Does the IDF target civilians?

[Jocko]

I deplore Palestinian suicide bombings of Israeli civilians. I think they're terrible events, and I'm completely against the politics that drive these attacks. That being said, I urge you to think about how the occupation and all the IDF abuses I have documented disrupt the fabric of Palestinian society.

You "deplore" terrorists, but condemn the IDF. How predictable.

And then you top it off with AUP's favorite: It's all STILL Israel's fault that terrorists kill civilians by the dozen. You have a lot of chutzpah to call others "partisan hacks," when you're nothing more than an apologist yourself.

This one paragraph alone present all anyone ever needs to know about you, your position, your politics and your character.

 

[Orwell]

Target: An object, such as a padded disk with a marked surface, that is shot at to test accuracy in rifle or archery practice. Something aimed or fired at.
http://www.answers.com/topic/target

 

[Jocko]

Target: An object, such as a padded disk with a marked surface, that is shot at to test accuracy in rifle or archery practice. Something aimed or fired at.

Ah, so terrorists don't "target" civilians because you can't "aim" a bomb belt.

Thanks for clearing that up, Kissinger.

 

[Orwell]

Indifference to objective truth is encouraged by the sealing-off of one part of the world from another, which makes it harder and harder to discover what is actually happening. There can often be a genuine doubt about the most enormous events. For example, it is impossible to calculate within millions, perhaps even tens of millions, the number of deaths caused by the present war. The calamities that are constantly being reported — battles, massacres, famines, revolutions — tend to inspire in the average person a feeling of unreality. One has no way of verifying the facts, one is not even fully certain that they have happened, and one is always presented with totally different interpretations from different sources. What were the rights and wrongs of the Warsaw rising of August 1944? Is it true about the German gas ovens in Poland? Who was really to blame for the Bengal famine? Probably the truth is discoverable, but the facts will be so dishonestly set forth in almost any newspaper that the ordinary reader can be forgiven either for swallowing lies or failing to form an opinion. The general uncertainty as to what is really happening makes it easier to cling to lunatic beliefs. Since nothing is ever quite proved or disproved, the most unmistakable fact can be impudently denied. Moreover, although endlessly brooding on power, victory, defeat, revenge, the nationalist is often somewhat uninterested in what happens in the real world. What he wants is to feel that his own unit is getting the better of some other unit, and he can more easily do this by scoring off an adversary than by examining the facts to see whether they support him. All nationalist controversy is at the debating-society level. It is always entirely inconclusive, since each contestant invariably believes himself to have won the victory. Some nationalists are not far from schizophrenia, living quite happily amid dreams of power and conquest which have no connection with the physical world.

http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/english/e_nat

 

[zenith-nadir]

http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/english/e_nat

Indifference to objective truth is encouraged by the sealing-off of one part of the world from another, which makes it harder and harder to discover what is actually happening.

Exactly. You "seal-off" the history of this conflict.

I deplore Palestinian suicide bombings of Israeli civilians. I think they're terrible events, and I'm completely against the politics that drive these attacks. That being said, I urge you to think about how the occupation and all the IDF abuses I have documented disrupt the fabric of Palestinian society.

"I urge you to think about how the occupation and all the IDF abuses I have documented disrupt the fabric of Palestinian society". And here we go again. I've been through this in many threads at JREF, over and over and over again, with so many different posters it's tiresome.

Fatah was founded in 1959 by Yasser Arafat.

Fatah's first ever guerilla attack came on January 3, 1965, when they attempted to sabotage the Israeli National Water Carrier, which had recently started operation. The attack was thwarted by the Israeli Security Forces.

"Palestinian Terrorists tried to attack Israel's water supply and it was thwarted by the Israeli Security Forces"....sound familiar? By the way the occupation you refer to occured in 1967 not 1965.

The PLO was founded in 1964. The text of the Palestinian National Charter has many clauses calling for the destruction of the state of Israel.

By the way the occupation you refer to occured in 1967 not 1964. Additionally the PLO didn't call for an end to the occupation, it called for the destruction of Israel.

The occupation you speak of came about because since 1920 the "palestinians" have been involved in hostilities with the zionists/jews/Israelis. Likewise Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq were also involved in well-documented hostilities with the zionists/jews/Israelis. These hostilities have been raging since the 20's with the Palestinians right smack in the middle.

Now fast forward to modern times. In 1993 Arafat and the PLO - a terrorist organization responsible for thousands of international bombings, hijackings, assassinations and other attacks - claims it'll be peacefull now - a lie - and changes it's name to the Palestinian Authority. But even after 12 years of signing internationally-brokered treaties with Israel to disarm and dismantle these known terror organizations - some of whom have been attacking Israel since the 60s - the Palestinian Authority still allows known Palestinian terrorist groups to hold frikkin "let's destroy Israel" parades down main street Palestine. The Palestinian Authority was even caught red handed supplying these known terror organizations!

Ironically all these known terror organizations are recognized and labeled as known terror organizations by the USA, EU and Israel. These terror organizations operate with impunity free from arrest from within Palestinian civilian areas. These terror organizations send suicide bombers and launch Qassam rockets into Israel and all these organizations are Palestinian. In any book that is an act of war.

So this is a war Orwell, the result of this long drawn-out war between Palestinian terror organizations and Israel has spread over the years into Jordan, Lebanon, Israel and now it's concentrated in the streets and alleys of Gaza and the West Bank. With the Palestinians still right smack in the middle.

Then Arafat died and Abbas was elected and a year later we still have known Palestinian terrorist groups operating with impunity free from arrest from within Palestinian civilian areas. So who is left to stop Palestinian terrorist groups from killing Israelis to this very day Orwell? Why the Israelis of course. Since that first UNPROVOKED Fatah attack years before the occupation the responsibility has been up to Israel to protect it's own citizens from Palestinian terrorists. It is Israel who has to send sons and daughters into Nablus at night and arrest the members of these known terror organizations. They have to go dodge AK-47 bullets, RPGs, suicide bombers and explosive booby-traps when the jihadists resist arrest by the "zionists".

It would all be moot if the Palestinian Authority would do their job AND POLICE THEIR OWN as they are obligated to under several internationally-recognized peace treaties. But they don't, and you, like so many others before you, come here and blame the Palestinian violence on:

I urge you to think about how the occupation and all the IDF abuses I have documented disrupt the fabric of Palestinian society.

Well duh... Of course allowing known Palestinian terrorist groups to roam freely around Gaza and the West Bank - who endlessly attack Israel - since the 60s disrupts the fabric of Palestinian society. I'd say that policy has reduced the Palestinian society to the god-damn stone age. Is that the Israelis fault?

5-9 July 2001

• 58% support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel and 39% oppose them.

07-14 October 2003

• 75% support the suicide attack at Maxim Restaurant in Haifa leading to the death of 20 Israelis.
• Despite the widespread support for the Hudna and the mutual cessation of violence, 58% would still support Hamas’ decision to oppose the ceasefire.

28 September 2005

• 84% view Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip as victory for armed resistance and 40% give Hamas most of the credit for that achievement
• But a majority of 62% opposes continued armed resistance from the Gaza Strip and 60% support collection of arms from armed factions in the Strip

Those are Palestinian numbers. By the way the PSR Survey Research Unit is 100% Palestinian:

http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/survey.html

PSR Survey Research Unit is known and respected internationally for its polling work and for its efforts to further objective survey research methodology in the area. Poll results are used by a wide variety of individuals and organizations, including political leaders, researchers, local and foreign press, diplomatic community members, and local grassroots institutions.

So don't come to me and say the Palestinian people are unwilling participants in this deadly game of cat and mouse with the IDF.

That is why that first paragraph is so important to you. "Indifference to objective truth is encouraged by the sealing-off of one part of the world from another". You seal off the reason why the IDF is forced to be at war on Palestinian streets.

 

[Orwell]

So Israeli security justifies massive human rights abuses against Palestinians, civilians included? Is that what you're saying, ZN?

 

[Jocko]

So Israeli security justifies massive human rights abuses against Palestinians, civilians included? Is that what you're saying, ZN?

No, he said massive Palestinian aggression justifies Israeli security measures. Jusr because your country likes to roll over and take it in the pooper from anyone who'll buy you a Molson doesn't mean other countries have to operate that way.

 

[Orwell]

Funny, I never changed the subject, not even once, but you people keep claiming that I did. That's probably because you started by shoehorning me into your little categories, were you classify people into friends of Israel vs. enemies of Israel, and then you realised that I don't quite fit in one of those groups. That must have been traumatic for you, so now you keep claiming that it's actually my fault: "I changed the subject!". I didn't play along.

 

[zenith-nadir]

No, he said massive Palestinian aggression justifies Israeli security measures.

Exactly my point. The Israelis cannot rely on the Palestinians to police their own. That is a given and a reality that cannot be denied.

Let's revisit - yet again - the main points Orwell:

• Palestinian terrorism against Israelis began years before the occupation, I already linked my evidence.
• Palestinian terrorism against Israelis became an international epidemic in the 70s and 80s, I already linked my evidence.
• Palestinian terrorism against Israelis was supported and encouraged by Arafat and the Palestinian Authority in the 90s, I already linked my evidence.
• Palestinian terrorism against Israelis by the PLO, Hamas and Islamic Jihad is based upon the destruction of Israel and not the occupation, I already linked my evidence.
• Palestinian public opinion polls conducted by the Palestinians own PSR Survey Research Unit clearly show that between 2000 and 2005 at least half of the Palestinian population supported Palestinian terrorism against Israelis, I already linked my evidence.
• Known Palestinian terrorist organizations are still allowed to operate and roam freely under the "new and improved" Palestinian Authority headed by Mahmoud Abbas, AKA Abu Mazen, I already linked my evidence.

{edited to add}

I forgot one.

• One of the worst known Palestinian terror organizations on record is Hamas - who is backed by Iran and Syria. The International community has pressured Israel to allow Hamas to participate in the upcoming Palestinian elections.

{end edit}

Conclusion?

he said massive Palestinian aggression justifies Israeli security measures.

 

[Orwell]

Ok, I'll rephrase that in the hopes that something will get through...

Does Palestinian aggression justify Israeli security measures that involve massive human rights abuses? Further more, do attacks perpetrated against Israelis by a small but militant minority of Palestinians justify massive human rights abuses directed against all Palestinians, even those that are not directly implicated in these attacks?

 

[Jocko]

Ok, I'll rephrase that in the hopes that something will get through...

Does Palestinian aggression justify Israeli security measures that involve massive human rights abuses? Further more, do attacks perpetrated against Israelis by a small but militant minority of Palestinians justify massive human rights abuses directed against all Palestinians, even those that are not directly implicated in these attacks?

Way to poison that well, Captain Fallacy. Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

"... do a small minority justify massive abuses..." Yeah, someone's not gettting the point here, all right.

 

[zenith-nadir]

Ok, I'll rephrase that in the hopes that something will get through...

Does Palestinian aggression justify Israeli security measures that involve massive human rights abuses?

That question implies guilt. First off most Israeli security measures do not involve massive human rights abuses. Secondly, Israeli security measures are in place because of Palestinian aggression, not for the sole purpose of being abusive to Palestinians. There is not one Israeli I have ever met in my life that likes the occupation, it is a necessity because the Palestinian Authority refuses to act against Palestinian aggression. They refuse to stop known terror organizations from targeting civilians inside the West Bank and Gaza and outside of the West Bank and Gaza. I documented it above ad nauseum. Palestinian aggression fuels the requirement for Israeli security measures - this requirement predates the occupation.

If there was no aggression then there would be no need for Israeli security measures.

Ok, I'll rephrase that in the hopes that something will get through...

Further more, do attacks perpetrated against Israelis by a small but militant minority of Palestinians

Ok. I will repost the Palestinian Public opinion polls yet again.

5-9 July 2001

• 92% support armed confrontations against the Israeli army in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip
• 58% support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel and 39% oppose them

In 2001 92% of Palestinians polled supported armed confrontations against the Israeli army, 58% support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel. That is not "a small but militant minority of Palestinians".

07-14 October 2003

• 75% support the suicide attack at Maxim Restaurant in Haifa leading to the death of 20 Israelis
• Despite the widespread support for the Hudna and the mutual cessation of violence, 58% would still support Hamas’ decision to oppose the ceasefire.
• 59% believe that current armed confrontations have helped the Palestinians achieve national rights in ways that negotiations could not. In June, 65% shared that belief.

In 2003 75% of the Palestinians polled supported the suicide bombing at the Maxim Restaurant in Haifa, 58% supported Hamas and the opposition to a ceasefire, 59% believed that current armed confrontations have helped. That is not "a small but militant minority of Palestinians".

7-9 September 2005

• But a majority of 62% opposes continued armed resistance from the Gaza Strip and 60% support collection of arms from armed factions in the Strip
• 77% support the continuation of the current ceasefire and 56% oppose (and 37%) support the suicide attack that took place in Beer Sheva in August

Two months ago 56% opposed and 37% of the Palestinians polled supported the suicide bombing on a civilian marketplace in Beer Sheva in August. That is not "a small but militant minority of Palestinians".

Ok, I'll rephrase that in the hopes that something will get through...

justify massive human rights abuses directed against all Palestinians, even those that are not directly implicated in these attacks?

As I said most Israeli security measures do not involve massive human rights abuses. Nor do I like the occupation, it is inherently dangerous for all noncombatants - on both sides.

The irony is instead of placing Palestinian terrorists and those who send them on trial, you, and others before you, decry the Israeli security measures. You call them abusive and place Israel in the dock, on the charge that it is Israel that is harming the Palestinians' quality of life. Sorry Orwell but saving lives is more important than preserving the quality of life.

Quality of life is always open for improvement. I have realized since the 70s that death at the hands of the PLO, Fatah, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, Hizballah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades, Tanzim, Ahmed Abu Reish Brigade, Palestine Liberation Front, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Force 17, ANO and the The Popular Resistance Committees is permanent.

Nov. 30, 2005 21:59

The political leader of the Palestinian terror group Hamas on Wednesday said it would not renew a truce with Israel when it expires at the end of the year and accused the Jewish state of violating the agreement that reduced violence.

September 24, 2005

At least 19 Palestinians were killed and 85 injured when an explosive-packed car blew up during a rally organized by the militant group Hamas on Friday in Jabalia refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip, Palestinian interior ministry said.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri told reporters that he saw the Israeli reconnaissance drone firing four missiles at a convoy of cars participating in the parade. "Israel would pay a heavy price for this crime," said Abu Zuhri, vowing a revenge.

The latest blast took place only hours after Islamic Jihad militants in Gaza Strip fired several Qassam rockets at Israel, causing no injuries or damage.

September 24, 2005

Israel launched an air strike on two cars driving in Gaza City on Saturday, killing at least four Hamas militants and wounding nine others, medical officials said.

The escalation was set off by an explosion Friday at a Hamas rally in the crowded Jebaliya refugee camp in which at least 15 Palestinians were killed. Witnesses said the blast went off near a pickup truck carrying Hamas militants and homemade rockets. Hamas blamed Israel for the blast and said it fired rockets on Israeli border towns in retaliation. However, the Palestinian Authority held the Islamic militants responsible, saying they apparently mishandled explosives, and renewed demands that armed groups stop flaunting their weapons in public.

The strike came hours after Israeli towns were hit by the first major Hamas rocket barrage from Gaza since Israel pulled out of the coastal territory two weeks ago.

 

[Mycroft]

That's probably because you started by shoehorning me into your little categories, were you classify people into friends of Israel vs. enemies of Israel, and then you realised that I don't quite fit in one of those groups. That must have been traumatic for you, so now you keep claiming that it's actually my fault: "I changed the subject!". I didn't play along.

The irony here is you'rethe one trying to shoehorn your opponents. Between calling us Nationalists, partisan hacks, or just creating straw-man arguments such as "So Israeli security justifies massive human rights abuses against Palestinians, civilians included?" you have yet to actually answer an argument made by anyone else.

Is "shoehorning" your opponent a bad thing? If so, how come it's okay when you do it? Does the definition of "shoehorning" change depending on what you believe?

Or better yet, what does a conversation look like where people don't shoehorn their opponents? Would that be a conversation where you actually seek to discover why the other person believes something you disagree with? Or do you just call them names and spam them with articles that may or may not be relevant?

 

[Orwell]

I am not shoehorning you. Your hostility, personal attacks, bad faith arguments, stupid generalisations and reluctance to even acknowledge the most basic simple facts is what has shoehorned you into the partisan hack category. Just ask the other people who had the unfortunate luck of debating about this particular subject with you.

In didn't start this idiotic debate, Mycroft. You did.

Now go back to the regularly schedule programming...

 

[rikzilla]

Ok, I'll rephrase that in the hopes that something will get through...

Does Palestinian aggression justify Israeli security measures that involve massive human rights abuses? Further more, do attacks perpetrated against Israelis by a small but militant minority of Palestinians justify massive human rights abuses directed against all Palestinians, even those that are not directly implicated in these attacks?

So;

A: Palestinians are comitting "agressions" that run the gamut from stone throwing to suicide bombings.

B: Israeli Security Forces perpetuate massive human rights abuses.

Personally I'd say that we both agree that; A causes B since you yourself have selected this ordering of events. Therefore if Palestinians decided not to "comit agressions" there would be no human rights abuses (oh wait, sorry..."massive" human rights abuses) comitted by the IDF. While I don't believe all A's "justify" all B's; I do believe A in general does cause B. for this reason it is imperative that we lend our support to the party which is seeking to promote peace, not war. To my knowledge it is the Israeli government which is overtly seeking peace...the PA however is calling for the destruction of Israel in it's own charter.

Further more...your "further more" seeks to portray the terrorist Palestinians as being out of the mainstream and limited in number while Israeli human rights abuses remain characterized as "massive". This is a biased spin and not a debate tactic worthy of respect from members of this forum. It insults the intelligence of even those who may agree with you.

-z

 

[WildCat]

Target: An object, such as a padded disk with a marked surface, that is shot at to test accuracy in rifle or archery practice. Something aimed or fired at.
http://www.answers.com/topic/target

You proved a point there, but not the one you think you did. Reading comprehension is obviously not your strong suit.

 

[zenith-nadir]

Here. I will spell it out for you Orwell.

01 December 2005

GAZA (Reuters) - Palestinian gunmen burst into a government complex in the Gaza Strip on Thursday to demand that ruling party primaries, suspended because of fraud and violence, be allowed to proceed. The protest by dozens of al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militants came just three days after gunmen from the same group forced polling stations in Gaza to close. It underlined the chaotic divisions in President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah party.

Ok. Who are the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades?

The al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades are one of the militias of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's al-Fatah faction. The al-Aqsa brigades are responsible for dozens of suicide bombings and many more shooting attacks against Israeli vehicles in the West Bank.

Ok. They are armed and dangerous.

01 December 2005

Gunmen armed with assault rifles and rocket propelled grenade launchers burst into the Gaza City compound housing finance and interior ministries, though no shots were fired.

Yup they are armed and dangerous.

So who's responsible for stopping al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militants - AKA terrorists with guns and RPGs - from disrupting Palestinian elections, storming Palestinian government complexes and Palestinian polling stations?

The Fatah movement, the ruling party of the Palestinian Authority, decided Friday to hold its first internal elections in 16 years on Aug. 4, according to Amin Maqboul, a senior Fatah official.

Huh? Fatah, who the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades belong to, are the same people responsible for policing the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades militants.

Wow. Wrap your head around that for a bit.

I guess if the Palestinian Authority ever decided to POLICE THEIR OWN militants then these 'terrorists', cuz that is what they really are, would not be able to attack Israel, or disrupt Palestinian elections and storm Palestinian Authority government complexes.

 

[Mycroft]

I am not shoehorning you.

At the moment you are "shoehorning" everyone who disagrees with you in this thread. You're the one making up blanket labels to describe those who disagree with you.

"So Israeli security justifies massive human rights abuses against Palestinians, civilians included?"

Who said that? Zenith-Nadire? Me? Wildcat?

You did. Over and over again. In trying to characterize your opponents argument in terms that you could deal with, terms that fit with your "shoehorning." That none of your opponents actually said it doesn't matter to you.

Your hostility, personal attacks, bad faith arguments, stupid generalisations and reluctance to even acknowledge the most basic simple facts is what has shoehorned you into the partisan hack category.

You realize, of course, that this describes your behavior.

Just ask the other people who had the unfortunate luck of debating about this particular subject with you.

Just how many of them are here backing you up? Even they understand the difference between incidental civilian casualties and civilians being targeted for death. Even they understand that spamming a thread with 50 or more links of dubious relevence and then ducking away from any challenge is not the way to argue an issue.

You've discovered the 4-year-old method of argument, just call the other guy a poopy-head and plug your ears and say it over and over again if he tries to talk to you.

 

[The Fool]

Just how many of them are here backing you up? Even they understand....

Mods..
can we get this claim of mindreading ability moved to a more appropriate section of the forum?

 

[demon]

Rikzilla:
"So;
A: Palestinians are comitting "agressions" that run the gamut from stone throwing to suicide bombings.

B: Israeli Security Forces perpetuate massive human rights abuses.

Personally I'd say that we both agree that; A causes B since you yourself have selected this ordering of events. Therefore if Palestinians decided not to "comit agressions" etc etc etc".


Hmmm, missing out the crucial "C" as ever -that would be the almost forty years of illegal occupation, theft and brutal oppression causing Palestinian violence.
Perhaps you could go to your local Higher Education facility and see if they have a course or something on which you could enrol? It might help you out of these mental impasses.