|
On November 16 2012 03:01 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:55 TheFrankOne wrote: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.
In war of this nature, with all the modern technology available, i would judge a government on their results, not on their intentions. I don't pretend to know what the war is like from the point of view of either side, but from where i'm sitting, far from any danger, it seems that both sides seem to think nothing of killing civilians if they deem it necessary to get a job done. To me that is unacceptable, no matter who has deliberately put their civilians in harm's way.
|
On November 16 2012 03:01 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:55 TheFrankOne wrote: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.
Of course, when you are in a position of strength you want people to fight you at your strongest. But just like the Jewish terrorists of British Era Palestine liked to target civilians instead of British colonial troops, so the Palestinians fight in the way that will maximize their returns.
|
On November 16 2012 03:02 Sub40APM 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. 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.
The Gaza Strip is somewhat smaller and has a somewhat smaller number of avenues of access than Afghanistan or Iraq. Just saying.
And your contention that guerrillas cannot be defeated save through Nazi-like repression and murder is not held up by an examination of history.
|
so for the hopeless palestinians it would be ok to assasinate israels minister of defense? he ordered killings where civilians were harmed making him a war criminal, by your eye for an eye logic they would be justified in killing him as well...
dont you see that you cant win by violence?
|
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..
What? He wasn't elected, plus he was a mass murderer.
|
On November 16 2012 03:00 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:54 Op wrote: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.
As mentioned before in this thread the term "anti-semite" is a dangerous one. Probably anybody would be "anti" the people who occupy their land...
I also think that if Palestinians would be given the choice between all the things you say Israel gives them and their land they would most likely choose the land which they claim is theirs ;-)
You mentioned the 2nd world-war, the resistance in Europe continued fighting against the occupation and in the end they won.
(just making the case opposite to yours, so you can see the other point of view. I am not claiming one side has more rights to the land than the other, and try to avoid taking sides)
|
On November 16 2012 03:01 Goozen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:55 TheFrankOne wrote: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.
I know you are more invested in this as an Israeli but come on at least try to make arguments that make sense to people who are not partisan on the issue. First of all the human shield stuff is atrocious and unfortunately used by both sides: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/gaza-civilians-endangered-military-tactics-both-sides-20090108
Wtf does that second part even mean? Because they got a good deal at the exchange they regard human life as less?! That doesn't make any sense, you could argue it shows how much more worth an Israeli life is to the Israeli government than a Palestinian one (I will not do that though because it's stupid)...
|
On November 16 2012 03:06 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 03:02 Sub40APM wrote: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. The Gaza Strip is somewhat smaller and has a somewhat smaller number of avenues of access than Afghanistan or Iraq. Just saying. And your contention that guerrillas cannot be defeated save through Nazi-like repression and murder is not held up by an examination of history.
When was the last time a Democracy defeated a guerrilla force when that guerrilla force was supported by the local population? In the Boer War. And all it took was for the Brits to put almost everyone into concentration camps.
Why do you think Israel withdrew from Gaza and South Lebanon in the first place? They were ground down.
|
On November 16 2012 03:06 Maxhster wrote:
so for the hopeless palestinians it would be ok to assasinate israels minister of defense? he ordered killings where civilians were harmed making him a war criminal, by your eye for an eye logic they would be justified in killing him as well...
dont you see that you cant win by violence?
It would be seen as a more legitimate target then civilians, yes.
|
On November 16 2012 03:07 yosisoy wrote:Show nested quote +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.. What? He wasn't elected, plus he was a mass murderer.
do you have legitimate proof?
as i understand Hamas, however dreadful they are, represent an elected government in palestine and he was part of it.
|
On November 16 2012 03:02 Sub40APM 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. 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.
The Iraqi terrorists (aka insurgents) were actually wiped out as the result of the surge.
Afghanistan's landscape prevents a similar strategy, though the drone-program has proven to be pretty effective. The biggest problem with the Taliban is simply that they have a nation that gives them safe haven, Pakistan.
|
On November 16 2012 03:06 Maxhster wrote:
so for the hopeless palestinians it would be ok to assasinate israels minister of defense? he ordered killings where civilians were harmed making him a war criminal, by your eye for an eye logic they would be justified in killing him as well...
dont you see that you cant win by violence?
In a war between governments, of course you can win by violence. On one level that is what this conflict is. However, the conflict runs much deeper, into a war of ideologies and faith, which can never be won by violence, and only grow more extreme.
|
On November 16 2012 03:06 Maxhster wrote:
so for the hopeless palestinians it would be ok to assasinate israels minister of defense? he ordered killings where civilians were harmed making him a war criminal, by your eye for an eye logic they would be justified in killing him as well...
dont you see that you cant win by violence?
The participants of every war ever are calling, they're very interested in your idea that you can't win by violence.
And sure it would be okay for the Palestinians to attempt to do so, as long as they did so in uniform. Even if you aren't a soldier of a recognized army of a recognized, independent, sovereign nation, if your organization uses uniforms then under the Geneva Conventions you are recognized as being legally the same as a soldier from, say, the British Army.
Hamas uses uniforms for its fighters for precisely this reason where previously they did not.
When was the last time a Democracy defeated a guerrilla force when that guerrilla force was supported by the local population? In the Boer War. And all it took was for the Brits to put almost everyone into concentration camps.
Why do you think Israel withdrew from Gaza and South Lebanon in the first place? They were ground down.
Now you're placing an unreasonable qualification on it. The point of a guerrilla war is to remove the support of the populace from the guerrillas.
Why did Israel withdraw from Gaza and South Lebanon? Not because they were being ground down, that is simply nonsense. They withdrew because of political considerations, in Lebanon in an attempt to better relations with the Lebanese government and the non-Hezbollah factions of the country, and in Gaza because Ariel Sharon got pissed off at Europe and basically said "You say the occupation is the problem? Fine, we will fully withdraw from Gaza, and you see what happens." It was a move of petulance from Sharon that is widely regarded as a mistake in both its intentions and its execution.
|
On November 16 2012 02:49 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:43 RezJ 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-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. Correct. The amount of children murdered is irrelevant, it pretty much says as much in the Bible.
Really? You went there?
Do you realize Israel is the only country that was ever expected to be "proportionate" in its response, at a time of constant aggression from the other side? + Show Spoiler +And now what has that achieved? A status-quo of back and forth firing in small, proportionate amounts. Woopie fucking doo!
Do you have any idea how many children would have been "murdered" had anyone fired just ONE rocket onto [insert any first world country]? Do you have any idea how much the IDF has done WHILE INSIDE GAZA to warn civilians of targeted attacks, sometimes compromising the attack altogether? Do you realize Israel has done more to minimize casualties of war than any other country in the history of warfare?
Do you realize there are huge atrocities committed (with FAR more dead children, if you like being a demagogue) around the globe with zero condemnation from the international community, just because everyone's main focus is on this inch and a half in the middle east called Israel?
|
On November 16 2012 03:12 RezJ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 02:49 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 16 2012 02:43 RezJ 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-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. Correct. The amount of children murdered is irrelevant, it pretty much says as much in the Bible. Really? You went there? Do you realize Israel is the only country that was ever expected to be "proportionate" in its response, at a time of constant aggression from the other side? + Show Spoiler +And now what has that achieved? A status-quo of back and forth firing in small, proportionate amounts. Woopie fucking doo! Do you have any idea how many children would have been "murdered" had anyone fired just ONE rocket onto [insert any first world country]? Do you have any idea how much the IDF has done WHILE INSIDE GAZA to warn civilians of targeted attacks, sometimes compromising the attack altogether? Do you realize Israel has done more to minimize casualties of war than any other country in the history of warfare? Do you realize there are huge atrocities committed (with FAR more dead children, if you like being a demagogue) around the globe with zero condemnation from the international community, just because everyone's main focus is on this inch and a half in the middle east called Israel?
i deleted that post shortly after i made it for a reason... I'm sorry if that makes your post seem redundant, but i realized that it was the wrong thing to say the wrong time...
|
On November 16 2012 03:07 silynxer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 03:01 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 02:55 TheFrankOne wrote: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. I know you are more invested in this as an Israeli but come on at least try to make arguments that make sense to people who are not partisan on the issue. First of all the human shield stuff is atrocious and unfortunately used by both sides: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/news/gaza-civilians-endangered-military-tactics-both-sides-20090108Wtf does that second part even mean? Because they got a good deal at the exchange they regard human life as less?! That doesn't make any sense, you could argue it shows how much more worth an Israeli life is to the Israeli government than a Palestinian one (I will not do that though because it's stupid)...
I mentioned it to show how Hamas value civilian life and the price they are willing to pay for their goals. Also if you look at the goldstone follow up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Fact_Finding_Mission_on_the_Gaza_Conflict#Goldstone.27s_retraction_of_civilian_targeting_claim There is a attempt to minimize civilian deaths although not at the cos of our own.
|
On November 16 2012 03:09 zalz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 03:02 Sub40APM wrote: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. The Iraqi terrorists (aka insurgents) were actually wiped out as the result of the surge. Afghanistan's landscape prevents a similar strategy, though the drone-program has proven to be pretty effective. The biggest problem with the Taliban is simply that they have a nation that gives them safe haven, Pakistan.
No, they actually were not. They simply finished the ethnic cleansing of their respective neighborhoods and the Shiite death squads did the rest. But David Patreaus appreciates you supporting his mythology, in the coming years he will need people to believe the surge worked in hopes of preserving his legacy.
The surge has failed in Afghanistan because the Taleban are supported by the Pashtuns in the South. As soon as the Americans leave, the Tajiks and Hazar are going to be driven back out of power and return to what they were doing pre-2001 and cling to power in their own territories.
|
On November 16 2012 03:04 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 03:01 Goozen wrote:On November 16 2012 02:55 TheFrankOne wrote: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. In war of this nature, with all the modern technology available, i would judge a government on their results, not on their intentions. I don't pretend to know what the war is like from the point of view of either side, but from where i'm sitting, far from any danger, it seems that both sides seem to think nothing of killing civilians if they deem it necessary to get a job done. To me that is unacceptable, no matter who has deliberately put their civilians in harm's way.
As a coworker was told by a recruiter during the Vietnam war "There's always collateral damage in a warzone". I would definitely agree that Isreal has more legitimate targets and does not blanket population centers with rockets, which can't be condemned strongly enough. That said, these occasional strikes and the general low intensity state of this conflict ensures it will go on. Something different needs to be done. Ghandi style or G. W. Bush style, I don't know, but this is just not working and ensuring both sides are hardening to each others positions.
|
On November 16 2012 03:15 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2012 03:09 zalz wrote:On November 16 2012 03:02 Sub40APM wrote: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. The Iraqi terrorists (aka insurgents) were actually wiped out as the result of the surge. Afghanistan's landscape prevents a similar strategy, though the drone-program has proven to be pretty effective. The biggest problem with the Taliban is simply that they have a nation that gives them safe haven, Pakistan. No, they actually were not. They simply finished the ethnic cleansing of their respective neighborhoods and the Shiite death squads did the rest. But David Patreaus appreciates you supporting his mythology, in the coming years he will need people to believe the surge worked in hopes of preserving his legacy. The surge has failed in Afghanistan because the Taleban are supported by the Pashtuns in the South. As soon as the Americans leave, the Tajiks and Hazar are going to be driven back out of power and return to what they were doing pre-2001 and cling to power in their own territories.
No, they were not wiped out, but to claim anything other than that they were significantly damaged is to either be ignorant or have a malicious disregard for the truth.
The surge in Iraq worked, whether you like it or not. The central government would have collapsed and the country broken up into warlord-controlled regions if it had not. Such a situation did exist in some areas of the country before the surge, and the areas where the central government does not have control are much, much smaller now than they were then.
|
Why did Israel withdraw from Gaza and South Lebanon? Not because they were being ground down, that is simply nonsense. They withdrew because of political considerations, in Lebanon in an attempt to better relations with the Lebanese government and the non-Hezbollah factions of the country, and in Gaza because Ariel Sharon got pissed off at Europe and basically said "You say the occupation is the problem? Fine, we will fully withdraw from Gaza, and you see what happens." It was a move of petulance from Sharon that is widely regarded as a mistake in both its intentions and its execution.
Yes. Political considerations. Of course. "Hey guys, after spending 20 years down here in South Lebanon we will withdraw, handing a total and complete victory to our most effective enemies in Hizbollah that will allow them and their Syrian allies to take over the entire country, creating a second front against us. But those of you who dont support them, lets be friends!"
They withdrew from Lebanon because they could not sustain the occupation of a territory whose population was wholly antagonistic to them. They withdrew from Gaza because deploying 70,000 troops to protect 7,000 settlers was just as costly and stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
