Israel will allow fuel, medicine into Gaza - official

[The Fool]

Okay, now tell us what part of the FGC forbids enacting a blockade against an enemy?

Its in the link along with a lot of other stuff, you want me to read it to you? Enough diversions crap or get off the pot.

 

[Mycroft]

Its in the link along with a lot of other stuff, you want me to read it to you? Enough diversions crap or get off the pot.

What kind of lame dodge is this? I looked at the page and didn't see anything about blockades. Obviously (unless you're just blowing smoke) you see something I don't.

So point it out already. Make your argument. Geez, it's like pulling teeth just getting you to make a case to support your assertions.

 

[The Fool]

Okay, now tell us what part of the FGC forbids enacting a blockade against an enemy?

What enemy is that Mycroft? The civilian population of Gaza?

The issue I'm trying to stick to and you are trying to tapdace around is that you say its not fair for me to say you have no regard for the applicability of international law in this conflict. In support of this I provide a long list of examples...anything in there you don't reject? After all....you say its unreasonable to characterise that as your opinion. You reject it all, to the letter. Why try to pretend otherwise?

 

[The Fool]

Apparently it's the EU.



It's disingenuous of you to try to separate Hamas from Palestinians like that. Hamas couldn't exist as it does without a large degree of popular support among the populace. Hamas is the elected leaders of the Palestinian people, and the sole leaders of the Gaza Strip after they took over at gunpoint. Hamas is responsible for the well being of the Palestinian people and they choose to lead them to war and hardship.

you don't like it when someone tries to separate terrorists from civilians? I think terrorists and civilians should be treated differently, is that a problem?

 

[yairhol]

Ok then why are you keeping it? Not to prevent a palestinian state not as a buffer....then why?

I've said it a million times before. The moment the Arabs will have a reasonable leader who recognizes Israel's right to exist and does not wage war against it, the Palestinians will get that territory back in the form of a state backed up by the international community.

Here's a question for you TheFool: Should Israel give the territories back NOW inspite of who's leading the Palestinians, their intentions towards Israel and the missile attackes on Israel?

 

[The Fool]

I've said it a million times before. The moment the Arabs will have a reasonable leader who recognizes Israel's right to exist and does not wage war against it, the Palestinians will get that territory back in the form of a state backed up by the international community.

I know you have said this many times before but it is not addressing the question of why you keep the territories. You say its not to prevent a palestinian state yet you tell me how dangerous a palestinian state would be to Israel if you did... I can fully understand if you tell me you think a palestinian state is not something you are willing to allow. I may not agree but I can certainly understand that position...but why oh why try to suggest that you are not keeping control of the territories to prevent it?

Here's a question for you TheFool: Should Israel give the territories back NOW inspite of who's leading the Palestinians, their intentions towards Israel and the missile attackes on Israel?

basically yes...I don't see how it would make things significantly worse for Israel and I can see how it would make things worse for Hamas who tell Gazans that the only way they will achieve it is through attacking Israel. This endless war and occupation is like oxygen to Hamas...

 

[a_unique_person]

Do you notice that we almost agree with eachother?

Good, I like that. It reminds me of the old days on this Forum in the '70s, with the endless Northern Ireland threads. Thank god those days are over.

Listen carefully. I have said this before but since we're so close to an agreement I'll repeat it:
Israel WANTS to give the Palestinians a state of their own. Please understand this and accept it as fact.

Then I would hope Israel would set aside that land and say "here, this is what we are offering, when you are ready, take it. We won't touch it till you do". What seems to be happening instead is that the land that is available is being whittled away every day.

So now the question becomes why doesn't a Palestinian state form today? This is actually very simple. The movement that actually controls the Palestinians is Hamas. It is a world recognized terrorist group. Please understand this also and accept it as fact.
No country in the world would allow a terroristic state to form next to its own borders. This is very reasonable and I hope you can agree with me on this point also.

Robert Manne pointed this out years ago. The occupation is a deadly embrace. The longer you hold on to it, the worse it gets. Better to cut your losses ASAP, do a deal with Abbas, give him the kudos for cutting the deal, and ensuring the moderates win. Hamas have surprised me. They are disciplined, and dedicated. They appear to be in this for the long haul. The longer they show Israel up, such as the recent events on the Egyptian border, the more they are telling Palestinians they can achieve what the more moderate factions can't.

The situation now is that Abbas is the president of the Palestinians and he seems like a rational person who would like peace for his people. Israel is nagotiating with him on almost daily basis but the problem is that he is not in control of his own people and again we return to the Hamas who are de facto in control.

He seems to be in control in the West Bank. But this perfectly illustrates to Palestinians why he is weak. That is where Israel is not leaving, where the wall is going up, where more and more Palestinian land is being taken. Bush himself said, it's an occupation, and it's producing an offer to the Palesitinians that resembles a Bantustaan. That is, token self government, strictly divided and dysfunctional villages that are not capable of surviving alone.

You see how close you and I are to agreeing with eachother completely? Only that you want Israel to accept a terroristic state next to its borders and Israel does not accept it.

You have painted yourselves into a corner. Years ago, it would have been much easier to extricate yourselves. Fatah was a secular organisation, for example, not a religiously based one. You say you won't accept a terrorist state, but you are stuck with the nightmare of occupation. Every year that goes past, that nightmare is just going to get worse.

 

[JoeEllison]

I don't see how people can honestly believe that doing the right thing has anything to do with the motives or behaviors of others, while not understanding that doing the wrong thing over and over makes people your enemy whether or not they would have chosen to be so. Israel has insisted on making the Palestinians their enemy, and then bases all of its action on the fact that some Palestinians have risen to the bait. At every step, it seems, Israel acts in ways that strengthen Hamas, and makes peace even less likely than it was before.

 

[yairhol]

Originally Posted by yairhol
I've said it a million times before. The moment the Arabs will have a reasonable leader who recognizes Israel's right to exist and does not wage war against it, the Palestinians will get that territory back in the form of a state backed up by the international community.

I know you have said this many times before but it is not addressing the question of why you keep the territories. You say its not to prevent a palestinian state yet you tell me how dangerous a palestinian state would be to Israel if you did... I can fully understand if you tell me you think a palestinian state is not something you are willing to allow. I may not agree but I can certainly understand that position...but why oh why try to suggest that you are not keeping control of the territories to prevent it?

Here's a question for you TheFool: Should Israel give the territories back NOW inspite of who's leading the Palestinians, their intentions towards Israel and the missile attackes on Israel?

basically yes...I don't see how it would make things significantly worse for Israel and I can see how it would make things worse for Hamas who tell Gazans that the only way they will achieve it is through attacking Israel. This endless war and occupation is like oxygen to Hamas...

Then I would hope Israel would set aside that land and say "here, this is what we are offering, when you are ready, take it. We won't touch it till you do".

This is for the both of you TheFool and a_u_p:
We know that Hamas will not stop its efforts to harm Israel in every possible way. This organization is built on terror. They do not recognize Israel's right for a state under any circumstance.
Today they are firing rockets at us. What do we do? It depends. We either sit quietly like we've done many times before without retaliation or we kick their butts. How do we kick it? we enter those territories and make arrests of Hamas leaders, we look for hidden weapons and so on. Imagine what will happen if we give them a state. They will not stop firing at Israel since they don't recognize Israel as legitimate. So how will Israel retaliate? we will not be able to go into those territories since we'll be like Iraq in Kuweit. We can bomb them back but rest assure the international community will be right there to condemn us for being a powerful country and bombing the small, new state of Palestine who are just having growing pains. We will be a country which is starting a war with its neighboring country.
Out of the two bad options, It has been decided that the first is preferable.
Bart Simpson had said "you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't".
I hope now I've answered both of your concerns about why Israel is still holding some of these territories.

 

[webfusion]

T-F:

When did they tell you? I can see that you are desperately trying to water your claim down to general weapons smuggling and trying your best to pin some opinion on me that smuggling doesn't happen.

Come on web, let it drop.

I repeat:

HAMAS overnight on Thursday, January 24th, was using their cranes positioned at the broken wall, to lift over Katyusha rockets, machine guns, mortars, and other assorted weaponry. This activity was observed by the IAF, and I was in a conversation with those in Israel who were made aware of it, and they mentioned to me that "we decided not to bomb those specific cranes because there would be resulting loss of civilian lives, as the HAMAS is using the masses of people at the border crossing for cover."
The IAF instead went after some selected high-value targets in Rafah, instead.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1201070789753
According to Palestinian sources quoted by Israel Radio, one of those killed was the commander of the Hamas military wing in Rafah.

basically yes (relinquish the occupied territories immediately)...I don't see how it would make things significantly worse for Israel and I can see how it would make things worse for Hamas who tell Gazans that the only way they will achieve it is through attacking Israel. This endless war and occupation is like oxygen to Hamas...

Israel is not occupying gaza.
Israel legally occupies the West Bank and will continue to hold onto it for the time being.

We don't care about HAMAS 'oxygen' -- we know perfectly well who we are dealing with and they are suffocating, actually (or taking well-derved dirt naps, in fact).

 

[a_unique_person]

This is for the both of you TheFool and a_u_p:
We know that Hamas will not stop its efforts to harm Israel in every possible way. This organization is built on terror. They do not recognize Israel's right for a state under any circumstance.
Today they are firing rockets at us. What do we do? It depends. We either sit quietly like we've done many times before without retaliation or we kick their butts. How do we kick it? we enter those territories and make arrests of Hamas leaders, we look for hidden weapons and so on. Imagine what will happen if we give them a state. They will not stop firing at Israel since they don't recognize Israel as legitimate. So how will Israel retaliate? we will not be able to go into those territories since we'll be like Iraq in Kuweit. We can bomb them back but rest assure the international community will be right there to condemn us for being a powerful country and bombing the small, new state of Palestine who are just having growing pains. We will be a country which is starting a war with its neighboring country.
Out of the two bad options, It has been decided that the first is preferable.
Bart Simpson had said "you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't".
I hope now I've answered both of your concerns about why Israel is still holding some of these territories.

You could legitimise Abbas. If you let the Palestinians know that negotiation and peace will produce a meaningful result, HAMAS will be gone. Every day you hold out, HAMAS is proven to be right.

 

[webfusion]

Joe Ellison:

Israel has insisted on making the Palestinians their enemy...

This is a lie.

"the palestinians" are a vast group of individuals, who number (at last random count) somewhere in the 11-millions. Some of them are Israeli citizens, some are American citizens, some are British, etc etc.
Israel is not their enemy. Israelis do not declare them to be our enemy. We do not teach our children that they are our enemy.

Once any specific palestinians pick up weapons and act in violent ways, then we defend ourselves, and act towards them as enemies, since that is how those individuals are behaving.

 

[webfusion]

a_u_p --- [You could legitimise Abbas.]

He may be gone tomorrow. We will place only a limited amount of eggs in his basket.
(see: Benazir Bhutto)

 

[JoeEllison]

Never mind... waste of time.

 

[a_unique_person]

a_u_p --- [You could legitimise Abbas.]

He may be gone tomorrow. We will place only a limited amount of eggs in his basket.
(see: Benazir Bhutto)

There's always a reason....

 

[FireGarden]

HAMAS overnight on Thursday, January 24th, was using their cranes positioned at the broken wall, to lift over Katyusha rockets, machine guns, mortars, and other assorted weaponry. This activity was observed by the IAF, and I was in a conversation with those in Israel who were made aware of it, and they mentioned to me that "we decided not to bomb those specific cranes because there would be resulting loss of civilian lives, as the HAMAS is using the masses of people at the border crossing for cover."

The IAF can take photos.
What did they observe? Crates? Boxes? Trucks?

Why does Israel keep the evidence secret? Surely Olmert should give a press conference.


I repeat that I think it is highly likely that Hamas is using the present situation to increase its supply of arms. There has to be some smuggling, even from before, otherwise the Gaza strip would have run out weapons and the materials needed to make them.

That does not mean they are moving Katyushas so openly that the IAF can observe it but, at the same time, so secretly that the Israel has to say nothing for fear of revealing its sources.

Israel is not occupying gaza.
Israel legally occupies the West Bank and will continue to hold onto it for the time being.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5122404.stm

In 2005, Israel pulled out the troops occupying Gaza, along with thousands of Jews who had settled in the territory. As far as Israel was concerned that was the end of the occupation.

However, that has not been accepted internationally as Israel still exercises control over most of Gaza's land borders, as well as its territorial waters and airspace.

Not to mention that there were some Israeli politicians saying that recent events were an opportunity to wash their hands of Gaza at last -- indicating that Gaza was still their responsibility.

 

[webfusion]

Uh, FireGarden, I am not in control of the media. I can only tell you here what was told to me.

Israeli leaders are currently very busy with all kinds of stuff, including welcoming a delegation headed by US special Envoy Lt. Gen. William M. Fraser III. The Israeli Prime Minister is in face-to-face meetings with PA President Abbas. The Israelis have to work out details for the return of EU monitors and organize with Egypt a re-opening of the border under proper supervision. There are numerous other concerns as well, among them: Rockets still flying into Israel. Warnings of terror infiltrations across the entire length of Egyptian border (Sinai) all the way to Taba/Eilat. Maintaining an ongoing imposition of the blockade at the Israeli crossings. Focusing on eliminating top leaders of the HAMAS and their jihadist buddies.

Somehow, I get the feeling that making a point to the world media about smuggled crates of weaponry (where the palestinians just would claim "no, they're just motorcycles and spare parts for our industrial sector) is a waste of energy.
Israel is very familiar with how useless that kind of "press conference" ends up being.
Look at Lebanon, after the UN 1701 Resolution --- did the Syrians and Hezbollah stop bringing in missiles? No -- in fact, they boasted about how they've re-supplied to levels even above 10,000 that they apparently had before summer 2006.

Look, fellow skeptics, I am not claiming to have authorititive proof positive. I related the information as it was told to me, and in the context of my postings to FireGarden and T-F
starting with # 163 and

posting # 166

and finally

my mention of the specific crate-smuggling operation with cranes in message #169, which I posted on January 27th. It seemed an appropriate place to say what I had been told, since there was context, and a good reason to add the information. I didn't start a thread about it. I didn't force it down your throats as being "true" -- I merely added one single sentence to an entire commentary about HAMAS taking advantage of the breach, a breach that they clearly organized and planned for.

And now, with the breach in the border, HAMAS is getting whatever they want across --- money, small arms, missiles, explosives, you name it. They even put up heavy cranes to lift over crates of Katyusha rockets, high-caliber machine guns, and mortars.

I'm just simply amazed about the reaction to what I said. You would have thought I tried to convince you all of something which was "woo" and plainly unbelievable. That's when the cry of "evidence" is heard here -- not when someone comes along and says "The sun appears at dawn in the East"

 

[webfusion]

Quick point:

Israel still exercises control over most of Gaza's land borders, as well as its territorial waters and airspace.

That will continue to be the case for generations to come, in my opinion. As I pointed out to you before, Gaza is just "HAMASTAN" and we aren't going to allow another Iranian-backed jihadist Hezbollah-land to our south.

Fuggeddaboudit.

 

[Mycroft]

What enemy is that Mycroft? The civilian population of Gaza?

The issue I'm trying to stick to and you are trying to tapdace around is that you say its not fair for me to say you have no regard for the applicability of international law in this conflict. In support of this I provide a long list of examples...anything in there you don't reject? After all....you say its unreasonable to characterise that as your opinion. You reject it all, to the letter. Why try to pretend otherwise?

You're the one tap dancing. You were challenged to find a law that forbids enforcing an embargo against an enemy. You haven't done that. Period.

Typically, you want to dodge by shifting the topic to me and to what I believe. Ironically, you do this even just a few hours after complaining when others do it to you:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3378047#post3378047

So, do you want to get back on topic? Or do you want to continue personalizing the argument by speculating on how my opinions are different from what I say they are?

you don't like it when someone tries to separate terrorists from civilians? I think terrorists and civilians should be treated differently, is that a problem?

By "terrorists" you are referring to the democratically elected leaders of the Palestinian-Arabs.

I think it would be great if someone would separate the Palestinian civilians from the Palestinian terrorists, but unfortunately that boat sailed when the terrorists were placed in charge of the civilians.

And no, I'm not talking about the election of Hamas. That was a mistake made long ago when Arafat and the PLO were recognized as the leaders of the Palestinian-Arab people.

So, if you have some magic way of waging war against a populations democratically elected leaders without inconveniencing the population itself in any way, then your talents are being wasted here in these forums. You need to off your arse and start teaching the world leaders your secret techniques.

 

[The Fool]

You're the one tap dancing. You were challenged to find a law that forbids enforcing an embargo against an enemy. You haven't done that. Period.

Nope...that was your latest "challenge" The issue was you asking me to name "the international law" which I did...gave you a big long list... So now you move on to the next goalpost. I'm not sure long you expect me to follow you from diversion to diversion. See if you can find someone else that will play your game.