The Israel Situation [Archive] - Page 15 - The SuperHeroHype Forums

View Full Version : The Israel Situation

Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20

The Overlord

01-05-2009, 01:45 PM

So we should abandoned are one true ally in the Middle East simply because of Middle Eastern public opinion? Brilliant.

Isn't Israel a big boy now, can't they take care themselves? This is state welfare, with all the economic problems in America, we shouldn't be sending money to a first world country, that is more capable of taking care of itself? What we get out of it? Frankly I dislike that whole region so I don't care about allies there or not.

I say we stop supporting Israel, but we stop commenting on the situation as well getting involved.

Let Israel and Arab states hash it out, either they make peace or destroy each other, either way I'm sick of this conflict, sick of this region and sick of the irrational idiots who ensure it continues. I'm sick of having to care about region where people kill each other over hocus pocus myths.

The Senator

01-05-2009, 01:46 PM

I bet the IRA deserves their own state, too.

The Senator

01-05-2009, 01:48 PM

I take exception to your sig "Israel deserves peace" jmanspice, by the way.

Israel has rejected every call for ceasefire or restraint from the world leaders, even temporary ceasefire to allow aid into Gaza. For a nation to do what Israel is doing now is considered a war crime. Firstly, because they have not exhausted all diplomatic means. Can you honestly say they have, when they reject calls for a ceasefire? Secondly, their response is hugely disproportionate to the rocket attacks into Israel.

You are hugely naive if you believe Israel is not equally to blame for the current situation as Hamas, if not more so.

Oh please. I'm not going to be ridiculed by some internet message board hack who has a history of sympathizing with terrorist causes on these boards, whether it is the IRA or Hamas. Sometimes I wonder if you think Hitler's regime had a right to murder the six million Jews who lost their lives during the Holocaust.

BlackLantern

01-05-2009, 01:49 PM

I'm inclined to think if Palestine did have their own state, they'd probably continue ****ing with Israel....

The Senator

01-05-2009, 01:49 PM

Israel sending in the ground troops is a grave mistake.

These air strikes and land invasion can only turn out, at the very best for the Israelis, short term benifits. In the long term, it will hurt Israel. The world's opinion will be lower than ever of Israel, and the deaths of civilians will only serve as an excellent recruiting tactic for Hamas.

The invasion was a dumb move. And it seems it was largely politically motivated which just makes it even sadder.

Strange... similar situations have happened before, and the international community has yet to back away from Israel... looks like your predictions are going to prove false in the end...

Marx

01-05-2009, 01:50 PM

Isn't Israel a big boy now, can't they take care themselves? This is state welfare, with all the economic problems in America, we shouldn't be sending money to a first world country, that is more capable of taking care of itself? What we get out of it? Frankly I dislike that whole region so I don't care about allies there or not.

I say we stop supporting Israel, but we stop commenting on the situation as well getting involved.

Let Israel and Arab states hash it out, either they make peace or destroy each other, either way I'm sick of this conflict, sick of this region and sick of the irrational idiots who ensure it continues. I'm sick of having to care about region where people kill each other over hocus pocus myths.
The point remains that Israel is one of our most important allies. You do not turn your back on your allies. Why is that so hard to understand? :huh:

The Senator

01-05-2009, 01:51 PM

I'm inclined to think if Palestine did have their own state, they'd probably continue ****ing with Israel....

They would. After all, many leaders of Hamas have claimed that Israel deserves to be wiped off the map and that the Jews ought to be exterminated. The creation of Palestine would ultimately bring legitimacy to a movement ripe with terrorism and racism, because there is no doubt in my mind that the same extremists who were elected to lead Hamas will be leading a Palestinian government.

Marx

01-05-2009, 01:51 PM

I'm inclined to think if Palestine did have their own state, they'd probably continue ****ing with Israel....

If a Palestine (free of Hamas) existed as a state, I believe there would be alot more cooperation.

That could just be my wishful thinking though.

Superman4ever

01-05-2009, 01:52 PM

There are some really good articles from both sides of the fence today. I enjoyed these:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/why-arent-more-americans_b_155194.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mitchell-bard/hamas-is-responsible-for_b_155261.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daoud-kuttab/ten-myths-about-gaza_b_155182.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marty-kaplan/eyeless-in-gaza_b_155204.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-farer/israel-in-gaza-self-defen_b_154937.html

The Senator

01-05-2009, 01:54 PM

If a Palestine (free of Hamas) existed as a state, I believe there would be alot more cooperation.

That could just be my wishful thinking though.

The ONLY way Palestine will be able to exist and co-exist with Israel is if the Palestinians elect moderate leaders who are willing to strike a compromise between the two peoples... leaders who denounce terrorism as a response mechanism to an atrocity which occurred sixty years ago... otherwise, there will be perpetual conflict in the region... and I fully anticipate the latter is more likely, at least for the near future...

Shemtov

01-05-2009, 01:54 PM

Sometimes I wonder if you think Hitler's regime had a right to murder the six million Jews who lost their lives during the Holocaust.
he probably is a Holocaust deneyer.

hippie_hunter

01-05-2009, 02:13 PM

Israel sending in the ground troops is a grave mistake.

These air strikes and land invasion can only turn out, at the very best for the Israelis, short term benifits. In the long term, it will hurt Israel. The world's opinion will be lower than ever of Israel, and the deaths of civilians will only serve as an excellent recruiting tactic for Hamas.

The invasion was a dumb move. And it seems it was largely politically motivated which just makes it even sadder.

I don't think that the invasion will end up hurting Israel. States that traditionally oppose Israel like Russia and the Arab states will continue to be opposed to it regardless and states that traditionally support Israel will continue to do so.

Shemtov

01-05-2009, 02:13 PM

The violence will always continue, no matter how many peace treaties or cease fires there may be
no, in seven years The Sprout will come and end all war.

Superman4ever

01-05-2009, 03:45 PM

The ONLY way Palestine will be able to exist and co-exist with Israel is if the Palestinians elect moderate leaders who are willing to strike a compromise between the two peoples... leaders who denounce terrorism as a response mechanism to an atrocity which occurred sixty years ago... otherwise, there will be perpetual conflict in the region... and I fully anticipate the latter is more likely, at least for the near future...

For the near future, yes, unfortunately. Hard to disagree with such an eloquent statement. :up:

To interject thought the religious right on Israel's side, which the government caters too, doesn't help. The whole Jerusalem undivided nonsense is wrong.

Marx

01-05-2009, 03:47 PM

Nivek

01-05-2009, 03:57 PM

I'm inclined to think if Palestine did have their own state, they'd probably continue ****ing with Israel....

That's what I always figured. It would just be a designated spot to launch more stupid suicide/ missile/ cowardly attacks.

Palestinians are no different than Jews to alot of those surrounding countries. No one around them wants to take them in, but they are oh so quick to support them every time Israel smacks them down.

Kelly

01-05-2009, 04:18 PM

We can't do anything. The Palestinians need to have this epiphany themselves... and frankly, I don't really know if they will be able to put their anger and frustrations behind them in the name of peace any time soon...

Religion is the core on one side, not both.....what they both share as reasons for this conflict is power and land.

Israel wants a certain group in power in Gaza and West Bank (they have been able to work fairly well with the PA in the West Bank, until now and the PA is having to give lip service to Hamas at the moment...) The PA wants Sovereign power over a state of their own.....Hamas wants Jews off the face of the earth (that is where the religion comes in...)

Superman

01-05-2009, 04:34 PM

isn't israel a big boy now, can't they take care themselves? This is state welfare, with all the economic problems in america, we shouldn't be sending money to a first world country, that is more capable of taking care of itself? What we get out of it? Frankly i dislike that whole region so i don't care about allies there or not.

I say we stop supporting israel, but we stop commenting on the situation as well getting involved.

Let israel and arab states hash it out, either they make peace or destroy each other, either way i'm sick of this conflict, sick of this region and sick of the irrational idiots who ensure it continues. I'm sick of having to care about region where people kill each other over hocus pocus myths.Amen!!

The Overlord

01-05-2009, 04:53 PM

The point remains that Israel is one of our most important allies. You do not turn your back on your allies. Why is that so hard to understand? :huh:

Other allies don't ask for handouts, seriously is Canada on the dole?

Besides why are we allies, I know what they get out of it, but we do we get out of it?

BlackLantern

01-05-2009, 04:56 PM

I really feel the only way to stop these 2 from annihilating each other is to put them at opposite ends of the globe or something...separate them like children

Superman

01-05-2009, 04:57 PM

Oh please. I'm not going to be ridiculed by some internet message board hack who has a history of sympathizing with terrorist causes on these boards, whether it is the IRA or Hamas. Sometimes I wonder if you think Hitler's regime had a right to murder the six million Jews who lost their lives during the Holocaust.What the heck is wrong with you? It seems that you have been aggressive against anyone who isn't 100% behind Israel in this thread.

Look, We all know Hamas is bad, We all agree on this, But Israel isn't 100% innocent in this either. I think you need to step back and try to see both sides of this situation.

MaskedManJRK

01-05-2009, 05:04 PM

One podcast I listen to did some interesting stuff recently about the whole Israel/Gaza stuff. It's called "Common Sense with Dan Carlin" and he put out a different idea then what I'm sure most news sites and stuff are putting out.

http://www.dancarlin.com/disp.php?page=csarchive (It's the first one at the top, called "The Samson Suicide Pact")

Shemtov

01-05-2009, 05:19 PM

.

Would you talk to someone from the stormfront forums who has their mind set on certain beliefs?
yes,if other people would read the discussion. it would be for the pupose of showing why stormfront is wrong to anybody who might be considering otherwise.

Marx

01-05-2009, 06:34 PM

Other allies don't ask for handouts, seriously is Canada on the dole?

Israel is not even close to being in the same position as our other allies and you know it.

Besides why are we allies, I know what they get out of it, but we do we get out of it?

If you really don't know why, maybe you should not be in this thread. Israel is our only connection to the middle east. :huh:

The Senator

01-05-2009, 06:40 PM

What the heck is wrong with you? It seems that you have been aggressive against anyone who isn't 100% behind Israel in this thread.

Nope, that's not at it all. I've been aggressive against anyone who sides with the terrorists leading Hamas.

The Overlord

01-05-2009, 07:07 PM

Israel is not even close to being in the same position as our other allies and you know it.

They are somewhat less stupid Palestinians, they are still fairly stupid in many areas. Financial aid should come lots of strings, no free rides.

If you really don't know why, maybe you should not be in this thread. Israel is our only connection to the middle east. :huh:

I know that, I don't just care. That whole region is a God damn Hell hole filled irrational idiots, the sooner we stop involving ourselves in it, the better.

Superman4ever

01-05-2009, 08:13 PM

Nope, that's not at it all. I've been aggressive against anyone who sides with the terrorists leading Hamas.

Who is siding with them? And you do have a history, J, of being extremely aggressive against anyone who doesn't side with Israel. You've come a long way from your rhetoric of past, though.

From what I've read NO one is siding with Hamas. They have grievances in concern with the plight of the Palestinian people and the extreme response by Israel that is slaying innocent lives and if you (or anyone didn't) that would be inhumane.

I think calling Superman a hack or a terrorist sympathizer is far too much though. He always civil in discourse, so I find that cheap shot completely out of line. I don't think he sides with terrorists or has any sympathies for them. He cares about the Palestinian people, a majority of the world does, and a LOT of us can support them without advocating either the destruction of Israel or the slaughter of innocent civilians (on either side).

Extreme support on (or for) either side will lead us no where.

Kelly

01-05-2009, 08:22 PM

I think all of us in here are intelligent and sensitive enough to be able to have this discussion/debate without namecalling.....so let's try our very to keep our passion within our posts, but no namecalling please...

bunk

01-05-2009, 08:25 PM

The Senator

01-05-2009, 08:28 PM

Who is siding with them? And you do have a history, J, of being extremely aggressive against anyone who doesn't side with Israel. You've come a long way from your rhetoric of past, though.

From what I've read NO one is siding with Hamas. They have grievances in concern with the plight of the Palestinian people and the extreme response by Israel that is slaying innocent lives and if you (or anyone didn't) that would be inhumane.

I think calling Superman a hack or a terrorist sympathizer is far too much though. He always civil in discourse, so I find that cheap shot completely out of line. I don't think he sides with terrorists or has any sympathies for them. He cares about the Palestinian people, a majority of the world does, and a LOT of us can support them without advocating either the destruction of Israel or the slaughter of innocent civilians (on either side).

Extreme support on (or for) either side will lead us no where.

Well, I was referring to Kaine as such, because he has sided with Hamas and other terrorist organizations... not Superman.

Asteroid-Man

01-05-2009, 09:51 PM

I just read through this entire thread and the majority of you have no idea what your talking about. Please watch this video and any other videos made by the user (the young turks) regarding this situtation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=064hql9y7-E

If history has taught us anything it's that Israel and Palestine are BOTH at fault. War will NOT end this conflict, it's been going on since the death of Abraham roughly 4000 years ago, on again and off again. The truth is they both need to realize that both of their governing bodies are screwed up and will not work and that essentially they are the same race. They are the same people. They were both followers in Abraham and they both were apart of ONE tribe. The truth is that both of their peoples have a right to be there, the Palestinians who can prove that their homes were stolen by the Israeli government should be reimbursed in some way or form, and they need to be lead by a new group of people who are of both sides. Like a Jewish Palestinian for example.

Last time something similar happened was with the Persians and the Medes. Both were essentially Aryan and they were constantly at war. So Cyrus being a decendent of the Medes and the Persians eventually rallied up Persian and Mede allies to take the governing body down. Wanna know the best part? They didn't even wage war. Cyrus inheritted the Persian tribe and the Mede general joined with Cyrus. The two marched their armies to the capital and the Medes were forced to surrender. Cyrus then joined the two in culture and in geography.

Now of course things aren't as simple but other countries should pressure the Israeli government with embargos until they comply and come to a civil conclusion, a conclusion that the Palestinians can also agree with.

Kelly

01-05-2009, 10:15 PM

Wow.......thank you old wise one.......

You pretty much repeated what has been said, several times by most in this thread.....well except for the slight world history lesson.....

But welcome to the discussion....

Asteroid-Man

01-05-2009, 10:22 PM

Ahaha, thanks for the welcome Kel. It just pisses me off how so many people in this thread see the situation as Black and White with no grey areas. The conflict is more than just Israel Vs Palestine and a lot of people need to stop being so extremist and one sided regarding this issue.

Kelly

01-05-2009, 10:23 PM

Actually we've had some discussions on that very thing.....

Most do not see this as a black and white issue....

Asteroid-Man

01-05-2009, 10:28 PM

Haha in that case I'm mixing this thread with people at work and in class too.

Superman4ever

01-05-2009, 11:00 PM

Haha in that case I'm mixing this thread with people at work and in class too.

So, then, you didn't just read the entire thread, O Wise One. :whatever:

Compi716

01-05-2009, 11:00 PM

I can't believe I just found this thread.

As a practicing Modern Orthodox Jew, descendant of Holocaust survivors, and someone who has actually LIVED IN ISRAEL (not just vacationed there), it should be obvious that my feeling are incredibly strong on this subject. The issues of both sides in this situation have been stated over and over in this thread. I'd like to simply bring up the issue of "proportional response."

Certain individuals, like the thread starter, feel that Israel's retaliation in Gaza is not proportional, and even excessive.

********.

Those terrorists have been sending rockets into civilian homes for years. YEARS. I've met these people. I've been to their homes. I've spent Shabbat with them and saw how they thanked every day that they were actually alive. There is nothing, NOTHING, that Israel has done that has been out of proportion.

Israel sends mass text messages to citizens in Gaza telling them to get away from certain areas (mosques, schools, etc.), because these place are where weapons are stored, and they are about to be bombed. People can only be warned so much. When you watch the footage of those building blowing up, well...there's more than one explosion going on there.

Hamas is not an organization that is to be treated humanely. They are animals, who want nothing more than for Israel to be destroyed. When my friends and I talk about what is happening in Gaza, we all have the same reaction: "It's about damn time." Only recently has this been moved into the spotlight of mainstream media. We've been living with this pain for years. For as long as I can remember, Israel has always been threatened by outside forces, and the good-for-nothing UN has done absolutely nothing.

So yes, go and read the incredibly biased New York Times (controlled by a self-hating Jew, coincidentally). Go and read how the Palestinian children suffer. I'm sure you won't see the article on page 18 of all the Israelis left parent less, and how many of the soldiers are orphans.

There's a famous story from about 7 years ago or so. The front page article of the Times featured a group of Israeli soldiers surrounding a bloody boy, with the headline and article about how the Israelis were abusing this Palestinian teenager. WRONG. That boy was an American Jew in a yeshiva (a place of Jewish learning) for the year (the exact reason why I was living there), and the soldiers were protecting him from the rocks that were being thrown at him. Remember the rock throwing? Remember how many Israelis were either killed or wounded? Of course, the retraction article was buried deep in the bowels of the paper months later.

Am Yisrael Chai, v'Leshana HaBaah b'Yirushalayim.

"If the Arabs lay down their arms today, there will be peace today. If the Israelis lay down there arms today, there will be no Israel tomorrow."

The Senator

01-05-2009, 11:03 PM

Compi716

01-05-2009, 11:06 PM

And, by the way, it is great seeing all the Israel support in this thread. It's actually really touching.

raybia

01-05-2009, 11:08 PM

http://www.amirsahib.com/top-5-lies-about-israels-assault-on-gaza-by-jeremy-r-hammond

Bunker

01-05-2009, 11:15 PM

http://www.amirsahib.com/top-5-lies-about-israels-assault-on-gaza-by-jeremy-r-hammond

:up:

raybia

01-05-2009, 11:15 PM

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1051028.html

Superman4ever

01-05-2009, 11:22 PM

So yes, go and read the incredibly biased New York Times (controlled by a self-hating Jew, coincidentally). Go and read how the Palestinian children suffer. I'm sure you won't see the article on page 18 of all the Israelis left parent less, and how many of the soldiers are orphans.

There's a famous story from about 7 years ago or so. The front page article of the Times featured a group of Israeli soldiers surrounding a bloody boy, with the headline and article about how the Israelis were abusing this Palestinian teenager. WRONG. That boy was an American Jew in a yeshiva (a place of Jewish learning) for the year (the exact reason why I was living there), and the soldiers were protecting him from the rocks that were being thrown at him. Remember the rock throwing? Remember how many Israelis were either killed or wounded? Of course, the retraction article was buried deep in the bowels of the paper months later.
[/I]

You're comparing rock throwing to 1 ton bombs in the most densly populated land strip in the world? And what about the 100 fold Palestinian children left orphaned?

And if you want to talk rock throwing should I post videos from B'tselem of "Settlers" throwing rocks by the dozens at Palestinian civilians in Hebron?

This is on a daily basis too:

N5SJs4DPj4U

This radicalism on either side, that ONE side is always right/wrong will lead nowhere. It's lead us in circles for SIXTY years. For everything you stated in that emotional post, which I thank you for, could be stated for the Palestinians.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1051028.html

These are the names of the glorious military victory we achieved there - Jawaher, age 4; Dina, age 8; Sahar, age 12; Ikram, age 14; and Tahrir, age 17, all sisters of the Ba'lousha family, all killed in a "precise" strike on the mosque. Another three sisters, a 2-year-old brother and their parents were injured. Twenty-four neighbors were wounded and five homes and three stores destroyed.

What about these students? They weren't pelted by rocks and, unfortunately, they didn't survive.

Superman4ever

01-05-2009, 11:29 PM

Double!

Compi716

01-05-2009, 11:32 PM

Hobgoblin

01-05-2009, 11:36 PM

If only everyone could discuss the situation as respectfully as you guys have. :yay:

What do you think of the past program of having Israeli and Palestinian children meet and play together? Whatever happened with that? It seemed to just evaporate years ago.

raybia

01-05-2009, 11:38 PM

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/5/israeli_professor_neve_gordon_condemns_israeli

Marx

01-05-2009, 11:43 PM

I know that, I don't just care. That whole region is a God damn Hell hole filled irrational idiots, the sooner we stop involving ourselves in it, the better.

If you don't care, then why are you in this thread? I'm not trying to be rude or anything, I'm just saying. If you could care less about the situation, why bother discussing it?

As for the part of your post that I bolded, whether we like it or not, we have to care what goes on in the middle east. Anyone that knows me knows that I do not favor a 'police the world' mentality, but this is a part of the world that honestly does need our attention. If you can't see why, then I'm sorry.

raybia

01-05-2009, 11:44 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/world/middleeast/06scene.html?hp

Marx

01-05-2009, 11:45 PM

Welcome to Politico Compi716! :yay:

(I don't believe I've come across you before.)

Compi716

01-05-2009, 11:55 PM

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/1/5/israeli_professor_neve_gordon_condemns_israeli
Not all Israelis are for the war. Much like America, there are liberals and conservatives. When the US went into Iraq, Bush's approval ratings, and well as the approval ratings for that war, were incredibly high. People are always going to have opinions, especially the hard-left Israelis. They are incredibly secular, and view Israel as a state, rather than what is was established as, and what it has always been intended to be: The Jewish State.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/world/middleeast/06scene.html?hp
Yes. An article from the New York Times. How...fair and balanced. Is that really "All the New's that's Fit to Print?"
Welcome to Politico Compi716! :yay:

(I don't believe I've come across you before.)
Well, I only recently found this thread. I don't usually make my way into the forums that aren't superhero related (being as that's why I come here for the most part). I'm just glad that people are actually listening to each others thoughts, unlike some other forums.

And what is "Politico?" Does it have any relationship to the website, which I just found in a Google search since I had no idea what "Politico" was?

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 12:07 AM

Well thank you for appreciating my post.

I agree with you - these finger pointing, violence-based "solutions" will not bring a peaceful end to this.

One aspect of this conflict that I feel has just been overlooked is the issue of the "Right to the Land," which has been THE cause for conflict since literally the day of Israel's establishment as a new state in 1948. We think WE'RE right, and they think THEY'RE right. As long as there is debate, there will be conflict.

This is a very sensitive issue for me for a number of reasons, some of which have been stated, some of which have been implied. I also have family members and friends (yes, AMERICANS who joined the IDF) out there on the front lines. So obviously this hits a bit close to home, literally.

It's a sensitive subject for me too and I COMPLETELY understand your point of view. My family is Islamic (I'm a devout Muslim), but over half my extended family are Israeli Jews. Both my grandmothers married Muslim men. My family is in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa. I know their anxiety...I spoke to them last night. I have a cousin, Maya, who is 8, whom I adore with all my heart and would easily kill an army if one strand on her hair was misplaced.

The point now is not who was right or who was wrong, but that we're BOTH there. I feel that BOTH sides are being played for suckers. Both sides are being manipulated for a whole other agenda (I'd refer you to Chomsky on this). I don't see that tragic circle breaking anytime soon though.

Spielberg said it best for me that peace would not come through violence but through representatives of both sides sitting down, in earnest honesty, locking themselves in a room until they are blue in the gills. << Paraphrase.

Marx

01-06-2009, 12:07 AM

Well, I only recently found this thread. I don't usually make my way into the forums that aren't superhero related (being as that's why I come here for the most part). I'm just glad that people are actually listening to each others thoughts, unlike some other forums.

And what is "Politico?" Does it have any relationship to the website, which I just found in a Google search since I had no idea what "Politico" was?

:funny:

I'm sorry. I always refer to the 'political forum' as politico. Politico is actually a website, but it has nothing to do with the Hype! forums. You should get into more conversation with all of us. We're not nearly as scary as some make us out to be. :oldrazz:

Or are we? :ninja:

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 12:09 AM

And what is "Politico?" Does it have any relationship to the website, which I just found in a Google search since I had no idea what "Politico" was?

He's just playing on words.

Marx

01-06-2009, 12:09 AM

It's a sensitive subject for me too and I COMPLETELY understand your point of view. My family is Islamic (I'm a devout Muslim), but over half my extended family are Israeli Jews. Both my grandmothers married Muslim men. My family is in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Haifa. I know their anxiety...I spoke to them last night. I have a cousin, Maya, who is 8, whom I adore with all my heart and would easily kill an army if one strand on her hair was misplaced.

The point now is not who was right or who was wrong, but that we're BOTH there. I feel that BOTH sides are being played for suckers. Both sides are being manipulated for a whole other agenda (I'd refer you to Chomsky on this). I don't see that tragic circle breaking anytime soon though.

Spielberg said it best for me that peace would not come through violence but through representatives of both sides sitting down, in earnest honesty, locking themselves in a room until they are blue in the gills. << Paraphrase.

Truer words were never spoken. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

Compi716

01-06-2009, 12:28 AM

Both sides are being manipulated for a whole other agenda (I'd refer you to Chomsky on this). I don't see that tragic circle breaking anytime soon though.
I completely disagree. We know exactly what we want, and we want to get it. For our entire existence, we Jews have been pushed around, expect for the brief period at the start of the Davidic Dynasty. After the Six Day War, it looked liked maybe FINALLY things were going to get better, but of course they didn't. This is not a war based solely on what I and Project David like to refer to as the "supposed occupation."

Israel is split between the secular and the religious. The next Prime Minister could give away Jerusalem to the West Bank, and a half the Israeli Jewish population wouldn't care. Intermarriage and secularization is killing off more Jews than the Holocaust - FACT. Your grandmothers, for instance: I'm sure they're fine people, and this comment isn't directly at them, but the thing is that no truly devout Jew would ever marry outside the faith. There's a certain level of commitment there.

Again, I do not mean to offend in any way, and if I did than I apologize wholeheartedly.

In terms of Noam Chomsky, well...he doesn't exactly see eye-to-eye with the majority of Zionist Jews, unlike his colleague Alan Dershowitz. If ANYBODY has ANY questions on the Jewish feelings of Israel, I highly recommend listening or reading some of Dershowitz's stuff.

Here's a link that features a debate between Chomsky and Dershowitz: http://www.democracynow.org/2005/12/23/noam_chomsky_v_alan_dershowitz_a

bell110

01-06-2009, 04:49 AM

One aspect of this conflict that I feel has just been overlooked is the issue of the "Right to the Land," which has been THE cause for conflict since literally the day of Israel's establishment as a new state in 1948. We think WE'RE right, and they think THEY'RE right. As long as there is debate, there will be conflict.

I haven't overlooked that. That's why I feel there will never be an end to this conflict, at least not any time soon. Maybe it's pessimistic, but hey.

Asteroid-Man

01-06-2009, 06:06 AM

So, then, you didn't just read the entire thread, O Wise One. :whatever:
Ahaha, I'm not claiming to be wise here.... But I read it all over time as I went to class and work so you can clearly see how I'd make a few assumptions.

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 06:29 AM

I completely disagree. We know exactly what we want, and we want to get it. For our entire existence, we Jews have been pushed around, expect for the brief period at the start of the Davidic Dynasty. After the Six Day War, it looked liked maybe FINALLY things were going to get better, but of course they didn't. This is not a war based solely on what I and Project David like to refer to as the "supposed occupation."

Israel is split between the secular and the religious. The next Prime Minister could give away half of Jerusalem, and half the Jewish population wouldn't care. Intermarriage and secularization is killing off more Jews than the Holocaust - FACT. Your grandmothers, for instance: I'm sure they're fine people, and this comment isn't directly at them, but the thing is that no truly devout Jew would ever marry outside the faith. There's a certain level of commitment there.

Again, I do not mean to offend in any way, and if I did than I apologize wholeheartedly.

In terms of Noam Chomsky, well...he doesn't exactly see eye-to-eye with the majority of Zionist Jews, unlike his colleague Alan Dershowitz. If ANYBODY has ANY questions on the Jewish feelings of Israel, I highly recommend listening or reading some of Dershowitz's stuff.

Here's a link that features a debate between Chomsky and Dershowitz: http://www.democracynow.org/2005/12/23/noam_chomsky_v_alan_dershowitz_a

No offense taken. I've read Dershowitz, Finkelstein...you name it, I've probably read it. I didn't say you didn't know what you wanted, or that the Arabs didn't know what they wanted but that external forces manipulate those feelings, sensitivities for other purposes. That we are both victims of imperialism.

How do you destabilize a region completely? You pin neighbor against neighbor. Brother against brother.

raybia

01-06-2009, 10:16 AM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/06/gaza-israel-death-un

Israeli shelling kills dozens at UN school in Gaza• Reports of more than 40 killed in and around UN shelter
• 12 members of family killed in Gaza City air strikeChris McGreal and Rory McCarthy in Jerusalem, and Mark Tran

guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 6 January 2009 15.28 GMT
larger | smaller
Article history
The civilian death toll in Gaza increased dramatically today, with reports of more than 40 Palestinians killed after missiles exploded outside a UN school where hundreds of people were sheltering from the continuing Israeli offensive.

Two Israeli tank shells struck the school in Jabaliya refugee camp, spraying shrapnel on people inside and outside the building, according to news agency reports.

The medical director of the hospital in Jabaliya told the Guardian 41 bodies had been brought in so far and more could be on the way. Reuters journalists filmed bodies scattered on the ground amid pools of blood and torn shoes and clothes. A donkey lay on the ground in its own blood.

In addition to the dead, several dozen people were wounded, hospital officials said. The Israeli military said it was looking into the reports.

Elsewehere at least 12 members of an extended family, including seven young children, were killed in an air strike on their house in Gaza City. The bodies of the Daya family were pulled from the rubble of a house in Gaza city's Zeitoun district after it was hit by two Israeli missiles. The dead included seven children aged from one to 12 years, three women and two men. Nine other people were believed to be trapped in the rubble.

Hours earlier, three young men – all cousins – died when the Israelis bombed another UN school, the Asma primary school in Gaza City. They were among about 400 people who sought shelter there after fleeing their homes in Beit Lahiya in northern Gaza.

The UN, which said the school was clearly marked, said it was "strongly protesting these killings to the Israeli authorities and is calling for an immediate and impartial investigation".

"Where it is found that international humanitarian law has been violated, those responsible must be held to account. Under international law, installations such as schools, health centres and UN facilities should be protected from attack. Well before the current fighting, the UN had given to the Israeli authorities the GPS co-ordinates of all its installations in Gaza, including Asma elementary school."

The killings take the total toll in Palestinian lives since the Israelis launched their assault on the Gaza Strip 11 days ago to above 600. Doctors at Gaza hospitals say that at least one-fifth of the victims are children and a large number of women are among the dead.

Israel continues to insist that the bulk of those killed are Hamas and Islamic Jihad fighters, although its claim to be going to extraordinary lengths to target only "terrorists" has been undermined by one of its own tanks firing on a building being used by Israeli troops, killing four.

The sharp spike in the number of civilian casualties came as Israeli troops and tanks moved into Gaza's second largest city, Khan Younis, for the first time today, supported by intensive artillery strikes as the military pledged to press on with its attack.The heaviest fighting has been in northern Gaza, with witnesses reporting wave after wave of bombing strikes across the north of the territory accompanied by gunfire from helicopters and artillery from land and sea. Thousands of Palestinians have been ordered to leave their homes or forced to flee the fighting.

In Shajaiyeh, east of Gaza City, Israeli troops seized control of three apartment blocks and set up gun positions on the rooftops. Residents were locked in their homes and soldiers confiscated their mobile phones, neighbours said.

Three of the four Israeli soldiers killed by friendly fire died when a tank mistakenly fired on a building where the soldiers had taken up positions. There was heavy artillery fire to cover the evacuation of 24 soldiers who were injured, including the commander of the Golani infantry brigade, one of Israel's key fighting forces.

Israel's defence minister, Ehud Barak, said his country's troops would continue their operation despite mounting Palestinian casualties and growing international calls for a ceasefire.

"Hamas has so far sustained a very heavy blow from us, but we have yet to achieve our objective, and therefore the operation continues," Barak said.

The Israeli foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, said the offensive was intended to change permanently the shape of Israel's conflict with Hamas. "When Israel is targeted, Israel is going to retaliate," she said. Israel has rejected calls for a ceasefire.

The military said it had bombed more smuggling tunnels across the border with Egypt, in the south, and hit more than 40 other sites across Gaza including buildings storing weapons and rocket launching areas.

In Gaza, Mahmoud Zahar, the most senior leader of Hamas in the strip and a hardliner in the movement, appeared on the party's al-Aqsa television station and gave a defiant speech threatening attacks not only in Gaza but elsewhere.

"The Zionists have legitimised the killing of their children by killing our children. They have legitimised the killing of their people all over the world by killing our people," Zahar said. He urged Hamas fighters to "crush your enemy".

Another Hamas figure, a recognised military spokesman called Abu Ubaida, said thousands of Hamas fighters were waiting in Gaza to take on the Israeli military, and that rocket attacks would increase. More than 40 were fired into southern Israel yesterday, including one that landed in an empty kindergarten, which, like all schools near the Gaza border, has been closed since the conflict began.. Israeli police said a total of 520 rockets had been fired in the past 11 days of fighting.

Israeli troops are now deployed in and around the major urban areas of Gaza, particularly to the north, in Beit Hanoun, Beit Lahiya and Jabaliya. Using leaflets, telephone calls and radio announcements, they have ordered residents in many areas to leave their homes, forcing at least 15,000 Palestinians to flee to safety elsewhere. At least 5,000 are staying in 11 different UN schools and shelters.

The UN said more than 1 million Gazans were still without electricity or water and that it was increasingly difficult for staff to distribute aid or reach the injured. It said more industrial diesel was needed to reopen the strip's sole power plant, which has been shut for a week. Ten transformers have been damaged in the fighting.

More wheat grain is needed for food handouts, and the UN said Karni, the main commercial crossing, should be reopened to allow it in. Four ambulances and three mobile clinics were destroyed when bombs hit the headquarters of the Union of Health Care Committees in Gaza City.

John Holmes, the UN emergency relief coordinator, said Gaza represented an "increasingly alarming" humanitarian crisis, and that the territory was running low on clean water, power, food, medicine and other supplies since Israel began its offensive. Israeli leaders claim there is no humanitarian crisis.

Israel is out of control. If they do not seize this brutality immediately then an international security force needs to be formed to stop them and all aid from the U.S. should be cut off.

IMO this is shades of the Bosnia genocide.

The Overlord

01-06-2009, 11:47 AM

If you don't care, then why are you in this thread? I'm not trying to be rude or anything, I'm just saying. If you could care less about the situation, why bother discussing it?.

Because its ruining the world, that's why. A lot of terrorist groups and corrupt governments and use this conflict to get support, that's why I care.

As for the part of your post that I bolded, whether we like it or not, we have to care what goes on in the middle east. Anyone that knows me knows that I do not favor a 'police the world' mentality, but this is a part of the world that honestly does need our attention. If you can't see why, then I'm sorry.

I can see why, because of oil, that's the only reason anyone cares about that place and that there is a bunch of "holy" crap over there. Seriously
think of all the conflicts in Africa that almost no one cares about. Its just more of a corrupt double standard.

Marx

01-06-2009, 11:52 AM

Because its ruining the world, that's why. A lot of terrorist groups and corrupt governments and use this conflict to get support, that's why I care.

I can see why, because of oil, that's the only reason anyone cares about that place and that there is a bunch of "holy" crap over there. Seriously
think of all the conflicts in Africa that almost no one cares about. Its just more of a corrupt double standard.

I wouldn't say the history of the region is nothing but 'holy crap'. That's beyond insensitive. The region holds alot of value to alot of people. Sure, there is oil involved, but that isn't the only reason.

As for Africa, the tragedies that are going on there are absolutely horrible. I have long advocated more of a response to the situation in Darfur. It's taken far too long to gain what little attention it has gained.

The Overlord

01-06-2009, 12:07 PM

I wouldn't say the history of the region is nothing but 'holy crap'. That's beyond insensitive. The region holds alot of value to alot of people. Sure, there is oil involved, but that isn't the only reason. .

Like I care, if people are dumb enough to kill over a bunch a crap they think is sacred, I'm going treat them and the stuff they are fighting over, with contempt.

And oil is a huge reason for Western involvement there.

As for Africa, the tragedies that are going on there are absolutely horrible. I have long advocated more of a response to the situation in Darfur. It's taken far too long to gain what little attention it has gained.

But why do think this corrupt double standard exist, because the Middle East has more oil the Africa. That's why I have contempt for Western involement in that place.

hippie_hunter

01-06-2009, 12:14 PM

I wouldn't say the history of the region is nothing but 'holy crap'. That's beyond insensitive. The region holds alot of value to alot of people. Sure, there is oil involved, but that isn't the only reason.

As for Africa, the tragedies that are going on there are absolutely horrible. I have long advocated more of a response to the situation in Darfur. It's taken far too long to gain what little attention it has gained.

It is insensitive, but Overlord is correct. The only reason why we give a damn about the Middle East is because of the oil there. I bet that if it weren't for the oil, it would be as horrible as Africa is currently.

And we don't give a damn about Africa is because the Western powers already sucked it dry from when they colonized it. It's downright horrible that this happens.

Compi716

01-06-2009, 12:32 PM

You guys do know that Israel is the only state in the Middle East that has no oil, right?

Marx

01-06-2009, 12:35 PM

You guys do know that Israel is the only state in the Middle East that has no oil, right?

When I was referring to oil, I was referring to the region as a whole. (Not the state of Israel.)

The Overlord

01-06-2009, 12:48 PM

You guys do know that Israel is the only state in the Middle East that has no oil, right?

I meant Western invovlement in the Middle east as a whole, not just Israel.

American involement with Israel is easy to explain too, it goes back to what said before a bunch of sacred crap. A bunch of religious wackos who believe Jesus won't come back till the ancient borders of israel are restored have a lot of power in the US, that's pretty well it.

I may like Israel a little bit more then Palestine, but I still don't see why they should get state welfare. They are a first world country with the best military in the region, they shouldn't get handouts.

Midnyte_Sun

01-06-2009, 12:58 PM

The Situation there is horrible. As usual, Israel's disproportionate level of violence is just mind boggling. For ever 1 Israeli citizen, 100 Gazan civilians are killed.

Hamas on the other hand, is also disproportionally weak. Their 'defense' is no different than a guy throwing a rock at a trigger-happy guy with a bazooka.

Compi716

01-06-2009, 01:07 PM

American involement with Israel is easy to explain too, it goes back to what said before a bunch of sacred crap. A bunch of religious wackos who believe Jesus won't come back till the ancient borders of israel are restored have a lot of power in the US, that's pretty well it.
You really don't get it, do you? I bet you don't realize how offensive your comments are, either.

"A bunch of religious wackos who believe Jesus won't come back till the ancient borders of israel are restored." Great. You described a small percentage of the Israeli population.

danoyse

01-06-2009, 01:14 PM

Overlord, please try making your points without being offensive.

Ace of Knaves

01-06-2009, 01:15 PM

I'll bet anyone any money that Hamas set up positions in that school.

Marx

01-06-2009, 01:16 PM

I'll bet anyone any money that Hamas set up positions in that school.

I wouldn't be surprised. There are also rumors that they are using the hospital as a shield. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon13.gif

Addendum

01-06-2009, 01:16 PM

"A bunch of religious wackos who believe Jesus won't come back till the ancient borders of israel are restored." Great. You described a small percentage of the Israeli population.

And he also described the thoughts of the religious right in the US

Ace of Knaves

01-06-2009, 01:17 PM

Exactly. I'm not saying Israel bombing that position was right, but Hamas are the ones putting these civilians in danger. I understand they are a small army and have to use guerilla tactics, but using hospitals and schools as military positions is just asking for trouble.

Marx

01-06-2009, 01:18 PM

And he also described the thoughts of the religious right in the US

The Religious Right is a vocal minority. They are not representative of the larger majority of believers in Christianity.

danoyse

01-06-2009, 01:20 PM

The Religious Right is a vocal minority. They are not representative of the larger majority of believers in Christianity.

Exactly.

Midnyte_Sun

01-06-2009, 01:20 PM

They are a first world country with the best military in the region, they shouldn't get handouts.

I agree, especially when they abuse their power like they normally do by changing borders, creating new barriers and walls, and checkpoints, taking more land, and building more settlements which make the search for peace practically impossible with the Palestinians.

However, if the US stops giving monetary support for Israel (which some tally to be well over a trillion dollars historically), Israel would be another unstable Middle Eastern country....but with Nukes..and seeing how they are not ashamed to use excessive violence and firepower, could be rather disastrous to say the least.

Ace of Knaves

01-06-2009, 01:22 PM

Channel 4 in the UK are interviewing Ghazi Hamad a Hamas spokesman. He is completely avoiding the question "Were Hamas soldiers setting up positions and firing from the school?"

Says it all really.

Marx

01-06-2009, 01:29 PM

Channel 4 in the UK are interviewing Ghazi Hamad a Hamas spokesman. He is completely avoiding the question "Were Hamas soldiers setting up positions and firing from the school?"

Says it all really.

:facepalm

Ace of Knaves

01-06-2009, 01:31 PM

:( Bastards!!

The Overlord

01-06-2009, 01:36 PM

You really don't get it, do you? I bet you don't realize how offensive your comments are, either.

"A bunch of religious wackos who believe Jesus won't come back till the ancient borders of israel are restored." Great. You described a small percentage of the Israeli population.

Actually I was trying to be provocative to make a point, but since I don't want incur the wrath of the mods, I will be slightly more polite.

I wasn't taking about the Israeli population, I was talking about the US population, that's one of the most major reasons for US support of Israel.

Why should this conflict gain more international attention, then the hundreds of conflicts in Africa, two factors, religion and oil. The conflict is a threat to oil production in the Mid east in general and various religious factors ensure it gets more coverage then the hundreds of other conflicts going on around the globe, which is why I so cynical about it.

The fact is Israel is first world country, so they shouldn't get financial aid from the US.

Marx

01-06-2009, 01:37 PM

Actually I was trying to be provocative to make a point, but since I don't want incur the wrath of the mods, I will be slightly more polite.

I wasn't taking about the Israeli population, I was talking about the US population, that's one of the most major reasons for US support of Israel.

Why should this conflict gain more international attention, then the hundreds of conflicts in Africa, two factors, religion and oil. The conflict is a threat to oil production in the Mid east in general and various religious factors ensure it gets more coverage then the hundreds of other conflicts going on around the globe, which is why I so cynical about it.

The fact is Israel is first world country, so they shouldn't get financial aid from the US.

That's usually a little more admirable. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

danoyse

01-06-2009, 01:45 PM

Actually I was trying to be provocative to make a point, but since I don't want incur the wrath of the mods, I will be slightly more polite.

That's all we ask. :cwink:

The Overlord

01-06-2009, 02:10 PM

That's usually a little more admirable. http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

I was making a point, but the point has been made so I will be less provacative now.

Kelly

01-06-2009, 02:24 PM

Asteroid-Man

01-06-2009, 02:48 PM

Asteroid-Man

01-06-2009, 02:55 PM

It is insensitive, but Overlord is correct. The only reason why we give a damn about the Middle East is because of the oil there. I bet that if it weren't for the oil, it would be as horrible as Africa is currently.

And we don't give a damn about Africa is because the Western powers already sucked it dry from when they colonized it. It's downright horrible that this happens.
Did you know that the US actually gets the majority of their oil from Canada? And the USA still hasn't even started using most of their own oil yet. This whole Middle East Vs West thing has been going on just as long as the Palestine/Israel conflict. Goes all the way back to Greece Vs Persia and has been kept going with a lot of different reasons.

Nivek

01-06-2009, 03:08 PM

Also, the Israeli government just killed the innocent family of a Hammas leader, PURPOSELY. HE was a terrorist yes, but FIFTEEN civilians were killed. His wives and kids. They were INNOCENT.

And he killed them, not Israel. You need to understand, this is a fairly known terrorist strategy to bring people who value "innocent life" to their cause. If you knew he crowded himself with women and children to make killing him a bad P.R. move for Israel, it kinda takes the "innocence" away from it. These are scumbags who store arms and fire at Israel from schools and Mosques. These people strap ball bearing vests to children for crying out loud, those kids are just another tool to these Terrorist puppet masters who twist the media to make Israel seem like some remorseless vindictive baby killers. Meanwhile, these top Hamas guys are probably wearing a protective vest of puppies, kittens, and infants to keep safe from Sniper fire.

Hobgoblin

01-06-2009, 03:20 PM

Did you know that the US actually gets the majority of their oil from Canada? And the USA still hasn't even started using most of their own oil yet. This whole Middle East Vs West thing has been going on just as long as the Palestine/Israel conflict. Goes all the way back to Greece Vs Persia and has been kept going with a lot of different reasons.

I've heard that most of the Mid East oil goes to Europe and Japan, while the US gets most of its from Venezuela. That was a while ago, so maybe its Canada now.

Also, the extremists in the Muslim world dont like that so much pornography on the internet comes from the US. Its corrupting. :rolleyes: And of course, there is our support of Israel.

Asteroid-Man

01-06-2009, 03:31 PM

And he killed them, not Israel. You need to understand, this is a fairly known terrorist strategy to bring people who value "innocent life" to their cause. If you knew he crowded himself with women and children to make killing him a bad P.R. move for Israel, it kinda takes the "innocence" away from it. These are scumbags who store arms and fire at Israel from schools and Mosques. These people strap ball bearing vests to children for crying out loud, those kids are just another tool to these Terrorist puppet masters who twist the media to make Israel seem like some remorseless vindictive baby killers. Meanwhile, these top Hamas guys are probably wearing a protective vest of puppies, kittens, and infants to keep safe from Sniper fire.
You have no idea what I'm talking about, this leader in particular is a leader who wears a suit (the whole camo suit and Hammas soldier gettup) and goes out and fights and has told Israel he can be found out in battle and he isn't afraid to show himself. He doesn't hide with the people around him or in schools or mosques. And besides, I'm not trying to justify him but rather his family as innocent. His FAMILY did NOT fire the missiles. Israel decided not to kill him out in battle but rather to drop a bomb on his house and kill innocent women and children. Don't try and justify the Israeli Government's actions when you know what they did was wrong.

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 04:05 PM

"If the Arabs lay down their arms today, there will be peace today. If the Israelis lay down there arms today, there will be no Israel tomorrow."

I can't believe I missed this. That is completely offensive and lacks historical accuracy.

Egypt has weapons, an army and signed a peace accord with Israel. Jordan has weapons and an army and sign a peace accord. Saudi Arabia has a huge weapon supply and doesn't attack. Syria the same. The Palestinians DON'T have weapons. They have fireworks (AKA rockets without explosive heads) being fired by radicals and rocks.

Yet Israel has the most advanced weaponry system in the world (next to the US). 4-500 nuclear weapons and there has been no peace.

What that statement implies is if the arabs surrender completely, we'll let them "live". That doesn't say peace.

That statement is just a cop-out to alleviate any responsibility from the Israeli side. That's a ludicrous statement, riddled with fallacy.

Again, radical statements like that are made from the Palestinian/Arabs side against Israel and only serve to push tensions over the edge.

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 04:07 PM

Israel just started using white phosphorus. For those of you who didn't know it burns you and can burn you until the bone. They claim it's a smokescreen for the soldiers to enter through, which they wouldn't do because it would BURN THEM. Also, the Israeli government just killed the innocent family of a Hammas leader, PURPOSELY. HE was a terrorist yes, but FIFTEEN civilians were killed. His wives and kids. They were INNOCENT.

Watch TYT's reaction to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RpBxq2a4w0

Israel using white phosphorous, the SAME chemical agent Saddam used against the Kurds (and I think the Iranians too), is NOT a war crime. It's a humane, very proportionate response to...this is Hamas' fault!

They used it against the Lebanese and nothing came of that either:

ld6cOJqyPqY

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 04:14 PM

You have no idea what I'm talking about, this leader in particular is a leader who wears a suit (the whole camo suit and Hammas soldier gettup) and goes out and fights and has told Israel he can be found out in battle and he isn't afraid to show himself. He doesn't hide with the people around him or in schools or mosques. And besides, I'm not trying to justify him but rather his family as innocent. His FAMILY did NOT fire the missiles. Israel decided not to kill him out in battle but rather to drop a bomb on his house and kill innocent women and children. Don't try and justify the Israeli Government's actions when you know what they did was wrong.

This rational is beyond them because the wives and kids are guilty by association. Just like the vid you posted, by TYT, Arabs/Middle-Easterners (of any religion) have been dehumanized to barbaric terrorists.

All Middle-Easterners are terrorists. EVERYTHING Israel does is reactionary and the Arabs are ALWAYS (to the infinite degree) the wrong ones.

If a 1 TON bomb (or illegal chemical weapons) drops on the caged Gaza (AKA the most densely populated land strip in the world, which is fenced with NO WAY OUT, text messages be damned!) it's their own doing. If the UN, UNICEF is having trouble getting food, medical supplies and other essential aid to Gaza, do you think Israel is going to let a bunch of Gazans flood the border to escape?

dzDCXMUTNq0

Asteroid-Man

01-06-2009, 04:56 PM

Israel using white phosphorous, the SAME chemical agent Saddam used against the Kurds (and I think the Iranians too), is NOT a war crime. It's a humane, very proportionate response to...this is Hamas' fault!

They used it against the Lebanese and nothing came of that either:

ld6cOJqyPqY
The difference being that with Iran and Lebenon they were at War. With the Kurds it was a genocide on innocent people, making it inhumane and they say now that their targets are only Hamas and everyone else is just collateral damage but those clouds of phosphorous cover too many people and will kill innocent people. THAT's inhumane.

the_joker

01-06-2009, 04:58 PM

This rational is beyond them because the wives and kids are guilty by association. Just like the vid you posted, by TYT, Arabs/Middle-Easterners (of any religion) have been dehumanized to barbaric terrorists.

All Middle-Easterners are terrorists. EVERYTHING Israel does is reactionary and the Arabs are ALWAYS (to the infinite degree) the wrong ones.

If a 1 TON bomb (or illegal chemical weapons) drops on the caged Gaza (AKA the most densely populated land strip in the world, which is fenced with NO WAY OUT, text messages be damned!) it's their own doing. If the UN, UNICEF is having trouble getting food, medical supplies and other essential aid to Gaza, do you think Israel is going to let a bunch of Gazans flood the border to escape?

dzDCXMUTNq0
Casualties are inevitable in war and Israel is fighting a war to win. Though I'm sure the death rate in Gaza could be reduced if Hamas fighters didn't insist on using human shields and setting up positions from schools and hospitals.

As for the Middle East - you must concede that they haven't exactly been innocent placid bystanders in conflict open to any compromises (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_UN_Partition_Plan). Since the very beginning, Israel has always faced a threat - they are responding in the only way they know how. The real people to blame here are Western leaders for not acting as mediators in the conflict - instead they were wasting their time with military expeditions in Iraq and elsewhere. This has been the real failure of George W Bush's policy. Because let's face it, it's clear that the participants in this conflict are never going to be able to sort this out rationally amongst themselves and there's no point expecting the EU to do anything when they are gutless with short memories and riddled with anti-Israel sentiment. Only America with its influence could have made a difference. Alas, the conflict continues.

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 05:30 PM

Casualties are inevitable in war and Israel is fighting a war to win. Though I'm sure the death rate in Gaza could be reduced if Hamas fighters didn't insist on using human shields and setting up positions from schools and hospitals.

As for the Middle East - you must concede that they haven't exactly been innocent placid bystanders in conflict open to any compromises (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_UN_Partition_Plan). Since the very beginning, Israel has always faced a threat - they are responding in the only way they know how. The real people to blame here are Western leaders for not acting as mediators in the conflict - instead they were wasting their time with military expeditions in Iraq and elsewhere. This has been the real failure of George W Bush's policy. Because let's face it, it's clear that the participants in this conflict are never going to be able to sort this out rationally amongst themselves and there's no point expecting the EU to do anything when they are gutless with short memories and riddled with anti-Israel sentiment. Only America with its influence could have made a difference. Alas, the conflict continues.

Before trying to tell me what I should concede in believing you should go back and read my posts. I've stated over and over (and over and over and over) again that I don't think either side is right/wrong. BOTH sides are to blame, but when the civilian casualty is reaching 700 and humanitarian aid is disallowed entry, but the song that text messages were sent as a warning to flee, keeps being sung, there is a point of ludicrous whitewashing that is intolerable and inhumane.

Again with the Hamas and the civilian shields? This is only part of the problem. No matter how accurate a 1 ton bomb is, it's still going to eviscerate ANYTHING in it's surrounding area, especially one where as densely packed as the Gaza strip.

This line that civilian casualties is an unfortunate acceptability in war is going to bite the west's ass SO hard one day.

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 05:33 PM

The difference being that with Iran and Lebenon they were at War. With the Kurds it was a genocide on innocent people, making it inhumane and they say now that their targets are only Hamas and everyone else is just collateral damage but those clouds of phosphorous cover too many people and will kill innocent people. THAT's inhumane.

I understand this, I was being evasive.

Midnyte_Sun

01-06-2009, 06:42 PM

The Israeli Bombing of Gaza - Unedited Video Feed

Caution: Some parts might be a little disturbing

Mod Edit: Too graphic...(If people want to see it you can send it to them through PM's)

---

Its Ironic to me that a people like the Israelis (who many came from post WWII Europe) can justify this heavy handed and disproportionate murdering of Civilians .

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 06:47 PM

Who broke the cease-fire? CNN:

-pTX4d6B6_k

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 06:48 PM

They finally put the video back up. It was on Youtube, over a week ago but kept getting flagged, by...

People should watch it!

But, I'm waiting for it to be removed for being to "graphic" by a mod or called a hoax.

BlackLantern

01-06-2009, 07:11 PM

I think the Israelis have just been pushed to the breaking point by Hamas....I think we are probably looking at a full on open war in the making or war breaking out in the next year

Compi716

01-06-2009, 07:19 PM

I can't believe I missed this. That is completely offensive and lacks historical accuracy.

Egypt has weapons, an army and signed a peace accord with Israel. Jordan has weapons and an army and sign a peace accord. Saudi Arabia has a huge weapon supply and doesn't attack. Syria the same. The Palestinians DON'T have weapons. They have fireworks (AKA rockets without explosive heads) being fired by radicals and rocks.

Yet Israel has the most advanced weaponry system in the world (next to the US). 4-500 nuclear weapons and there has been no peace.

What that statement implies is if the arabs surrender completely, we'll let them "live". That doesn't say peace.

That statement is just a cop-out to alleviate any responsibility from the Israeli side. That's a ludicrous statement, riddled with fallacy.

Again, radical statements like that are made from the Palestinian/Arabs side against Israel and only serve to push tensions over the edge.
"Lacks historical accuracy?" Are you serious?

If at any point since 1948 Israel decided to get rid of their weaponry, they would be wiped of the face of the map by Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and any other nation that currently has a "peace" treaty with Israel. Every single Arab nation hates Israel, and the only reason they participate in these peace treaties is because a) it makes them look better in the UN, and b) Israel already showed them what happens if they attack.

If all the weapons in Israel just disappeared overnight, the state be gone within the week. If "certain peoples" would just lay down their weapons and agree to some form of peace treaty, rather than saying "I will not agree to peace until Israel is no more and I have the land that may or may not rightfully belong to me, depending on who you ask and how far [historically] you want to go," then there would be peace.

Midnyte_Sun

01-06-2009, 07:46 PM

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 08:00 PM

"Lacks historical accuracy?" Are you serious?

If at any point since 1948 Israel decided to get rid of their weaponry, they would be wiped of the face of the map by Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and any other nation that currently has a "peace" treaty with Israel. Every single Arab nation hates Israel, and the only reason they participate in these peace treaties is because a) it makes them look better in the UN, and b) Israel already showed them what happens if they attack.

If all the weapons in Israel just disappeared overnight, the state be gone within the week. If "certain peoples" would just lay down their weapons and agree to some form of peace treaty, rather than saying "I will not agree to peace until Israel is no more and I have the land that may or may not rightfully belong to me, depending on who you ask and how far [historically] you want to go," then there would be peace.

You DID NOT SAY: "Certain people" you said Arabs. As in ALL of them. Not certain. And your assertion is that Israel is blameless in any type of violence/aggression.

"I am for compulsory transfer; I do not see anything immoral in it."
David Ben-Gurion to the Jewish Agency Executive, June 1938

And wasn't Netanyahu who said that quote? Who supported/started Hamas again?

Again, it wasn't Hamas that broke the truce this time. So, yes, they should put their weapons down and the rockets were wrong, but certain other people should have done the same thing.

-pTX4d6B6_k

Superman4ever

01-06-2009, 08:03 PM

Lets be real here, the Isrealis hold all the cards for peace in the region. It just depends on how much of those occupied territories they are willing to give back.

I don't believe in any sincerity among the Israeli government in building long-lasting peace with the Palestinians. No matter what peace accord it signs, it keeps changing facts on the ground by building new settlements, roads, barriers, etc. in occupied territory, even when there are cease-fires.

Right, and now Jerusalem is the everlasting, undivided capitol of Israel (it's not official yet, but we all know it's coming, the CIA (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/is.html) and IMFA (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFA+Publications/Photo+exhibits/Jerusalem+-+Capital+of+Israel.htm)states the capital of Israel is Jerusalem, so it's going to happen). What the hell is that? How is that land grab going to create peace? How is that fair?

Fine, both sides got screwed into this circular, unending war decades ago, but how is that decision, which has been spearheaded since the mid-90s, going to make matters any better?

Kurosawa

01-06-2009, 08:08 PM

Neither group deserves or is capable of control, imo. The entire region should be controlled by a third party.

The Senator

01-06-2009, 08:41 PM

I meant Western invovlement in the Middle east as a whole, not just Israel.

American involement with Israel is easy to explain too, it goes back to what said before a bunch of sacred crap. A bunch of religious wackos who believe Jesus won't come back till the ancient borders of israel are restored have a lot of power in the US, that's pretty well it.

I may like Israel a little bit more then Palestine, but I still don't see why they should get state welfare. They are a first world country with the best military in the region, they shouldn't get handouts.

I know a lot of people who support Israel, not because of its religious significance, but because it is a legitimate country which has been around for sixty years. That's why I support it. I think that it was abominable for the Western world to kick the Palestinians off their land after World War II, but so what? It has been six decades, generations have come and gone, and the fact remains that Israel is a legitimate state and Palestine is not.

I feel as though that's why most politicians support Israel with a passion. Not because it is significant in Christianity, but because Israel is a legitimate state with a people who have been at the receiving end of unwarranted violence for decades. The Israelis didn't kick the Palestinians off their land; the international community did. The violence from the Palestinians against the Israelis is unwarranted precisely because of this, and myself and others find the atrocities committed against the Israelis to be deplorable.

The Senator

01-06-2009, 08:46 PM

Lets be real here, the Isrealis hold all the cards for peace in the region. It just depends on how much of those occupied territories they are willing to give back.

I don't believe in any sincerity among the Israeli government in building long-lasting peace with the Palestinians. No matter what peace accord it signs, it keeps changing facts on the ground by building new settlements, roads, barriers, etc. in occupied territory, even when there are cease-fires.

And I don't believe in any sincerity among the Palestinians in building a long-lasting peace with the Israelis, unless they stop resorting to extremism as a response mechanism to every move the Israelis make which the Palestinians disagree with. But at the same time, when you consider that the Palestinians have long been electing radicals as the voice of their movement, it makes me feel as if there won't be peace in the region. Coupled with Israel's warranted yet seemingly excessive security measures, I doubt either side will be able to cede enough of their own arrogance in order to achieve a sustainable compromise.

The Senator

01-06-2009, 08:49 PM

Neither group deserves or is capable of control, imo. The entire region should be controlled by a third party.

No. Then you would have the Israelis and the Palestinians fighting against the third party for control, while fighting each other. The region would be worse off under this scenario.

The Senator

01-06-2009, 08:52 PM

I wouldn't say the history of the region is nothing but 'holy crap'. That's beyond insensitive. The region holds alot of value to alot of people. Sure, there is oil involved, but that isn't the only reason.

As for Africa, the tragedies that are going on there are absolutely horrible. I have long advocated more of a response to the situation in Darfur. It's taken far too long to gain what little attention it has gained.

I hope you don't mean a response by the United States. I'm all for sending foreign aid to the region, possibly a few hundred ground troops to coordinate strategy, but I do not think the United States should involve itself in foreign matters anymore unless it directly conflicts with the security of the United States. We are still dealing with the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, I do not want to keep adding countries and regional conflicts on to our ever-growing list of humbling military blunders.

Midnyte_Sun

01-06-2009, 08:57 PM

Neither group deserves or is capable of control, imo. The entire region should be controlled by a third party.

Agreed. Give it to the UN.

The Senator

01-06-2009, 09:00 PM

Agreed. Give it to the UN.

:lmao:

The UN can't manage a food exchange program, how can you expect them to manage a region riled with ethnic infighting?

Midnyte_Sun

01-06-2009, 09:05 PM

And I don't believe in any sincerity among the Palestinians in building a long-lasting peace with the Israelis, unless they stop resorting to extremism as a response mechanism to every move the Israelis make which the Palestinians disagree with. But at the same time, when you consider that the Palestinians have long been electing radicals as the voice of their movement, it makes me feel as if there won't be peace in the region. Coupled with Israel's warranted yet seemingly excessive security measures, I doubt either side will be able to cede enough of their own arrogance in order to achieve a sustainable compromise.

You are right on the Extremism part on the Palestinian side. I don't understand how killing civilians is going to make their case any better. Hamas is stupid to think they even make a dent into Israel with their rocket attacks. The reprisal attacks by Israel are disproportionate...Israel is killing flies with sledgehammers, and it doesn't help at all. If Israel invades Gaza, nothing good can come from this.

I totally agree with you on the arrogance aspect. Both sides are unwilling to cede anything and the real question is how many more people have to die before there is a 2 - state solution.

hippie_hunter

01-06-2009, 10:19 PM

Agreed. Give it to the UN.

The UN is so horribly ineffective to the point where it isn't even funny.

Marx

01-06-2009, 10:33 PM

I hope you don't mean a response by the United States. I'm all for sending foreign aid to the region, possibly a few hundred ground troops to coordinate strategy, but I do not think the United States should involve itself in foreign matters anymore unless it directly conflicts with the security of the United States. We are still dealing with the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, I do not want to keep adding countries and regional conflicts on to our ever-growing list of humbling military blunders.

I believe that sending a few hundred American troops to coordinate with the AU is all it would take.

The Overlord

01-06-2009, 10:56 PM

I know a lot of people who support Israel, not because of its religious significance, but because it is a legitimate country which has been around for sixty years. That's why I support it. I think that it was abominable for the Western world to kick the Palestinians off their land after World War II, but so what? It has been six decades, generations have come and gone, and the fact remains that Israel is a legitimate state and Palestine is not.

I feel as though that's why most politicians support Israel with a passion. Not because it is significant in Christianity, but because Israel is a legitimate state with a people who have been at the receiving end of unwarranted violence for decades. The Israelis didn't kick the Palestinians off their land; the international community did. The violence from the Palestinians against the Israelis is unwarranted precisely because of this, and myself and others find the atrocities committed against the Israelis to be deplorable.

That still doesn't change the fact that Israel is a first world country and shouldn't finical aid. Why should my tax dollars go to that?

Besides what makes a state legitimate is merely the will of the powerful and rule of the victory. Look at all the legitimate states in Africa, they were arbitrarily created by European powers, filled with ethnic groups that hate each other, heck look at how awkward some of them are. States that's creation ensure the misery of the people who live there are legitimate, frankly it makes question the whole system.

Now I'm not cruel, I can see the need a Jewish state after the Holocaust, but if you wanted to fair, we should craved it out of Germany or something, in 48. Israel was created in the Middle East because of religion, not because logic. Seriously creating a Jewish state in an area filled with Muslim fundamentalists, of course that wasn't going to work out well. Its too late to change that now, the decision was made long ago and ultimately the world has to accept it, but it still gives me reason to be cynical over this whole thing. Maybe they will make peace or maybe they will destroy each other, but I'm not hopeful.

Backdrifter

01-07-2009, 01:19 AM

Neither group deserves or is capable of control, imo. The entire region should be controlled by a third party.

I've actually been to Israel... They seem to pretty much have it under control. I never once felt that I was in any danger when I was in Israel. However, when I did go to Bethlehem in the West Bank... that was a different story.

Without sounding like too much of a... racist, I will say this: From what I gathered, the Arab Israelis were noticeably more depressed (economically) than the Jews. But, I do not believe it is because of any kind of socio-political problem. For example, pretty much everywhere you go you will see half built Arab houses. What they do is build only part of their houses and live in them but they don't have to pay taxes on the property because the houses aren't complete. They were everywhere. I was so shocked that such a loophole was being so blatantly exploited. Anyway, I guess that doesn't really say a whole lot. I am sure there is some racism on the Jews part as far as the socio-economic and political situations go... but I also think that the Arabs do a lot of "playing the vicitim." There are a lot of Arabs living in Israel who a perfectly happy with the State of Israel, too. I met some, in fact.

Midnyte_Sun

01-07-2009, 04:21 AM

The UN is so horribly ineffective to the point where it isn't even funny.

I totally agree, but I don't think the UN should be sidelined in this. UN's biggest financier and biggest hurdle to peace in the Israel/Palestine is the United States. The Palestinians have always used the UN to condemn Israel and they still work through the UN...because there is NO other alternative.

Obviously Israel can manage their own armed forces and government (with US aid), but the Palestinians have no real viable leadership and Israel doesn't have any partner in dealing with the peace process that isn't bent on destroying Israel.

The answer lies in a multi-national Arab and/or Muslim force to govern Palestine and stop any hostile attacks against Israel. The UN can do this if it has viable partners willing to do this task. Instead of condemning Israel, these super rich Arab nations should work through the UN to build a multi-national armed force that can stabilize the Palestinian territories.

Those Arab states that recognize Israel should send their troops through the auspices of the UN to secure and manage the Palestinian state until they can form viable partners willing to partake in a 2-state solution. This is where effective diplomacy comes in and the US and other Security council members should spearhead that by giving incentives for Arab and Muslim nations to take part in bringing peace for the benefit of the entire region.

The fact remains, so long as people die and the cries for peace are drowned out by the sounds of bombs and wailing on both sides, there is no hope for it. Bringing in a UN sponsored multi-national Arab and/or Muslim force to bring security so a viable partner in peace can be formed is worth it.

Midnyte_Sun

01-07-2009, 04:33 AM

I believe that sending a few hundred American troops to coordinate with the AU is all it would take.

I say keep American troops out of it. Israel doesn't need American troops, and the Palestinians don't want them there either. Bring in a multi-national Arab and Muslim nation force, preferably those that believe in a 2-state solution to control the Palestinian territories and allow enough security for them to build a competent government that can be a viable partner in peace.

If the US wants to get involved, the US should use its leverage to convince the Israelis in dismantling all settlements in the West Bank, and create a real 2-state map with a shared Jerusalem as its capital.

Nivek

01-07-2009, 06:58 AM

You have no idea what I'm talking about, this leader in particular is a leader who wears a suit (the whole camo suit and Hammas soldier gettup) and goes out and fights and has told Israel he can be found out in battle and he isn't afraid to show himself. He doesn't hide with the people around him or in schools or mosques. And besides, I'm not trying to justify him but rather his family as innocent. His FAMILY did NOT fire the missiles. Israel decided not to kill him out in battle but rather to drop a bomb on his house and kill innocent women and children. Don't try and justify the Israeli Government's actions when you know what they did was wrong.

No, using your family and neighbors as human shields is wrong. At no certain point is the line between innocent victim, collateral damage, and willing suicidal photo op are supposed to cross.

As for the "guy out fighting Israel in fatigues", well, there seem to be more cowards than real men like that out there since there is no real army vs. army battles going on.

Israel has every right to defend itself from anyone seeking to destroy it.

The Senator

01-07-2009, 10:06 AM

I say keep American troops out of it. Israel doesn't need American troops, and the Palestinians don't want them there either. Bring in a multi-national Arab and Muslim nation force, preferably those that believe in a 2-state solution to control the Palestinian territories and allow enough security for them to build a competent government that can be a viable partner in peace.

If the US wants to get involved, the US should use its leverage to convince the Israelis in dismantling all settlements in the West Bank, and create a real 2-state map with a shared Jerusalem as its capital.

I say you really need to READ the discussion at hand before responding...

Superman4ever

01-07-2009, 10:31 AM

Israel conditionally welcomes cease-fire proposal

GAZA CITY, Gaza — Israel ordered a three-hour pause in its Gaza offensive Wednesday to allow food and fuel to reach besieged Palestinians, and said it welcomed a cease-fire proposal as long as Hamas halts rockets and weapons smuggling.

Hamas said any deal must include an opening of Gaza's borders. But the proposal still could mark the first sign of a possible break in 12 days of deadly fighting.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy said in Paris that both Israel and the moderate Palestinian leadership in charge of the West Bank had accepted the truce proposal, but Israeli officials did not confirm that.

In Turkey, meanwhile, a diplomat said that country will be given the task of constructing an international force for Gaza.

Both Israel and Hamas appeared to seek guarantees about the details of a cease-fire, before agreeing to halt the fighting.

Israel said it would support the proposal only if it halts "hostile fire" from Hamas in Gaza and includes measures to prevent the militant group from rearming, said government spokesman Mark Regev.

"Israel welcomes the initiative of the French president and the Egyptian president to bring about a sustainable quiet in the south," he said.

Hamas said Israel does not seem to be serious about reaching a cease-fire."Israel is still widening and escalating its aggression and is not giving any positive signals in response to these efforts," Ghazi Hammad said.

The precise details of the Egyptian-French proposal remain unclear, but it comes as international outrage grows over civilian deaths in Gaza.

About 300 of the more than 670 Palestinians killed so far were civilians, according to Palestinian and U.N. figures. Of those killed, at least 130 are children 16 and younger, says the Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights, which tracks casualties.

Israel has lost six soldiers since launching a ground offensive on Saturday — four of them in "friendly fire" incidents — and four other Israelis have been killed by rocket fire, three of them civilians, since fighting began on Dec. 27.

With Gazans increasingly suffering the effects of nonstop airstrikes and shelling, Israel's military said it would open "humanitarian corridors" to allow aid to reach Palestinians.

Israeli military spokesman Peter Lerner said the 1 to 4 p.m. "recess in offensive operations" was aimed at allowing in supplies and fuel. He said similar lulls in the coming days would be considered.

Lerner said that even during the pause, "For every attack against the army, there will be a response." The scale of fighting appeared to drop after the lull took effect, gaining in scope again when it expired.

Before Wednesday's brief lull, Israel said it struck 40 Hamas targets overnight. Gaza health officials said strikes Wednesday morning killed eight people.

Outrage grew over an Israeli shelling Tuesday near a U.N. school, with the U.N. agency responsible for the building demanding an "impartial investigation" into the attack. Gaza health officials put the death toll from the strike at 39, while the U.N. says 40 were killed in the deadliest single strike of the fighting.

Israel says its forces fired at militants who launched mortars from that location.

The number of Palestinian fighters killed is unclear, as Hamas is keeping its casualties secret.

Israel's lull in operations brought some relief to civilians in Gaza, where much of the territory has no power or running water, because pumps are dependent on electricity.

More than 500 aid trucks have been shipped into Gaza since operations began. But even when aid crosses into Gaza military operations have prevented officials from distributing it, leading to food shortages in some areas.

A World Bank statement Wednesday said there are growing signs of a severe public health crisis in Gaza because of a shortage of drinking water and an escalating failure of the sewage system.

Militants hit the Israeli city of Ashkelon on Wednesday with a medium-range rocket, causing no casualties. Rocket fire has fallen off somewhat as Israeli troops tighten their hold on Gaza, taking over open areas used to launch rockets, but Gaza residents say militants are still launching from heavily populated areas.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said the initiative he proposed with Sarkozy calls for an immediate cease-fire by Israel and Palestinian factions for a limited period to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza and an urgent meeting of Israel and the Palestinian side on arrangements to prevent any repetition of military action and to deal with the causes.

International Mideast envoy Tony Blair said Tuesday the key to any cease-fire will be an arrangement to stop weapons smuggling over the Gaza-Egypt border.

Turkey will be tasked with putting together an international force in Gaza, according to a Mideastern diplomat familiar with the country's efforts to end the conflict. He said the responsibilities of the force were yet to be determined. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information, and Turkish officials would not immediately comment.

An Israeli lieutenant-colonel near the Gaza border in southern Israel said soldiers overwhelmingly opposed a truce. "We went in and we have to finish it off," said the officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity because military regulations forbid him from speaking to the press.

Hamas remained defiant. "This aggression must cease. The blockade must be lifted. The crossings must be unconditionally open. The oppression of our people must end. After that, we can talk," Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said. He said Wednesday's lull was an Israeli "ruse."

In the meantime, Israel has been making preparations to continue fighting. The military has called up thousands of reserve troops that it could use to expand the Gaza offensive, supporting the three brigade-size formations of regular troops now inside. Defense officials said the troops could be ready for action by Friday. They spoke on condition of anonymity because the army's preparations are classified.

Israel's military said its shelling of the U.N. school — the deadliest single episode since Israeli ground forces invaded Gaza on Saturday following a weeklong air bombardment — was an attack on a military target and accused Hamas militants of using civilians as cover.

Christopher Gunness of the U.N. Relief and Works Agency, responsible for the school, said the agency is "99.9 percent certain there were no militants or military activity in its school."

That would not necessarily contradict Israel's claim that the militants were just outside.

Gunness demanded an investigation, and punishment for anyone found to have violated international law.

Two residents of the area who spoke with The Associated Press by telephone said they saw a small group of militants firing mortar rounds from a street near the school. They spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. Gunness said 1,300 people were taking shelter from the shelling at the school.

Barhou, the Hamas spokesman, said there were no militants there at the time.

The Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights said the presence of militants did not justify Israel's response. "The presence of armed resistance does not justify in any way the use of excessive force that is disproportionate," the center said in a statement.

Please G-d (please, please, please)...

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-world-middleeast/20090106/ML.Israel.Palestinians/

Marx

01-07-2009, 11:35 AM

I say keep American troops out of it. Israel doesn't need American troops, and the Palestinians don't want them there either. Bring in a multi-national Arab and Muslim nation force, preferably those that believe in a 2-state solution to control the Palestinian territories and allow enough security for them to build a competent government that can be a viable partner in peace.

If the US wants to get involved, the US should use its leverage to convince the Israelis in dismantling all settlements in the West Bank, and create a real 2-state map with a shared Jerusalem as its capital.

I was referring to the situation in Darfur, not the Israel/Gaza conflict... :huh:

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 11:54 AM

Marx

01-07-2009, 11:57 AM

the same people that want the US to go into Darfur want us out of Iraq.....in both cases, its intervening in a sovereign country....so if the US was to go into Darfur, all the anti-Iraq **** should stop....

There is a difference BL. I want our troops out of Iraq because they should have never been there in the first place. I believe that there should be a small group of american troops sent to Darfur to help coordinate an effort TO STOP GENOCIDE. Are you seriously suggesting that the United States should just look away? And do nothing with respect to Darfur?

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 11:58 AM

Yes...I am....it's not our fight

Marx

01-07-2009, 12:01 PM

Yes...I am....it's not our fight

Wow...I couldn't disagree more.

And any respect throughout the world goes right out the window when a country as powerful as ours steps aside and does nothing.

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 12:02 PM

Marx

01-07-2009, 12:05 PM

We either are allowed to do everything or we don't do anything....that's how I see it...the world hates us already, and here's a secret...outside of a few celebrities who know it's good for a sound bite and some idealistic college students, nobody gives a **** about Africa

Coordinating an effort with AU forces would not require that much US intervention...

I am not a celebrity, nor am I some idealistic college student.

The world hates us because of policies like Iraq and the 'go-it-alone' attitude of the Bush Administration.

Humphrey Bogart

01-07-2009, 12:20 PM

The Bush Administration should have based its case for going into Iraq largely, if not solely, on a legitimate humanitarian effort and not the litany of BS that was procured. We had more than enough evidence against Saddam on those grounds, and we could have coupled that with the moral obligation for putting him in power to begin with. We do have a moral obligation to help the people of Darfur in any case.

The Israelis are overreacting as they often do, but given their position I'm sure no one is surprised.

The Overlord

01-07-2009, 12:23 PM

We either are allowed to do everything or we don't do anything....that's how I see it...the world hates us already, and here's a secret...outside of a few celebrities who know it's good for a sound bite and some idealistic college students, nobody gives a **** about Africa

But is that fair, right or moral? Everyone cares about the Middle East because it has oil, no cares about Africa because it was picked clean by the Europeans long ago. How is that not a throughly corrupt double standard?

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 12:27 PM

But is that fair, right or moral? Everyone cares about the Middle East because it has oil, no cares about Africa because it was picked clean by the Europeans long ago. How is that not a throughly corrupt double standard?

That's the way the world works....sorry....you wouldn't work for free, would you?

Paradyme

01-07-2009, 12:31 PM

There is a difference BL. I want our troops out of Iraq because they should have never been there in the first place. I believe that there should be a small group of american troops sent to Darfur to help coordinate an effort TO STOP GENOCIDE. Are you seriously suggesting that the United States should just look away? And do nothing with respect to Darfur?

While I agree with half your statement and I have no way of making this sound right so I'm just going to say it flat out. Why Darfur and not Burma? Both have had Genocide going on for quite some time but hasn't Burma been at it longer or am I mistaken?

Marx

01-07-2009, 12:32 PM

While I agree with half your statement and I have no way of making this sound right so I'm just going to say it flat out. Why Darfur and not Burma? Both have had Genocide going on for quite some time but hasn't Burma been at it longer or am I mistaken?

The topic of conversation was Darfur, which is why I said Darfur. I believe that genocides like those in Burma and Darfur should be stopped. And that the US should coordinate efforts to do just that.

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 12:33 PM

I say no....just my opinion....

The Overlord

01-07-2009, 01:05 PM

That's the way the world works....sorry....you wouldn't work for free, would you?

I know that, but you making arrogant statements of someone who lives in an ultra privilaged society, disgusts me. Dismissing an entire contitent is so completely self absorbed, its sickening. Maybe you should act humble instead.

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 01:06 PM

I know that, but you making arrogant statements of someone who lives in an ultra privilaged society, disgusts me. Dismissing an entire contitent is so completely self absorbed, its sickening. Maybe you should act humble instead.

I served 4 years in the US Military and in travelling the world, I got to learn what the world really thinks of America....we're better off minding our business, in most cases

The Overlord

01-07-2009, 01:11 PM

I served 4 years in the US Military and in travelling the world, I got to learn what the world really thinks of America....we're better off minding our business, in most cases

Except in Iraq?

That may be, but don't act arrogant and dismissive, that reflects poorly when you do.

Plus there other ways to help that region besides a direct uS force, perhaps a NATO mission or some sort of local African mission with Western support.

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 01:13 PM

the US doesn't have any control over NATO, they are their own entity....if you've noticed, minus the UN aide, no country or entity is getting near Burma or Darfur....

The Overlord

01-07-2009, 01:16 PM

the US doesn't have any control over NATO, they are their own entity....if you've noticed, minus the UN aide, no country or entity is getting near Burma or Darfur....

I never said the US should do anything in there, that's why I emntioned NATO or some African countries, but the US could try to influecne these things so they happen.

Midnyte_Sun

01-07-2009, 01:19 PM

NATO is already hardpressed in Afghanistan. The UN should grow some balls and send their 20,000 proposed troops to the region to assist the African union troops and have the Arab League negotiate with Sudan to allow them in.

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 01:20 PM

I never said the US should do anything in there, that's why I emntioned NATO or some African countries, but the US could try to influecne these things so they happen.

This isn't 'Mother May I'....we aren't obligated to do jack as far as other countries are concerned....

Paradyme

01-07-2009, 01:40 PM

The topic of conversation was Darfur, which is why I said Darfur. I believe that genocides like those in Burma and Darfur should be stopped. And that the US should coordinate efforts to do just that.

I agree as well but we don't have enough troops to do that. Even if we pull out of Iraq. How do we decide which one gets first help? I don't think we could do it alone. While I feel the U.N. is basically useless I still think we need some help from different countries.

Marx

01-07-2009, 01:43 PM

I agree as well but we don't have enough troops to do that. Even if we pull out of Iraq. How do we decide which one gets first help? I don't think we could do it alone. While I feel the U.N. is basically useless I still think we need some help from different countries.

With respect to Darfur, I believe that we would only need to send a few hundred troops to coordinate an effort with the AU (African Union).

The Overlord

01-07-2009, 01:48 PM

This isn't 'Mother May I'....we aren't obligated to do jack as far as other countries are concerned....

I never said you were, but it would be nice, because it seems to the US often puts economic objectives, above the Democratic values it claims to promote, how else would you explain the US-Saudi relationship? It be nice if the uS does something that doesn't invovle naked self interest.

Besides my ain point is that you should not make arrogant, privilaged and dismissive comments, because it makes you look.....unpleasant, its that kind of attitude that has made the US so unopular in the last 8 years

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 01:54 PM

ask anyone here that talks with me....I don't do pleasant....

The Overlord

01-07-2009, 02:04 PM

ask anyone here that talks with me....I don't do pleasant....

You are trying to enforce the sterotype of conservatives being arrogant, dismisive and jingoistic?

Like I said its this kind of bad attitude tht makes the US unpopular, you wouldn't like it if someone else from another country had such an attitude.

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 02:06 PM

You are trying to enforce the sterotype of conservatives being arrogant, dismisive and jingoistic?

Like I said its this kind of bad attitude tht makes the US unpopular, you wouldn't like it if someone else from another country had such an attitude.

....I wouldn't care if they did....I love how people love to throw the word "jingoistic" around....We shouldn't be in Iraq, Israel, Darfur, Burma, or any of those places.....

The Overlord

01-07-2009, 02:08 PM

....I wouldn't care if they did....I love how people love to throw the word "jingoistic" around....We shouldn't be in Iraq, Israel, Darfur, Burma, or any of those places.....

Well you are a consistant isolationalist, I will give you that. At least you are consistant. I can admire that on a low level.

Raiden

01-07-2009, 02:39 PM

Here's an article from Washington Post (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28533698/) (posted on MSNBC) that traced the source of today's violence back from years of blunders that ultimately gave Hamas the powers that they have today.

Asteroid-Man

01-07-2009, 03:08 PM

Israel has every right to defend itself from anyone seeking to destroy it.
That guys family wasn't a part of Hammas. What about the UN's school full of Palestinian children? Look at the facts, Israel jumped at the chance to attack the Palestinians to get rid of them all and have no threat in general even with innocent people. It's becoming a genocide.

The Senator

01-07-2009, 03:10 PM

That guys family wasn't a part of Hammas. What about the UN's school full of Palestinian children? Look at the facts, Israel jumped at the chance to attack the Palestinians to get rid of them all and have no threat in general even with innocent people. It's becoming a genocide.

Sometimes there are casualties of war. Sometimes those casualties are "shocking." Unfortunately, these things happen.

Shemtov

01-07-2009, 03:33 PM

weirdly enough, Hamas means "violence" in Biblical Hebrew.

Paradyme

01-07-2009, 03:34 PM

With respect to Darfur, I believe that we would only need to send a few hundred troops to coordinate an effort with the AU (African Union).

If everything goes according to plan. It'd be better to send in a bit more than a few hundred to show them we mean business.

Fenrir

01-07-2009, 04:08 PM

Interesting thoughts of a former Israeli Army Officer who served in the 1960s on the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine/print

The Senator

01-07-2009, 04:11 PM

If everything goes according to plan. It'd be better to send in a bit more than a few hundred to show them we mean business.

I'd rather not send any troops into the Sudan. I actually agree with BlackLantern on most of these points. As much as genocide is upsetting and shocking to us, it is not up to us to stop it.

I cede that, realistically, we are going to stick our noses into yet another conflict we don't need to be involved in... so I do think a few hundred ground troops will be necessary to help guide efforts by the African Union...

Marx

01-07-2009, 04:30 PM

If everything goes according to plan. It'd be better to send in a bit more than a few hundred to show them we mean business.

Last I heard, the African Union has upwards of 20,000 ground troops already in the area.

raybia

01-07-2009, 08:32 PM

Interesting thoughts of a former Israeli Army Officer who served in the 1960s on the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/07/gaza-israel-palestine/print

An excellent and damning article by an authority on the situation.

Unsurprisingly the strongest supporters of Israel have neglected to comment. Of course if/when they do, I would imagine that Avi Shalim's comments will be dismissed and the validity of his statements question as though they have a better knowledge/grasp on the situation than someone with his qualifications/credentials.

I would never justify the response of Hamas but this perspective certainly helps to explain their actions as Hamas and previous groups like it are viewed as freedom fighters in the eyes of the Palestinian people who probably feel like a caged animal struggling for survival and an wounded animal backed into a corner certainly isn't going to just lay down and let itself be killed.

A wounded Palestinian policeman gestures while lying on the ground outside Hamas police headquarters following an Israeli air strike in Gaza City. Photograph: Mohammed Abed/AFP/Getty Images

The only way to make sense of Israel's senseless war in Gaza is through understanding the historical context. Establishing the state of Israel in May 1948 involved a monumental injustice to the Palestinians. British officials bitterly resented American partisanship on behalf of the infant state. On 2 June 1948, Sir John Troutbeck wrote to the foreign secretary, Ernest Bevin, that the Americans were responsible for the creation of a gangster state headed by "an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders". I used to think that this judgment was too harsh but Israel's vicious assault on the people of Gaza, and the Bush administration's complicity in this assault, have reopened the question.

I write as someone who served loyally in the Israeli army in the mid-1960s and who has never questioned the legitimacy of the state of Israel within its pre-1967 borders. What I utterly reject is the Zionist colonial project beyond the Green Line. The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in the aftermath of the June 1967 war had very little to do with security and everything to do with territorial expansionism. The aim was to establish Greater Israel through permanent political, economic and military control over the Palestinian territories. And the result has been one of the most prolonged and brutal military occupations of modern times.

Four decades of Israeli control did incalculable damage to the economy of the Gaza Strip. With a large population of 1948 refugees crammed into a tiny strip of land, with no infrastructure or natural resources, Gaza's prospects were never bright. Gaza, however, is not simply a case of economic under-development but a uniquely cruel case of deliberate de-development. To use the Biblical phrase, Israel turned the people of Gaza into the hewers of wood and the drawers of water, into a source of cheap labour and a captive market for Israeli goods. The development of local industry was actively impeded so as to make it impossible for the Palestinians to end their subordination to Israel and to establish the economic underpinnings essential for real political independence.

Gaza is a classic case of colonial exploitation in the post-colonial era. Jewish settlements in occupied territories are immoral, illegal and an insurmountable obstacle to peace. They are at once the instrument of exploitation and the symbol of the hated occupation. In Gaza, the Jewish settlers numbered only 8,000 in 2005 compared with 1.4 million local residents. Yet the settlers controlled 25% of the territory, 40% of the arable land and the lion's share of the scarce water resources. Cheek by jowl with these foreign intruders, the majority of the local population lived in abject poverty and unimaginable misery. Eighty per cent of them still subsist on less than $2 a day. The living conditions in the strip remain an affront to civilised values, a powerful precipitant to resistance and a fertile breeding ground for political extremism.

In August 2005 a Likud government headed by Ariel Sharon staged a unilateral Israeli pullout from Gaza, withdrawing all 8,000 settlers and destroying the houses and farms they had left behind. Hamas, the Islamic resistance movement, conducted an effective campaign to drive the Israelis out of Gaza. The withdrawal was a humiliation for the Israeli Defence Forces. To the world, Sharon presented the withdrawal from Gaza as a contribution to peace based on a two-state solution. But in the year after, another 12,000 Israelis settled on the West Bank, further reducing the scope for an independent Palestinian state. Land-grabbing and peace-making are simply incompatible. Israel had a choice and it chose land over peace.

The real purpose behind the move was to redraw unilaterally the borders of Greater Israel by incorporating the main settlement blocs on the West Bank to the state of Israel. Withdrawal from Gaza was thus not a prelude to a peace deal with the Palestinian Authority but a prelude to further Zionist expansion on the West Bank. It was a unilateral Israeli move undertaken in what was seen, mistakenly in my view, as an Israeli national interest. Anchored in a fundamental rejection of the Palestinian national identity, the withdrawal from Gaza was part of a long-term effort to deny the Palestinian people any independent political existence on their land.

Israel's settlers were withdrawn but Israeli soldiers continued to control all access to the Gaza Strip by land, sea and air. Gaza was converted overnight into an open-air prison. From this point on, the Israeli air force enjoyed unrestricted freedom to drop bombs, to make sonic booms by flying low and breaking the sound barrier, and to terrorise the hapless inhabitants of this prison.

Israel likes to portray itself as an island of democracy in a sea of authoritarianism. Yet Israel has never in its entire history done anything to promote democracy on the Arab side and has done a great deal to undermine it. Israel has a long history of secret collaboration with reactionary Arab regimes to suppress Palestinian nationalism. Despite all the handicaps, the Palestinian people succeeded in building the only genuine democracy in the Arab world with the possible exception of Lebanon. In January 2006, free and fair elections for the Legislative Council of the Palestinian Authority brought to power a Hamas-led government. Israel, however, refused to recognise the democratically elected government, claiming that Hamas is purely and simply a terrorist organisation.

America and the EU shamelessly joined Israel in ostracising and demonising the Hamas government and in trying to bring it down by withholding tax revenues and foreign aid. A surreal situation thus developed with a significant part of the international community imposing economic sanctions not against the occupier but against the occupied, not against the oppressor but against the oppressed.

As so often in the tragic history of Palestine, the victims were blamed for their own misfortunes. Israel's propaganda machine persistently purveyed the notion that the Palestinians are terrorists, that they reject coexistence with the Jewish state, that their nationalism is little more than antisemitism, that Hamas is just a bunch of religious fanatics and that Islam is incompatible with democracy.

But the simple truth is that the Palestinian people are a normal people with normal aspirations. They are no better but they are no worse than any other national group. What they aspire to, above all, is a piece of land to call their own on which to live in freedom and dignity.

Like other radical movements, Hamas began to moderate its political programme following its rise to power. From the ideological rejectionism of its charter, it began to move towards pragmatic accommodation of a two-state solution. In March 2007, Hamas and Fatah formed a national unity government that was ready to negotiate a long-term ceasefire with Israel. Israel, however, refused to negotiate with a government that included Hamas.

It continued to play the old game of divide and rule between rival Palestinian factions. In the late 1980s, Israel had supported the nascent Hamas in order to weaken Fatah, the secular nationalist movement led by Yasser Arafat. Now Israel began to encourage the corrupt and pliant Fatah leaders to overthrow their religious political rivals and recapture power. Aggressive American neoconservatives participated in the sinister plot to instigate a Palestinian civil war. Their meddling was a major factor in the collapse of the national unity government and in driving Hamas to seize power in Gaza in June 2007 to pre-empt a Fatah coup.

The war unleashed by Israel on Gaza on 27 December was the culmination of a series of clashes and confrontations with the Hamas government. In a broader sense, however, it is a war between Israel and the Palestinian people, because the people had elected the party to power. The declared aim of the war is to weaken Hamas and to intensify the pressure until its leaders agree to a new ceasefire on Israel's terms. The undeclared aim is to ensure that the Palestinians in Gaza are seen by the world simply as a humanitarian problem and thus to derail their struggle for independence and statehood.

The timing of the war was determined by political expediency. A general election is scheduled for 10 February and, in the lead-up to the election, all the main contenders are looking for an opportunity to prove their toughness. The army top brass had been champing at the bit to deliver a crushing blow to Hamas in order to remove the stain left on their reputation by the failure of the war against Hezbollah in Lebanon in July 2006. Israel's cynical leaders could also count on apathy and impotence of the pro-western Arab regimes and on blind support from President Bush in the twilight of his term in the White House. Bush readily obliged by putting all the blame for the crisis on Hamas, vetoing proposals at the UN Security Council for an immediate ceasefire and issuing Israel with a free pass to mount a ground invasion of Gaza.

As always, mighty Israel claims to be the victim of Palestinian aggression but the sheer asymmetry of power between the two sides leaves little room for doubt as to who is the real victim. This is indeed a conflict between David and Goliath but the Biblical image has been inverted - a small and defenceless Palestinian David faces a heavily armed, merciless and overbearing Israeli Goliath. The resort to brute military force is accompanied, as always, by the shrill rhetoric of victimhood and a farrago of self-pity overlaid with self-righteousness. In Hebrew this is known as the syndrome of bokhim ve-yorim, "crying and shooting".

To be sure, Hamas is not an entirely innocent party in this conflict. Denied the fruit of its electoral victory and confronted with an unscrupulous adversary, it has resorted to the weapon of the weak - terror. Militants from Hamas and Islamic Jihad kept launching Qassam rocket attacks against Israeli settlements near the border with Gaza until Egypt brokered a six-month ceasefire last June. The damage caused by these primitive rockets is minimal but the psychological impact is immense, prompting the public to demand protection from its government. Under the circumstances, Israel had the right to act in self-defence but its response to the pinpricks of rocket attacks was totally disproportionate. The figures speak for themselves. In the three years after the withdrawal from Gaza, 11 Israelis were killed by rocket fire. On the other hand, in 2005-7 alone, the IDF killed 1,290 Palestinians in Gaza, including 222 children.

Whatever the numbers, killing civilians is wrong. This rule applies to Israel as much as it does to Hamas, but Israel's entire record is one of unbridled and unremitting brutality towards the inhabitants of Gaza. Israel also maintained the blockade of Gaza after the ceasefire came into force which, in the view of the Hamas leaders, amounted to a violation of the agreement. During the ceasefire, Israel prevented any exports from leaving the strip in clear violation of a 2005 accord, leading to a sharp drop in employment opportunities. Officially, 49.1% of the population is unemployed. At the same time, Israel restricted drastically the number of trucks carrying food, fuel, cooking-gas canisters, spare parts for water and sanitation plants, and medical supplies to Gaza. It is difficult to see how starving and freezing the civilians of Gaza could protect the people on the Israeli side of the border. But even if it did, it would still be immoral, a form of collective punishment that is strictly forbidden by international humanitarian law.

The brutality of Israel's soldiers is fully matched by the mendacity of its spokesmen. Eight months before launching the current war on Gaza, Israel established a National Information Directorate. The core messages of this directorate to the media are that Hamas broke the ceasefire agreements; that Israel's objective is the defence of its population; and that Israel's forces are taking the utmost care not to hurt innocent civilians. Israel's spin doctors have been remarkably successful in getting this message across. But, in essence, their propaganda is a pack of lies.

A wide gap separates the reality of Israel's actions from the rhetoric of its spokesmen. It was not Hamas but the IDF that broke the ceasefire. It di d so by a raid into Gaza on 4 November that killed six Hamas men. Israel's objective is not just the defence of its population but the eventual overthrow of the Hamas government in Gaza by turning the people against their rulers. And far from taking care to spare civilians, Israel is guilty of indiscriminate bombing and of a three-year-old blockade that has brought the inhabitants of Gaza, now 1.5 million, to the brink of a humanitarian catastrophe.

The Biblical injunction of an eye for an eye is savage enough. But Israel's insane offensive against Gaza seems to follow the logic of an eye for an eyelash. After eight days of bombing, with a death toll of more than 400 Palestinians and four Israelis, the gung-ho cabinet ordered a land invasion of Gaza the consequences of which are incalculable.

No amount of military escalation can buy Israel immunity from rocket attacks from the military wing of Hamas. Despite all the death and destruction that Israel has inflicted on them, they kept up their resistance and they kept firing their rockets. This is a movement that glorifies victimhood and martyrdom. There is simply no military solution to the conflict between the two communities. The problem with Israel's concept of security is that it denies even the most elementary security to the other community. The only way for Israel to achieve security is not through shooting but through talks with Hamas, which has repeatedly declared its readiness to negotiate a long-term ceasefire with the Jewish state within its pre-1967 borders for 20, 30, or even 50 years. Israel has rejected this offer for the same reason it spurned the Arab League peace plan of 2002, which is still on the table: it involves concessions and compromises.

This brief review of Israel's record over the past four decades makes it difficult to resist the conclusion that it has become a rogue state with "an utterly unscrupulous set of leaders". A rogue state habitually violates international law, possesses weapons of mass destruction and practises terrorism - the use of violence against civilians for political purposes. Israel fulfils all of these three criteria; the cap fits and it must wear it. Israel's real aim is not peaceful coexistence with its Palestinian neighbours but military domination. It keeps compounding the mistakes of the past with new and more disastrous ones. Politicians, like everyone else, are of course free to repeat the lies and mistakes of the past. But it is not mandatory to do so.

• Avi Shlaim is a professor of international relations at the University of Oxford and the author of The Iron Wall: Israel and the Arab World and of Lion of Jordan: King Hussein's Life in War and Peace.

raybia

01-07-2009, 08:44 PM

weirdly enough, Hamas means "violence" in Biblical Hebrew.

Actually that is not correct.

That definition is from modern Hebrew. Biblical Hebrew is different in subtle but important ways from Modern Hebrew and one must be careful to check with Biblical Hebrew Scholars when trying to make a connection between Hamas in Biblical Hebrew and the current tongue.

Wikipedia states that Hamas is an acronym of the Arabic phrase Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya or "Islamic Resistance Movement". The word formed by the acronym corresponds to an Arabic word meaning "enthusiasm, fire, ardor, fervor, zeal, fanaticism".

Plus the current people group calling themselves Hamas take their name from an Arabic acronym and does not relate any meaning of their name to the Hebrew.

Bunker

01-07-2009, 08:50 PM

BlackLantern

01-07-2009, 08:50 PM

When leaders of countries and political figures make statements like "We will not rest until Israel is destroyed", I can't blame Israel for doing what they are doing

Asteroid-Man

01-07-2009, 09:19 PM

Sometimes there are casualties of war. Sometimes those casualties are "shocking." Unfortunately, these things happen.
But it isn't Palestine at war with Israel, it's Israel at war with Hammas. Innocent people are being killed.

The Senator

01-07-2009, 09:38 PM

But it isn't Palestine at war with Israel, it's Israel at war with Hammas. Innocent people are being killed.

Well... maybe the Palestinians should stop electing extremists as the voice of their movement...

Asteroid-Man

01-07-2009, 09:53 PM

That's the best thing they have...

raybia

01-07-2009, 10:05 PM

Well... maybe the Palestinians should stop electing extremists as the voice of their movement...

Funny how democracy is only good when we approve of the choice of the people. Palestinians supported and elected Hamas. Ironically so did Israel at once point.

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

raybia

01-07-2009, 10:07 PM

Well... maybe the Palestinians should stop electing extremists as the voice of their movement...

Oh I just cannot resist this but we did when we elected Bush...TWICE!

The Senator

01-07-2009, 10:12 PM

Funny how democracy is only good when we approve of the choice of the people. Palestinians supported and elected Hamas. Ironically so did Israel at once point.

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

So, because the Palestinians elected terrorists to lead their movement, we should support them? Even as they continuously pour rockets into Israel and make other strides to murder innocent Israelis in order to make a point?

Marx

01-07-2009, 10:43 PM

But it isn't Palestine at war with Israel, it's Israel at war with Hammas. Innocent people are being killed.

And those innocent people elected Hamas. Furthermore, Hamas is now using those innocent people as their shields.

Well... maybe the Palestinians should stop electing extremists as the voice of their movement...

That's the best thing they have...

No it isn't. Electing terrorists to lead your government are acts made out of fear and desperation, not logic.

Marx

01-07-2009, 10:49 PM

'JOE THE PLUMBER' HEADED TO THE MIDDLE EAST
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/01/07/joe-the-plumber-headed-to-middle-east/

Joe Wurzelbacher: Plumber. Campaign celebrity. Foreign correspondent?

‘Joe the Plumber’ is headed overseas to try his hand at covering the conflict in Gaza, Wurzelbacher’s publicist Thomas Tabback confirmed to CNN Wednesday.

Wurzelbacher plans to spend 10 days in Israel reporting on the conflict for pjtv.com, a Web site run by conservative media outlet Pajamas Media.
The famous plumber will be focusing on the Israeli perspective on the situation. "It's tragic, I mean it really is,” Wurzelbacher told CNN affiliate WNWO “I don't say that in any little way. It's very tragic, but at the same time what are the Israeli people supposed to do.”

Wurzelbacher told WNWO he’s not worried about the potential dangers of his new gig. "Being a Christian I'm pretty well protected by God I believe. That's not saying he's going to stop a mortar for me, but you gotta take the chance,” he told the CNN affiliate.

“Israeli officials are very excited to have him,” Tabback told CNN.

Oh. Dear. Lord. :facepalm

raybia

01-07-2009, 11:02 PM

So, because the Palestinians elected terrorists to lead their movement, we should support them? Even as they continuously pour rockets into Israel and make other strides to murder innocent Israelis in order to make a point?

Well that was certainly the claim by Israel, that Hamas is a terrorist organization, at the time that the Palestinians elected the group into power.

And some claim that Israel's actions towards the Palestinians over the past 40+ years have been terrorism.

However, rather than just dismiss the will of the people and refuse to ever negotiate with the Palestinian elected government because of their radical history, it should insist that they (Hamas) reform themselves and renounce terrorist tactics before recognizing them.

But guess what. Israel even refuses to do that. Because Hamas actually began to moderate its political programm following its rise to power from the ideological rejectionism of its charter towards a pragmatic accommodation of a two-state solution. In March 2007, Hamas and Fatah formed a national unity government that was ready to negotiate a long-term ceasefire with Israel. Israel, however, refused to negotiate with a government that included Hamas. But Israel didn't have a problem negoitating with so-called "terrorist" in the 80's when they were trying to weakens Arafat's Fatah group.

Also don't forget that while Hamas in firing rockets into Israel, what do you think Israel is firing into Gaza? And they too are killing innocence people. Israel lives are no more precious than Palestinian rights. Do you believe that?

Israel isn't doing this as self-defense, they are doing it to punish the Palestinians for electing Hamas and beat them into submission until they decide to elect a new Government that Israel approves of and as a result taking away the "democracy of the people."

Also I don't think the Palestinians could care less whether we support them or not. I would think they would just ask that we stop a "legitimate country" from committing atrocities towards them, stop suppressing their efforts towards Palestinian nationalism and recognize them as having the only true democracy in the Middle East.

raybia

01-07-2009, 11:05 PM

No it isn't. Electing terrorists to lead your government are acts made out of fear and desperation, not logic.

I agree with this. Guess who made the Palestinians fearful, desperate and illogical?

The Senator

01-07-2009, 11:06 PM

Well that was certainly the claim by Israel, that Hamas is a terrorist organization, at the time that the Palestinians elected the group into power.

And some claim that Israel's actions towards the Palestinians over the past 40+ years have been terrorism.

However, rather than just dismiss the will of the people and refuse to ever negotiate with the Palestinian elected government because of their radical history, it should insist that they (Hamas) reform themselves and renounce terrorist tactics before recognizing them.

But guess what. Israel even refuses to do that. Because Hamas actually began to moderate its political programm following its rise to power from the ideological rejectionism of its charter towards a pragmatic accommodation of a two-state solution. In March 2007, Hamas and Fatah formed a national unity government that was ready to negotiate a long-term ceasefire with Israel. Israel, however, refused to negotiate with a government that included Hamas. But Israel didn't have a problem negoitating with so-called "terrorist" in the 80's when they were trying to weakens Arafat's Fatah group.

Also don't forget that while Hamas in firing rockets into Israel, what do you think Israel is firing into Gaza? And they too are killing innocence people. Israel lives are no more precious than Palestinian rights. Do you believe that?

Israel isn't doing this as self-defense, they are doing it to punish the Palestinians for electing Hamas and beat them into submission until they decide to elect a new Government that Israel approves of and as a result taking away the "democracy of the people."

Also I don't think the Palestinians could care less whether we support them or not. I would think they would just ask that we stop a "legitimate country" from committing atrocities towards them, stop suppressing their efforts towards Palestinian nationalism and recognize them as having the only true democracy in the Middle East.

None of that erases the fact that Hamas is made up of militant extremists willing to murder civilians in order to make a point.

raybia

01-07-2009, 11:12 PM

None of that erases the fact that Hamas is made up of militant extremists willing to murder civilians in order to make a point.

Some think that Israel is doing the exact same thing.

Hobgoblin

01-08-2009, 12:26 AM

“Israeli officials are very excited to have him,” Tabback told CNN.
Bull.

Marx

01-08-2009, 12:34 AM

Bull.
I don't believe it either. Not for one second.

Fenrir

01-08-2009, 05:03 AM

Oh I just cannot resist this but we did when we elected Bush...TWICE!

Yeah. That means the terrorists will be perfectly justified in targeting American civilians because they elected such a war mongering government twice "as voice of their movement". Guess those innocent Americans too are "guilty by association" and are perfectly eligible to pay for the crimes of their government.

What a seriously dumbass logic. :rolleyes: x 10000000000000000000000000000

raybia

01-08-2009, 07:35 AM

Yeah. That means the terrorists will be perfectly justified in targeting American civilians because they elected such a war mongering government twice "as voice of their movement". Guess those innocent Americans too are "guilty by association" and are perfectly eligible to pay for the crimes of their government.

What a seriously dumbass logic. :rolleyes: x 10000000000000000000000000000

This is exactly the logic that Israel is using towards the Palestinians.

By the way, just like we know that a great number of Americans did not vote for Bush in either election and most Americans do not support the Bush Administration, not all Palestinans voted nor supported Hamas.

Paradyme

01-08-2009, 08:13 AM

Last I heard, the African Union has upwards of 20,000 ground troops already in the area.

And they're just sitting there? Thats great.

raybia

01-08-2009, 08:14 AM

More and more Israel (their government that is) is proving to the world their true character. Truly inhumane.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7817926.stm

The Overlord

01-08-2009, 08:20 AM

Funny how democracy is only good when we approve of the choice of the people. Palestinians supported and elected Hamas. Ironically so did Israel at once point.

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

Yeah and the Nazis were elected in Germany, does that make Nazi Germany a democracy? If Germany elected the Nazis again or if the US elected a KKK led government, would they still be Democracies?

Bush believes democracy is jsut elections, but anyone with a brain knows there is more to it then it? As well as elections, you need the rule of law, a civil society, respect for individual rights. Unless Hamas has created those things, they aren't democractic. I mean does Hamas follow for equal rights for homosexuals, I do think so.

Electing hamas was a very stupid decision by the Palestinians and I have little pity for idiots. It was stupid decison and now they have their foolishiness and its fallout.

raybia

01-08-2009, 08:36 AM

Yeah and the Nazis were elected in Germany, does that make Nazi Germany a democracy?

If Germany elected the Nazis again or if the US elected a KKK led government, would they still be Democracies?

First of all, Hamas is not the Nazis and Palenstine is not Nazi Germany so that is a ridculous argument.

Hitler never had more than 37 percent of the popular vote in the honest elections that occurred before he became Chancellor. And the opposition among the 63 percent against him was generally quite strong. Hitler therefore would have never seen the light of day had the German Republic been truly democratic. Unfortunately, its otherwise sound constitution contained a few fatal flaws. The German leaders also had a weak devotion to democracy, and some were actively plotting to overthrow it. Hitler furthermore enjoyed an almost unbroken string of luck in coming to power. He benefited greatly from the Great Depression, the half-senility of the president, the incompetence of his opposition, and the appearance of an unnecessary backroom deal just as the Nazis were starting to lose popular appeal and votes.

Critics of democracy often claim that Hitler was democratically elected to power. This is untrue. Hitler never had the popular votes to become Chancellor of Germany, and the only reason he got the job was because the German leaders entered into a series of back-room deals. Some claim that Hitler's rise was nonetheless legal under the German system. The problem is that what was "legal" under the German system would not be considered legal under a truer and better-working democracy. In a democracy along the lines of the United States or Great Britain, Hitler could have never risen to power.

Bush believes democracy is jsut elections, but anyone with a brain knows there is more to it then it? As well as elections, you need the rule of law, a civil society, respect for individual rights. Unless Hamas has created those things, they aren't democractic. I mean does Hamas follow for equal rights for homosexuals, I do think so.

Electing hamas was a very stupid decision by the Palestinians and I have little pity for idiots. It was stupid decison and now they have their foolishiness and its fallout.

[B]Some say the same about the U.S. with us electing Bush twice and that we are deserving of the current situation we are in with our ecomonic woes.

Nivek

01-08-2009, 08:56 AM

Electing terrorists to lead your government are acts made out of fear and desperation, not logic.

And that is how we ended up with Bush in 2004. Not saying he was a Terrorist, but he did use the threat of Terrorism to maintain power.

Fenrir

01-08-2009, 09:07 AM

This is exactly the logic that Israel is using towards the Palestinians.

If that is the case, then no one, I repeat NO ONE can be truly innocent. If harmless Palestinian women and children (more than 300 of whom were killed in the barbaric bombings) are fair game for the Israelis as even remotely justifiable targets, then the pro-Israeli camp has no business calling Hamas (or anyone else for that matter) as terrorists.

Shemtov

01-08-2009, 10:11 AM

Actually that is not correct.

That definition is from modern Hebrew. Biblical Hebrew is different in subtle but important ways from Modern Hebrew and one must be careful to check with Biblical Hebrew Scholars when trying to make a connection between Hamas in Biblical Hebrew and the current tongue.

Wikipedia states that Hamas is an acronym of the Arabic phrase Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya or "Islamic Resistance Movement". The word formed by the acronym corresponds to an Arabic word meaning "enthusiasm, fire, ardor, fervor, zeal, fanaticism".

Plus the current people group calling themselves Hamas take their name from an Arabic acronym and does not relate any meaning of their name to the Hebrew.
i know it comes from araibic but its an odd coincidence. oh, and it is biblical. i know this because the heb. version of the flood uses "hamas" to mean violence.

Superman4ever

01-08-2009, 10:12 AM

None of that erases the fact that Hamas is made up of militant extremists willing to murder civilians in order to make a point.

Same could be said of the other side:

oABSeGoBdkE

^^ This is the excuse they use for killing 46 kids in a school. FORTY-SIX KIDS! The terrorists were NOT in the school, just in the vicinity! Point made.

Superman4ever

01-08-2009, 10:15 AM

Yeah and the Nazis...[NUFF SAID]

Godwin's law.

Epic Fail!

:lmao:

First of all, Hamas is not the Nazis and Palenstine is not Nazi Germany so that is a ridculous argument.

Critics of democracy often claim that Hitler was democratically elected to power. This is untrue. Hitler never had the popular votes to become Chancellor of Germany, and the only reason he got the job was because the German leaders entered into a series of back-room deals. Some claim that Hitler's rise was nonetheless legal under the German system. The problem is that what was "legal" under the German system would not be considered legal under a truer and better-working democracy. In a democracy along the lines of the United States or Great Britain, Hitler could have never risen to power.

Some say the same about the U.S. with us electing Bush twice and that we are deserving of the current situation we are in with our ecomonic woes.

Owned!

raybia

01-08-2009, 10:24 AM

i know it comes from araibic but its an odd coincidence. oh, and it is biblical. i know this because the heb. version of the flood uses "hamas" to mean violence.

What I mean is that in the Modern Herbrew "hamas" is translated to mean "violence" but I'm pretty sure it has a different meaning in the ancient Biblical Herbrew.

Shemtov

01-08-2009, 10:34 AM

What I mean is that in the Modern Herbrew "hamas" is translated to mean "violence" but I'm pretty sure it has a different meaning in the ancient Biblical Herbrew.
sort of. in biblical hebrew it meant violence BUT especially Violent robbery.

The Overlord

01-08-2009, 10:38 AM

Some say the same about the U.S. with us electing Bush twice and that we are deserving of the current situation we are in with our ecomonic woes.

I would say to a certain extent, they are right, Bush was unqualified to be president and people voted for him because they wanted to have a beer with him or because if Kerry won gays would be allowed to marry, on pure merits Bush had no case and was still elected. If people elect stupid or insane people to office, should be prepared for the negative compact their rule will have.

None of this changes the fact that you ignored my main point: has Hamas created rule of law, a civil society and do they ensure individual rightd are protected? Are Homosexuals in Gaza equal to everyone else? If they don't do those things, they aren't democratic. You are confusing mob rule with Democracy, those are two different things.

Also I find it fair to compare Hamas with the Nazis on cetain levels, their propganada agaisnt Jews is pretty similar.

And you ingored my other point, if the US elected a KKK led governemnt, would it still be democratic?

Godwin's law.

Epic Fail!

I was using the Nazis as a comparsion because its the best known one, but ultimately I can come up with several examples of governemnts that are eelcted that aren't democratic. That's notmy main point, which you are not adressing, both you and raybia claim Hamas is democratic just because they are elected, I believe that is not the case, there is more to Democracy then winning elections and unless can prove Hamas meets the other requirments of democracy, they aren't democratic. Democracy and mob rule are two different things.

Owned!

Not really, I don't disagree with that point about Bush so I don't see how I am "owned"

raybia

01-08-2009, 10:40 AM

sort of. in biblical hebrew it meant violence BUT especially Violent robbery.

Not to belabor the point but I don't think it has anything to do with violence.

I will do some research and post what I find out...even if I find out I'm wrong! :woot:

There is a local Temple that teaches Herbrew. I will go and ask the instructor.

raybia

01-08-2009, 10:56 AM

I would say to a certain extent, they are right, Bush was unqualified to be president and people voted for him because they wanted to have a beer with him or because if Kerry won gays would be allowed to marry, on pure merits Bush had no case and was still elected. If people elect stupid or insane people to office, should be prepared for the negative compact their rule will have.

None of this changes the fact that you ignored my main point: has Hamas created rule of law, a civil society and do they ensure individual rightd are protected? Are Homosexuals in Gaza equal to everyone else? If they don't do those things, they aren't democratic. You are confusing mob rule with Democracy, those are two different things.

I DISAGREE.

Also I find it fair to compare Hamas with the Nazis on cetain levels, their propganada agaisnt Jews is pretty similar.

I DISAGREE.

And you ingored my other point, if the US elected a KKK led governemnt, would it still be democratic?

Well, in all seriousness, it can be said that we have during the history of our country elected a KKK led/infiltrated Government. If truly elected by the people it would be through the democratic process but if that newly elected Government didn't adhere to the Constitution of the U.S. and remained in power by force then they would be enemies of Democracy and the people.

I even wouldn't have a real problem with the Klan in power if it was the KKK "in name only" and they reformed themselves and denounced their past and their agenda of violence, fear, hate, etc. as part of their ideology. Of course I would still be skeptical but would wait to see if they would abide by this.

I expect HAMAS to do the same. Either renounce their tactics and reform themselves or give the Palenstians a chance to elect someone else.

What options do the Palenstians have besides Hamas? Do they even have the power to unseat them or has Hamas hijacked them and using force to remain in power? I really don't know the answer to this.

The Overlord

01-08-2009, 11:18 AM

Well, in all seriousness, it can be said that we have during the history of our country elected a KKK led/infiltrated Government. If truly elected by the people it would be part of the democratic process but if the newly elected Government didn't adhere to the Constitution and remained in power by force then they would be enemies of Democracy..

Well Woodrow Wilson was a KKK member, of course back then women couldn't vote. I'm talking about today.

But that's the thing, does Palestine have a government any sort document that ensures the individual rights of everyone in those areas, its not really a Democracy, its mob rule.

I even wouldn't have a real problem with the Klan in power if it was in name only and they reformed themselves and denounced their past and their agenda of violence, fear, hate, etc. as part of their ideology. Of course I would still be skeptical but would wait to see if they would abide by this...

But if they were elected to power and didn't change, they wouldn't be Democratic, that's my point.

I expect HAMAS to do the same. Either renounce their tactics and reform themselves or give the Palenstians a chance to elect someone else. ...

Well they have been power for a few years now and how much have they really changed? Besides been elected how Democratic have they been, what have they done to make their areas of control more Democratic?

If they haven't done anything in that regard, then they aren't democratic, they rule by the virtue of mob of rule at best.

What options do the Palenstians have besides Hamas? Do they even have the power to unseat them or has Hamas hijacked them? I really don't know the answer to this.

If most Palestinians were interested in real peace, then they could easily change things and get rid of Hamas, no government survvies wihout some public support. The question is, are they really interested in peace?

Marx

01-08-2009, 11:20 AM

And they're just sitting there? Thats great.

They've been running into alot of red tape with the Sudanese government. I think the AU was largely designed as a peace mission, rather than an invading force. Needless to say, the Sudanese government has tried to keep them out of the country.

Compi716

01-08-2009, 11:21 AM

Not to belabor the point but I don't think it has anything to do with violence.

I will do some research and post what I find out...even if I find out I'm wrong! :woot:

There is a local Temple that teaches Herbrew. I will go and ask the instructor.
"Chamas" in Biblical Hebrew translated to corruption/robbery. Check out Parshat Noach (the story of Noah).
Same could be said of the other side:

oABSeGoBdkE

^^ This is the excuse they use for killing 46 kids in a school. FORTY-SIX KIDS! The terrorists were NOT in the school, just in the vicinity! Point made.
Please, if you want to go about bringing up points, use sources that are least somewhat neutral and are guaranteed to have the facts 100% straight, not something from Al-Jazeerah.

Marx

01-08-2009, 11:23 AM

UN SUSPENDS AID WORK IN GAZA
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/08/israel.gaza/index.html

The move comes after a U.N. Relief and Works Agency truck driver was killed and two other people were wounded by an Israeli tank shell near the Erez Crossing, said Adnan Abu Hasna, a spokesman for the U.N. agency in Gaza.

A spokeswoman for the Israeli military said it is not aware of the attack but said Hamas militants sometimes have targeted U.N. aid trucks to take food.

The U.N. relief agency will suspend activities until the Israeli military can guarantee the safety of its staff, said the agency's chief spokesman, Chris Gunness, in Jerusalem.

The U.N. agency provides food and relief supplies to about 80 percent of Gaza's 1.5 million people.

Israeli artillery and missiles have struck three U.N. schools in Gaza this
week. More than 40 civilians were killed in a strike Tuesday on a U.N. school in Jabalya that was being used as a shelter. Three people were killed in airstrike Monday on a school shelter in Gaza City.

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said Israeli forces fired on Hamas militants in "the immediate vicinity" of the Jabalya school. Gunness vehemently denied any militants were inside the school and demanded that Israel agree to an impartial investigation.

The UN says that it was an Israeli tank that opened fire on them...the Israeli government says that Hamas sometimes fires on the UN to steal supplies.

Hmmm...who to believe. :whatever:

Israel needs to stop while they're ahead.

Compi716

01-08-2009, 12:13 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,477881,00.html

With the latest missile strikes from Lebanon, it's looking like a second front may be opened up.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,476866,00.html
^This, along with the story about the pro-Israel rally where Muslim protesters shouted things like "Gas the Jews" and "Send them back to the ovens" shows that this is not merely a "localized" fight over land. Israel is fighting antisemitism (ONE word, no hyphen: check the origin of it).

raybia

01-08-2009, 12:24 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,476866,00.html[/url]
^This, along with the story about the pro-Israel rally where Muslim protesters shouted things like "Gas the Jews" and "Send them back to the ovens" shows that this is not merely a "localized" fight over land. Israel is fighting antisemitism (ONE word, no hyphen: check the origin of it).

Well by all means sir, bomb those f**kers. Twice!

Kurosawa

01-08-2009, 12:59 PM

Well by all means sir, bomb those f**kers. Twice!

That's condescending and unneeded.

raybia

01-08-2009, 01:14 PM

That's condescending and unneeded.

Thats what I thought about the post I was responding to.

Welcome to the Hype! :up:

Kurosawa

01-08-2009, 03:01 PM

Thats what I thought about the post I was responding to.

Welcome to the Hype! :up:

If you don't realize that extreme bigotry is a huge part of this conflict, then you are deluding yourself.

raybia

01-08-2009, 03:37 PM

If you don't realize that extreme bigotry is a huge part of this conflict, then you are deluding yourself.

I realize that the Palestinans are being portrayed as antisemitic. If you think that is what this conflict is all about then I would have to say you are the one who has been deceived.

I would say though that they are anti-zionism and so am I and hopefully one day and one day soon the entire world.

Kurosawa

01-08-2009, 05:04 PM

Compi716

01-08-2009, 05:08 PM

I realize that the Palestinans are being portrayed as antisemitic. If you think that is what this conflict is all about then I would have to say you are the one who has been deceived.

I would say though that they are anti-zionism and so am I and hopefully one day and one day soon the entire world.
To be an Anti-Zionist is to be an anitsemite. To say that the Jews should not live in their home is to say the Jews should not live. For me they are the same. It's a never-ending circle of hatred: Why do you hate Israel? Because they a) took land, b) force people into settlements, c) Jews, d) other. Why is Israel like that? a) Jews b) they think they own something that they didn't rightfully get/previously own c) Jews d) other. Who's to blame?

See where this is going?

You have angry anti-Israel protests, and what do those ALWAYS lead to? That's right - antisemitic remarks/actions.
http://www.yourish.com/2009/01/02/5899

Kelly

01-08-2009, 05:18 PM

As I read this thread..........................I understand how these 2 groups have been fighting for 2000+ years....

Midnyte_Sun

01-08-2009, 05:20 PM

Is this REALLY what the Israelis offerred the Palestinians at Camp David in 2000?

http://img34.picoodle.com/img/img34/3/1/8/f_6a00d834522m_7b31def.gif (http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?img=/3/1/8/f_6a00d834522m_7b31def.gif&srv=img34)

This looks more like a prison than a real map.

The Senator

01-08-2009, 05:27 PM

Kurosawa

01-08-2009, 05:30 PM

As I read this thread..........................I understand how these 2 groups have been fighting for 2000+ years....

That's why neither needs to be in charge. This is the plus side of Imperialism: make dumbasses like these people behave.

Superman

01-08-2009, 05:45 PM

Can anyone tell me how many people was killed by the rockets from Gaza over the past few months since Israel broke the ceasefire?

Compi716

01-08-2009, 05:52 PM

Can anyone tell me how many people was killed by the rockets from Gaza over the past few months since Israel broke the ceasefire?
http://apps.facebook.com/qassamcount/
It's a Facebook app, but it lets you know what is going on where, when, and how much.

Superman

01-08-2009, 06:03 PM

http://apps.facebook.com/qassamcount/
It's a Facebook app, but it lets you know what is going on where, when, and how much.:huh: All that tells me is how to donate. I'm not a member of Facebook nor do I want to be.

I just want to know how many have been killed in Israel from the rockets from Gaza over the past few months since the ceasefire broke.

Kelly

01-08-2009, 06:08 PM

As a teacher.....I stay faaaaaaaaaaaaar away from Facebook or MySpace........

Compi716

01-08-2009, 06:36 PM

:huh: All that tells me is how to donate. I'm not a member of Facebook nor do I want to be.

I just want to know how many have been killed in Israel from the rockets from Gaza over the past few months since the ceasefire broke.
It also gives real-time updates on the right-hand side.

Check http://www.haaretz.com.

The Overlord

01-08-2009, 06:59 PM

I realize that the Palestinans are being portrayed as antisemitic. If you think that is what this conflict is all about then I would have to say you are the one who has been deceived.

I would say though that they are anti-zionism and so am I and hopefully one day and one day soon the entire world.

So exactly how are the kids shows that demonize Jews, produced by Hamas, not antisemitic?

To be an Anti-Zionist is to be an anitsemite. To say that the Jews should not live in their home is to say the Jews should not live. For me they are the same. It's a never-ending circle of hatred: Why do you hate Israel? Because they a) took land, b) force people into settlements, c) Jews, d) other. Why is Israel like that? a) Jews b) they think they own something that they didn't rightfully get/previously own c) Jews d) other. Who's to blame?

See where this is going?

No, that doesn't make sense, otherwise is Noam Chomsky an anitsemitic? What about the group of conservative Jews who don't believe in Israel for religious reasons, are they anitsemitic?

Are you saying you can't criticize the state Israel without being anitsemitic? That's silly, that's like saying if I criticize Russia, I'm anti Russian.

Backdrifter

01-08-2009, 07:10 PM

deleted.

...screw it...what's the point?

Kurosawa

01-08-2009, 08:19 PM

You can blast Israel to hell and back and not be anitsemitic, but Hamas sure as hell IS anitsemitic.

Compi716

01-08-2009, 08:30 PM

I should clarify: attacking Israel's government and methods is not antisemitic, but attacking its RIGHT TO EXIST is.

Kurosawa

01-08-2009, 08:35 PM

I should clarify: attacking Israel's government and methods is not antisemitic, but attacking its RIGHT TO EXIST is.

That I do agree with.

Kelly

01-08-2009, 08:58 PM

Israel is bad....

Hamas is bad..

That is my take on this situation....

Superman4ever

01-08-2009, 11:26 PM

"Chamas" in Biblical Hebrew translated to corruption/robbery. Check out Parshat Noach (the story of Noah).

Please, if you want to go about bringing up points, use sources that are least somewhat neutral and are guaranteed to have the facts 100% straight, not something from Al-Jazeerah.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,477881,00.html

With the latest missile strikes from Lebanon, it's looking like a second front may be opened up.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,476866,00.html
^This, along with the story about the pro-Israel rally where Muslim protesters shouted things like "Gas the Jews" and "Send them back to the ovens" shows that this is not merely a "localized" fight over land. Israel is fighting antisemitism (ONE word, no hyphen: check the origin of it).

Coming from the guy who just referenced foxnews? Al-Jazeerah is the only news organization that has FULL access to the Gaza strip. AP, Reuters, CNN, and FOXNEWS (ALL of them) rely on Al-Jazeera's coverage/footage. Israel won't allow ANY other news organization in.

A producer with Fox News e-mailed me, asking for an interview on what the situation was like in Gaza. Like many people, he didn't realize that I'm not actually in Gaza and that Israel has prevented journalists from entering since the conflict began.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/12/gaza-strip-in-p.html

Moreover, I'm not their biggest fan, but the English version is becoming well respected within the media/journalism community. It's won several awards, nominated for several emmys, on it's exposes and footage and reporting integrity. Say what you will, but their coverage in Gaza is unparalleled and their counterparts have been applauding them.

So, try getting some facts straight before you begrudge me, especially if you're going to quote Foxnews. Dude, seriously?

Superman4ever

01-08-2009, 11:33 PM

I should clarify: attacking Israel's government and methods is not antisemitic, but attacking its RIGHT TO EXIST is.

That's an honest answer, which is appreciated. At least this answer allows for dialogue and discussion. It allows for things to get moving in a positive direction. This I highly applaud you for.

I don't believe anyone here disagrees with Israel's existence or that the Jews now have a homeland and are entitled to an identity.

Red Mask

01-08-2009, 11:58 PM

My two cents:

This is a terrible setback in finding a better solution to this conflict. Hamas ruled terribly without considering the welfare of their people. I also blame POTUS Bush because of his weak handling of the issue. May they all rot in hell for the lives they've ruined. And Dick Cheney can join them too.

Superman4ever

01-09-2009, 01:23 AM

Backdrifter

01-09-2009, 02:06 AM

Coming from the guy who just referenced foxnews? Al-Jazeerah is the only news organization that has FULL access to the Gaza strip. AP, Reuters, CNN, and FOXNEWS (ALL of them) rely on Al-Jazeera's coverage/footage. Israel won't allow ANY other news organization in.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/babylonbeyond/2008/12/gaza-strip-in-p.html

Moreover, I'm not their biggest fan, but the English version is becoming well respected within the media/journalism community. It's won several awards, nominated for several emmys, on it's exposes and footage and reporting integrity. Say what you will, but their coverage in Gaza is unparalleled and their counterparts have been applauding them.

So, try getting some facts straight before you begrudge me, especially if you're going to quote Foxnews. Dude, seriously?

You are seriously going to whine about Fox News and plug Al-Jazeera? Come on, dude, nobody is going to buy that. Who cares if they won an award? Fox News wins awards too, does that some how make more or less relevant as a news source? Al-Jazeera is going to be heavily slanted towards the Arab side. Period. Don't lie to yourself and say that they aren't.

Compi716

01-09-2009, 11:37 AM

Just found out that three of my friends are in Gaza right now. I knew for sure that two of them were (one in a tank, the other on the ground), but I had no idea that the third guy (who is arguably my best friend) was, too.
http://www.njjewishnews.com/njjn.com/010809/njFatherTells.html

Marx

01-09-2009, 11:51 AM

edit

Marx

01-09-2009, 11:52 AM

Superman4ever

01-09-2009, 01:38 PM

FQFSomkDKus

Superman4ever

01-09-2009, 01:49 PM

You are seriously going to whine about Fox News and plug Al-Jazeera? Come on, dude, nobody is going to buy that. Who cares if they won an award? Fox News wins awards too, does that some how make more or less relevant as a news source? Al-Jazeera is going to be heavily slanted towards the Arab side. Period. Don't lie to yourself and say that they aren't.

This coming from a right-wing poster who has a history of harsh and uncalled for Islamophobic/Anti-Arab rhetoric?

And don't tell me I have you confused with someone else, I have the PMs B.

I'm not plugging the Al-Jazeerah (don't be juvenile) but when ALL of Western media relies on them and when their counterparts have been praising them for their reportage, I don't need to say anything.

If you have a problem with them then you and Compi should ask the Israeli government why they are the only news source that has FULL access to Gaza (for over 6 months now). Why not the AP or Rueters? Al-Jazeerah is given the clear by the Israeli government to be in Gaza. They've been the ONLY news media allowed unfettered. If they were a propaganda machine Israel certainly has the power to evict them. Al-Jazeerah (Arabic, not the English Channel) was banned from Iraq for a while. So, if the Americans can ban them...

Get on the line with the Israeli press minister...don't talk my ear off about it.

SuBe

01-09-2009, 01:56 PM

Gaza Conflict Moving Online

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,478626,00.html

Heretic

01-09-2009, 02:00 PM

I heard a very brief report yesterday that Isreal stopped a UN supply truck and looked inside and found military supplies...

I never heard that report again.

It just seems to me that...if that happened...then the UN is fueling this battle for some reason and apparently sees some benefit to it continuing.

Compi716

01-09-2009, 02:06 PM

FQFSomkDKus
Shall I go ahead and post some videos of victimized Israelis for you? We don't want to keep things too unbalanced now, do we?

The Senator

01-09-2009, 02:22 PM

Shall I go ahead and post some videos of victimized Israelis for you? We don't want to keep things too unbalanced now, do we?

Well, since the rockets the Palestinians launch into Israel are filled with hugs and kisses, you would be hard-pressed to find any videos or pictures of Israelis who aren't smiling while asking, "please sir, can I have some more?"

Paradyme

01-09-2009, 02:22 PM

Not really sure if this has been mentioned yet but, what does everyone think of Obama wanting to hold talks with Hamas?

BlackLantern

01-09-2009, 02:23 PM

Not really sure if this has been mentioned yet but, what does everyone think of Obama wanting to hold talks with Hamas?

I say why not??

The Senator

01-09-2009, 02:25 PM

Not really sure if this has been mentioned yet but, what does everyone think of Obama wanting to hold talks with Hamas?

Well, first of all, this is information reported by a British newspaper which is known to exaggerate the facts, so we don't really know if this is true or not. Second, I don't think it is a wise idea to negotiate with terrorist organizations, for a variety of reasons. However, if this is the only way to ensure peace in the region, we may just have to suck it up and deal with it. I don't see how talks could hurt, especially since Obama has indicated that he is fully behind the Israelis in this current conflict.

SuBe

01-09-2009, 02:31 PM

Well, first of all, this is information reported by a British newspaper which is known to exaggerate the facts, so we don't really know if this is true or not. Second, I don't think it is a wise idea to negotiate with terrorist organizations, for a variety of reasons. However, if this is the only way to ensure peace in the region, we may just have to suck it up and deal with it. I don't see how talks could hurt, especially since Obama has indicated that he is fully behind the Israelis in this current conflict.
The only thing that it could "hurt" is it would give credibility to the Terrorists. I, however, agree with you, sometimes you need an Arbitraitor, and really, maybe it time for something different in that region. Like, you know, talking.

Paradyme

01-09-2009, 02:35 PM

I say why not??

Well, first of all, this is information reported by a British newspaper which is known to exaggerate the facts, so we don't really know if this is true or not. Second, I don't think it is a wise idea to negotiate with terrorist organizations, for a variety of reasons. However, if this is the only way to ensure peace in the region, we may just have to suck it up and deal with it. I don't see how talks could hurt, especially since Obama has indicated that he is fully behind the Israelis in this current conflict.

In all honesty I don't think talking with terrorists is going to help anything. They promise one thing and do another. If the talks do succeed hopefully they'll hold something in them about not firing anymore rockets into Israel and how stern the reaction would be if it ever happens again. Such as Hamas going bye-bye.

The Senator

01-09-2009, 02:36 PM

In all honesty I don't think talking with terrorists is going to help anything. They promise one thing and do another. If the talks do succeed hopefully they'll hold something in them about not firing anymore rockets into Israel and how stern the reaction would be if it ever happens again. Such as Hamas going bye-bye.

I have a feeling these talks will be conditional. Considering his foreign policy team, I doubt anyone would advise him to go in there without holding something over Hamas' head.

The Senator

01-09-2009, 02:37 PM

The only thing that it could "hurt" is it would give credibility to the Terrorists. I, however, agree with you, sometimes you need an Arbitraitor, and really, maybe it time for something different in that region. Like, you know, talking.

I agree. It would be wise to hold talks and see how it goes. If it doesn't work, then it doesn't work, and we're back to square one. There's nothing to lose here.

SuBe

01-09-2009, 02:40 PM

I agree. It would be wise to hold talks and see how it goes. If it doesn't work, then it doesn't work, and we're back to square one. There's nothing to lose here.
I shake your hand in agreement.

If you have talks first, then atleast you tried. Then you know for a Fact you can't Negotiate with these people.

Marx

01-09-2009, 03:41 PM

Not really sure if this has been mentioned yet but, what does everyone think of Obama wanting to hold talks with Hamas?

I believe what Obama said during the campaign - 'Not talking to our enemies or those whom we disagree with as though it's some sort of punishment is ridiculous.'

I believe that we should talk to everyone. If there is even the smallest opportunity to improve a situation, then we should hold negotiations.

Red Mask

01-09-2009, 06:50 PM

Not really sure if this has been mentioned yet but, what does everyone think of Obama wanting to hold talks with Hamas?

At this time, I don't think so. I agree with the stand that he can't make an official stand until after he takes office. Anything before that will undermine the hierarchy and the political system. If the battles end before he takes office that will just be good timing for him to talk. If it continues after he takes oath, it will be a tense day and I can only wait to see what he'll do on Day 1.

But even if Obama does initiate dialogue with Hamas, I doubt they are in a good mood to negotiate. Israel would only want to dictate terms. There's too much pain and anger now. You need cooler heads to prevail. I see a better chance many months later, if everything calms down afterwards.

Kelly

01-09-2009, 07:39 PM

Hamas will never negotiate anything, other than the total destruction of Israel, and the Jews off the land that they believe is rightfully theres....

I think, they (Hamas) will think they are smart enough to use Obama.....but they aren't, and Obama will realize that trying to negotiate anything with them is futile.

IF, the PA can gain control of Gaza again, then there is a possibility of steps forward....with Hamas, IMO......its a waste of time.

StorminNorman

01-09-2009, 07:42 PM

Obama trying to negotiate with Hamas is an act in futility - I merely hope his attempt doesn't do any harm.

RachelDawes

01-09-2009, 08:31 PM

Obama trying to negotiate with Hamas is an act in futility - I merely hope his attempt doesn't do any harm.

What harm could it do?

StorminNorman

01-09-2009, 08:38 PM

What harm could it do?

If Obama comes across as weak when meeting with the Hamas leaders, its a national disgrace and hurts the country and our President's standing across the world. When JFK met with Khrushchev he came across as weak - this happened in 1961, the Cuban Missile Crisis happened in '62.

It can also legitimize an illegitimate government.

I strongly disagree with the idea of the American President meeting with the leader of Hamas.

Heretic

01-09-2009, 11:33 PM

raybia

01-10-2009, 12:26 AM

Hamas is not an "illegitimate" government. The people voted for this, therefore Hamas is the rightful party in charge.

Wait a second...the people voted for a terrorist group, hellbent on destroying isreal...and they KNEW that this terrorist group would use their children as human shields when attacking? Then those same people allowed their children to be used by the terrorists they put in power??

You know...I have no sympathy for the palestinians. They voted for terror...they voted to have their children killed so that the terrorists could keep bombing. Im not sure how Isreal is somehow to blame for these kids deaths when it is their own parents who led them to die.

the most ardent supporters will somehow someway rationalize the worst of Israel's atrocities and portray this conflict as good vs. evil with of course the Palestinians as the bad guys.

Well, the truth is starting to come out.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123154826952369919.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Heretic

01-10-2009, 12:36 AM

raybia

01-10-2009, 12:43 AM

Hamas admits to breaking the cease-fire...and admits to hurling bomb after bomb at Isreal for months on end...but because Isreal is well trained to deal with terror, only one isreali died. Im not ssure how that makes Hamas innocent. Thats like me trying rape someone, but they got away, and injured me in the process, and then me crying about how i am wronged.

What war crime is Iisreal committing????? They were being bombed!!!!!!!

What? Is killing terrorists a war crime???? Seems like the anti-Isrealis seem to think that terrorists should never be dealt with. We should love them...heck...give them the world in a pretty pink bow.

Again...the ONLY reason why innocent people are dying is because Hamas...and the people who voted for them...are firing rockets while hiding behind children. If you take your kid to a gunfight, and throw him inthe line of fire, expect them to be shot. Instead of crying about Isreal, wheres your anger with the parents who are willing to have their children killed to prove a point???

Israel then broke the truce on Nov. 4, raiding the Gaza Strip and killing a Palestinian. Hamas retaliated with rocket fire; Israel then killed five more Palestinians. In the following days, Hamas continued rocket fire -- yet still no Israelis died. Israel cannot claim self-defense against this escalation, because it was provoked by Israel's own violation.

An armed attack that is not justified by self-defense is a war of aggression. Under the Nuremberg Principles affirmed by U.N. Resolution 95, aggression is a crime against peace.

Didn't you even read the article? Wake up.