Israel has big plans with Gaza!

[charles brough]

Is their objective there what they claim and we duly repeat, or is it to remove the elected Hamas government of Gaza and impose in its place a pliable regime like they established in the West Bank after the death of Arafat?

In considering world affairs, it helps to determine what will happen not be considering what people say, but what is in their own best interest. A pliable regime in Gaza is most certainly what Israel would like to have. So, that is what they intend to end up with---hence, their goal, regardless of what they and our own government spokesmen say. Israel did not invade Gaza knowing it was tearing up the country---and increasing Palestinian hatred---if they did not have a plan the knew would work.

Of course, it is all blamed on the Palestinians. What is the matter with them that they keep shooting rockets into Israel? Could it be that their “county” is only a desert wasteland jammed with them, nearly all of whom are refugees and their children which were pushed out of their homes and land in Israel? Could it be that they send rockets over because they want to go back to their homes and land in Israel---also because they resent being fenced in and blockaded? Perhaps Gaza Palestinians are just humans like anyone else who would behave much the same in their position.

 

[theprestige]

Perhaps Gaza Palestinians are just humans like anyone else who would behave much the same in their position.

Fair enough. By the same token, I suppose Israelis are also just humans like anyone else who would behave much the same in their position. Likewise the rest of us passing judgement and picking sides and making statements and whatnot.

The whole thing turns out to be a very natural and understandable case of people doing what people do. I have no problem with this.

 

[Thunder]

Their goal is to remove Hamas. Im not sure what they will out in its place. Perhaps Fatah is waiting to retake control.

Honestly, I prefer Fatah over Hamas. Fatah can make peace. But I don't like civilians suffering in a political game.

 

[Pardalis]

Honestly, I prefer Fatah over Hamas. Fatah can make peace. But I don't like civilians suffering in a political game.

If anything, you're very consistent Parky...

Cool. Now let the real fighting begin. I hope Hamas kicks some butt. Even the score a little. Show the Israelis that 4 Jews DOES NOT equal 400 Arabs.

 

[geni]

Their aim is to produce something they can present to their electoriate as a success. The removal of Hamas would probably be acceptable but likely hard to atchive. Reduceing the rate of rocket launches is posible but questionable if that would be viewed as a sucess.

Long term occupation would be problematical.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Such depressing news on the front page this morning.

It appears that the Israeli government is trying to set the clock back, to before Sharon pulled Israel out of Gaza. I appreciate the statement made in the AP release (Ibrahim Barzak and Jason Keyser reporting from Nir Am, Israel) by Israeli officials being a disclaimer, but I have little confidence that it is practical. What I see is, all protestations aside, another occupation of Gaza for a good, long while. This is not progress. This looks a lot like the days of the Intafada all over again, with occupation forces being a daily dose of salt in the wound.

"Israeli leaders said the operations, known as Cast Lead and meant to quell militant rocket and mortar fire, would not end quickly, but that the objective was not to reoccupy Gaza or topple Hamas."​

OK, Isreali leaders, talk to me.

1. If you aren't going to occupy Gaza, how do you keep folks from setting up mortars and rockets once you pull out again? From past history, I say you can't. What rabbit from the hat this time, Prime Minister Geller?

2. If you aren't trying to displace Hamas, what possible good will have you engendered with Hamas, current political leadership in Gaza, by this days to weeks long armed incursion into their turf? What incentive do they have for working with you? What trust relationship have you supported or created?

Next few lines:

"The depth and intensity will depend in part on parallel diplomatic effots that so far haven't yielded a truce proposal acceptable to Israel, the officials said."​

Right. SSDD, yielding something like what's on the Korean peninsula: a cease fire that settles nothing. The outcome is never final.

Aside:

I attribute this latest regression to the endemic Zionist myopia, Zionist in its more accurate sense: when other dreamers left Europe to form their Utopias in the New World, be they Quakers, Puritans, Jesuits, Conquistadors, or whomever, they looked to the New World for a place to perfect what was imperfect in the old.

This time, so they thought, they'd get it right. Got some right, some wrong.

For their own reasons, the Zionists looked backward, to the Oldest of The Old World, and tried to rewind the clock. Against considerable odds, they succeeded. In so succeeding they did not change the nature of time, nor the region, nor erase the intervening reality. The Holy Land was not conducive to Utopia, and perhaps never can be.

This time, we'll get it right, and it will be our Jewish homeland and a multicultural socialist society living in harmony. They got part of it right.

Rewinding the clock, among other things, resurrected all of the down side (local friction aka war) that comes with fulfilling the Utopian dream of re-establishing their Jewish homeland, of restoring Zion. By blood and iron was it crafted, by blood and iron it must be maintained, or by blood and iron in will fall. That seems to be Israel's Fate.

Where's Frodo, who can undo this all by dropping the Ring into Etna? Nowhere, this isn't a fairy story. Most Utopia's fall hard when they trip on reality. ​

As I see it, what's going on in Gaza is more clock resetting. This latest action doesn't erase intervening events. It just adds to the catalogue.

Does anything ever change in the Holy Land among its fractious peoples? The three thousand year track record says no, unless a foreign empire steps on everyone's neck. (To get a little figurative here, look at where Fallen Man ended up when kicked out of Eden! A punishment, not a boon, eh? )

China, you interested? US is no longer the indispensable nation, and in this area, is unlikely to be seen as an honest broker. The Turks may not be welcomed back, though they were effective at keeping an imperial peace for a time in the Holy Land.

As to Israel's leadership: you have had cease fires already, PM Geller, which have not worked out. Once you get some different promises, and you pull out, what makes you, me, or anyone believe this pending cease fire will stick?

Free spoon bending lessons for every Palestinian child? Is that the incentive?

DR

 

[gtc]

DR,

I value your opinion so what do you think Israel should have done differently this time?

 

[Darth Rotor]

DR,

I value your opinion so what do you think Israel should have done differently this time?

I grant that the Israelis are in a pickle, a difficult position. No matter what they do, bad things happen. This latest will bring more bad things.

It is my opinion that the political will for what I propose is lacking. The response to the rockets is a quid pro quo. The people launching the rockets show no concern over who dies when they launch their rockets into the air. Neither should the Israelis.

The tech exists to set up counter mortar and counter artillery and counter rocket radars which can provide a reasonably accurate CEP of where a rocket or mortar was fired from. (Over head surveillance assets can make this more accurate, and Israel owns the airspace over Gaza.) US has had this stuff for decades, as have others.

Put the counter battery fire on auto. Seriously. A rocket or m ortar round comes over, immediate counterbattery fire at point of origin. (Possibly from overhead assets, or from artillery. ) Point and shoot.

Since Isreal is already killing a lot of people who aren't the target, no matter how hard they try not to, it seems that a change of policy ought to be enacted. The message sent on how to change this is simple:

Dear Gaza leadership, this is your incentive to stop the rockets. We have it on auto. There is no emotion involved here. Rockets come over, counter battery comes back. Make sure every rocket shooter knows this, and that he's consigning his locale to incoming when he fires. We have the tech to do this.

The counter battery stops when the rockets stop. If you want our assistance on the prevention side, our years of expertise, please call us. We'd love to help you stop this. It is in both our interests.

Until then, you have exactly what we have: incoming, on a one for one basis. Welcome to our world of Kevlar umbrellas.

As I said, the political will to enact that is lacking.

As little else has worked, why not give this a try? It's close to proportional, other than being a bit more accurate on where it is hitting versus the rockets. It will even, now and again, hit those who fired. It will also hit others, but that's already happening now.

No new downside. Is this getting down into the ditch to wrestle with the pig? Yes, but guess what? They have been in that ditch together for quite some time, and are coated with mud already, both little piggies are.

As far as negotiations go, I regret that I come up empty. If I had the better idea, it would be in the mail to world leaders tomorrow morning.

DR

 

[charles brough]

Their aim is to produce something they can present to their electoriate as a success. The removal of Hamas would probably be acceptable but likely hard to atchive. Reduceing the rate of rocket launches is posible but questionable if that would be viewed as a sucess.

Long term occupation would be problematical.

Seems to me that once they occupy Gaza, they can manage in there what they achieved in the West Bank. They managed to impose their own regime on the West Bank Palestinians upon or after the death of Arafat. So, they are experienced in doing that.

 

[geni]

Seems to me that once they occupy Gaza, they can manage in there what they achieved in the West Bank. They managed to impose their own regime on the West Bank Palestinians upon or after the death of Arafat. So, they are experienced in doing that.

Mahmoud Abbas was already a signifcant figure in fatah which was the main power broker there. In gaza there doesn't appear to be any alturnative to hamas or figures in hamas likely to be more moderate than their current leadership.

 

[Nogbad]

Two peoples want the same bit of land and neither are big on sharing. It is that simple. They are locked in waltz of hatred and death and will continue to dance for years to come. The Israelis might replace Hammas or then again they might simply make Hammas look more credible to other Palestinians.

 

[gtc]

I grant that the Israelis are in a pickle, a difficult position. No matter what they do, bad things happen. This latest will bring more bad things.

<snip>

As far as negotiations go, I regret that I come up empty. If I had the better idea, it would be in the mail to world leaders tomorrow morning.

DR

Thanks. It would stop the people who complain about proportionality and its not really sinking to their level if you are aiming at where the rockets came from.

 

[geni]

I grant that the Israelis are in a pickle, a difficult position. No matter what they do, bad things happen. This latest will bring more bad things.

It is my opinion that the political will for what I propose is lacking. The response to the rockets is a quid pro quo. The people launching the rockets show no concern over who dies when they launch their rockets into the air. Neither should the Israelis.

The tech exists to set up counter mortar and counter artillery and counter rocket radars which can provide a reasonably accurate CEP of where a rocket or mortar was fired from. (Over head surveillance assets can make this more accurate, and Israel owns the airspace over Gaza.) US has had this stuff for decades, as have others.

Put the counter battery fire on auto. Seriously. A rocket or m ortar round comes over, immediate counterbattery fire at point of origin. (Possibly from overhead assets, or from artillery. ) Point and shoot.

Since Isreal is already killing a lot of people who aren't the target, no matter how hard they try not to, it seems that a change of policy ought to be enacted. The message sent on how to change this is simple:

Dear Gaza leadership, this is your incentive to stop the rockets. We have it on auto. There is no emotion involved here. Rockets come over, counter battery comes back. Make sure every rocket shooter knows this, and that he's consigning his locale to incoming when he fires. We have the tech to do this.

I doubt hamas would view 30 incomeing bits of ordince a day as a significant issue.

 

[fuelair]

Is their objective there what they claim and we duly repeat, or is it to remove the elected Hamas government of Gaza and impose in its place a pliable regime like they established in the West Bank after the death of Arafat?

In considering world affairs, it helps to determine what will happen not be considering what people say, but what is in their own best interest. A pliable regime in Gaza is most certainly what Israel would like to have. So, that is what they intend to end up with---hence, their goal, regardless of what they and our own government spokesmen say. Israel did not invade Gaza knowing it was tearing up the country---and increasing Palestinian hatred---if they did not have a plan the knew would work.

Of course, it is all blamed on the Palestinians. What is the matter with them that they keep shooting rockets into Israel? Could it be that their “county” is only a desert wasteland jammed with them, nearly all of whom are refugees and their children which were pushed out of their homes and land in Israel? Could it be that they send rockets over because they want to go back to their homes and land in Israel---also because they resent being fenced in and blockaded? Perhaps Gaza Palestinians are just humans like anyone else who would behave much the same in their position.

I would hope their purpose there is the one of primary logic - kill as many Hamas as possible, break permanently the Hamas supply lines/communications lines and will to fight, harm as few as possible - given the cowardly nature of Hamas (knowingly hiding among civilians, fighting from neighborhoods, hospitals, mosques, schools, etc. - and then complaining to fools in the press and getting coverage as they use attacks on those to show how mean IDF is) - civilians. Hamas quits shooting into Israel, IDF quits explaining why that is wrong.

As a side note, the blame is on Hamas, not the Palestinians. Palestinians make clear to Hamas that assaulting Israel won't fly and back it up, problem solved.

 

[I Ratant]

Considering what would be the fate of the Israelis under Hamas, were that possible, I think even the Gazans can see the benefits to eliminating Hamas.

 

[Solitaire]

I hope that when this is finished that the Israelis let the 40% of the people in Gaza, who want to leave, immigrate to the West Bank. And, the 25% of the people in the West Bank, who want to leave, immigrate to Gaza. It’s the humane thing to do.

Source

 

[WildCat]

The tech exists to set up counter mortar and counter artillery and counter rocket radars which can provide a reasonably accurate CEP of where a rocket or mortar was fired from. (Over head surveillance assets can make this more accurate, and Israel owns the airspace over Gaza.) US has had this stuff for decades, as have others.

Put the counter battery fire on auto. Seriously. A rocket or m ortar round comes over, immediate counterbattery fire at point of origin. (Possibly from overhead assets, or from artillery. ) Point and shoot.

Except for the auto-fire part, this is pretty much what Israel has done in the past. Problem is Hamas fires the rockets from a safe distance away, or they are on a timer.

And then there's the old trick of firing them from a school, hospital, or some other place where a response gets the bleeding hearts in a tizzy.

So in the end, it's not much of a deterrent.

 

[Darth Rotor]

I doubt hamas would view 30 incomeing bits of ordince a day as a significant issue.

Hard to say. Since it hasn't been tried, we won't know, but the solution wouldn't be short term. I think that if it "worked" (a very loose version of that word) it would be after a sustained pattern of "rockets go out and locales from where they were fired blow up" is established as repeatable and unchanging. That provides a certain consistency. It links the actions explicitly, which may make for a better position to negotiate from.

May.

Or not.

DR

 

[Darth Rotor]

Except for the auto-fire part, this is pretty much what Israel has done in the past. Problem is Hamas fires the rockets from a safe distance away, or they are on a timer.

I am aware of that technique.

And then there's the old trick of firing them from a school, hospital, or some other place where a response gets the bleeding hearts in a tizzy.

That's where the auto return is an advantage, not a disadvantage, when well publicized.

No matter where you shoot from, it will blow up.

The choice is yours. The fires are only responsive. Only self defense. As soon as a firing position is a firing position, it is no longer a school. It is a target.

So in the end, it's not much of a deterrent.

We don't know that. What I suggested has not been tried. It also might not work.

Yes, it would be bloody, but so has much else tried. The Lebanon op of recent vintage wasn't exactly scalpel like incisions, was it?

DR

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Short of actually sharing the land/water nothing will resolve this situation. A measured response would have been smarter. Who knows what the real motivation was to invade Gaza yet again. The upcoming Israeli election fits the motivation bill. I can't see that the Hamas rockets were the critical reason just as the kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers proved not to be the reason for invading Lebanon.

While the Palestinians haven't been smart in this mess either, this website, Palestine Remembered, plus my personal acquaintance with one of my brother's past girlfriends has influenced my opinion on who is more responsible for the situation.

Suma's (the past girlfriend) parents were given pennies on the dollar for their home the Israeli's confiscated while confiscated Israeli homes were repaid with full price when Israel decided they needed a "security" perimeter within Palestinian territory back in the 60s. The apartheid practices which continue to this day are not brought up much by the US mainstream media.

And while some of the Israeli land was purchased originally, the website above documents just how densely populated the areas were that the Israelis confiscated and/or ethnically cleansed prior to 1947 and 1967. There is also evidence access to water plays a big role in just where the Israelis have decided their country's boundaries are.


The Palestinian mentality that armed resistance is the only reaction is not blameless. But the Israelis can't seem to figure out (or they don't want to) that after half a century their brutal response is not working and it is not likely to work in the future either. Unless the Palestinians have hope, and a decent plot of land to build a country from, a two state solution will never happen. They are left with crowded cites full of unemployed citizens. It's interesting that so many Palestinians work for low wages in Israel. The arable land they do have often has its only water access controlled by Israel.

These are also not talked about in the mainstream media much. We hear about the right to defend and the rocket attacks. Maybe the more access the world has to information about Palestinians that is occurring via blogs and other Net sources will one day be seen by them as a more effective tool than killing. Seems obvious to me. But that culture of revenge and both sides' immovable convictions may be an insurmountable barrier.

And you'd think the Israelis would see that the fact Hamas provides a social safety net is worth addressing. The harder Israel makes it for the Palestinians the more they would likely see Hamas as a benefit rather than the source of the problem.