yairhol
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2007
- Messages
- 1,401
gdnp said:Let's look a bit more clearly how this works.
Let's say that a Fatah supporter fires a rocket at Israel, which lands in a field somewhere and causes no injuries.
Israel doesn't know who fired the rocket, but decide to retaliate by a "pinpoint" attack on a Hamas target. Even though Hamas did not fire the rocket.
The Israeli attack misses the target but wounds 10 bystanders: maybe Hamas, maybe civilians.
Now let's look at this from the Hamas perspective. They didn't fire the original missile. They didn't violate the cease-fire. Yet Israel tried to kill one of their guys and injured 10 bystanders. A clear violation of the cease-fire. So what would you expect them to do? Why, retaliate, of course. Why should they uphold their part of the deal if Israel isn't upholding theirs?
Soon, you are in an ever-escalating cycle of tit-for-tat strikes.
Whose fault?
Well, it's partially the fault of the Fatah member who fired the first rocket. But his goal may have been to try to provoke another confrontation between Israel and Hamas. It's partially the fault of the Israelis who retaliated against the wrong target. I'm afraid to say that the only people I would have trouble blaming in the above hypothetical scenario for the collapse of the cease-fire would be Hamas.
Israel plays this game time and time again. They allow the radicals to set the agenda and scuttle any progress for peace. They provoke responses from their enemies and then claim to be the victims when they get attacked.
Are you suggesting that if someone fires rockets at Israel but Israel is not sure who fired then it should not do anything? Not retaliate back?
So if tomorrow 25 new groups consisting of 2 people each leave the Hamas and start firing rockets at Israel, since these groups are unknown yet and since they consist of 2 people (very small group so no big organization is needed) Israel must not retaliate? I mean Israel has zero chance of knowing who fired if it does not catch them on the act.
What about the Hamas responsiblity for its territory?
Do you think the Hamas would care if someone from the Israeli territory fired at them but the IDF would say it's not them, it's some small group of radicals?
I'd give less than half an hour until rockets start flying into Israel.
And don't give me that "Israel destroyed the Hamas' ability to stop other radical groups in operation Cast Lead" because Hamas did not do anything before the operation to stop the other groups and they have not become peace supporters with Israel suddenly now.
You're thinking somewhat naively. We've been in these situations countless times before. Israel is blamed if it protects its borders (see cease-fire violation #3 I think), Israel is blamed if it retaliates against unprovoked attacks (see all other cease-fire violations), Israel is blamed if after 3000 rockets hitting Israeli towns in a single year it decides to put an end to it etc.
I find it truly amazing that people here justify terroristic acts when they are done against Israel. No matter what Israel does, it is to blame. I'm sure that if we sat quietly and let 3000 more rockets hit Israel we would be blamed for some other things.
You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't.
Last edited: