re-occupy Gaza with ~100,000 troops or so and annihilate Hamas.
The way 100,000 American troops annihilated the Taleban or the Iraqi terrorists huh?
Occupations like this never work unless you go full Nazi and just start exterminating people wholesale. Which is why guerrilla warfare is usually so effective against democracies.
|
On November 16 2012 02:58 Maxhster wrote:
i am astounded at the amount of people that say its ok to asassinate foreign elected government officials, imagine germany would order a hit on the swiss minister of defense... the uproar that would happen, but in isreal, business as usual..
The commander of a enemy military force is pretty much the most legit target there is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
