War in Gaza - Page 6

1. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 26 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:07 pm

“after Hamas ended the ceasefire a week ago”

What ceasefire? 1500 rocket and mortar attacks into Israel from Gaza in 2008. The farce that the Hamas government are not responsible for the actions of Hamas militants, therefore are not breaking the ceasefire is exactly that - a farce.
2. The Vagus Kid (10) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 39 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:16 pm

If Israel withdrew from the Palestinians land then they could have the moral high ground. Instead they insist on carrying out economic genocide and war on people trying to get back their land. It strikes me that the Israelies have a forgotton their history. If they remembered it they would perhaps have more empathy for the Palestinians.

[DPF: They did withdraw from the Palestinian land. And that land is now used to attack parts of Israel not claimed by Palestinians]
3. Put it away (143) Vote: Add rating 23 Subtract rating 3 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:38 pm

The only arab who wants to negotiate is one who’s run out of bullets. Everyone knows this, yet for the benefit of the bleeding heart lefties in the media, Israel has to go through this farce of pretending to believe that the terrorist party is serious about a ceasefire, and has to suffer a few thousand unprovoked rocket attacks before they act. They should just say fuck it, no ceasefire until all the terrorists are dead, all the weapons are seized, and all the borders are sealed so they can’t obtain any more.
4. TJCO (58) Vote: Add rating 14 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

Vagus

What about the ethnic cleansing carried out by the Arab countries surrounding Israel? How many Jews now live in any of them? Fact is that 20% of Israel’s population is Arab, so who stole who’s land here?
5. TJCO (58) Vote: Add rating 20 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:42 pm

As for economic genocide, I note that Gaza also has a border with Egypt…how come Gaza isn’t free to trade with them? Must be those damn Elders of Zion conspiring again huh?
6. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 18 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:43 pm

Over 700,000 Jews were forceably evicted from Arab lands after the establishment of Israel. Many from places where they had lived continusouly for nearly two thousand years. Even now in Yemen, a local Jew (who looked more Yemeni than any Jew I have ever seen) was stabebd to death for refusing to convert to Islam.
7. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 15 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:47 pm

TJCO - You are right. Egyptian border police fired on Gazan Arabs trying to enter Egypt just yesterday.
8. Murray (2106) Vote: Add rating 23 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:48 pm

I think its the vague kid who needsto do some work on his grasp of history.

Untill the palestinian charter stops having the destruction of Israel and the genocide of all Jews as its first item then there is nothing to “negotiate”.

Meanwhile perhaps the vague one could name for us one other single country that would sit there and be bombarded by misiles at a greater rate than Britain did under V1 and V2 attacks and do nothing in response. Idiots continuing to use extreemist retoric like
“economic genocide” has led to the situation that Iarael is screwed if they don’t defend themselves and screwed if they do. That they finally decided to be hung for the sheep as the lamb should come as no suprise to anyone.

Go Israel.
9. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 17 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:54 pm

Exactly TJCO. Gaza also borders on the Mediterranean Sea. What’s stopping them from using that border?

I don’t see why Gaza must rely on Israel for supplies. They want to be independent territory, so why must they rely on another country? Instead of spending all their time attacking Israel, why not concentrate on helping their own people and building their region?

Brian Smaller, you’re totally right. Tens of thousands of Jews were evicted from the Arab countries in which they lived when Israel declared independence. While those countries also told Arabs in Israel to leave, Israel asked them to stay, and that if they did, they’d be given citizenship and the exact same rights as every other Israeli.
10. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 23 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:56 pm

Also, I must say that Arabs in Israel have more rights than Arabs in any other Arab country.
11. TJCO (58) Vote: Add rating 15 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 1:59 pm

Exactly, Israel being the only democracy in the entire region has arab members of parliament and appointees to the Israeli Supreme Court…actually the fact that ALL its citizens have recourse to the courts at all is something missing in the surrounding countries…
12. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 16 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:01 pm

I don’t see why Gaza must rely on Israel for supplies. They want to be independent territory, so why must they rely on another country?

Their access to the rest of the world is very restricted by Israeli blockading and Israeli air space. Over the last six months, Israel has blockaded supplies in response to rocket attacks, and opened supply routes after periods of no rocket attacks. It’s a less violent form of retaliation than bombing, but I’m not sure what the stats are on loss of life due to lack of medical supplies.
13. TJCO (58) Vote: Add rating 14 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:05 pm

Israel has repeatedly in the past opened its hospitals to patients from Gaza and the West Bank. Again Ryan, Given Gaza’s border with Egypt and access to the coast, why does it require any economic input from Israel at all?
14. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 15 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:07 pm

“Their access to the rest of the world is very restricted by Israeli blockading and Israeli air space.”

No it’s not. Their access to Israel has been restricted, not the rest of the world. They also have a border with Egypt, which the Egyptians have also blocked. So it’s not just the Israelis blocking their supplies. And besides, they also border on the Mediterranean Sea, which Israel is not blocking. They’re free to get supplies from that route.
15. Murray (2106) Vote: Add rating 17 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:14 pm

How the fuck do the IDF block other peoples borders? They don’t.

BTW the palestinian problem was created by the Arab states who refsed to take them, not by Israel that would accept them.
16. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:16 pm

TJCO,

Ideally it wouldn’t have to. But the border with Egypt is controlled by both Egypt and Israel, as part of an agreement between Egypt and Israel in ‘82. It’s currently supposed to be controlled by a third-party EU police force, but they’ve pulled out after Hamas was elected, because Hamas is on their list of terrorist organisations.

http://domino.un.org/pdfs/AMA_OneYearOn.pdf has some information on obstacles to trade through the Rafah crossing.

It’s just been opened up by Egypt to let medical supplies through, in response to the recent bombings.
17. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:20 pm

No it’s not. Their access to Israel has been restricted, not the rest of the world. They also have a border with Egypt, which the Egyptians have also blocked. So it’s not just the Israelis blocking their supplies. And besides, they also border on the Mediterranean Sea, which Israel is not blocking. They’re free to get supplies from that route.

According to that report, Israel won’t rule out the possibility of interfering with a Gazan seaport, and so donors are holding back on building it or something.

But yes, you’re right, Egypt is part of the problem when it comes to trade with Gaza.
18. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 9 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:22 pm

Ryan Sproull, despite all that, Gaza still has a long stretch of its border on the Mediterranean Sea which they are free to use.

Israel and Egypt have no obligation to help Gaza. They have every right to close their borders to it.
19. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 13 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:26 pm

Israel and Egypt have no obligation to help Gaza. They have every right to close their borders to it.

They have the right to do so, yes, but the moral question of the effects on innocents remains.
20. TJCO (58) Vote: Add rating 12 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:27 pm

Particularly if they insist on electing Hamas to government whose Charter proscribes the destruction of Israel as its purpose.
21. TJCO (58) Vote: Add rating 13 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:30 pm

Lets not forget that Israel offered all of Gaza and 95% of the West Bank for the purpose of a Palestinian State, whereupon Yasser Arafat responded with suicide bombers and the resumption of the intifada…
22. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 4 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:30 pm

Particularly if they insist on electing Hamas to government whose Charter proscribes the destruction of Israel as its purpose.

Yeah, that’s a tricky one. It seems anti-democratic to attempt to influence future elections in ways you like, by imposing economic sanctions. But then, it’s one of the few ways to influence the behaviour of a government short of threatening military action. I guess the problem with a country with few borders, where none of its neighbours are cooperative, is that the actions of a few countries can prevent trade with every country.
23. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 13 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:32 pm

Lets not forget that Israel offered all of Gaza and 95% of the West Bank for the purpose of a Palestinian State, whereupon Yasser Arafat responded with suicide bombers and the resumption of the intifada…

I’d call that a radical interpretation of the text.
24. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 16 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:32 pm

Hamas or Fatah - who cares - they are all the same as far as I am concerned.

We keep hearing about gaza being a concentration camp, yet I have yet to see anyone starving. Perhaps the stupids Hamas militants shouldn’t have destroyed all those huge greenhouses the Israeli’s nicely left behind for them. Some stupid “peace” boat went into Gaza a few months back and Israelis wouldn’t let the dumb bitch running the show leave through their terrotory and she blogged about starving Gazans and such like. Trouble is she was photographed in a well stocked supermarket buying groceries which included Mars bars. Any news out of the ME that has AP, Reuters or any stringer with al- in his name should be regarded as propaganda and nothing more.
25. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 12 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:33 pm

They have the right to do so, yes, but the moral question of the effects on innocents remains.

They have no moral obligation to open the border. It would be great if Israel could help the innocent Palestinians in Gaza, but the fact is that Palestinians are firing rockets at civilians in Israel. The border will open when they stop firing rockets.
26. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 13 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:36 pm

Ryan - what moral obligation is there to people who rocket and mortar you every day for years on end and whom elected a government who have as a founding a principal your own death. You would hand your killer the knife.
27. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 15 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:37 pm

They have no moral obligation to open the border. It would be great if Israel could help the innocent Palestinians in Gaza, but the fact is that Palestinians are firing rockets at civilians in Israel. The border will open when they stop firing rockets.

That’s essentially collective punishment. It’s not “The Palestinians” firing rockets. It’s a minority of Palestinians firing rockets, and the response is to punish every Palestinian for those crimes. The people being punished are not the people committing the crimes.
28. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 11 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:40 pm

They have no moral obligation to open the border. It would be great if Israel could help the innocent Palestinians in Gaza, but the fact is that Palestinians are firing rockets at civilians in Israel. The border will open when they stop firing rockets.

That’s essentially collective punishment. It’s not “The Palestinians” firing rockets. It’s a minority of Palestinians firing rockets, and the response is to punish every Palestinian for those crimes. The people being punished are not the people committing the crimes.

It’s not about punishing anyone. It’s about stopping rockets being fired at innocent civilians in your own country!
29. Chuck Bird (343) Vote: Add rating 15 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:41 pm

There is only one way the problem in the Middle East will be solved and that is for the Moslems to recognise Israel’s right to exist. Arguments about whether the UN should have given Israel to the Jews are stupid and ill relevant.

Rightly or wrongly Israel exists. It has a very strong military force with nuclear weapons. Israel is not going to voluntarily go away. The argument about disproportionate force is ridiculous. Does the UN expect Israel to only kill one terrorist for every innocent civilian that gets murdered?

The UN should go do something useful in Zimbabwe and stop making stupid statements that only encourage terrorist.
30. TJCO (58) Vote: Add rating 15 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:42 pm

I’ve yet to see any spontaneous demonstrations in Gaza protesting against the use of rockets…
31. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 9 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:47 pm

Ryan - what moral obligation is there to people who rocket and mortar you every day for years on end and whom elected a government who have as a founding a principal your own death. You would hand your killer the knife.

It’s not quite every day for years on end, but again, the people firing those rockets aren’t a collective called Palestinians. They’re small groups of Palestinians. As for voting in Hamas rather than Fatah, not every Palestinian voted for Hamas, and we can’t know that those who did weren’t simply voting for the lesser of two evils. But seeing civilians as fair game because they elected the wrong government is a dodgy path to start down, and is in line with al-Qaeda’s justification for attacking American civilians.

I would not hand my killer the knife. But I wouldn’t withhold food and medicine from someone purely because they’re from the same country as my killer.
32. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 9 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:48 pm

It’s not about punishing anyone. It’s about stopping rockets being fired at innocent civilians in your own country!

Well, it’s working great.
33. reid (1505) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 12 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:51 pm

Iran’s jews condemn Israel. US jews silent.
34. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 6 Subtract rating 3 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:53 pm

I would not hand my killer the knife. But I wouldn’t withhold food and medicine from someone purely because they’re from the same country as my killer.

But would you withhold food and medicine from someone, who could get them from other sources, if it stopped your killer getting a knife?

Israel doesn’t see Palestinian civilians as fair game. They try to minimise civilian casualties, but their main concern is their own citizens.
35. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 4 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:56 pm

Iran’s jews condemn Israel. US jews silent.

Jewish Americans not silent. That includes New York. Hell, there are 13 Palestinian solidarity organisations in Israel.
36. reid (1505) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 13 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:57 pm

“Israel doesn’t see Palestinian civilians as fair game”

Yes Max, it does.

Israel’s siege of Gaza began on 5 November, the day after an Israeli attack inside the strip, no doubt designed finally to undermine the truce between Israel and Hamas established last June. Although both sides had violated the agreement before, this incursion was on a different scale. Hamas responded by firing rockets into Israel and the violence has not abated since then. Israel’s siege has two fundamental goals. One is to ensure that the Palestinians there are seen merely as a humanitarian problem, beggars who have no political identity and therefore can have no political claims. The second is to foist Gaza onto Egypt. That is why the Israelis tolerate the hundreds of tunnels between Gaza and Egypt around which an informal but increasingly regulated commercial sector has begun to form. The overwhelming majority of Gazans are impoverished and officially 49.1 per cent are unemployed. In fact the prospect of steady employment is rapidly disappearing for the majority of the population.

On 5 November the Israeli government sealed all the ways into and out of Gaza. Food, medicine, fuel, parts for water and sanitation systems, fertiliser, plastic sheeting, phones, paper, glue, shoes and even teacups are no longer getting through in sufficient quantities or at all. According to Oxfam only 137 trucks of food were allowed into Gaza in November. This means that an average of 4.6 trucks per day entered the strip compared to an average of 123 in October this year and 564 in December 2005. The two main food providers in Gaza are the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and the World Food Programme (WFP). UNRWA alone feeds approximately 750,000 people in Gaza, and requires 15 trucks of food daily to do so. Between 5 November and 30 November, only 23 trucks arrived, around 6 per cent of the total needed; during the week of 30 November it received 12 trucks, or 11 per cent of what was required. There were three days in November when UNRWA ran out of food, with the result that on each of these days 20,000 people were unable to receive their scheduled supply. According to John Ging, the director of UNRWA in Gaza, most of the people who get food aid are entirely dependent on it. On 18 December UNRWA suspended all food distribution for both emergency and regular programmes because of the blockade.

The WFP has had similar problems, sending only 35 trucks out of the 190 it had scheduled to cover Gazans’ needs until the start of February (six more were allowed in between 30 November and 6 December). Not only that: the WFP has to pay to store food that isn’t being sent to Gaza. This cost $215,000 in November alone. If the siege continues, the WFP will have to pay an extra $150,000 for storage in December, money that will be used not to support Palestinians but to benefit Israeli business.

The majority of commercial bakeries in Gaza – 30 out of 47 – have had to close because they have run out of cooking gas. People are using any fuel they can find to cook with. As the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has made clear, cooking-gas canisters are necessary for generating the warmth to incubate broiler chicks. Shortages of gas and animal feed have forced commercial producers to smother hundreds of thousands of chicks. By April, according to the FAO, there will be no poultry there at all: 70 per cent of Gazans rely on chicken as a major source of protein.

Banks, suffering from Israeli restrictions on the transfer of banknotes into the territory were forced to close on 4 December. A sign on the door of one read: ‘Due to the decision of the Palestinian Finance Authority, the bank will be closed today Thursday, 4.12.2008, because of the unavailability of cash money, and the bank will be reopened once the cash money is available.’

The World Bank has warned that Gaza’s banking system could collapse if these restrictions continue. All cash for work programmes has been stopped and on 19 November UNRWA suspended its cash assistance programme to the most needy. It also ceased production of textbooks because there is no paper, ink or glue in Gaza. This will affect 200,000 students returning to school in the new year. On 11 December, the Israeli defence minister, Ehud Barak, sent $25 million following an appeal from the Palestinian prime minister, Salaam Fayad, the first infusion of its kind since October. It won’t even cover a month’s salary for Gaza’s 77,000 civil servants.

On 13 November production at Gaza’s only power station was suspended and the turbines shut down because it had run out of industrial diesel. This in turn caused the two turbine batteries to run down, and they failed to start up again when fuel was received some ten days later. About a hundred spare parts ordered for the turbines have been sitting in the port of Ashdod in Israel for the last eight months, waiting for the Israeli authorities to let them through customs. Now Israel has started to auction these parts because they have been in customs for more than 45 days. The proceeds are being held in Israeli accounts.

During the week of 30 November, 394,000 litres of industrial diesel were allowed in for the power plant: approximately 18 per cent of the weekly minimum that Israel is legally obliged to allow in. It was enough for one turbine to run for two days before the plant was shut down again. The Gaza Electricity Distribution Company said that most of the Gaza Strip will be without electricity for between four and 12 hours a day. At any given time during these outages, over 65,000 people have no electricity.

No other diesel fuel (for standby generators and transport) was delivered during that week, no petrol (which has been kept out since early November) or cooking gas. Gaza’s hospitals are apparently relying on diesel and gas smuggled from Egypt via the tunnels; these supplies are said to be administered and taxed by Hamas. Even so, two of Gaza’s hospitals have been out of cooking gas since the week of 23 November.

Adding to the problems caused by the siege are those created by the political divisions between the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and the Hamas Authority in Gaza. For example, Gaza’s Coastal Municipalities Water Utility (CMWU), which is not controlled by Hamas, is supposed to receive funds from the World Bank via the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) in Ramallah to pay for fuel to run the pumps for Gaza’s sewage system. Since June, the PWA has refused to hand over those funds, perhaps because it feels that a functioning sewage system would benefit Hamas. I don’t know whether the World Bank has attempted to intervene, but meanwhile UNRWA is providing the fuel, although they have no budget for it. The CMWU has also asked Israel’s permission to import 200 tons of chlorine, but by the end of November it had received only 18 tons – enough for one week of chlorinated water. By mid-December Gaza City and the north of Gaza had access to water only six hours every three days.

According to the World Health Organisation, the political divisions between Gaza and the West Bank are also having a serious impact on drug stocks in Gaza. The West Bank Ministry of Health (MOH) is responsible for procuring and delivering most of the pharmaceuticals and medical disposables used in Gaza. But stocks are at dangerously low levels. Throughout November the MOH West Bank was turning shipments away because it had no warehouse space, yet it wasn’t sending supplies on to Gaza in adequate quantities. During the week of 30 November, one truck carrying drugs and medical supplies from the MOH in Ramallah entered Gaza, the first delivery since early September.

The breakdown of an entire society is happening in front of us, but there is little international response beyond UN warnings which are ignored. The European Union announced recently that it wanted to strengthen its relationship with Israel while the Israeli leadership openly calls for a large-scale invasion of the Gaza Strip and continues its economic stranglehold over the territory with, it appears, the not-so-tacit support of the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah – which has been co-operating with Israel on a number of measures. On 19 December Hamas officially ended its truce with Israel, which Israel said it wanted to renew, because of Israel’s failure to ease the blockade.

How can keeping food and medicine from the people of Gaza protect the people of Israel? How can the impoverishment and suffering of Gaza’s children – more than 50 per cent of the population – benefit anyone? International law as well as human decency demands their protection. If Gaza falls, the West Bank will be next.

37. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 7 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 2:59 pm

But would you withhold food and medicine from someone, who could get them from other sources, if it stopped your killer getting a knife?

Yes, I would. But I think you can have economic sanctions on weaponry (EDIT: and luxuries) without preventing fuel, medicine and food getting through.

Israel doesn’t see Palestinian civilians as fair game. They try to minimise civilian casualties, but their main concern is their own citizens.

That’s the thing. To me, civilians are civilians. I would rather no one was killed, but I’d rather one civilian was killed than 50 civilians were killed, if I was forced to make such a horrible choice.
38. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 12 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:02 pm

Ryan - by the logic of your argument WWII would still be going on. Collective punishment is what happens when countries war with one another. Show me a war in the history of humankind where that was not the case?

Israel has bent over backwards to appease these people. Hell, they let 250 terrorists go the other day alone. They are all well fed and well looked after. Israeli soldiers taken prisoner generally get their balls cut off and end up dumped a few years later.
39. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 8 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:06 pm

As far as limiting what gets into the country of your enemy - Germany tried it with unrestricted U Boat warfare in WWII. Napoleon and Britain tried it against each other in the Napoleonic Wars. It is a legitimate tactic when at war.
40. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 8 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:08 pm

Ryan - by the logic of your argument WWII would still be going on. Collective punishment is what happens when countries war with one another. Show me a war in the history of humankind where that was not the case?

I was responding to MaxPower saying that the blockades would stop when the rockets stopped. That doesn’t sound like war to me, but if you’re trying to convince me that something is a good idea, “It’s war!” is not the way to my heart.

Israel has bent over backwards to appease these people. Hell, they let 250 terrorists go the other day alone. They are all well fed and well looked after. Israeli soldiers taken prisoner generally get their balls cut off and end up dumped a few years later.

That doesn’t change my point - the blockades hurt people who aren’t committing the crimes used to justify the blockades. And “Israel has bent over backwards to appease these people” is a matter of opinion - an opinion that seems to fly in the face of things like continued bulldozing of farms and evicting people to make way for Israeli settlements.
41. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 6 Subtract rating 3 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:08 pm

Israel doesn’t see Palestinian civilians as fair game. They try to minimise civilian casualties, but their main concern is their own citizens.

That’s the thing. To me, civilians are civilians. I would rather no one was killed, but I’d rather one civilian was killed than 50 civilians were killed, if I was forced to make such a horrible choice.

That’s the thing though; the people firing rockets at Israel are trying to kill civilians. Israel is not. Israel is trying to attack militant targets and avoid civilian casualties. The one civilian you talk about would have been killed on purpose by militants in Gaza; the 50 civilians killed would be by accident.
42. reid (1505) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 6 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:09 pm

Meanwhile, in the US, Obama remains at “No comment” position, despite all prospects for ME peace disappearing down the gurgler…

Gee, talk about shutting down his previously available options, wonder who would possibli have a vested interest in doing that?
43. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 10 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:10 pm

As far as limiting what gets into the country of your enemy - Germany tried it with unrestricted U Boat warfare in WWII.

I have to say, I’ve never heard “but the Nazis did it first” used as a justification.
44. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 7 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:11 pm

That’s the thing though; the people firing rockets at Israel are trying to kill civilians. Israel is not. Israel is trying to attack militant targets and avoid civilian casualties. The one civilian you talk about would have been killed on purpose by militants in Gaza; the 50 civilians killed would be by accident.

When you know that your actions are going to cause civilian deaths, it’s not an accident.
45. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 12 Subtract rating 3 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:12 pm

Ryan “I have to say, I’ve never heard “but the Nazis did it first” used as a justification.”

what a dick you are. The Germans also tried in in WWI and nearly succeeded. Blockade has been done in just about every major war for thousands of years. Napoleon and Britain tried it in the Napoleonic Wars on each other (the Continental System and the British Blockade). It is a legitimate tactic of war.
46. jastowns (83) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 17 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:12 pm

this story is propaganda that israel has produced,israel is stealing land killing inocint woman and children and bullshit post like this want you to believe they are the good guys
heres the real story
The stinking smell of a conspiracy, a disaster, a political plan is behind the Israeli “war” against the population of Gaza. The Israeli military “Operation Cast Lead” did not begin as a result of adduced rocket-spiegel“self defense” against Palestinian rockets, which appear to be made and shot for the most part in Israel itself or distributed by the employees of Shin Bet Chief Yuval Diskin, the Israeli intelligence system, to collaborators within the Palestinian resistance.
It also has nothing to do with the primitive, home made rockets of the Palestinian resistance, or because Hamas had ended the weak truce after six month of continuous Israeli blockade against one million and a half persons in the concentration camp of Gaza. And it also has nothing to do with Israel wanting to free the Israeli-French war criminal Gilad Shalit captured by Hamas.

Nobody showed the hundred tons of explosives which the Israel Air Force dropped on the police stations and civilian offices in Gaza, leading to the death of over 300 civilian and police, and the injury of over 1000 persons, hundreds of them in critical condition. The western media has manipulated the information so that everyone believes that the Israeli destruction and ethnic cleansing of a nation is some kind of “self defense”, that Israel is some kind of “victim”.
The world is not so naïve to believe that Israeli intelligence Chief Yuval Diskin, 880f857Ehud Barak and Tzipi Livni will be able to hide the purpose of their abject crimes against the population of Gaza and their will to massacre hundreds, or even thousands, in order to win the coming Israeli elections with scenes of bodies without heads, and legs without foots of the Palestinian victims in order to placate the blood-thirsty masses of Israel.
47. reid (1505) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 11 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:13 pm

Israel is not [trying to kill civilians].

Well they’re certainly making a hell of a lot of mistakes then Max, had a look at the list of recent targets they’ve hit?

As I said on the general thread, if Israel really wanted to eliminate the Qassams, they’d equip the Palistinian police to do it.
48. Fletch (231) Vote: Add rating 15 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:13 pm

The whole protest thing is a farce.
Do a quick search of Google on ‘protest’, ‘Israel’, and ‘Gaza’ and you’ll read about thousands of people in cities around the world (including Paris and Canada) coming out to protest Israel’s attack on Gaza. Where were these same people when Israel was getting shelled by 80 rockets a day?
Who was protesting then?

No one. It bloody stinks.

People are afraid to criticize anything Muslim, but when it comes to Israel it’s open season. Did they expect Israel to just sit and do nothing? Just take the bombardment?

Hypocrites.
49. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 7 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:14 pm

That’s the thing though; the people firing rockets at Israel are trying to kill civilians. Israel is not. Israel is trying to attack militant targets and avoid civilian casualties. The one civilian you talk about would have been killed on purpose by militants in Gaza; the 50 civilians killed would be by accident.

When you know that your actions are going to cause civilian deaths, it’s not an accident.

True, but my point is that the militants in Gaza are trying to kill civilians. Israel is trying to avoid it.
50. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 9 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:14 pm

“When you know that your actions are going to cause civilian deaths, it’s not an accident.”

So you HAVE just handed your killer the knife. You know your enemy hides behind civillians. Therefore you don’t shoot in case you hit them. You might as well shoot yourself and save the enemy the bother.
51. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 10 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:16 pm

what a dick you are. The Germans also tried in in WWI and nearly succeeded. Blockade has been done in just about every major war for thousands of years. Napoleon and Britain tried it in the Napoleonic Wars on each other (the Continental System and the British Blockade). It is a legitimate tactic of war.

That doesn’t make it a good thing.
52. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 11 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:17 pm

True, but my point is that the militants in Gaza are trying to kill civilians. Israel is trying to avoid it.

Well, it would seem they’re both very shit at their jobs.
53. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 11 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:18 pm

rEID “As I said on the general thread, if Israel really wanted to eliminate the Qassams, they’d equip the Palistinian police to do it.”

PLEASE tell me that you are not that naive. Israel supplied tens of thousands of weapons to the PA over the years. Look what it has got them.
54. Brian Smaller (584) Vote: Add rating 9 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:21 pm

“That doesn’t make it a good thing”

How do you embed a quote?

War is not a good thing. I don’t know anyone, with the exception of a few mercenaries serving overseas, who does. But if you fight it you do it properly. If one side has point and kill zap guns and the other is armed with fruit then all the better for the first side. Disproportional response is what people whose favourite side is losing cry out.
55. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:24 pm

How do you embed a quote?

*blockquote*TEXT*/blockquote*

But with triangle bracket things replacing the *.
56. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 9 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:29 pm

How do you embed a quote?

http://www.w3schools.com/TAGS/tag_blockquote.asp

That should do it. Makes all pretty.

War is not a good thing. I don’t know anyone, with the exception of a few mercenaries serving overseas, who does. But if you fight it you do it properly. If one side has point and kill zap guns and the other is armed with fruit then all the better for the first side. Disproportional response is what people whose favourite side is losing cry out.

Okay, if this is a war (and I’m not saying it is), what are the goals of the war?
57. fatnuts (6) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 10 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:30 pm

How can Israel claim to be acting in self defense, or pursuing peace as long as it actively confiscates land outside its legitimate borders for the settlement of its own civilians?

This attack is a continuing smoke screen for the land grab; the annexation of Jerusalem and the prevention of a viable Palestinian state in the West bank.

If Israel was pursuing ‘peace’ then it would remove the illegal West bank settlements as it removed the same from Gaza, and the Sinai.
58. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 3 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:31 pm

The rocket attacks are crimes. Does someone have something up their sleeves that wipes out crime they’re not telling us about?
59. jastowns (83) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 11 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 3:41 pm

i guess israel has a friend at kiwiblog

* News
* World news
* Israel and the Palestinian territories

Israel mounts PR campaign to blame Hamas for Gaza destruction
Foreign minister briefs Rice, Miliband, and Solana

* Toni O’Loughlin, Jerusalem
* guardian.co.uk, Sunday 28 December 2008 15.45 GMT
* Article history

Israel has mounted a public relations campaign to convince international hearts and minds that Hamas is to blame for the death and destruction they are seeing on their television screens.

Stung by the wave of international criticism earlier this year when Israel invaded Gaza to stop militants firing rockets, in an operation dwarfed by its current attack, Israel decided to go on the offensive.

“In the past our prime minister received phone calls from high-ranking officials and politicians. When he said, ‘Surely you understand about the rocket fire’, they said, ‘What are you talking about?’” foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said.

So, while the military marshalled its forces, the foreign ministry honed its message and amassed its staff, ready for Saturday’s attack.

Israeli diplomats were recalled from holidays and ordered back to work and in the rocket-bombarded southern Israeli town of Sderot, on Gaza’s northern perimeter, it opened a multilingual media centre to brief foreign journalists.

Then when the time came, the foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, reportedly picked up the phone, dialing Britain’s foreign secretary, David Miliband, US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, UN secretary general Ban Ki-Moon, and EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana along with the foreign ministers of Russia, China, France and Germany.

Yesterday she also briefed two buses of up to 80 international representatives and dignitaries in the Sderot media centre.

“We thought it was essential to show the context in which Israel’s decisions are being made and that there is a sequence of events,” Palmor said.

For Israel, the chain of events leading up to this attack begins not with its occupation of Palestinian territory in 1967, which is the Palestinian view.

Instead it begins three years ago with its decision to withdraw its military barracks and civilian settlements from inside Gaza.

“We could start in 1948 [with the partitioning of historical Palestine to create Israel] but if we want to limit ourselves to the current situation, I would begin with the pull-out of 2005,” Palmor said.

Palestinian militants claimed the evacuation was a victory due to their rocket-launching campaign and continued firing rockets on to Israeli southern towns.

Having built a wall around Gaza before disengagement, Israel then imposed a progressively tighter blockade, by barring Gazan labourers from entering Israel in late 2005, then by banning Gazan commercial trade in 2006 and finally in mid-2007 by squeezing humanitarian aid.

Asked whether the campaign was working, Palmor said it was too early to tell.

Still, as the attack was beginning yesterday on , the message, whether due to Israel’s campaign or not, was being publicly repeated around the world.

Rice blamed Hamas “for breaking the cease-fire and for the renewal of violence” while the Palestinian Authorityís President, Mahmoud Abbas, said the attack could have been avoided.

“We have warned of this grave danger and said that we should remove all the pretexts used by Israel,” Abbas said yesterday as the attack on Gaza continued.
60. cha (168) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:02 pm

Disinformation, secrecy and lies: How the Gaza offensive came about and from the Christian Science Monitor Domestic politics fuels Gaza conflict.
61. Adam (230) Vote: Add rating 11 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:13 pm

The rocket attacks are crimes.

Oh really? I would call it an act of war. Seriously you’re too stupid for words Ryan.
62. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 8 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:14 pm

{blockquote}The rocket attacks are crimes.{/blockquote}

Oh really? I would call it an act of war. Seriously you’re too stupid for words Ryan.

Use the less-than and greater-than signs for html tags.

Where would you draw the line between crimes and acts of war?
63. Adam (230) Vote: Add rating 6 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:18 pm

Go play your silly little argument somewhere else. If you can tell the difference then there is no hope for you.
64. barry (270) Vote: Add rating 6 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:24 pm

Frankly - I cant understand why Isreal doesnt just clear the place out (Gaza). Just destroy everything as far in as the rockets can go - and go further if bigger rockets are used.

There are many reasons why the Palestinians are not happy with the situation. The UN and the Allies fucked up after WW II - but thats not Israels fault. Its like the Scots (highland clearances), the Irish (British criminal rule), etc, etc. Theres no good livimg in the past. As it turns out the Scots and the Irish (and the Welsh) will get their independance back (already half done) without tryng to live in the past and fighting old wars. the Irish did this and they are way behing the Scots on the road to independance.

The Palestinians should be blaming the UN and the Allies, but living in the past committs them to ongoing second class status.

Further I cant understand why in all thes Arab countries there never seems to be a limit to the numbers of middle aged men who are on the streets protesting - ie: looking for trouble. They should be working or doing something to help their families grow out of the shit they are in.
65. Spoff (94) Vote: Add rating 4 Subtract rating 7 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:31 pm

It is very obvious from the posts that few here have any idea what the Palestine conflict is about. One thing is certain, you will not learn about it from the newspapers or television.
I am the same age as the State of Israel and for most of my life supported it. That was until the conflict in Lebanon last year when a few alarm bells went off in my head. I now hold a different view and it is the result of reading thousands of pages of original documents inspired by the essay linked below.
Anyone wishing to gain a greater understanding, and I sincerely hope that anyone who has the temerity to post on the subject would feel obliged to, I suggest reading Origins of conflict:
http://www.bidstrup.com/zionism.htm
It is not a long piece and is very readable.
I then suggest that you double check all of the facts that the writer presents.
66. Harpoon (33) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 6 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:33 pm

how many teachers, doctors, nurses, plumbers, grandparents, schoolchildren, mothers and fathers died in the Hamas rocket attacks? To the nearest ten would be sufficient. Just hazard a guess.
67. cha (168) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:34 pm

Historical maps from 1945 with rough population estimates and the proposed borders of the UN’s 1947 partition plan.
68. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 3 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:38 pm

how many teachers, doctors, nurses, plumbers, grandparents, schoolchildren, mothers and fathers died in the Hamas rocket attacks? To the nearest ten would be sufficient. Just hazard a guess.

Since 2001, 15 Israelis (wikipedia doesn’t have a reference for that particular number) have been killed by rocket attacks, and a further eight by mortar attacks. Just over 3000 rockets have been fired since 2001.
69. PhilBest (3938) Vote: Add rating 9 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:47 pm

There have been numerous cases around the world, of competing claims by different races or cultures, to the same piece of land. We have bits of land between Germany and France, between Serbia and Bosnia, between Russia and Poland, between India and Pakistan; to name but a few. In some cases, ancient hatreds seem to have been buried and peaceful coexistence achieved, irrespective of the issues of which nation possesses the disputed territory.

In other cases, it has been necessary for a compromise solution to be imposed by the international community through the UN. These compromise solutions involve a physical separation of the incompatible peoples, with the displacement of significant numbers of both. Obviously, the solution designed will attempt to be as fair as possible, and draw borders that require the minimum amount of displacement of peoples. This was the case with the UN-designed “1946 borders” of Israel and Jordan and a “Palestinian State”. However, this solution assumed a peaceful coexistence, and did not allow for defensibility of the borders of the new Jewish State; in fact one would even wonder if the Europeans involved had any intention of the new State surviving at all, when the facts on the ground at the time are considered. I mean, a State that over a significant amount of its length, is 15 miles wide, between the Mediterranean sea and its sworn enemies………get real?

OK, the Jewish State embarrassed its creators by daring to survive, and in the process, taking defensive positions beyond its original borders while reasonably awaiting end-of-conflict non-aggression agreements. Note that NO JEWS remained in “Palestinian” or Arabic areas, while several hundred thousand Arabs remained within the borders of Israel. This should tell us a lot about the moral status of the adversaries; but no, Israel’s detractors choose to focus solely on displaced Arabs, rather than displaced Jews and their legitimate fears in the event that they remained in Arab dominated areas.

The point that I find is crucial, when discussing these issues with New Zealanders, is that almost everyone has no concept of the size of the territories in dispute. This is not France and Germany; or India and Pakistan. We are talking about a State, Israel, that is about the size of the lower North Island of NZ from Wanganui to Wellington, only, at its narrowest point, no wider than the Kapiti Coast. We are talking about territories disputed by the “Palestinians”, that are about the size of Upper Hutt. Imagine the Kapiti Coast being populated by Jews, and the overlooking ranges being populated by “Palestinians”. Would you deny the Jews the right to hold onto at least the first range of hills overlooking their towns, in the absence of clear, sworn, and demonstrated peaceability on the part of the Arabs? What we are talking about here, is a tacit “Final Solution” that you can either endorse or reject; what you choose says a lot more about you than it does about Israel.

There are surrounding nations that are kin to the “Palestinian” Arabs; Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia; these nations are in total a hundred times the size of Israel, hundreds of thousands of square kilometers. Yet the possibility of the absorption of the displaced “Palestinians” by these nations never comes up; the focus is entirely on 18,000 square km Israel being demanded to relinquish 4,000 square km of strategic territory that virtually cuts it in half, to people who remain avowedly devoted to Israel’s destruction.

I have said this before and will keep saying it. If the “Palestinans”, and Jordan, Syria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia were all Christian, or Buddhist, or Hindu, or anything except Islamic, the descendants of the displaced “Palestinians” would all long since have got themselves a life in the land to which they had been displaced and welcomed with open ams; in many cases merely a few kilometers from where they originally lived. Are there ANY territorial disputes anywhere in the world where Islam is involved, where this has happened? Cyprus? Bosnia? Kashmir? East Timor?

Look at India and Pakistan. How many Hindus in Pakistan? Nix. Nada. Nil. How many Muslims in India? Tens of millions. Which country still has trouble with the other side attacking it, demanding that their rights be acceded to? How many Hindu demands for a right to live in peace in Pakistan where their ancestors came from, backed up with terror attacks in Pakistan? Ever?

The international blindness to the existential threat that is Islam, in favour of an obsession with the so-called crimes of the tiny, imperilled Jewish state, can only be explained by reference to the biblical and the supernatural. It is not explicable on rational, humanist grounds. And the inability of people like Ryan Sproull to acknowledge this, merely strengthens the case against them.
70. cha (168) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 7 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:52 pm

Since the Second Intifada broke out in 2000, Israelis have killed nearly 5000 Palestinians, nearly a thousand of them minors. in contrast, from the ceasefire Hamas announced in June, 2008 until Saturday, no Israelis had been killed by Hamas.
71. Ryan Sproull (1141) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 4 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 4:58 pm

Since the Second Intifada broke out in 2000, Israelis have killed nearly 5000 Palestinians, nearly a thousand of them minors. in contrast, from the ceasefire Hamas announced in June, 2008 until Saturday, no Israelis had been killed by Hamas.

That’s not really a contrast, since they’re vastly different timeframes. In the last decade, as compared to the last six months (which has been under a ceasefire).
72. jastowns (83) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 12 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 5:07 pm

spoff finally someone with a clue,tv and papers etc are propaganda tools designed to keep the public from knowing any truth about what is really going on
i have been ridiculed by many here at kiwiblog for trying to shear info i have learned over the years,i think most of them are pollyannas with the agenda of keeping people away from doing there own research
mainstream media hides most truth and puts its own spin on to influence there agenda,the gaza is only one of many
israel has much to answer for
73. cha (168) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 3 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 5:09 pm

In 2001-2008 rockets killed about 15 Israelis and injured 433,
74. Owen McShane (496) Vote: Add rating 5 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 5:12 pm

WE live in strange times.

Go to:
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8305
and read:

“Churchill über alles and the scourge of revisionism”
Two recent publications assert that the brutal British and the aggressive Americans are the true villains of WWII.
JOnathan Ariel writes:
“Buchanan argues that had the savage Winston Churchill not corralled a certain Austrian into an untenable corner, Der Fuehrer might not have, on September 1, 1939, dispatched 1,850,000 soldiers, 3,100 tanks, 10,000 artillery pieces and 2,085 airplanes to subjugate Poland. And in turn, have the Allies “unnecessarily” declare war, two days later. Elsewhere in the book, among other distortions, Buchanan opines that it was the Allies’ folly and not Hitler’s long standing desire of ridding Europe of Jews, which was responsible for the Holocaust. Tens of millions of Europeans died needlessly because the Allies fought a war they chose not to avoid, seems to be what Pat Buchanan is selling. And Roy Williams is buying. And to boot, he wants us to buy too. But at what price?

“The liberties we currently enjoy are the going rate, I suspect.

“In an equally twisted review by Williams, this time of the leftist Nicholson Baker’s Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization, the case is promoted that the Allied bombing of German cities was tantamount to a war crime. Baker seemingly frog marches in lock step with one Jorg Friedrich, a most unattractive apologist for Nazi conduct during the war, who has railed for years against what he deems are Britain’s “war crimes”.

“Baker says that there was no need to carpet bomb German towns and to pulverise infrastructure. This was so “unnecessary”, he declares. Suggesting, I infer, that less destructive ways (such as negotiations) were available to say, the Royal Air Force, to stop the flow of fuel, storm troopers, collaborators and bullets, earmarked for the mobile Nazi death units called the Einsatzgruppen which pillaged and raped, before merrily shooting and gassing their way through Europe and Russia.”

What I find most frightening is that all but one of the seven comments so fare endorse the views of Buchanan and his soul mate.
The Germans were innocents – it was all our fault.
75. reid (1505) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 7 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 6:17 pm

“What I find most frightening is that all but one of the seven comments so fare endorse the views of Buchanan and his soul mate. The Germans were innocents – it was all our fault.”

If you read that into people who voice opposition to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians Owen, you’re an idiot.
76. Spoff (94) Vote: Add rating 4 Subtract rating 8 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 6:49 pm

123 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 1,050 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000.

1,062 Israelis and at least 4,876 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000.

8,341 Israelis and 33,034 Palestinians have been injured since September 29, 2000.

Israel has been targeted by at least 65 UN resolutions and the Palestinians have been targeted by none.

1 Israeli is being held prisoner by Palestinians, while 10,756 Palestinians are currently imprisoned by Israel.

0 Israeli homes have been demolished by Palestinians and 18,147 Palestinian homes have been demolished by Israel since 1967.

Israel currently has 223 Jewish-only settlements and ‘outposts’ built on confiscated Palestinian land. Palestinians do not have any settlements on Israeli land.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
77. Glutaemus Maximus (1030) Vote: Add rating 4 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 7:48 pm

Bullshit baffles brains for sure.

When the declared aim of Sovreign States in the area around Israel is to take the land, and push the Zionists into the sea to drown.

Then there is an intractable problem of resolving the issues in the Region.

When you look at the quality, and track record of the ‘Haters of Zion’ then you know who it easier to business with.

I’m a Dinner Jacket is a feudal fuckwit, and the Optician who rules Baathist Syria both hate each other.

Shia v’s Sunni.

The leading Muslims are becoming a real World problem. They have ambitions to build another World Emirate.

Why should we conform to their ideals? If they don’t like the West, then move out!

They also want to de-stabilise India and China and Russia etc.

They wave the Palestinain Cause as the catalyst, and yet seem more content killing anything that brings a smile to their faces.

Secularism? They don’t want to tolerate us. Why should we be scared as to not offend them and their feudal, mediaeval, and misogynist outlook.

Their mischievous leaders are dangerous.

Not every Muslim is a terrorist, however at the moment it sure looks like every Terrorist is in fact a Muslim.
78. Spoff (94) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 7:49 pm

Owen.

I think the reviewer indulges in a little hyperbole. Buchanan’s thesis is not nearly so shocking as this piece makes out and much of it was shared by Sir Basil Liddell-Hart, A.J. P. Taylor and other prominent military historians. The central point of interest is the offer of peace made by Hitler after Dunkirk which was on very favourable terms. It is not heresy to suggest that Churchill should have taken it as it would have preserved Britain’s Empire/treasure and Germany did not even demand her former colonies back, neither were there any conditions for Britain to disarm. In essence, the theory is that Hitler’s main phobia was Bolshevism and he wanted Britain to remain the primary Naval power. In any case, by accepting, Churchill would have bought time to re-arm. There are many books that explore these possibilities, some from just after the War.
The first casualty in War is Truth. It pays to avoid becoming wedded to any dogma that proceeds from it.
Another reliable dictum is that there all the actors are rational. If you are told that Hitler, the Muslims, the Serbs ….whatever, are mad, most likely you are being fed propaganda. Insane people are not organized enough to command ten people let alone an army or a Nation.
79. Don the Kiwi (140) Vote: Add rating 6 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 8:09 pm

A lot of fog has been descending over some of the commenters here.
Did the Hamas miltants in Gaza start firing rockets into Israel around six months ago, or not?
Did Israel surrender/return the Gaza Strip to the Palestinians for a homeland, hopeful of peace?

Do the Hamas Palestinians have in their Declaration the destruction of Israel, or not?

Do the Muslim Palestinians - mainly of Gaza, but elsewhere also - have as their aim, to kill all Jews (Israelis)?


I suggest that it is time to cut through the fog and face facts. Israel is certainly not lily white, and has committed what I would call gross miscalculations in relation to their land occupation, but I cannot blame them for their response when it comes to the protection of their citizens, and in fact, their very survival.
80. Spoff (94) Vote: Add rating 4 Subtract rating 9 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 8:11 pm

Right on cue here comes Bum Muscle with a dogma he is wedded to.
“the declared aim of Sovreign States in the area around Israel is to take the land, and push the Zionists into the sea to drown.”

“At the time of the June 1967 war it was stridently asserted by Israel’s supporters that Egyptian President Gamal Nasser threatened to drive the Israelis into the sea.
This claim, for which there was no evidence at all, was almost universally believed in the West and it had a powerful effect on public opinion in Britain and the United States at that time.
In Britain one Member of Parliament even quoted it during a television program, provoking another Member of Parliament, Christopher Mayhew, to offer 5000 pounds to any of the millions of viewers who could produce evidence that Nasser had made such a statement. Mr. Mayhew repeated the offer later on television, and in the House of Commons and broadened it to include genocidal statements by other Arab leaders. As he explained in a letter to the Manchester Guardian:

“I made this 5000 pound offer with a quite serious intention. I wanted to help reassure Jewish people that, in spite of much Israeli propaganda to the contrary, responsible Arab leaders are not genocidal. Those who try to suggest otherwise are seriously mistaken and merely help to increase the fear and hatred in the Middle East which does so much to prevent a peaceful settlement.”

During the following four years Mr. Mayhew received a steady trickle of letters from eager claimants, each one producing some blood-curdling quotation from an Arab leader, usually culled straight from one pro-Israeli publication or another. Mr. Mayhew replied to each claimant, explaining that the quotation was mistranslated, wrongly attributed or invented, as the case might be, but always adding that if the claimant was not satisfied he could take him to court.
Eventually, one claimant, a Mr. Warren Bergson, did take Mr. Mayhew to court. Bergson issued a writ during the October 1974 General Election for Parliament at a time when Mr. Mayhew was contesting the constituency of Bath.
In February 1976 the case was heard. Significantly, Mr. Bergson was unable to offer evidence of Nasser’s alleged statement. Instead, he produced a genocidal threat alleged to have been made by the then Secretary-General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, in 1948. When Mr. Mayhew produced the original statement in Arabic, however, the claimant was unable to deny that his English version was a flagrant and apparently deliberate mistranslation.”
From: Facts & Fables: The Arab-Israeli Conflict by Clifford A. Wright
http://www.answerway.com/expertans.php?category=369& expertname=abirl&catnam=Breaking+News

“The leading Muslims are becoming a real World problem. They have ambitions to build another World Emirate.”

I would be interested to see evidence of this. All I see is evidence of a certain cliche in America who openly promote a thing called the Project for the New American Century.

“If they don’t like the West, then move out!”
I rather think they would like to see the West move out of such dominions as Iraq.

“They also want to de-stabilise India and China and Russia etc.”

Oh boy. Maybe one should back away quietly at this point. What the hell, one more.

“Not every Muslim is a terrorist, however at the moment it sure looks like every Terrorist is in fact a Muslim.”

Google King David Hotel, Patria, Rome Embassy bombing 1946, Lavon Affair, Irgun Terrorism, Deir Yassin, Shatila, Sabra. That should do for starters.
81. gatcollie (6) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 8:33 pm

Spoff, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.
While the statistics may be correct (although, if I were you, I wouldn’t include the statistics on the UN, since I think the UN’s stance on Israel says far more about the United Nations than Israel - if you do not believe me look up the reports on the laughingly named Durban anti-racism conference), they miss the underlying problem. The tragedy of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that when it intensifies it is generally (although not universally acknowledged) to be due to provocation from the Palestinians (who are being used as tools of extremists regimes who wish to hurt Israel and the West).
Israel is certainly not innocent. The government has blood on its hands, and seems to have ceased to have any meaning except the protection of Jewish land. But think, what are they to do? The basis of the state is to protect its citizens. If there are rockets and terror attacks pouring over the border, what is a country to do? If it was North Korea sending hundreds of rockets over the South Korean border every week, would we still be asking who was right? If New Zealand was being bombed by rockets from Australia, what would be think of a government that stood back and did nothing to protect their citizens?
82. jastowns (83) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 10 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 8:50 pm

Glutaemus Maximus what a pillock you are,a true pollyanna with no facts just bullshit,why dont you tell us all where your info is coming from (george bush) ???
these are the trolls i have been taking about,trying to baffle all with bullshit
how about some facts with your dim witted propaganda
the lies are starting to unravel and theres not a fucken thing you can do about it,and im loving it
83. Glutaemus Maximus (1030) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 8:53 pm

“I think the reviewer indulges in a little hyperbole. Buchanan’s thesis is not nearly so shocking as this piece makes out and much of it was shared by Sir Basil Liddell-Hart, A.J. P. Taylor and other prominent military historians. The central point of interest is the offer of peace made by Hitler after Dunkirk which was on very favourable terms. It is not heresy to suggest that Churchill should have taken it as it would have preserved Britain’s Empire/treasure and Germany did not even demand her former colonies back, neither were there any conditions for Britain to disarm. In essence, the theory is that Hitler’s main phobia was Bolshevism and he wanted Britain to remain the primary Naval power. In any case, by accepting, Churchill would have bought time to re-arm. There are many books that explore these possibilities, some from just after the War.”

You are quite wrong here. Operation Sealion had already been planned.

Hitler, whilst deeming the Brits to be of better stock than the Slavs, also considered the Island Fortress a home of ‘Unter Menschen’ with power on the Seas he was deeply jealous of. And with Dominions he wanted. Including the States.

So go and play with your devious, pious rag head friends, and just Fuck Off!
84. Straight Shooter (31) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 8:54 pm

Wow, 83 comments! Did I miss something? Should I care?
85. jastowns (83) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 7 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:00 pm

gatcollie if New Zealand was stealing land and bulldozing homes in Australia they have the right to bomb us
i guess kiwis respect the rights of ozzy’s to live on there own land in peace, something your having trouble understanding
you are right about something though the UN can not be trusted and israel has blood on its hands
86. joeAverage (32) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:09 pm

whos the first poster to step up to the plate and go and fight Israel, BIG SILENCE , opps worrying about our jobs next year are we,yer
87. Glutaemus Maximus (1030) Vote: Add rating 5 Subtract rating 3 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:09 pm

jastowns (77) Vote: 0 1 Says:

December 29th, 2008 at 9:00 pm

You and Spoff are the true Trolls. Your views are simply that. Certainly not bullet proof truth.

A question for both of you?

Been to Israel, Jordan, Egypt, the Lebanon?

I have.

So if you don’t like a personal view based on experience, and not Dogma then tough.

You are just lying, brainwashed gits!
88. Glutaemus Maximus (1030) Vote: Add rating 4 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:17 pm

Google King David Hotel, Patria, Rome Embassy bombing 1946, Lavon Affair, Irgun Terrorism, Deir Yassin, Shatila, Sabra. That should do for starters.

Fast and loose with facts here, you prannock. David Ben Gurion was a terrorist, and capable killer. Along with Moshe Dyan.

Put Rag Heads on them, and you would call them ‘Freedom Fighters’

Funny how the Left love the despotic, controlling autocracies of the Levant, North Africa, and Trans Jordan.

Don’t try and re-write history bufoons.

You have no idea. Sensitive, Fuck yes, how many mates have you lost to stone age fundamentalists?
89. Grant (268) Vote: Add rating 6 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:19 pm

So tell us, Reid and jastowns, what should Israel do then? Just let itself be overun possibly? Should they form an orderly queue on the beach and wait for instructions from their new masters?
Do you not agree that Hamas and co would be happy to see the Jewish state destroyed? Do you personally think that that is a worthy aim? Would you support such destuction?
You are obviously uncomfortable with the deaths of Palestinian civilians, would the deaths of Jewish civilians, as a result of the desired destruction, be of lesser import? Perhaps they deserve it in your opinion.

G
90. jastowns (83) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 8 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:29 pm

glutaemus vote 1019 like i give a fuck
ive been all over the world but i would expect a troll to say he has inside knowledge so ive put testimony from someone that was there and killed there by being run over from a Israeli bulldozer tearing down Palestinian homes
also i asked you to put some facts on your claims pollyanna

enjoy a true story from gaza
91. Glutaemus Maximus (1030) Vote: Add rating 7 Subtract rating 4 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:35 pm

Next these Latte drinking socialists will be telling us that Saddam was misunderstood, that Ghaddafi was innocent, Mugabe is still a war hero.

Entebbe was piracy, and the Munich Massacre just went a bit wrong!

The left hate Jews. Simple fact. They prefer to side with the ‘Freedom Fighters’, whose indiscriminate killings (purposeful) are completely acceptable.

Intervention in Desert Storm 1 was avoidable! How?

You are sick and bad and wrong.

Jastowns, conspiracy theorist 2008. Overall Winner.

How old? Experienced?

Fuck off muppet!
92. reid (1505) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 7 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:36 pm

“what should Israel do then?”

Uh Grant, it’s pretty obvious isn’t it?

One definition of insanity is trying the same thing and expecting a different result.

Has 50 years of oppressive bloodshed by Israel and 50 years of reactive bloodshed from the Palestinians produced a result? No? So how about BOTH sides being forced to sit down with a neutral powerful world player and made to listen on pain of punishment?

Unfortunately the US has ruled itself out of this game by its curiously sycophantic approach to all things Israel. So who would you suggest is capable of playing this role?

Both sides are evidently quite incapable of solving their own problem, I think one important thing is for some people who’ve commented today including yourself, to understand it’s not a one-sided issue. How about a little objectivity and a tad of research that goes beyond the sites that proclaim poor widdle Iswael is just a widdle victim…
93. Glutaemus Maximus (1030) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 4 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:39 pm

Answer the question Jastowns, please.

Have you ever been to the area we are furiously debating?

Or are you just another OE backpacker with funds supplied by Mummy and Daddy?

Don’t suppose you ever did Military Service?

No, I thought not.

Trust Baby!
94. reid (1505) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 2 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:42 pm

“The left hate Jews.”

Try not to associate disagreement with Israeli policies with leftist politics Glutaemus. I’m a conservative as you probably know. Left-right politics has nothing to do with justice. Only lefties obfuscate that issue. You’re not a lefty, are you?
95. Glutaemus Maximus (1030) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 4 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:42 pm

For the record, I think Israelis are some of the most obnoxious people I have ever had the misfortune to meet.

FFS they are even more arrogant than SAFA’s and with a very weird accent.

They are both results of continuous threat from a much larger population group.
96. TomYum (6) Vote: Add rating 2 Subtract rating 3 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:43 pm

Ryan S -
I don’t often agree with your posts, but in this thread I have been mightily impressed with a cool head under fire - arguing the facts, addressing the argument and ignoring the personal abuse. Well done, I appreciate your contribution to the debate. While whoever “wins” the debate on Kiwiblog is unimportant and trivial, it is good to see that some people can engage in thoughtful discourse, and play the ball rather than the man. And I must say I don’t even like sport, let alone lawn bowls. Cheers. Tom
97. MaxPower (15) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 1 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:45 pm

At the time of the June 1967 war it was stridently asserted by Israel’s supporters that Egyptian President Gamal Nasser threatened to drive the Israelis into the sea.
This claim, for which there was no evidence at all, was almost universally believed in the West and it had a powerful effect on public opinion in Britain and the United States at that time.

Even if that wasn’t said, Egypt still clearly wanted to destroy Israel. In 1967, Egypt evicted the UN from the Egypt/Israel border, which had been stationed there since the last war to keep the peace between the two nations. Egypt then began sending its own military to the border. It eventually massed 100,000 troops at the border, as well as tanks and artilary.

Before that Egypt had also blocked the Strait of Tiran with warships. This was Israel’s only connection to the Red Sea. Under international law this is seen as an act of war, and any attack by Israel would have been justified. However, Israel tried and tried and tried to resolve the issue through diplomatic measures.

And despite what ever reference you have Spoff, Egypt’s President Nasser said: “Our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel”

Egypt was clearly planning a full on military attack on Israel. Israel was completely out numbered and out gunned. It’s only chance at survival was a pre-emptive strike against Egypt.
98. jastowns (83) Vote: Add rating 1 Subtract rating 6 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:45 pm

so you have been to israel you fucken troll
just watch the clip and make up your own mind
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBPf29ZOWkg&feature=PlayList&p=194C562FA9857BD5&playnext=1&index=8
99. Grant (268) Vote: Add rating 3 Subtract rating 0 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:48 pm

Reid
I would suggest that the existence of a “neutral powerful world player” is on a par with the existence of the fountain of youth.

My point is that all the pro Palestinian posters on here, and in the MSM, cannot bring themselves to admit that Israel’s capitulation to the demands of its foes will mean the deaths of very many people. That is the long and the short of it. Will that make you be happy ?

Also, your sarcasm in the last paragraph is unbecoming. No issue is ever one sided, but sometimes you have to deal with what’s in front of you. What is, is.
G
100. Glutaemus Maximus (1030) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 3 Says:
December 29th, 2008 at 9:49 pm

Reid, I apologise but the red mist decended.

Have heard too many apologists for the fundamantalists.

What happened to the Palestinians was wrong. Very Wrong. It has to be sorted out in order for there to be any glimmer of World Peace.